Preface (Cont.) (7)

However tendentious the literature presented may be, and however obvious its hidden thoughts and aims, it at least maintains outwardly a mask of propriety and respectability, with some exceptions. But the question was obviously too important for Roman Catholicism to hide its agitation behind a mask of scientific or literary calm. Therefore it came forward directly with polemic against the aspirations of the Episcopalians, and here it fully revealed its fears about the realization of the dangerous aims of Episcopalianism. The Roman Catholic press, with polemical and sarcastic zeal, began to pursue the Episcopalians at their general conventions, and even the ordinarily respectable and restrained journal (Catholic World) descended to theatrical buffoonery in its articles on the resolutions of these conventions concerning relations with the East. Since the revelation of a tendency toward the East in Episcopalianism, no convention passed without this journal pursuing it with mockery in specially dedicated articles. Regarding the resolution of the general convention of 1868, it said, among other things: “In relation to other Christian confessions the Episcopal Church is particularly unfortunate. It has communion with no community in the entire world. It excludes itself from other Protestant sects on the grounds that they are irregular, while itself calls itself a branch of the Catholic Church—that is, those who speak for it call it by this name. Other branches are the Eastern Churches and the Roman Catholic Church; at least so say those who say anything about this branch theory. With these other branches the Episcopal Church has no communion at all, and most likely never will have. There is no need to speak of the Roman Catholic Church, for its language and actions have always been decisive and clear. But the Eastern branches have condemned Anglican doctrine and ordination even more decisively than the Episcopalians have condemned their Protestant brothers. There was never a case where a Greek bishop agreed to give communion to a member of the Anglican branch without his renouncing his errors; and the rejection of the ordination of Anglican priests is just as certain in the East as in the West. Moreover, doctrines specially condemned by the Thirty-Nine Articles are held as firmly by the Eastern branches as by the Western. Why then do our high-church friends beg patronage from the Greek Church? It will not help them. They may crawl on their faces before the Metropolitan of Moscow and arrange compromises; but though like a gentleman he will be courteous with them, he will have a low opinion of them and will say in his heart: gentlemen, if you do not have your own legs to stand on, it seems to me it would be better for you to sit down.”[1] “All the attention of the Episcopalians,” says the same Roman Catholic organ, “is devoted to the East, and if they found there even a fleeting smile as a sign of recognition, it would gladden their hearts. Now perhaps they will receive it, because they have gone so far as to even recognize the jurisdiction of the Greek Church in Alaska.”[2] To the general convention of 1871, the Greco-Russian Committee presented certain factual material about the sympathy of the East to the aspirations of the Episcopal Church, and the Roman Catholic journal continued to mock maliciously. “Another thing occupying us is the magnitude of the task, again piled on the committee which must seek unity with the Eastern heretical churches. In this respect, besides the exchange of courtesies, so little has been done that we fear the means are inadequate to the goal. The Anglicans have already declared their willingness to drop Filioque from the Creed and thus renounce the doctrine of the Trinity, but this apparently does not bring these two or four communities closer to each other. The Eastern Churches still call the Anglicans heretical and say they have no ordination, while the latter in all humiliation crawl before the bishops of Constantinople and St. Petersburg and beg for the slightest smile of recognition. We do not think the committee has done its work, and like the prophet who urged the priests of Baal, we ask them not to fall behind. These venerable patriarchs perhaps sleep or are absent on a journey.”[3] “We are simply pained to see in the Episcopalians a lack of self-respect in their attempts to deal with the ‘holy Orthodox Eastern Church.’ This community, though it has true ordination, holds doctrine condemned by the Thirty-Nine Articles and has openly and manifestly anathematized Protestantism. Why then do the Episcopalians agree to be beaten and whipped in the face for the sake of a unity that is utterly impossible? If this pleases them, there is nothing for us to regret; but even for the sake of common humanity we protest against this.”[4] “The Eastern Churches,” the publicist declares categorically, “will never recognize the Episcopalians as anything other than a sect of Protestants.”[5]

But enough. We shall not cite other unworthy outbursts with which the Roman Catholic press was marked during this time. In themselves they have no significance for us, but they are important for characterizing the attitude of Roman Catholicism toward the question under consideration and for evaluating the movement of Episcopalianism toward unity with the East. If by the law of historical criticism, the diminishing of the significance of a known fact by a party hostile to it is a sure sign of its real importance to that party, then from the relation of the Roman Catholic press to the tending of the Episcopal Church toward the Orthodox East is determined the real significance of this fact. It really has enormous significance for the fate of Roman Catholicism in the United States. The Episcopal Church in its present unstable position serves, as the Roman Catholic organs themselves admit, only as an intermediary link for the acquisitions of Roman Catholicism on American soil. About half of Roman Catholicism’s converts come from Episcopalianism or through it. If the Episcopal Church should truly find support in communion with the Orthodox East, then it would cease to be a serving instrument for Roman Catholicism and—either would itself acquire stability in its existence, or more likely would direct those seeking church truth toward the East. In either case it would be a heavy loss for Roman Catholicism, and in the latter almost fatal. This explains its anxiety about the tending of the Episcopal Church toward the Orthodox East, and this anxiety becomes even clearer to the critical eye in the seemingly light mocking form of its relation to the fact.

As for the positive significance of the fact under consideration, it is difficult to exaggerate it. The actual realization of some unity between the Episcopal Church and the Orthodox East would give the ecclesiastical principles of the latter their first and most reliable basis for penetrating into the body of the American people, in which, as we have seen, there is no lack of receptivity to true ecclesiastical-religious principles, and on the contrary there exists a strong seeking for these principles. But ecclesiastical unity of both churches is possible only on the basis of preliminary agreement in faith. “The Orthodox Church,” says Metropolitan Isidore in his message to the Episcopal Church,[6] “considers preliminary agreement in faith absolutely necessary for practical mutual participation in the sacraments, since the former is the only possible foundation or basis for the latter. And to achieve this most desirable goal, it would be necessary to make a careful study and investigation of the differences in doctrine between the two churches; and to facilitate this, the great principle of mutual help will undoubtedly be found in the spirit of peace and love that animates both churches, both the Orthodox and the Anglican, and in those prayers for peace throughout the world and for the unity of the holy Churches of God which are offered to God of truth and mercy by the Eastern Churches, and which are doubtless also shared by the Anglican Churches.”[7]

In these few words with categorical precision is expressed both the foundation on which from the Orthodox point of view the realization of church unity is possible, and the means which can lead to this unity. A detailed investigation of these means does not enter into our task and would divert us far from the direct purpose of the work, and therefore, to conclude our sketch of the religious condition of the American people, we shall only generalize the material it presents.

In the religious life of the American people there are acting at present three forces having different significance. The most important of them is a potential force, which, expressing itself in the seeking by the American religious spirit of absolute church truth, makes itself known in dissatisfaction with the present forms of ecclesiastical-religious life and in an unclear but nonetheless strong striving toward Catholicity as the general expression of the ecclesiastical-religious ideal. This force acts throughout the entire American religious world, without distinction of churches, sects, and confessions. Another force is the force of Episcopalianism as a church more or less approaching the ideal of Catholicity. This force struggles for its own independence as an autonomous church and even makes claims to realize in itself that church truth which the American spirit hungers for, and thus to give real existence to the potential striving of this spirit. But at the first attempt its inner weakness in accomplishing this great task becomes evident; therefore it itself seeks external support, and as one that has preserved in itself more than others the wholeness of Catholic traditions, this church more clearly than others knows where to seek firm Catholic principles in their unshakeable historical wholeness, and hence its tending toward the Orthodox East and its seeking of unity with it. In this respect the Episcopal Church serves as a pointer to the wandering American spirit toward that Catholic Church which it dimly seeks and in which it can find ultimate rest. From such a position of Episcopalianism it becomes completely clear also the enormous significance that the actual realization of its striving toward unity with the Orthodox Eastern Church could have for directing the religious consciousness of the American people. Finally, the third force is Roman Catholicism, which appears as an independent and actively persistent claimant to the title of the one Catholic Church, which alone can satisfy the demands of the American religious spirit. Relying on its deep historical antiquity and with the help of its powerful ecclesiastical organization, it not only serves as a brake on the striving of the American religious spirit toward the Orthodox East, but also makes great conquests for its own benefit, directing this spirit into the bosom of its own church as the sole representative of true Catholicity. In the course of one past century it has achieved extraordinary success in this regard and has made not only enormous factual acquisitions but has also gained great public significance, representing a pledge of future successes. A detailed investigation of the facts and causes of these successes of Roman Catholicism on American soil constitutes the special purpose of this work, and to it we now turn.

* * *