Respecting the Procession, it is not only true, as you observe, that the Greeks communicated with the Latins for some time after the Latin doctrine had been heard of, but that inter-communion was repeatedly renewed even after the Latins had been anathematized by Photius. However, I am not a theologian, but a soldier. And yet, having been brought so much among the clergy, I cannot help knowing something about such matters. And if I were a bishop, I should ask you first about doctrine, and about the Creed; and if you spoke of coming to us, as you might have come 1000 or 800 years ago, still, there have been such divisions in the West since, and so many questions have been raised there which never came formally before us, that I should require some farther examination and agreement." "That is quite reasonable," I replied. "Well, then," he continued, "what would. you say about the Sacraments?" Answer. "About the Eucharist, I say that the bread is changed into, and becomes, and is, the very Body of Christ spiritually and supernaturally, without ceasing to be still physically, in the order of nature, bread; wherein we deny the Roman doctrine of Transubstantiation. And I have noticed that in the Russian version of the XVIII. Articles of the Synod of Bethlehem of A.D. 1672, the concession of these two correlative terms 'substance' and 'accidents' has disappeared; nor is the word

'accidents' admitted in the Russian Catechism; so that neither of those two Russian documents is at all inconsistent with orthodox doctrine."

He seemed surprised at my knowing of the change that had been made in the wording of the XVIII. Articles of Bethlehem, but admitted that the fact was so. He then said: "There may possibly be shades of difference (nuances) between churches on a subject so entirely beyond our understanding; but for myself, without pretending to speak positively, I think that the Greek Church agrees (that is, agrees unreservedly) with the Roman doctrine. There is a difference in this, that the Greeks make the invocation of the Holy Ghost, and not the bare repetition of Christ's words, to complete the consecration. Then there is Confession," -to which I made no objection. Then he spoke of the Icons, and thought it very liberal in me not to call him an idolater; "for that," said he, "is the common calumny, though they don't call us idolaters for bowing to the Emperor, or even to the Emperor's picture." However, as regards the decree of the Second Nicene Council," I said, "we reject it, as did nearly all the West at the beginning." "No," he objected, "the Popes from the first received it, and still receive it." "Yes," I replied, "but it was condemned, in spite of their reception of it, all over Germany, France, and Britain; and as a matter of private opinion, I prefer

the judgment of my own Church, and regard that custom as inexpedient, at least in England, and liable to abuse." He admitted that it might be abused (as almost everything else may be abused, and is abused); and soon afterwards, on my saying, apologetically, that in things not essential it is necessary and inevitable for us to yield much to popular ignorance and prejudice, to abuses and shortcomings in practice, and to corruptions and distortions of religious feeling and opinion, he answered: "Ah! you may conceive that we, too, in Russia are obliged to do that, as well as you in England."

Then he spoke of the Seven Sacraments; and he would not let me distinguish the two chief sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist from the other five, saying, "Our Church knows no such distinction, but puts them all absolutely together."

"But," he said, "you have a chaplain here, and another at Cronstadt: do they agree with you? And my wife has with her an English bonne or companion, a good woman enough. I shall have something to talk about to them, as this is all new to me. If such are really the doctrines of the Anglicans, how is it that you do not teach them to the people? Or how is it that the English here, if they have not a minister or pastor of their own, will go anywhere, especially to the church of the Calvinists, who do not believe even in

the divinity of our Lord? Whereas we should think that about the same thing as to go and pray with the Mohammedans."

He went on: 66 We, too, have had a Calvinistic or Protestant spirit among us, which Platon" (really Theophanes Procopovich, in the time of Peter I.) "began: Philaret (the present Metropolitan of Moscow) was somewhat that way inclined; and especially Michael, the late Metropolitan of Kieff. But this has all been corrected, and now there is an orthodox reaction. said to the Metropolitan of Moscow, that if he wished to show himself a good Christian, and humble, he would, with the assistance of his brethren, retouch and correct his own former Catechism; and this he did, correcting it, and filling up his former omissions."

We

He said: "If you live among the clergy, you must not judge of all the 40,000 from those you may see here at Petersburg, for here there are 70,000 Lutherans, Germans, and others, and Lutheran pastors; and our clergy, some of them, get liberalized. But for the pure

and ancient Greek orthodoxy, you should go into the interior."

Then returning to the doubt he had expressed before, he asked, "Do you mean to tell me that the bishops in England hold and teach such doctrine as you have now been professing? I will not ask if there are any among them who are heretics or heretically inclined.

I know you must have such: we have such, even here."

He said: "In admitting strangers to Communion the ordinary course is, first, to ask and ascertain whether the person has been baptized, and validly baptized? Next, whether he has been confirmed or christened? If so, then a very slight ceremony is used for reconciliation. But recently, in the case of the Uniats, nearly 2,000,000 in number, a great step was made; they were all received en masse, on merely repeating the Creed after the Greek form, and acknowledging that Jesus Christ alone is the head of the Church"

(that is in contrast with the Pope). "And this seems to have had a good effect on the minds of many Catholics, and to have set them upon desiring unity" (that is unity with the Eastern church) "it being so easy. Not long ago a French priest wrote to ask on what terms he could be received, as he wished to be Catholic (Catholic-Eastern) without being under the Pope."

I said: "I cannot understand, nor approve, of a French priest acting so; but it seems that he felt himself burdened by some Roman decrees or decisions, from which he thought he might be free in the Greek Communion."