Page:Orthodox Eastern Church (Fortescue).djvu/406

368 least condemning and anathematizing the others." One can understand the Count's astonishment. We have seen, too, how the Russian Holy Synod quite lately again insisted that the Orthodox Communion is the "one and only heir of Christ, and the only ark of salvation" (p. 347). In short, in spite of all kindly and pious hopes for reunion with other Christians (such as Catholics also express), in spite of their courtesy and hospitality to guests of other Churches (this, too, will be found in countless Catholic monasteries), the Orthodox are quite as definitely committed to the belief that their Church is the only true one as Catholics are on their side. The reunion of Christendom means to the Orthodox simply the conversion of other Christians to their Church. Latins and Protestants are not only schismatics but also heretics. They call us so continually. The Filioque alone is a black and soul-destroying heresy, so are Papal Infallibility, the Immaculate Conception, and so on. And although these Eastern people are not remarkable for the consistency of their ideas, they have never let the confusion become so great as to believe that a body publicly and officially committed to heresy can be a branch of the true Church. And yet there are points that seem to contradict this. Why, for instance, if they believe themselves to be the only true Church, have they never sent missionaries to convert us; why have they set up no real Orthodox bishops instead of the Latin heretics who occupy the Western sees, although (as we shall see) they are doubtfully baptized, have doubtful orders, and a doubtful Eucharist? And why do the Orthodox count only seven general councils? If they are the whole Church, why cannot they hold a general council that shall be as legitimate as Nicæa?

The first question can be easily answered. In any case, it proves nothing. Till the Russians began their missions the Orthodox sent no missionaries anywhere. They did not try to