UNION
131
UNION
the obstacles to its accomplishment. Another sjiiod
of Ruthenian bishops met at Brest on 24 June, 1593,
but avoided the question of union, and confined itself
to depriving Gideon Balaban of the administration of
his diocese. Balaban refused to recognize the privi-
lege granted to the Orthodox patriarchal community
of Lemberg by Jeremias II.
On 24 June, 1.594, the Ruthenian bishops again assembled at Brest, but their meeting had no synodal character, as Sigismund III was in Sweden, and no synod could be held in the absence of the sovereign. A few days later, Bishops Terlecki, Balaban, Zbiruj- ski, and Kopystenski met at Sokal and reaffirmed their adhesion to the act of union drawn up at Bels and approved at Brest, in 1.590. Terlecki had full powers to treat of the union with the Court of Poland and the Holy See. They composed a "Decree on receiving back and entering into the communion of the Holy Roman Church " (Decretum de recipienda et suscipienda communione sanctjp Romana; Ecclesia?), in which, after deploring the evils resulting from the schism, they begged to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the visible pastor of God's Church, on condition that the sacred rites and liturgical customs of the Eastern Church were preserved, saving such points as might be judged contrary to the union and prejudicial to the unity of faith. Ter- lecki began to solicit the adhesion of the Ruthenian bishops to this document, which was dated 2 Decem- ber, 1594. It was subscribed by the metropolitan, Rahosa, Pociej, Terlecki, Zbirujski, Pelczy.ski, Gregory of Polotsk, and Jonas Hohol of Pinsk.
On 12 June, 1,595, Rahosa, the metropolitan, and the BLshops of Vladimir, Lutzk, and Pinsk met at Brest and drew up two petitions, one to Clement VIII and the other to Sigismund III. The former protested that they desired to renew the union con- eluded at the Council of Florence, saving always t he Eastern customs and rites; in the latter the same desires were expressed, and it was added that the Ruthenian Church adopted the Gregorian Calendar. Pociej and Terlecki betook themselves to Cracow to confer with the king's delegates and the Apostolic nuncio as to the basis and conditions of the union. These conditions were accepted. On 2 Aug., 1.595, Sigismund III declared that the Ruthenian clergy enjoj'cd the same privileges and rights as the Latin, that they were free of the excommunications and censures inflicted by the Patriarch of Constantinople, that Ruthenian sees should be entrusted only to Ruthenian prelates, that the Ruthenian Church should retain the free possession of its property, that Ruthenian churches and monasteries could not be latinized, and that the Eastern prelates were thence- forward to have no jurisdiction over the Ruthenian clergj'. The ApostoUc nuncio agreed to the conces- sion of these privileges, and Sigismund III required that delegates of the Ruthenian episcopate should go to Rome for the definitive sanction of the act of union. But its conclusion was already known, and the Bishops of Lutzk, Chelm, Przemysl, and Lemberg announced it to their flocks in pastoral letters dated 27 .\ugust. Unfortunately, the metropolitan, Rahosa, did not act loyally: after signing the decree of union, he endeavoured secretly to hinder its execution, and instigated Constantine, Prince of Ostrog, to assemble the Ruthenian bishops and dis.suade them from sub- mitting to the Holy See. But Rahosa's intrigues were to no purpose, and, on 25 November, 1.595, Pociej and Terlecki arrived at Rome with the decree of union of 2 December, 1.594.
The arrival of the Ruthenian bishops overwhelmed Clement VIII and the Roman Court with joy. The delegates were received with great honour; the pope and the cardinals discussed the conditions of reiinion proposed by the Ruthenian episcopate, and ungrudg- ingly conceded that the integrity of the Ruthenian
Rite should be maintained; it was also agreed that
the "Filioque" should not be in.serted in the Nicene
Creed, although the Ruthenian clergy professed and
taught the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Son.
The bishops asked to be dispensed from the obligation
of introducing the Gregorian Calendar, so as to avoid
popular discontent and dissensions, and insisted that
the king should grant them, as of right, the dignity of
senators. To all these requests Clement VIII
acceded.
All obstacles having been removed, the union of the Ruthenians with the Roman Church was solenmly and publicly proclaimed in the Hall of Constantine in the Vatican. Canon WoUowicz, of Vilna, read in Ruthenian and Latin the letter of the Ruthenian episcopate to the pope, dated 12 June, 1.595. Cardi- nal Silvio Antoniani thanked the Ruthenian episco- pate in the name of the pope, and expressed his joy at the happy event. Then Pociej, in his own name and that of the Ruthenian episcojiate, read in Latin the formula of abjuration of the Greek Schism, Ter- lecki read it in Ruthenian, and they affixed their signatures. Clement VIII then addressed to them an allocution, expressing his joy and promising the Ruthenians his support. A medal was struck to commemorate the event, with the inscription: "Ruthenisreceptis". On the same day t lie Bull "Mag- nus Dominus et laudabilis" was publislicd, aimounc- ing to the Catholic world the return of the Ruthenians to the unity of the Roman Church. The Bull recites the events which led to the union, the arrival of Pociej and Terlecki at Rome, their abjuration, and the concession to the Ruthenians that they should retain their own rite, saving such customs as were opposed to the pm'itj' of Catholic doctrine and incom- patible with the communion of the Roman Church. On 7 Feb., 1596, Clement VIII addressed to the Ruthenian episcopate the Brief "Benedictus sit Pastor ille bonus", enjoining the convocation of a synod in which the Ruthenian bishops were to recite the profession of the Cathohc Faith. Various letters were also sent to the Polish king, princes, and mag- nates exhorting them to receive the Ruthenians under their protection. Another Bull, "Decet roraanum pontificem", dated 2.3 Feb., 1596, defined the rights of the Ruthenian episcopate and their relations in subjection to the Holy See.
.\bout the beginning of February, 1,590, Terlecki and Pociej returned to their own country, arriving at Lutzk in March and celebrat ing a solemn "Te Deum" for the success of their mission. But the enemies of the union, their religious fanaticism aroused, re- doubled their activity. At the Diet of Warsaw, which opened in May, 1596, the Ruthenian deputies, led by the Prince of Ostrog, protested against the bishops who had signed the decree of union and de- clared that they would not accept it. The Orthodox communities of Vilna and Lemberg stirred up the peo- ple against the unionist bishops. To cut this religious agitation short, Sigismund III ordered the Ruthenian episcopate to be convoked in a synod at Brest, S Oc- tober, 1.596, and the union to be solemnly proclaimed. About 6 October the metropolil.an, Rahosa, the Ruthenian Bishops of Vladimir, Lutzk, Polotsk, Pinsk, Chelm, the Latin Bishops of Lemberg, Lutzk, Chelm, Father Skarga, and other ))relates met at Brest. The Orthodox had sent many of their lay representatives, various archimandrites, Nicephorus, the prolosyn- cellus of the Patriarch of Con.stantinoplc, and CjtH Lucaris, representing the Patriarch of Alexandria. The Orthodox, under the Prince of Ostrog, petitioned for the deposition of the bishops who had withdrawn from the obedience of the Patriarch of Constanti- nople, for the maintenance of the Old Calendar, and for the abrogation of the act of union. They more- over held a conciliabulum to concert mea.s>jrc8 of op- position. In vain did the king's commissioners la-
