CHAPTER XXIV.

Issue of the interview.-Mr. Palmer's letter for

I

the Emperor.

COMPLAINED that the Russians seem to have

the same faults as we have, viz. that of not thinking of the whole body, nor striving for its reunion, but calling the Papists Catholics just as we do, and themselves Eastern or Græco-Russian, and hesitating about the Western Church, neither distinctly recognizing it as a part of the whole body, nor distinctly and consistently anathematizing it as heretical. He said that they had struck out of all recent publications, by the Emperor's desire, the designations Greek and GræcoRussian, and the like, and had put in the word Catholic (Capholic) instead wherever they could. "Still," I

said, "you have not done enough: and though Orthodox-Catholic' has nothing amiss in it, 'Eastern-Catholic' or 'Catholic-Eastern' involves as much weakness as 'Greek' or 'Graeco-Russian,' or Anglican. The truth, orthodoxy, and the Church are all universal, and can be

no more connected with the East than they can with England." I observed to him that he had himself more than once in this present conversation called the Papists "Catholics." He smiled, and said that he used the word in French and German as it is popularly used, for the Latins or Roman-Catholics. "But we too," he said, "have the same Greek word, κaloλuỳ, of which the French Catholique is a modification; and we have ever used it as belonging to the Orthodox Church. But in Russian this word is written and pronounced Capholic; and by this word, so written and pronounced, nobody understands the Latins, nor applies it to them; but they, until recently, were always called the 'Latins:' and now, if in conversation or writing they are often called Catolics or Roman-Catolics, still the word Catolic, so written and pronounced, is purely foreign, and equivalent to Western or Latin, French, German, or Italian. No one would ever think of applying it to the Orthodox Church, or to her members."

He was very attentive to all I said on this subject,

1 [What St. Cyril and other Fathers say is, that the very word "Catholic" is, (as if by a divine provision) a discriminating epithet of the true Church, for popular guidance, before going to consider its meaning, in a way, therefore, which is not fulfilled by the word "Universal," "Ecumenical," or " Capholic." If in London Count Pratasoff had to ask the way to his Emperor's church, he would not ask for the Catholic or Capholic church, but for the Russian or Greek. Capholic is as local as Russian is, and far less intelligible. It is not in the Creed.]

though he did not seem to go along with me when I distinguished between the original Apostolical Churches of Rome and Italy, France, Spain, &c., and schismatical Romanizing communities which have separated from older Apostolical Churches, whether in England or in the East; nor did he see the dangerous consequence of allowing "Churches" and "Religions" to be constituted only by identity of secondary doctrines and opinions, not to say even mere rites, without reference to the right of jurisdiction, and so admitting the whole Roman-Catholic unity to be homogeneous, and all equally valid or invalid.

He complained of Roman ambition, as the Pope would still be the first Patriarch if unity were restored: but he is not content with that, and must be absolute Head.

He asked whether I had ever sought Communion on the same principles from any Latin bishops, and what had been their answer. They told me," I replied, "that they must follow the custom, which is to regard the Greeks as schismatics and the Anglicans as heretics, and to recognize as absolutely one with themselves those whom I call Romanizing schismatics in Britain and in the East. They also said that an opinion asserting the Greeks and the Anglicans still to form part of the visible Church, and so reopening all those questions which have been decided, either by Rome alone, or by

the Greeks alone, or by the Anglicans alone, is, to say the least, extremely temerarious and tending to schism, so that a Catholic holding such an opinion could scarcely obtain the sacraments."

He said, "Protestantism has only the Bible, but the Church adds the authority of her tradition." I answered, "Quite true." "What then?" he exclaimed ; "is yours a dogmatical Church, having fixed doctrine?" Answer: "Of course it is, else it could not pretend to be Orthodox, Catholic, and Apostolic." He asked over and over again: "If that be true, how can it be that it is so little known? Why do you not forbid your people to pray with the Lutherans and the Calvinists? Why do you not make Catechisms, and teach distinctly your doctrine?" Answer: "At any rate, if there is any good in the Church of England, it must come out and show itself now: for since the admission of Protestant Dissenters and Irish Papists into Parliament (in 1828 and 1829) the axe has been laid at her root as a mere establishment." "That is quite just," he said.

He desired me to write him a letter, in any language I pleased, stating what I wished, and he said, "I will have it translated. The Court will be back here in ten or twelve days, and then I can show it to the Emperor when I next make my report, or refer to it and take his pleasure. In the mean time, as your intentions seem to be good, and what you are doing is uncommon, we will

do what we can to help you. I doubt about your living in the Academy, though certainly the white or secular clergy have less instruction than the black; but we will see. If you will come to-morrow at one o'clock to the Synod, I will present you to my colleague, M. Mouravieff, the Unter-Prokuror, who, though also a layman, is a young man of great information in ecclesiastical matters. It is only our duty to do what we can for you, as unity is the duty of the Church, and we all pray for it."

Previously he had said of the idea of living in the Lavra itself that there might be awkwardness, as the thing was so new and unusual. On the one hand, they would not know what to think if they saw me not doing like themselves; and on the other, there might be rules and restraints which would not suit me. I said: "As to the mode of life, you need be under no scruple for me, as I am not particular; and as for rules and practices, I am ready to conform to whatever may be desired, so long as there is nothing (and I cannot conceive that there should be anything) incapable of being done in a good and Christian sense." He smiled and said: "It will be best not to be in too great a hurry, but to wait a little, that we may see our way."

According to his desire I wrote in Latin the same day to Count Pratasoff a letter, the chief part of which was as follows :