not for us of the West, amidst our ease and prosperity, our abundant sins and scandals, to stigmatise them as professors of a dead or dying Christianity, and thus to disparage the most splendid and irrefragable perhaps of all the testimonies which man can render to the Religion of the Cross.3

No, assuredly the testimony of Eastern Christendom is valid, and it is emphatic against the Papal claims.

But we have among us some who say: "We do not concern our selves about the Easterns. We admit that they have strong ground. They stand where they did before the great schism; and we Westerns, who profess the Filioque, stand on new ground. But there is no need for further subdivision. Let us leave the East alone; recognise the Pope as Head of the West, and unite ourselves to him.'

But what would be the conditions of such a surrender, and what the resulting gain? First, we should have to admit that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith and morals; and I, for one, no more believe it than I believe that the earth is square. We must abandon our secure foothold on the creeds and the Bible for the varying and perhaps inconsistent decisions of successive Popes. We must exchange the characteristic virtues of the Church of England-an open Bible, a vernacular liturgy, Communion in both kinds, freedom of marriage for the clergy, freedom of Communion for the laity for the opposite evils of the Roman system. And, in the region of practical effort, we should renounce our passport to the sympathies of the great AngloSaxon race, which has, to all appearance, broken finally with Rome and all that savours of her.

We come then to this. The headship of the Pope is unsupported by Scripture or History, is vehemently repudiated by a great part of modern Christendom; and could not be accepted by us without grievous loss to our spiritual privileges and opportunities. Is then the cause of Unity,' as between the Church of England and the Church of Rome, hopeless?

If by 'Unity' is meant Reunion, I neither expect nor desire it. But Lord Halifax and his friends seem to see another chance of Unity in a form which would involve no compromising declarations by us. In plain words, they think it conceivable that the Pope may recognise the validity of English Orders, and all that such validity implies. 'Recognition,' then, rather than 'Reunion,' is their immediate object. Now on this I would briefly remark:

1. Lord Halifax, having discussed the matter in confidential conversations with the Pope and other high Roman authorities, is much better able than I am to judge of the likelihood of this recognition ; but, for my own part, I do not believe in it. We know that human nature is very strong even in Cardinals; it is part of human nature to dislike being proved to be in the wrong; and this would be most conspicuously the case with the Anglo-Roman body if 3 The Sixteenth Century arraigned before the Nineteenth.'

Anglican orders were pronounced valid. My own belief, therefore, is that, whatever may be the Pope's own sympathies, the Roman authorities in England will fight tooth and nail against Recognition, and will prevail. We have learned from Cardinal Manning's Life that diplomacy and intrigue are not unknown at the Vatican, and that Infallibility is often subjected to a little judicious wire-pulling in order to make its decisions conform with the prepossessions of its environment. We must wait and see.

2. I entirely deny that the Pope and his Commission of Cardinals, whether well or ill affected towards us, have any power to decide for us whether our Orders are valid or not. We are not believers in the Infallibility, and on no other ground could the Pope's decision have binding force. We can judge as well as he of the historical facts of the case, and not less so of the question whether the words and acts of the English Ordinal comply with the requirements of our Lord.

3. Supposing, for argument's sake, that the Pope decides that English Orders are valid, what is the gain? Some weak-kneed Anglicans might be comforted, but people who need the Pope's comfort are better at Rome. Romans could not communicate with us, nor admit us to their altars, for we should still be, ex hypothesi Romana, in a state of schism. Rome would regard the Church of England as she now regards the Oriental Churches, and I see no great gain in that. I am told that there is a certain section of Anglicans who long to submit to Rome, but cannot bring themselves to repudiate Anglican Orders and the Sacraments by which they have lived. Well, certainly, if Rome were to recognise our Orders, people of this class would be able to betake themselves to Romanism without disavowing their whole spiritual history. But this, though it might be no great loss, can hardly be reckoned as a gain. Although I do not expect the Pope to pronounce in favour of our Orders, I still sincerely wish that Lord Halifax's aspiration might be fulfilled. It would, at any rate, be an admission by Rome of what we believe to be the truth; it would tend to the increase of Christian charity between two great Communions; and it might, in God's good Providence, do something to accelerate the time when the separated branches of the one great Christian family shall be able, without surrendering their distinctive views of truth, to co-operate for Christian ends.

More than this in the way of Unity I do not expect to see; and even this would be glaringly incomplete if it did not include the great bodies of orthodox Nonconformists. On that word orthodox I lay all possible stress, for the great dividing line between religious truth and error is the doctrine of our Lord's Godhead. Between all who accept it there must be a vital union of heart and hope and worship, which those who reject it, alas! cannot share.

Henry Drummond, the Irvingite apostle, used to say that religious people are commonly right in what they affirm and wrong in what

they deny. This saying affords a good guide for our dealings with Nonconformist Christians. They affirm the doctrines of the Holy Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Atonement; of sin, redemption, and grace; and they are right. They affirm that they administer a valid Baptism, and they are right. They do not claim the apostolic succession, with the power to consecrate the Eucharist and to absolve the penitent; so we have no controversy with them there. If they maintain that in their devout celebration of the Memorial Feast they are spiritually refreshed and strengthened, they speak that which they know, and who is it that dare gainsay them? If, yearning for the blessings of an authenticated rite, they present themselves for Communion at our altars, 'the English Church offers the Supernatural to all who choose to come. The way is open, it is barred by no confession, no human priest.' If, on the other hand, they choose to abide where they were placed by God's Providence in birth and education, we, while devoutly thankful for our different lot, can surely walk with them in charity and mutual tolerance, and joint efforts for the objects of the Christian Kingdom. After all, we must remember that the Master promised not one fold' but 'one flock' under 'One Shepherd,' even Himself.

GEORGE W. E. RUSSELL.

1896

FROM THE EMPEROR OF CHINA TO
KING GEORGE THE THIRD

(TRANSLATED FROM THE TUNG-HWA LUH, OR PUBLISHED COURT RECORDS OF THE NOW REIGNING MANCHU DYNASTY)

KÊNG-WU (day).'-His Majesty proceeded to the Great Pavilion in the Garden of Myriad Trees, where the English Chief Envoy Macartney and the Assistant Envoy Staunton were admitted to Audience.

'I-mao (day).2-An imperial order was issued to the King of England in the following terms:

So then, thou King, far away over many oceans, thou hast inclined thine heart towards civilisation, and hast made a point of despatching envoys to respectfully bear a submissive address. Crossing the seas, they have arrived at Court, and have offered their devout prayers for our imperial welfare, besides submitting articles of local production, by way of evincing thy heartfelt sincerity. We have opened and perused the address, the language of which is sufficiently honest and earnest to bear witness, O King, to the genuineness of thy respectful submission, and is hereby right well commended and approved. As to the chief and assistant envoys, bearers of the address and the tribute, in consideration of the fatigue they have undergone in carrying out the duties of their distant mission, We, in the exercise of our grace and courtesy, have already commanded our ministers to introduce them to the privilege of audience; have bestowed a banquet upon them; and have conferred upon them repeated gratifications, in order to make manifest our love and tenderness. As to the six hundred or more of officers and menials in charge of the ship who have returned

'Lord Macartney reached Peking on the 21st of August, 1793, and quitted it on the 7th of October. Kêng-wu was the 9th day after the kalends of the 8th moon, and as the Chinese moon is usually one moon behind ours, this would be September, or our 9th moon. As a matter of fact, the 14th of September was the date. The scene was one of the old Cathayan capitals now known as Jeho or Zhehol, which the present translator visited in 1870. The Emperor's tent was placed in the middle of the garden. Jeho is 140 miles north-east of Peking. (See Sir George Staunton's Embassy to China.)

I-mao was the ninth day after Kêng-nu-i.e. the 23rd of September.

with it to Chusan, though they have not been to the metropolis, We have also bestowed liberal presents upon them, so that they also may have a rich share in our gracious kindness, and one and all be equal recipients of our benevolence.

'As to the earnest prayer in thine address, King, that thou mayest despatch a man of thine own nationality to reside at the Celestial Court 3 and take the management of the commercial interests of thy kingdom, this is quite contrary to the policy of the Celestial Court, and positively can not be allowed. Hitherto, whenever men belonging to the different states of Europe have shown a desire to come to the Celestial Court and take service there, they have, it is true, been permitted to come to the metropolis. But, once there, they have submitted to the sumptuary usages of the Celestial Court, and have been quartered in the Hall, never being allowed to return to their own country. This is the fixed rule of the Celestial Court, with which, it is thought, King, thou must be well familiar. But now, O King, thou seekest to depute a man of thine own nationality to reside in the metropolitan city. As such a man would not be bound, like the different Europeans who have accepted service in the metropolis, to refrain from returning to his native land, and as it would be impossible to allow him to move freely to and fro and to communicate information with regularity, it would really be a profitless business. Moreover the area under the administration of the Celestial Court is of exceeding vast extent. Whenever the envoys of foreign dependencies arrive in the metropolis, the Interpreters' Bureau cares for their entertainment, and all their movements are regulated by strict etiquette: there is no precedent for their ever having been allowed to do as they like. If thy state were now to leave a man in the metropolis, his language would be as incomprehensible as his attire would appear extraordinary, and there are no quarters suitable for such a case. If, on the other hand, it were proposed to insist on his changing the style of his attire, after the manner of the Europeans who have come to the metropolis and accepted service there, the Celestial Court again would never be willing to force any man's compliance with the unreasonable. Just imagine, if the Celestial Court should desire to send a man to reside permanently in thy kingdom, dost thou think that thy kingdom would be able to accept these commands? Besides,

Some years previously the Emperor had directed that China be invariably described as the 'Celestial Court' in correspondence with barbarians, in order duly to impress them. The Emperor here uses it both in the sense of 'China' and of the Court of China.'

The Peking church was destroyed by fire in 1775, but the Emperor contributed towards building a new one. The King of France and the Pope, after the abolition of the Society of Jesus, arranged to place the Peking mission under the Lazarists; and Father Raux, the first Superior, arrived in 1784. In Peking the mission is known as the Hall of the Lord of Heaven.' The 'acceptance of service' refers to the geographical, mathematical, and astronomical aid given, in consideration of which the Jesuits and other priests had been allowed to remain in Peking.