Russo-Greek Committee

No. II
Correspondence of the Non-Jurors and the Russians

---

THE interest awakened on the subject of intercommunion with the Orthodox Eastern Church by the recent action of the Convocation of Canterbury touching this matter, has led to inquiries respecting the precise nature and extent of a previous movement in this direction on the part of certain English Bishops, and the spirit in which it was met, especially by the authorities of the Russian Church and Empire.

It has been suggested that, as many who are interested in this movement are not within reach of the sources of information, the publication of that part of the correspondence which was had with the Church of Russia might serve a useful purpose.

The circumstances under which this arose were as follows: In the year 1712, Arsenius, Archbishop of Thebais, was sent by Samuel, Patriarch of Alexandria, from Grand Cairo, in Egypt, "to represent to Protestant Princes and States in Europe, the truly deplorable circumstances of the Greek Church under the severe tyranny and oppression of the Turks, and to solicit a sum of money, particularly for the Patriarchal See of Alexandria," etc. While the Archbishop was in London, on this errand, in 1716, "the Bishops called Non-Jurors (to quote the language of Bishop Brett, one of their number), "meeting about some affairs relating to their little church, Mr. Campbell took occasion to speak of the Archbishop of Thebais, then in London, and proposed that we should endeavor a union with the Greek Church, and drew up some propositions thereto, addressed to the Archbishop, with whom, he intimated, he had already had some discourse on that subject." Collier, Mr. Campbell and Mr. Spinckes joined in it, and drew up proposals, which Mr. Spinckes (as Mr. Campbell informed me) put into Greek, and they went together and delivered them to the Archbishop of Thebais, who carried them to Muscovy, and engaged the Czar in the affair, and they were encouraged to write to his Majesty on that occasion, who heartily espoused the matter, and sent the proposals by James, Proto Syncellus, to the Patriarch of Alexandria, to be communicated to the four Eastern Patriarchs. Before the return of the Patriarchs' answer to the proposals, a breach of communion happened among the Non-Jurors here, Mr. Hawes, Mr. Spinckes, and Mr. Gandy on the one side, and Mr. Collier, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Gadderer, and myself on the other. So that when the Patriarchs' answer came to London, in 1722, Mr. Spinckes refused to be any further concerned in the affair, and Mr. Gadderer and I joined in it. After Mr. Gadderer went to Scotland, Mr. Griffin, being consulted, joined with us. The rest of the story relating to this matter may be gathered from the letters and the subscriptions to them. Mr. Collier subscribes Jeremias; Mr. Campbell, Archibaldus; Mr. Gadderer, Jacobus; and I, Thomas."

Sic Sub

. THOMAS BRETT.

March 30th, 1728.

The whole correspondence has never been published, and could not therefore be given in this paper, were it ever so desirable; besides, it would make a volume of nearly one hundred octavo pages. The letters of the English Bishops are given in full by Lathbury, in his History of the Non-Jurors (pp. 309-361), as documentary proofs of their Doctrinal status; but of the other side of the Correspondence he does not even give a synopsis. The replies of the Russians to the Letters which were addressed to them are to be found in Blackmore's Doctrine of the Russian Church (pp. xxvi-xxviii of the Introduction), and in the notes to Mouravieff’s History of the Russian Church (pp. 407-410). So we can make nearly complete both sides of this part of the Correspondence. The remainder is neither important nor of particular interest to us. The terms proposed by the Non-Jurors would be no practical basis of negotiation for intercommunion with us; while the Greek Church of the Levant, to which through Russia the overtures were made, is farther removed from us than is the Church of Russia, because of the strong Latin influences to which it has been for centuries subjected. Besides, the Resolutions of our Convention mention the Church of Russia only, which is by far the most educated and influential of all the Churches of the East, and is the Church with which an understanding of some sort, on the part of both the English and American Churches, is speedily becoming an unavoidable necessity, from our rapidly increasing intercourse with Russia on the shores of the Pacific Ocean.

This important and practical aspect of the case leads every one to ask with interest,—How will the Russian authorities be likely to meet the advances now being made in America and England?

If letters written a century and a half ago may be taken as an index of the mind of that great Church (and surely she cannot have retrograded), the well-wishers of this movement have everything to hope for. And to appreciate justly the Christian magnanimity of the authorities of that body, it must be remembered to whom, and under what circumstances, these letters were written. Had a National Synod, such as our General Convention, or the Convocation of a powerful Province like Canterbury or York, addressed the Holy Synod, a deferential as well as courteous reply would be naturally expected. But when two or three Non-Juring Bishops, without sees or official rank of any kind, joined by one or two Scotch Bishops of still less consideration, address such a monarch as Peter the Great, and so august a body as the Holy Governing Synod of the Church of all the Russias, and on such a matter, too, as the restoration of Intercommunion, which had been lost by the convulsions of centuries, such a reply as the Holy Synod was pleased to make is particularly gratifying. For, not only does it exhibit a humility and charity worthy of Apostolic times, but it shows a desire quite as strong, on their part, with all their greatness and power, as on the part of the Non-Jurors, with all their poverty and feebleness, for the healing of the great breach of Catholic fellowship, which has been for ages the standing disgrace of Christendom. But to the Letters.

Accompanying the proposals to be forwarded to the Eastern Patriarchs, under the patronage of the Russian authorities, was the following communication to the Czar, Peter the Great:

SIR:—The Archimandrite who attended the Archbishop of Thebais at London, acquaints us, that your Majesty is pleased to encourage the proposal of union between the Greek and Britannic Churches, and that your Majesty has graciously offered to send the Articles to the four Eastern Patriarchs. This welcome information has made it our duty to return your Majesty our most humble thanks for the honor of your countenance. And since God hath put it into the heart of so great a Prince, to assist in closing the breach of the Catholic Church, and restoring the harmony designed by the Christian Institution, we hope the undertaking will prosper in your Majesty's hand.

Some late practices with respect to Church and State have reduced our Communion to a few; but your Majesty knows truth and right do not depend on numbers. That God may reward your Majesty's pious endeavors, and long continue you glorious and happy to yourself and subjects, is the unfeigned prayer of us, who are, with the most profound regard, Your Majesty's most obedient servants.

JEREMIAS, Primus Angliae Episcopus.
ARCHIBALDUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus.
JACOBUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus.
THOMAS, Angliae Episcopus.

Oct. 8th, 1717.

In August, 1721, after a lapse of nearly four years, the answers of the Patriarchs, together with a letter from the Archbishop of Thebais, was brought to England by the same messenger, James, the Patriarchal Proto-Syncellus, who had carried the question to the Patriarchs. These have never been published, though an abstract of the Answer of the Patriarchs is given by Lathbury. A Rejoinder was proposed, "and delivered to some Greeks in London, to be by them transmitted to the four Eastern Patriarchs, May 29th, 1722," accompanied by a letter to the Metropolitan, Arsenius, which is not here given, because it is of no special importance or interest. A copy of this document was sent to the Holy Governing Synod at St. Petersburg, with the following letter:

To the Right Honorable Council for Ecclesiastical Affairs, at His Imperial Majesty’s Palace, in Petersburg

:

We, the underwritten Bishops of the Catholic Remainder in Britain, have thought ourselves obliged in point of regard to this Right Honorable Board, to acquaint your Lordships that, by the hands of the Rev. Gennadius Archimandrita and the Rev. Jacobus Proto-Syncellus, we have lately received an answer from the four Patriarchs to some proposals of ours, in order to a coalition, to which answers we have now returned a reply, with a transcript of it to your Lordships, humbly desiring your Lordships would give the Greek copy the conveyance to the most reverend Patriarchs. And the design of this projected union, being apparently undertaken upon true Christian motives, without any interested views on either side, we hope your Lordships' countenance and recommendation will second our endeavors. And being sensible that some difficulties with respect to authority and expense may probably arise, which neither party are in a condition to remove, we must humbly beg His Imperial Majesty will please to condescend so far as to lend his favor and assistance. And thus having the honor of encouragement and protection from so glorious a monarch, the affair, by the blessing of God, may be conducted to a happy conclusion. And we entreat this Right Honorable Board would please to believe we have nothing more at heart than that the issue may prove successful, and answer the overtures made by us, who are with the greatest regard, Your Lordships' most obedient servants.

JEREMIAS, Primus Angliae Episcopus.
ARCHIBALDUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus,
JACOBUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus.
THOMAS, Angliae Episcopus.

To the Grand Chancellor, Le Compte De Galofskin, a letter was likewise addressed, as follows:

MOST NOBLE LORD:—These are to return your Lordship our humble thanks for the trouble you have been pleased to give yourself, in promoting the union between the Orthodox Oriental Church and the Catholic Remainder in Great Britain. And as an affair of this nature stands in need of inclination and encouragement from those at the head both of Church and State; so we hope your Lordship’s countenance and assistance will prove considerably instrumental for the success of so great an undertaking. We therefore humbly entreat your Lordship would please to continue your favor and protection, without which we are afraid the business must languish and miscarry. My Lord, as to the Archimandrite, we are entirely satisfied with his conduct and good intentions, and hope he will still reside with us, for the carrying on of what he has hitherto so worthily engaged in.

JEREMIAS, Primus Angliae Episcopus.
ARCHIBALDUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus.
JACOBUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus.

Several letters were next exchanged between Arsenius, the Proto-Syncellus, and the British Bishops. In one of them, dated at Moscow, August 25th, 1723, Arsenius stated that the Emperor entered most warmly into the subject, and, at the wish of the Emperor, he requests that two of their number might be sent to Russia, for the purpose of mutual and friendly conferences.

In the meantime, the Rejoinder of the Greeks to the reply of the British Bishops, dated at Constantinople, September, 1723, had reached St. Petersburg, to be forwarded thence to England, accompanied by a Circular Letter to the Holy Synod from the Oecumenical Patriarchs of Constantinople, Antioch, and Jerusalem, entreating them to "remain steadfast in the pious doctrines of Orthodoxy," etc., evidently apprehensive that the Russians might be too favorably disposed to the British. Nor was this without reason. In their own reply to the British, which was intended to be final (it was certainly summary), they say that the doctrines have been decided upon and "that it is neither lawful to add anything to them nor take anything from them: and that those who are disposed to agree with us in the Divine doctrines of the Orthodox Faith must necessarily follow and submit to what has been defined and determined, by ancient Fathers and the Holy Oecumenical Synods, from the time of the Apostles and their Holy Successors, the Fathers of our Church, to this time. We say they must submit to them with sincerity and obedience, and without any scruple or dispute. And this is a sufficient answer to what you have written." With this letter they forwarded "An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith" of the Eastern Church, agreed upon in a Synod called the Synod of Jerusalem, 1672, and printed in 1675. With respect to "custom and Ecclesiastical Order, and for the form and discipline of administering the Sacraments, they will be easily settled," they say, "when once an union is effected. For it is evident from ecclesiastical history, that there have been and now are different customs and regulations in different places and Churches, and that the unity of faith and doctrine is preserved the same."

The absolute and unquestioning submission of the British to all Dogmas and Definitions of the Eastern Church, is what the ultimatum above given means. Very different was the spirit of the Holy Synod of Russia, as the following letters, with which they accompanied the ultimatum of the Greek Patriarchs, will show:—

"The most Holy Governing Synod of the Russian Church to the Most Reverend the Bishops of the remnant of the Catholic Church in Great Britain, our Brethren most Beloved in the Lord, wishing health:—

Your letters written to us the thirteenth of May in the last year we have received; from which more than ever, being assured that you have at heart above all things, and seek and desire peace and concord with the Eastern Church, we have conceived great joy in the Spirit: and we give glory to Christ our Saviour, Who is our Peace, for that He by moving you to these endeavors has confirmed our faith in His promise: for in truth, this your desire of concord is a proof that He is ever graciously present according to His promise with His Church. We also give you great thanks that you have not thought it unworthy of you to express your good will towards our Synod in terms of the greatest veneration, and have esteemed it worth your while to write to us of these matters. Your answers, which you have returned to the writings of the most Holy Patriarchs in the Greek tongue, we have sent to those Prelates; the other copy in Latin we have kept here, and have under our consideration. And as we make no doubt that these desires of yours spring from no earthly root, but are of an heavenly seed from above, we faithfully promise our best assistance to further this your so holy a negotiation; nay, rather our own; for it is ours also. And now, to come to the point, we have acquainted his imperial majesty, our Most gracious Lord, with your proceedings, as you desired we should, and as we also thought it our duty to do. Our most Potent Lord received the information most favorably. What his opinion is concerning this affair, we will with all plainness tell you. He thinks it fit that you should send two persons from among yourselves to have a friendly conference in the Name and Spirit of Christ, with two that shall be chosen out of our brethren. Hereby the opinions, arguments, and persuasions of each party may be more sincerely produced, and more closely understood; and it may be more easily known what may be yielded and given up by one to the other; what, on the other hand, may and ought for conscience sake to be absolutely denied. In the meantime, no prejudice will befall either your Communion or ours from such a private conference; nor the hope of future union be lost or compromised. This is the opinion of our Monarch, concerning the most holy negotiation:—and it seems to us the best that can be given. We now desire that, as soon as may be, you will let us know how you regard it. In the meantime, let it be our business, on both sides, earnestly to entreat God to be merciful unto us all, and to prosper our undertaking. Farewell, most beloved brethren.

Your Brethren most bounden to your Charity in Christ, etc.

THEODOSIUS, Archbishop of Novgorod.
THEOPHANES, Archbishop of Pleskoff.
LEONIDAS, Archbishop of Krutizk.
GABRIEL, Archimandrite of the Monastery of S. Sergius.
THEOPHILAITUS, Archimandrite of the Monastery of Tchudo.
HIEROTHEUS, Archimandrite.
PETRUS, Archimandrite.
ATHANASIUS, Hegumen.
ANASTASIUS, Hegumen. [A]

Moscow

, 1723, the month of February.

"The Most Holy Governing Synod of the Church throughout all the Russias, to the most Reverend the Bishops of the remnant of the Catholic Church in Great Britain, our Brethren most beloved in the Lord, wishing health:

A year is now past since we delivered Letters (the Letter just given) to the Reverend Father, the Proto-Syncellus, to be carried to you; but certain impediments have delayed his journey to England even to the present time.

We acquainted you, by those Letters, how well pleased the most Potent Emperor of all the Russias, our Gracious Sovereign, was to be further assured of your pious desire for the peace of the Churches, and what advice he gave concerning the best method to bring this holy endeavor to good effect. And now, inasmuch as he still continues in the same mind, we send the very same Letters together with these present; and we request you to pardon this delay, rather for the sake of your own goodness, than for any other excuse that might be made. We also send you a writing of the Greek Prelates (viz: a copy of the XVIII. Articles of the Synod of Bethlehem, with a Letter declining further conferences) which we have received from Constantinople during the interval, while the Father Proto-Syncellus was preparing for his journey, being desired by a Letter from them to transmit it to you. In the meantime, we desire your charity to know that if, in accordance with the advice of our Sovereign, you will send two of your Brethren to a conference, which we again entreat you to do, we may hope to bring our wishes to a more easy conclusion: which that at length He, even the Lawgiver of love, the God of peace, the Father of mercies, may prosper is our hearty desire and prayer.

Farewell, most beloved brethren.
The most fervent Brethren of your Charity, etc.
THEODOSIUS, Archbishop of Novgorod.
THEOPHANES, Archbishop of Pleskoff.
LEONIDAS, Archbishop of Krutizk.
GABRIEL, Archimandrite of the Monastery of S. Sergius.
THEOPHILAITUS, Archimandrite of the Monastery of Tchudo.
HIEROTHEUS, Archimandrite.
PETRUS, Archimandrite.
ATHANASIUS, Hegumen.
ANASTASIUS, Hegumen.

After receiving the second communication from the Greek Patriarchs, and the foregoing letters from the Holy Synod, the British Bishops wrote to Arsenius, thanking him for still remaining in Russia and devoting himself to his object, addressing to the Holy Synod at the same time the following:

MY LORDS:—'Twas with no small satisfaction we received your Lordships' Letters. The honor of your correspondence, and the indication of your zeal for a coalition, are strong motives for an acknowledgement, and make the prospect look not unpromising. And since an union is thus earnestly desired on both sides, we hope the means of effecting it may not prove impracticable. To close the breaches made in the Catholic Church is a glorious undertaking, and which nothing but the parting with essential truths ought to prevent. And though there may be a distance remaining in some few branches of belief, a charitable latitude may be left open for the repose of conscience and receiving a harmony in worship. And thus we may join in all the offices of Communion and walk in the House of God as friends.

As to his Imperial Majesty, none can be more sensible of his condescending goodness and princely generosity than ourselves, and for which we entreat our most humble thanks may be returned.

'Tis not without regret, that we cannot send two of our Clergy to wait on your Lordships this Summer, pursuant to what we promised the Rev. Archimandrite and Proto-Syncellus, but accidents unforeseen will sometimes happen, and which we hope you will please to excuse. The case is this: one of the gentlemen came but lately to town, and could not possibly put his private concerns in any tolerable order till the season for his voyage would be past. But as soon as the next Spring presents fair, they will certainly, God willing, attend your Lordships, with our friend Mr. Cassano. We own ourselves much obliged to the Proto-Syncellus for the great fatigue and hazard he has undergone in the affair: and are sorry our circumstances would not give us leave to show the marks of our regard with better significancy. And the same we likewise add with reference to the Archimandrite and his nephew. This latter at his coming will more particularly acquaint you with some disadvantages we lie under, and give further assurances how much we are, my Lords,

Your Lordships most humble and obedient servants,

ARCHIBALDUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus.
JEREMIAS, Primus Angliae Episcopus.
THOMAS, Angliae Episcopus.
JOHANNES, Angliae Episcopus.

The following was at the same time addressed to the Chancellor, dated July 13th, 1724:—

MY LORD:—The lustre and interest of your station in the Emperor of Great Russia's Court, makes us repeat our address, and humbly solicit your Lordship's recommendation of the endeavor for a coalition between the Great Muscovite and Britannic Churches. To this we are the more encouraged by your Lordship's disposition to promote that Christian design. We are likewise deeply sensible of his Imperial Majesty's condescension and bounty, and for the liberty his Majesty is pleased to give us for debating matters with some of the Russian Clergy and concerting measures for settling the union. This indulging a personal conference is a fresh instance of his Imperial Majesty's goodness, and will prevent the delay of corresponding by letters.

ARCHIBALDUS, Scoto-Britannie Episcopus.
JEREMIAS, Primus Angliae Episcopus.
THOMAS, Angliae Episcopus.
JOHANNES, Angliae Episcopus.

Before the proposed deputation had left England, the negotiations were arrested by the death of the Czar; on occasion of which the British Bishops addressed to the Holy Synod the following:

MY LORDS:—We are sensibly affected with the melancholy account of the great Emperor of Russia's death, and heartily condole with your Lordships upon this unhappy occasion, though we hope the loss may be made up by the accession of her Imperial Majesty to his throne. This misfortune has put a stop to the affair between us till we receive fresh directions, and know your Lordships' pleasure. For which purpose we have desired our worthy friend Mr. Cassano to wait upon your Lordships, upon whose fidelity and care we entirely rely. We commend your Lordships to the divine protection, and shall always remain, etc.

ARCHIBALDUS, Scoto-Britanniae Episcopus.
JEREMIAS, Primus Angliae Episcopus.
THOMAS, Angliae Episcopus.
JOHANNES, Angliae Episcopus.
April 11th, 1725.

A letter of similar import was addressed by the same parties to the Chancellor, and another to Arsenius, as follows:

MY LORD: —'Tis with great concern that we received the news of the Emperor of Russia's death, which has put a stop to our affair, till we have fresh directions from that Court. We have now by our friend Mr. Cassano sent a letter to the Holy Synod, and another to the Great Chancellor, of which he can give your Lordship a full account. We desire that your Lordship would be pleased to inform us of the situation of affairs, as far as relates to the religious negotiations between us, and shall always think ourselves happy in the continuance of your friendship and favor. We commit your Lordship to the Divine protection, and shall always remain, etc. (Signed by three of the four Bishops.)

On the 16th of September, 1725, the High Chancellor acknowledged the receipt of the letters of condolence from the British Bishops, together with their compliments on the new accession; and with respect to the negotiation continued thus: "As to the affair you have mentioned of an union, you may assure yourselves Her Imperial Majesty will support the same in such sort and manner as His late Imperial Majesty supported it; only at these mournful times your Lordships will please to have some longer patience, till the first opportunity I can have to represent to Her Imperial Majesty of all more at large, and then I do assure you, I will not fail to acquaint you thereof," etc. No further correspondence ensued, however, and here the matter ended.

At the close of his account of the foregoing correspondence, Dr. Brett says: "Not only the death of the Czar put a stop to the much desired union between the Greek church and British Non-jurors; but likewise the indiscretion of the Patriarch of Jerusalem in writing to Wake, then Archbishop of Canterbury, and sending copies of proposals to him, &c., quite knocked that scheme in the head. Wake behaved with great prudence and discretion in the case, not exposing the papers nor suffering them to be ridiculed." Wake's reply to the proposals of Chrysanthus, Brett makes no allusion to. It has been recently published, and for the first time, in "Occasional Papers of the Eastern Church Association, No. III," from Archbishop Wake's manuscripts in Christ Church Library, Oxford. It is here republished, not only on account of its relation to the subject of this paper, but likewise as showing the hearty sympathy of the then Metropolitan of England for the Orthodox Church of the East. It is as follows:

To the Most Holy Prelate; The Patriarch of Jerusalem; William, by Divine Providence Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate and Metropolitan of all England, Privy Councillor and Councillor in matters spiritual, To the most serene Prince and Lord George, by the grace of God, King of Great Britain, France and Ireland. I have received, most holy Father, from the hands of your faithful messenger and servant, Marcus Nomici, the books which you have descended to send me; and I most heartily thank your Fatherliness for the distinguished mark of kindness you have been pleased to bestow upon one who is personally unknown to you and separated from you by so great a space of land and sea. It would be impossible for me to tell, most Reverend Father, how much of consolation and of joy it is to us, to perceive in your first two most admirable volumes with how great care and constancy, and with what consummate wisdom you protect your rights against the unwearied plottings and strivings of the Papal tyranny; which not content to have trampled under foot the liberties of the Latin Churches, does not hesitate to arrogate to itself a supremacy over your Churches also, but everywhere strives to draw away your people to its own side. Against this nefarious project, you, most learned Father, maintain a vigilant and strenuous position. May your other prelates follow your wise example; and may God so bless your endeavors, that your Church may enjoy its rights and liberties undiminished and unimpaired to the utmost end of time.

Nor have you forgotten this same matter in that other great work of yours which is not so much the history of one See, as of the whole Church. In it the errors of the Roman Church are everywhere disclosed and held up before the reader's eyes; and it is everywhere shown how far she has departed from the pure Gospel both in her doctrine and in her discipline, so that from the warnings contained in this book alone the pastors of your Church can learn how to guard themselves and their people. When we consider these things among you, we also strive to stand in the liberty we have received from our forefathers, and not to bend our necks under a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear. And now, as I am writing these things to your illustrious Fatherhood, I ought by no means to overlook what I heard a year ago from one of my presbyters who is among our merchants at Constantinople, to wit: That certain schismatical Priests of our Church have written to you under the pretended titles of Archbishop and Bishops of the Anglican Church, and have desired your communion with them, that is, that men who have neither place nor preferment in these realms, have addressed themselves to deceive you who are in ignorance of their schism. The true position of these men, and the occasion of their schism, you will learn more fully from that faithful Presbyter of mine, Master Thomas Payne; who will relate to your Fatherhood how unrighteously they have separated from us; how they have, at one and the same time, withdrawn their due allegiance from the King's majesty, and their obedience from their Bishops; and how they have broken the unity of the Church, for no other reason than because we have decided that the laws of the land must be obeyed, and have held that he is to be reverenced as our Sovereign whom our Lords and Commons, and the princes and peoples of all Europe have acknowledged as our King, and unto whom the laws of the realm and the consent of all orders of men to whom belongs the right of settling such affairs, have committed the imperial sovereignty of Britain. For this cause a few of our Clergy, and still fewer of our Bishops, have seen fit to separate from us; have enticed the people to their party; have established congregations apart from the Church; and have at length reached such a pitch of madness as to consecrate Episcopal successors to certain of the first promoters of the schism who have since died. These are the men who have presumed to write to you. These are they who have endeavored to withdraw you from the communion of our Church. And one of them, as I have heard, assuming my place and authority, has not, truly, dared to call himself Archbishop of Canterbury, but has styled himself by the new title of prwtoV episkopoV. Of these men I pray and beseech your Fatherhood to beware. We, the true Bishops and Clergy, for the time being, of the Church of England, as we do in every fundamental article profess the same faith with you, shall not cease, at least in spirit and affection (however our distance from you may prevent us otherwise), to hold communion with you, and to pray that all things peaceable and joyful may be yours. And I, as I do profess myself most specially bounden to your Holiness, so do I most earnestly pray that you will remember me in your prayers and sacrifices at the Holy Altar of God. And so I bid you farewell in the Lord.

Given in my archiepiscopal palace in the month of September, and in the year of our Redemption M.DCC.XXV.—Editor.

[A] These signatures were obtained from the original manuscript in the archives (of the Holy Synod at St. Petersburg, by the Editor, in April, 1864, the examination of which was accorded to him, through the courtesy of His Excellency Prince Sergius Ourousoff, then Vice-Procurator of the Holy Governing Synod.—Editor.

Project Canterbury