^ a ^ r 
 G-7 "^3 2 
 
 THE RELATION 
 
 OF THE 
 
 MORAVIAN CHURCH 
 
 TO THE 
 
 CHURCH OP'eNGLAND, 
 
 OR THE 
 
 li^GLICAN COMMUNION. 
 
 By BISHOP £. R. HASSE. 
 PRICE TWOPENCE. 
 
 lonDon : 
 
 MORAVIAN PUBLICATION OFFICE, 
 32 Fetter Lane, E.C. 
 
Cbc Relation of our Church 
 
 TO THE 
 
 Church of Enolanb (^^^^^^Jn^-^n^") 
 
 By Bishop E. K. Hasse. 
 
 CHIS subject is one of special interest to us just 
 now. It has come into marked prominence 
 since our Synod at Bedford in 1903 p ractically 
 unanimously adopted the Report on our Orders 
 then presented to it, and decided that the same should 
 be sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury as a contribu- 
 tion on our part to (he question that had been before 
 three previous Lambeth Conferences. But the subject 
 fs no new one, nor can it be viewed merely in the light 
 of the present. It must be regarded as a part of the 
 larger whole; it must be dealt with historically. The 
 connection betv/een the two Churches takes us far back 
 into the past; nor is this to be wondered at, considering 
 the characteristic genius of our Church, and the many 
 features that are common to the two Communions. 
 Not to mention the influence of the writings of WyclifFe, 
 the Englishman, upon^Huss, the Bohemian, and the 
 men of his day, and those who in the Providence of God 
 were instrumental in founding our Church, there is 
 evidence that for some 300 years coinmunications have 
 passed, and a connection has been maintained, between 
 Anglican, divines and the authorities of the Unitas 
 Fratrum. 
 
 After the Reformation, among the Protestant 
 Churches of Eurojie, there was naturally, in face of the 
 common enemy at Rome, a desire to draw as closely 
 together as possible; and to no Church was the longing 
 for union more dear than to our own. It~EaJ been so' 
 from the very 1>eginning. Indeed, in all our past his- 
 tory few features are more striking than the efforts 
 made by our forefathers to promote the unity of the 
 
4 
 
 children of God in the communion of saints. Already in 
 1480 the Synod decided to send out four of its leading 
 members with a roving commission to search Asia, 
 Africa, and Europe in the hope of finding some body of 
 believers with whom Christian fellowship could be estab- 
 lished. The four, led by Luke of Prague, journeyed 
 East to Constantinople, and there they were separated. 
 One set out for India; a second visited Egypt; the 
 others reached Antioch, Damascus, and JerusaTem; and 
 finally they all returned with the report that their quest 
 had been in vain. At the Synod of 1486 a ^series of 
 remarkable resolutions was passed on the subject of 
 inter-communion with other Churches, and these 
 marked the policy of the Unitas for future times. 
 Amongst them is one to this effect: " If a number of 
 priests of another Church (are found) united together 
 by a right order of things, and feeding the people en- 
 trusted to them with the pure Word of God . 
 then it is for the elders of the Brethren's Church to 
 examine whether they cannot in some measure become 
 united to such in the one body of Christ." And 
 another was: " If God should raise up anywhere in the 
 world right-minded teachers and Church reformers, we 
 will make common cause with them." The Brethren 
 were not discouraged by the failure of their first em- 
 bassy, for in 1497 Luke of Prague was again sent forth, 
 this time to travel through Europe. Very soon after 
 the beginning of the Reformation in 1517 they were in 
 close communication with Luther; and, later on, with 
 the Calvinistic Churches of Switzerland and France. 
 
 Intercourse with the English Universities. 
 
 Personal intercourse was established with the English 
 Universities ; scholarships existed already in the reign 
 of Elizabeth at Oxford for members of our Church 
 studying for the ministry. A still closer connection is 
 that associated with the name of John Dury, who about 
 1630 was a Continental chaplain, and as such did much 
 to promote Christian unity. He made the aquaintance 
 abroad of Samuel Hartlib, an ardent educationalist, 
 and through him he came into touch with John Amos 
 Comenius, a still higher authority on this subject. 
 Already a^^ishop of our Church, and the author of the 
 
5 
 
 celebrated " Janua liiig-aariim reserata," -ft-hich was 
 translated into nearly every European language (a most 
 remarkable and probably unique fact for a book of tnat 
 kind at that time), Comenius came to England at the 
 invitation of certain members of ParUasient, whose idea 
 seems to have been to instal him as master of some 
 University College, just as later on he was also asked to 
 go to America as President of Harvard. The Civil War 
 prevented the carrying out of the plan for his settle- 
 ment in England, but the connection formed through 
 his visit was maintained during the whole of his life; 
 and when the Polish branch of the Unity was suffering 
 greatly under Romish persecution, and Lissa, its head- 
 quarters^was destroyed, he appealed on its behalf to the 
 Protestants of this country, and laid before the Arch- 
 "bishop of Canterbury a statement of the case; the 
 document itself is still preserved in the librai-y of Lam- 
 beth Palace. He also later on approached. Cromwell 
 when Lord Protector, and, as might have been ex- 
 pected, secured his sympathy and support, the result 
 being that some £6,000 was here collected and sent 
 abroad. 
 
 Comenius and the Church of England. 
 
 After the Restoration Comenius published in Holland 
 his " Ratio Disciplinge," which he dedicated to the 
 Church of England an presented to Charles IT. Lin 
 the introduction he speaks of himself as the last of a 
 long line of Bishops, and of his Church as apparently 
 near her dissolution. He recalls her honourable past, 
 maintains the validity of her Orders, and finally com- 
 mends her principles and her large-hearted tolerance to 
 his Anglican brethren. At the same time he w.as wise 
 ■enough to know that personal connection was necessary 
 if official intercourse was to be fruitful ; and so he sent 
 over to England his son-in-law, Petrus Figulus of 
 Jablonska, and later on Adam Samuel Hartman, one 
 of the Suffragan Bishops in Poland. TEe latter was 
 made a D.D. of Oxford in 168^ and in his diploma his 
 status as Bishop of the Moravian Church is fully ack- 
 nowledged. This is all the more re markable, since at 
 that time it was essential that every recipient-of a 
 Divinity degree should be in Anglican Orders. In the 
 
6 
 
 case of foreign divines, however, a letter from Canter- 
 bury or London was considered sufficient to meet this 
 requirement. The fact of the degree having been con- 
 ferred upon Bishop Hartman in the way that it was 
 / shows that then, by the University, our Orders were un- 
 questioned. The same applies to his brother, Paul 
 Hartman, who was ordained priest (presbyter) by 
 Bishop Skinner, of Oxford, in 1660; his previous 
 ordination as deacon in the Brethren's Church, in 1652 
 at Lissa, being apparentl y acce pted. He afterwards 
 was chaplain, or " Petty Canon,"' at Christ Church, 
 Oxford, and died as rector of Shellingford, maintaining 
 to the end his membership and standing in our Church., 
 Indeed, there was an idea that he might as Bishop of 
 the Unitas (to which office he was elected in 16T5)' 
 superintend the Brethren who at that time already were 
 living in England; but nothing practical came of it. 
 All these eminent men were in close touch with the 
 Anglican Bishops of their day, and worthily represented 
 our Church in high places. Largely through their in- 
 fluence Charles II. issixed an Order in Council authoriz- 
 ing collections to be made in all churches for the 
 Bohemian Brethren ; and Bancroft, the Primate, and 
 Compton, Bishop of London, heartily endorsed the 
 same. 
 
 Bishop Jablonsky and Union of the PfOtestant Churches. 
 
 The Episcopal succession was transmitted to Daniel 
 Ernst Jablonsky, a grandson of Comenius, at one time 
 a student at Oxford, and afterwards Court chaplain at 
 Berlin. He, true to the character of the Unity, and in 
 the spirit of his illustrious ancestors, endeavoured to 
 effect a union of the various Protestant Churches. He 
 suggested the introduction of the English Prayer-book 
 into Prussia, and had a long correspondence with Arch- 
 bishops Tennison and Sharp on the subject. What 
 concerns us more immediately is that he, as a Bishop^ 
 of our Church, introduced Christian Sitkovius, his 
 fellow Bishop, to the then Archbishop of Ca.nterbury, 
 Dr. Wake; and through the instrumentality of the" 
 latter, the case of the Unitas was once more brought 
 before the Privy ^Council, March lO.tJi, 1716. The 
 official^niyiute begins as follows: " Upon a representa- 
 
7 
 
 tion on this day made to his Majesty (George I.) by the 
 most reverend Father in God, William, Lord Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, of the deplorable condition of 
 several Episcopal Reformed Churches in Poland, &c., 
 . . ."; and the result was the issue of another 
 Cabinet Order, directing a collection throughout Eng- 
 land for their relief. 
 
 Archbishop Potter and the Moravian Church. 
 
 In 1722 our Church was renewed at Herrnhut, and 
 in 1735 Jablonsky consecrated David Nitsciiznan its 
 first Bishop. Two years later the question of the conse- 
 cration of Count Zinzendorf to the same office arose. 
 As it concerned mainly the work of our Church in the 
 British Colonies of North America, then under Angli- 
 can ecclesiastical jurisdiotion, he was anxious to know 
 what the attitude of the Episcopal Bench at home would 
 be in that case. He therefore had an interview with 
 Archbishop Potter, who declared that " flie objections\ \ 
 I against the Moravian Church were fi-ivolous ; that no j I 
 ! Englishman who had any notion of ecclesiastical his-|/ 
 I tory could doubt their succession, and that, for his// 
 I particular, he was fully persuaded that they, with th^ 
 \utmost hazard if need be, ought to vindicate and de-' 
 ^fend the constitution of the Moravian Church." To a 
 deputation that waited on him in regard to the mission- 
 ary efiforts of the S.P.G. in Georgia, the Primate fur- 
 ther said that "he had long been acquainted by books 
 with the Moravian Brethren, and that they were Apos- 
 tolical and Episcopal, not sustaining any dcctrine re- 
 pugnant to the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion of the 
 Church of England, and that he was confirmed in these 
 atatements by the conferences he had lately had with 
 the Count of Zinzendorf. 
 
 On the consecration of the latter as Bishop he re- 
 ceived_ from the Archbishop a very brotherly letter, 
 from which the following are extracts: — "Most sin- 
 cerely and cordia.lly do I congratulate you upon your 
 having been raised to the sacred and justly celebrated 
 Episcopal Chair of the Moravian Church. I should be 
 entirely unworthy of that high station in which Divine 
 Providence has placed me were I not to show myself 
 ever ready .... to especially love and embrace 
 
8 
 
 your Church, united with us in the closest bonds of love, 
 and which has hitherto invariably maintained both the 
 pure and primitive fath and the discipline of the Pri- 
 mitive Church, neither intimidaited by danger nor se- 
 duced by the manifold temptations of Satan." 
 
 The British Parliament and our Church. 
 
 In 1747 and 1749 two Bills were introduced into Par- 
 liament regarding our Church. The latter was entitled 
 !i" A Bill for encouraging the people known by the name 
 /of the Uuitas Fratrum, or United Brethren, to settle 
 [in his Majesty's Colonies in America." At the same 
 time, in spite of this, its title, some of its enactments 
 are expresisly declared to be binding within the United 
 Kingdom also. In the House of Commons there was 
 little opposition, but in the Lords, Sherlock, Bishop of 
 London, raised objections to the term " Episcopal 
 Church " being used. The Scottish Peers (Presby- 
 terians), headed by the Duke of Argyll, supported the 
 Bill, since the Brethren had Elders as well as Bishops. 
 The Anglican prelates also as a whole were in its favoi|r, 
 some of them enthusiastically so, especially the Bishop 
 of Worcesiter (Maddox), who declared — " It will be ah" 
 edification to myself and to the whole Episcopal Bench 
 and all true Protestants of England if the British na- 
 tion expresises itself in favoiir of the Brethren : for, 
 whatever benefits England confers upon this ancient 
 confessor Church must be an encouragement to all 
 Evangelical Christians throughout the world to expect 
 nothing but good from this country." 
 
 The result was that finally, on May 12, i749, the 
 Upper House gave its unanimous consent to the Bill, 
 recognising us as "an Ancient Protestant Episcopal 
 Church " ; and there is little doubt that had Convoca- 
 ; tion then been sitting tliis Act of Parliament would 
 i have been supplemented by an authoritative declaration 
 ; on the part of the Church of England which would have 
 lonce and for all defined our position ecclesiastically as 
 l^well as legally. But from 1717 till the middle of tlie 
 ^ineteeuith century Convocation was practically in abey- 
 ance, and hence through all these years the anomaly of 
 our relation to the Church of England has been perpe- 
 tuated. 
 
9 
 
 By the same High Court of Parliament which " estab- 
 lished " the National Church we a-lso are recognised as 
 an Episcopal Church — i.e., our Orders are admitted, 
 with all that is thereby involved ; but on the part of the 
 Church there was then no endorsement of this, dir«ct 
 or indirect, and indeed no expression of opinion on the 
 subject. In this state of indefinite uncertainty the 
 mAbter was allowed to remain for over a century. 
 
 It was at the second of the Lambeth Conferences 
 (1878)j an assembly oflOO An;ilican Bishops from all 
 parts of the world, that the subject of the relation of 
 our Church to the Anglican Coninuinion was introduced 
 by'the then Bishop of Bai bados, Dr. Mitchinson ; and this 
 not on any theoretical sjroun'l, but as a " difficulty he had 
 met with in the administration of hU Diocese." He sub- 
 mitted certain questions regardinji; the possibility of an 
 interchange of the Ministr}', in all il.s functions and offices 
 (Preaching, Sacraments, Confirmatiun, etc.), between the 
 two Churches. The subject was referred to a Committee 
 of Bishops, bur, ii ^> rep ort from them came before the next 
 Lambeth Conference in' T SSS ; which thereupon requested 
 the Archbishop of Canterljury to appoint a Committee of 
 Bishops, " who shall be empowered to confer with learned 
 theologians and with the heads of the Unitas Fratrum " ; 
 it was further resolved that " they shall leport to His 
 Grace before the end of the current ye.ir, and that His 
 Grace be requested to take such action on their report as 
 he si all deem right." To thi.s is added later on : " We 
 shall welcome any clearer illustration of their (Moravian) 
 History and actual status on the part of their own divines." 
 
 The resolution just quoted was acted on ; the Committee 
 met under the presidency of the Bishop of Winchester (Dr. 
 Harold Brown); and several of its members, such as the 
 bishop of .\Ieath (Dr. Reichel), the Bishop of Oxford (Dr 
 Stnbhs), the present Archbishop of the West Indies (Dr. 
 Nuttall), as well as Bishop Cr'ghton (the man who, as 
 inscribed at his own wish on his tomb, " tried to write true 
 History ") presented statements of their views and of the 
 resu'ts of their researches. Correspondence passed between 
 the Bishop of vieath and our General Directing Board in 
 (rermany on the subject of the origin of our Episcopacy 
 and on the possibility of intercommunion. In reply of the 
 
10 
 
 latter the following words occur ; " As far as we are con- 
 cerned such closer fellowship would be greatly valued by 
 us, both at home and in our Foreign Missions, because we 
 feel ourselves doctrinally in full a;<reement with the 
 Anglican Church, believing and proclaiming as we do, in 
 union with her, that we are accounted righteous before 
 God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ by faith, and not for our own works and deservings ; 
 and because we are closely united in spirit with a large 
 number of our Anglican Brethren as members of the one 
 true Church of which our Lord Jesus Christ is the Head." 
 
 The Lambeth Committee was apparently so divided in 
 its opinions that it was unable to agree upon a report, and 
 thus the next Lambeth Conference (1897) again had 
 nothing definite on tlie question before it. This explains 
 the wording of its resolution to the effect, that not having 
 sufficient information to warrant the giving of a decided 
 opinion, it could only express a " hearty desire for such 
 relations with the Unitas Fratrum, or Moravians, as will 
 aid the cause of Chi istian Unity," and recommend " a 
 further consideration of the whole subject, in the hope of 
 establishing closer relations." The Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury was once moi-e requested to appoint a Committee to 
 conduct further investigation, and to confer with the 
 authorities or representatives of our Church. 
 
 Three Features to be Noticed. 
 
 Up to this point all the approaches had been from the 
 Anglican side, and in regard to them three features are 
 to be noticed. 
 
 (1) The fact that the question was in the first instance 
 introduced, and I believe I am right in saying, originally 
 advocated by Mix^ionari/ Bishops, proves that this is a 
 matter that concerns net merely the British Province, but 
 the Church at large If it had not been for men like 
 Bishop Mitchinson (of Barbados), Archbishop Nuttall (then 
 Bishop of Kingston), and Dr. Jackson, Bishop of Antigua, 
 who all knew our missionaries personally, and their char- 
 acters and labours and the value of our Church's work 
 abroad, the subject would probably never have come to the 
 front at all. But things being as they are, it is evident 
 that it must be regarded from the standpoint of the Unity 
 
as a whole ; it must be treated in the light of the possi- 
 bility of our helping all the world over to justify the 
 beautiful name we bear. 
 
 (2) The consistent kindliness of spirit manifested by our 
 Anglican brethren is evidenced by their warm words of 
 appreciation for our Missionary efforts, our zeal for educa- 
 tion, and "the excellent methods and discipline which 
 have esp cially endeared them to those Bishops of our 
 Communion whose sphere of laboilr lies outside England." 
 
 There is also a strong expression in regard to '■ the duty 
 of bridging over or removing the obstacles which at present 
 separate the two Communions "; and the sentence in the 
 letter of the Bishop of Meath that it was " the urirent wish 
 of the Lambeth Conference that this might be possible." 
 
 (3) The fact must also We recognised that whilst the 
 subject was treated on the historic ground (" it must not 
 be overlooked that from time to time, up to the present 
 day, very friendly relations have existed between the 
 Moravians and the members of our Communion " — Lambeth 
 Conference Report, 1888), yet the object aimed at is one 
 that goes further than the tivo ecclesiastical bodies concerned, 
 as is expressed, e.;/., in the Lambeth Kesolution of J897 — 
 " a hearty desire for such relations with them as mil aid 
 the cause of Christian Unit'/." 
 
 The First Step on our Side. 
 
 Thus matters remained up to the year 1902, when the U 
 first step was taken on our side, and at"''our*Provincial 
 Synod in London the following resolution was moved : — 
 That a Committee be appointed to enquire into the pos- 
 si'iility of more friendly relations with the Anglican Church 
 by exchange of pulpits or otherwise." This was carried, 
 and in the following year the Report of the Committee — 
 almost entirely the work of the late Br. L G. Hasse — was 
 presented to the Synod at Bedford and adopted, and sent 
 by order of Synod to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and 
 also to all the Diocesan Bishops in England. In itself a 
 most able and valuable treatise, a scholarly producti m 
 animated by a truly Catholic spirit, it represents the_oiily^ 
 ^thorough enquiry into the origin of our Orders ever yet// 
 Ijmade from an Engli.sh standpoint. Its clearness ancV 
 accuracy sweep away many of the clouds that have sm- . 
 
rounded the subject, and serve to prove that both in the 
 " intention of the Ministry," and also in the agencies which 
 give efifect to this intention, the two Churches are in sub- 
 stantial unity. 
 
 The "Committee of Divines." 
 
 The effect of the sending of this Report to the Archbishop 
 was that in 1906 he appointed a Committee of Bishops and 
 theologica' experts, afterwards knovni as the ' Committee 
 of Divines." " to study and report to him on the Orders of 
 the Unitas Fratrum and their cdaina to the Historic Episco- 
 pate " . This Committee had for its chairman the Bishop 
 of Salisbury (Dr. Wordsworth), the other members being 
 Bishops (xore (Birmingham). Harmer (Rochester), Gibson 
 (Gloucester), Collins (Gibraltar), Macleane (Moray and 
 Ross), and .Mitchinson : also Drs. Bigg, Mason, Knowling, 
 and Watson A sub-committee went more especially into 
 the matter and drew up a lengthy report, which in draft 
 form was courteously submitted to me. A good deal of 
 correspondence passed between Dr. Mason and my broth r 
 and myself ; we a'so met the sub committee and discussed 
 the whole subject at some length. The Report was issued 
 in October, 1907 ; it was, of course, a private publication, 
 bearing no publisher's name, an l was meant to be treated 
 confidentially till it had been dealt with by those to whom 
 it was to be submitted, viz , the members of the Lambeth 
 Confei-ence of 1908. The recent review of it in orre of our 
 German magazines was, no doubt, unintentionally, yet 
 none the less really, a great mistake and breach of confi- 
 dence - In_ this Report, which lays itself open to criticism 
 at many points, the conx;lusion is reached that whilst a 
 " succession of regularly constituted ministers has beyond 
 question been maintained from the year 1467 to the 
 present time," the origin of the Ministry is presbyterian^ 
 and not episcopTT" ft was, this conclusion which I chal- 
 lenged at Lambeth ; and if this were the place to do so, it 
 would not be difficult to give the strongest reasons for 
 questioning it. But with the statement that the origin of 
 our Episcopacy, in a technical sense, is an "insoluble his- 
 torical pi-oblem," I quite agree ; for whilst unquestionably ' 
 we derived it from the Waldenses, no man living can say 
 anything for certain as to where theirs came fi'om, though 
 there are traces of evidence that point to the possibility, or 
 
13 
 
 even probabi'ity,of its having spi iing from an Eastern sgutce, 
 aftd having been transmitted through the so-called " Sects " 
 of the fourth to the tenth centuries. The study is a very 
 fascinating one, but I must not enter upon it here. The 
 concluding words of the Report of the Committee of Divines 
 are as foil lows : — "The wav to immediate inter-communion^ 
 with the Unity as a Sister Church seems to be at present 
 barred by the great uncertainty of its possessing the his- 
 toric episcopate ; . . . but any attempt to establish 
 a union with them on terras which would imply an acknow- 
 ledgment on their pait that they have not the succession 
 would be worse than useless. Nevertheless, the intervitws 
 and correspondence we have had with some of their leading 
 representatives in PJngland make us hopeful with regard to 
 the future Certainly, in our opinion no effort ought to be 
 spared which might lead to fall communion with a body so 
 zealous in good works, especially in missions to the ileathen, 
 so charitable, modest, and unobtrusive in all its dealings 
 with other Christian societies, and so large-minded in its 
 relation to Christian truth, as the Unity whose principles 
 were commended by Comenius to the guardianship of the 
 Church of England ^' - . . 
 
 To this I may add that on the part of this Committee 
 some suggestions were originally <liiade as to a system of, 
 joint Ordination of our, Deacons dnd Presbyters.' This waT 
 the revTval of an TcTea tBat had been in Zinzendorf's mind, 
 already in his day ; and at first I was Hisposed to think 
 that here might be a basis for future intei-communion. 
 But further reflection led me to reject them, as I am per- 
 suaded our Church would do if they stood alone ; and that 
 because the starting point— i.e., Ordination — is^not admis- 
 sible fiom our standpoint. It must be' noted that in the 
 Ttesoluiions of the Lambeth Cotifercnce, as they havejjow 
 come before us, the subject is approached from another 
 side, and a very far-reaching and most important admission 
 is made just on the point of our OrcHnations ; an admission 
 which enables us to, coi^sider tlie present proposals in a new 
 light, being different -^'ahything that has ever yet been, 
 suggested. It hears out the truth of the words of the 
 Encyclical Letter that " Wherever we have had reason to 
 think that an advance would be welcomed, we have gone 
 far to meet our Biethren." 
 
14 
 
 The Friendly Spirit of the Bishops. 
 
 The course of proceedings at the Lambeth Conference 
 M'as this — that every subject coming before it was first 
 introduced at one of the full sessions, and was then 
 referreii to a sectional Committee. Accordingly, the 
 .question of our Church came before ihe Committee on 
 Ke-union and Inter-communion, and I was invited to meet 
 the Bishops who had to specially deal with it. I also had 
 in this connection some preliminary correspondence with 
 the Bishop of Durham as chairman ; but as all his letters 
 were headed "Private" I cannot make use of them here. 
 My impression of the time spent iri conference with my 
 brother Bishops (I use the term advisedly, for, indeed, 
 they were, one and all, most brotherl3^ treating me quite as 
 one of themselves) I have given in my address at Syno \, 
 and the other side is to be found in the speec h of Bishop 
 Talbot on the same occasion. His words must in this 
 connection be specially studied, not only for their own 
 sake, but because they reproduce the spirit of the Bishops. 
 Every one I met would have spoken quite as warmjieartedly 
 as he did, even if all had not been blessed with the same 
 delightful geniality as our American visitor. The fact of 
 the Archbishop sending his~Tetl;er by such a messenger 
 go-^s far to endorse another passage in the Encyclical, when 
 it reads : "The careful report of our Committee (on Re- 
 union, etc.) and the detailed resolutions may seem to some 
 but cold in comparison with the warmth of the desires of 
 many hearts. But such readers should remember the 
 grave responsibility which attaches to the composition of 
 such documents, and the necessity of accuracy, cando^ir, 
 and self-restraint, if the cause of unity is to he advanced 
 by them," 
 
 Just that warmth of feeling which cannot be embodied 
 in an official pro?iouncement going forth "J7r5i et Orbi," 
 may be expressed through the messenger bearing it ; and 
 this is what was done in the present case. 
 
 As all subscribers to the Messenger will probably not see 
 the Lambeth Conference Report, it may be well here to 
 give the section, dealing with our Church. 
 
 The Unitas Fratrurri. 
 
 "The subject comes before our Conference as one 
 previously discussed in 1878 and 1888, when the matter 
 
15 
 
 was left in suspense, and more recently in a detailed state- 
 ment on the part of the Unitas (1904) regarding their 
 succession and other questions, a statement framed expressly 
 as an appeal to attention on the part of our Communion. 
 
 "In 1906 the Archbishop of Canterbury appointed a 
 Commiuee of Anglican Divines to review the pioblem. 
 In their recent learned Report, laid before the present 
 Conference, they find the clainied Ep iscop a l su ccession not 
 proven^ - 
 
 " On the other hand, the claina of the Unitas to respect- ly 
 ful and sympathetic consideration is in many ways unique, 
 irTv'iew not only of its reverence for Episcopacy, and of its 
 cordial attitude towards our Communion, but of its noble 
 record of missionary service. 
 
 " The present moment is timely for the consideration of 
 the question, as the annual Synod of the British Province 
 of the Unitas meets next month (August 4th, 1908), and 
 the decennial General Synod meets at Herrnhut next year, 
 1909.. 
 
 " Members of your Committee have had the opportunity 
 of meeting Bishop Hasse, President of the Directing Board 
 of the Moravian Church in Great Britain, who was present 
 by invitation, and a free interchange of inquiry and 
 answer took place. 
 
 "Though personally challenging the conclusions of the 
 Committee of "Dlvnies, the Bishop frankly accepted the 
 position created by it for our side. His impressions as to 
 the attitude of his Church as a whole towards closer rela- 
 tions with us were decidedly favourable. 
 
 " As a result of this interview and of subsequent dis- / 
 cussions, f g'f'Y T ^ Si Ul Btn^ P .".^ '^''^ proposed by your Committee 
 for acceptl^nce by tt^e Conference." 
 
 The foupjResolutipns are as foliows : 
 
 I. (70) For the sake of unity, and as a particular expres- 
 sion of brotherly affection, we recommend tjat any official 
 request of the Unitas Fratrum for the narticigation of 
 Anglican Bishops in the consecration ofC^isho^of the 
 Unitas should be acce)pt ed, provided that 
 
 1*^) Such Anglican Bishops should be not less than 
 three in number, and should participate both in the 
 saying of the Prayers of Consecration and in the laying 
 
16 
 
 on of hands, and that the rite itself is judged to be 
 sufficient by the Bishops of the Church of our Com- 
 munion to which the invited Bishops belong ; 
 - (2) The Synods of the Unitas (a) are able to give 
 sufficient assurance of doctrinal agreement with our- 
 selves in all essentials (as we believe that they will be 
 willing and able to do) ; and (h) are willing to explain 
 its position as that of a religious community or mission- 
 ary body in close alliance with the Anglican Communion, 
 and (c) are willing to accord a due recognition to the 
 position of our Bishops within Anglican dioceses and 
 jurisdictions; and (d) are willing to adopt a rule as to 
 the administration of Confirmation more akin to our 
 own. 
 
 t^- 11 (71) After the conditions prescribed in the preceding 
 Resolution have been complied with, and a Bishop has 
 been consecrated in accordance with them, corresponding 
 invitations from any Bishop of the Unitas Fratrum to an 
 Anglican Bishop and his Presbyters to participate in the 
 ordination of a Moravian Presbyter should be accepted, 
 provided that the Anglican Bishop should participate both 
 in the saying of the prayers of ordination and in the laying 
 on of hands, and that the rite itself is judged to be 
 sufficient by the Bishops of the Church of our Communion 
 to which the invited Bishop belongs. 
 
 III. (72) Any Bishop or Presbyter so consecrated or 
 ^- ordained should be free to minister in the Anglican 
 Communion with due Episcopal licenlej and in the event 
 of the above proposals — i.e , Resolutions 1 and 2— being 
 accepted and acted upon by the Synods of the Unitas, 
 during the period of transition some permission to preach 
 iii~bur churches might, on special occasions, be extendtd to 
 Moravian ministers by Bishops of our Communion. 
 ( IV. (73) We recommend that the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury be respectfully requested to name a committee to 
 communicate, as need arises, with representatives of the 
 Unitas, and also to direct that the decision; of the present 
 Conference be communicated to the .Seeretarius Unitatis. 
 
 Questions on which ^ight is desipabie^ 
 
 It will be remembered that on two^poirits iu the above 
 Synod decided to ask for further information from the 
 
17 
 
 Archbisho^)i and this will be done on bis return from ihe 
 Contnient ; but besides these two there are several other 
 questions on which more light is desirable. All these, 
 therefore, will not be touched upon in this article ; they 
 will be dealt with at another time. What may now be 
 fittingly emphasised is the first proposal concerning the 
 Consecration of our Bishops At such a service it is 
 suggested that the Anglican Bishops should be present by 
 invitation, and as assistants to our Bishop, who would 
 primarily consecrate The fact of three Anglican Bishops 
 being mentioned is merely bringing the ceremony into line 
 with their own usage; as is iilso the case in a number of 
 the expressions occurring later on in the I'esolutions. 
 The latter part, "that the rite itself is judged sufficient, 
 etc ," has reference to the fact that branches of the Anglican 
 Communion, such as the Episcopal Churches of America 
 or Australia, are wholly self-governing and free to make 
 their own laws and to legislate for any conditions that may 
 arise in their own country. The Lambeth Conference, 
 therefore, was bound to frame its resolutions in such a 
 way as not to interfere with this liberty of action. 
 
 The Vital Point in this IMost Important Proposal. 
 
 But the vital_j)oint in this first and most important 
 proposal is tne fact tbat it implies in a most pronounced 
 and unmistakable manner a recognition of the validity of 
 our Ordeis such as has never yet been made by the Church 
 of England. I was hoping all through the negotiations 
 tliat it would come as it has done, but I scarcely expected 
 that it would be so decided. It is found in the admission \ 
 that our Bishop-elect, who is to be consecrated, has been | 
 regularly ordained, first as Deacon, then as Presbyter; and [ 
 is thus, according to their own Ecclesiastical rule, and ours, j 
 qualified for the Episcopal Office. But who ordained 
 him? A Moravian Bishop. Therefore the ordination 
 thus conferred is ^digitt^ from their own standpoint as 
 valid. It has always been the rule in historic Churches; 
 "Gradxis conjerri per saltum ^lohibitum est" which means 
 that in the ministry the^rder of Deacon, Presbyter, Bishop 
 must be duly observed; no stage must be omitted; to 
 consecrate a Deacon as Bishop would be out of order. And 
 if in the Church of England ti.ere is any do\ibt as U) the 
 
18 
 
 regularity of anyone's ordination, he is re-ordained by one 
 of their own Bishops. But that is not suggested here. 
 Any of our Bishops jointly consecrated is to be "free to 
 minister (as a Bishop) in the Anglican Communion " ; 
 admittedly, therefore, he was, previous to his consecration, 
 a regularly ordained Deacon and Presbyter I do not 
 know that in any other Ecclesiastical form this recognition 
 could have been made more plainlj' than in the present 
 one ; the same point is also expressed in the latter part of 
 Resolution III., which, in guarded words, such as perhaps 
 were necessary to secure unanimity at Lambeth, opens the 
 Anglican pulpits to us all, on the same terms as they are 
 open to ministers of Churches already in communion with 
 the Church of England. 
 
 Fop the Sake of Unity. 
 
 One further point I must mention. The preamble to 
 Resolution I. begins, "For the .sake of Unity we recom- 
 mend," etc. This is wh^it we have to bear in mind, even 
 as it was in the mind of the Bishops at Lambeth. "For 
 the sake of Unity " we on our part must not fail to use the 
 opportunity that has come to us at this time. I would here 
 repeat more publicly what I said at Synod, that, if we now 
 ^ reject the hand held out to us, and throw cold water on tte 
 siijgestioiis made, we shall retard the movement towards 
 the oneness of God's people : but if we meet these sugges- 
 tions in a right spirit, the spirit which we profess to cherish, 
 then we shall be doing much to fulfil the desire of our 
 Lord as expressed in His Praver, "That all may be one, 
 as Thou Father art in Me and I in Thee, that they may be 
 one in Us that the woild may believe that Thou hast sent 
 Me." L^nqiiestionably much depends upon our present 
 attitude and action, A grave lespoiisibility rests upon us. 
 If inter-communion is now established with us, further 
 efforts will be made in the same direction, and in the next 
 instance with non-episcopal churches. If we send back a 
 "Non possumus," or lay down impossible conditions, we 
 shall hinder, it may be for a generation, the cause of 
 Christian Unity. 
 
 , Our Provincial Synod referred the matter, as it was 
 ^^bound to do, to the Geneml Synod of next year, in " the 
 hope that it may be possible to arrive at an understanding. 
 
19 
 
 mutually satisfactory and honourable, and that shall tend 
 towards the drawing together of the people of God in all 
 the Churches. 
 
 Let there meanwhile be much earnest prayer that in this 
 important matter our Lord will guide us aright, and so 
 overrule everything that His will, which is wise and good, 
 shall be known and carried out by us. 
 
 There are great possibilities ahead. There are expectant 
 hearts. As the Archbishop of Melbourne says in an article 
 in the "Contemporary Review" (Sept. 1908), "Before 
 another Lambeth Conference is held there are those who 
 hope that great progress will have been made in the cause 
 of Unity. The spirit of Union can '^row only in an atmos- 
 phere which is congenial to it." And where should such an 
 atmosphere be found, if not in our Moravian Church, the 
 venerable Unitas Fratrum 1