Is any more evidence required by any honest mind? If the opinion of the eastern churches is of any weight, it has been more than once given. Dr. J. J. Overbeck, a Russian priest, in a recent work on "Catholic Orthodoxy," treats at some length of the English orders, which he pronounces to be null. These are among his words: "1. The _Anglo-Catholic_ fathers, on the point of apostolical succession and its needfulness, held latitudinarian views, subversive of the whole fabric of the church. 2. The boasted unity or concord of Anglicans even in essentials is a specious _illusion_. 3. Anglo-Catholicism is _genuine Protestantism_ decked and disfigured by Catholic spoils." "As Parker's consecration was invalid, the apostolic line was broken off, irremediably broken off." {43} "If Rome considered all ordinations by Parker and his successors, namely, the whole present English episcopate and clergy, to be invalid, null, and void, and consistently reordained all those converts who wished and were fit for orders; the Eastern Church can but imitate her proceedings, as both, in this point, follow the very same principles. ... The fact of the reordination is the final and conclusive verdict on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations. By this fact all further controversy is broken off and indisputably settled." We fancy, then, the amusement which the pastoral of the late Anglican Synod will produce in the Eastern churches, for whose benefit it has been translated into the Greek language. We would recommend to the great Patriarchs to send a commission of doctors to the West, that they may see that _oneness of mind_ of which the bishops so fervently speak. Then when they see it, we would like to have them point it out to us, that we may see it also, and rejoice with them.