THE Critical History OF THE RELIGIONS AND CUSTOMS OF THE EASTERN NATIONS Written in French by the Learned Father SIMON And now done into English by A. LOVELL A. M. LONDON Printed by J. Heptinstall for Henry Faithorne and John Kersey at the Rose in St. Paul's Church-Yard MDCLXXXV THE TRANSLATOUR TO THE READER IF at anytime a Book of this nature hath been usefull it seems now to be necessary when most men think themselves obliged to make a bustle for proselyting others to their Opinions and yet are not certain wherein they differ one from another or how far they agree together Difference will still be difference though to use a word well known at this time it may be trimm'd under a disguise of Conformity And therefore to prevent the mistakes and disappointments that those who labour about so good a Work as the Vniting of Christians under one and the same Belief may meet with from Prejudice Interest or Artifice perhaps not one thing may be more effectual than the true stating of the Faith and Opinions of others who if they be ingenuous will never be complemented out of their Perswasions nor look upon them as Friends who would impose upon them for friendship sake what is inconsistent with their Principles It were to be wished indeed that all men were of one mind if Providence which governs the World thought it convenient it should be so but since it hath been foretold that Offences must come it were to be desired at least that all knew the minds one of another that so they might rightly understand how to rectifie mistakes or confirm the truth amongst men In order to that usefull discovery probably none of those many who have laboriously sifted the truth by their Criticks deserve the Title of Candid and Impartial Judges better than Father Simon the Learned Authour of this Treatise who through the whole Book has employed his great Talent with so much Integrity and Disengagedness that one may say of him Amicus Papa Amici Graeci Amici Latini sed magis Amica Veritas And therefore when this Book came recommended from beyond Sea and that I perused it I thought that I could hardly in my low Station doe better service to the publick than to render it into English especially seeing the whole design of it is to clear matter of fact from mistakes and aspersions and the Belief and Practice of the Eastern Christians from the Erroneous Notions that at this distance may be given us of them by the Travellers and Writers of all sorts And though the Authour discourses largely of Transubstantiation as being the belief of the Greek Church the Reader will easily perceive that he never meant to enter into the merits of the cause and to dispute the truth of the Doctrine which peradventure may seem in the Author's Opinion very difficult to be attempted by Humane Reason but barely to assert and relate matter of fact which it is fit all should know Nor indeed could he have used in my weak Judgment a meaner Argument either for or against that Doctrine than the belief of an ignorant and opprest People seeing Protestants that weigh things are not startled or moved by the same belief which they know to be maintained and professed in the Church of Rome a Church far more conspicuous both for Freedom Wealth and Learning than that of the forlorn Greeks The truth is the Learned Authour of a Discourse lately published against Transubstantiation manages the Controversie much better and reasons more closely to the point when amongst his other Arguments he assigns the time that that Doctrine came to be established in the Church to be when Image-Worship was enjoyned by the second Council of Nice which to me is as strong an Argument as any that Father Simon has produc'd to prove that the Greeks who own that Council and are very Superstitious in Image-Worship have ever since entertained that belief seeing no attempt was ever used before the Reformation to convince them of the contrary Since then the onely design of this Book is to relate matter of Fact and to clear the truth from mistakes I Question not but that it will be so well taken that even those Ingenious Persons who have asserted in Print some things which they will find here contradicted may not dislike what I have done who am very carefull not to offend in any thing against the publick in setting it forth in English and since they or their Friends want not Learning to defend the truth they cannot be suspected to want Modesty and Sincerity if convinc'd to acknowledge a mistake A. LOVELL A Table of the Chapters of this Book and of the Pieces subjoyned to it CHap. I. Of the Belief and Customs of the Modern Greeks Page 1. Chap. II. Of Transubstantiation Whether it be acknowledged by the Greeks who are commonly called Schismaticks p. 33. Chap. III. Of the Adoration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist Whether it be in use amongst the Greeks p. 57. Chap. IV. Of the Belief of the Melchites p. 61. Chap. V. Of the Belief and Customs of the Georgians or Iberians and of those of Colchis or Mengrelia p. 64. Chap. VI. A Supplement concerning the Belief and Customs of the Georgians and Mengrelians p. 70. Chap. VII Of the Belief and Customs of the Nestorians p. 74. Chap. VIII Of the Indians or Christians of St. Thomas p. 87. Chap. IX Of the Customs and Ceremonies of the Jacobites p. 106. Chap. X. Of the Belief and Customs of the Cophties p. 110. Chap. XI Of the Belief and Customs of the Abyssins or Ethiopians p. 118. Chap. XII Of the Belief and Customs of the Armenians p. 123. Chap. XIII Of the Belief and Customs of the Maronites p. 131. Chap. XIV A Supplement to what has been said concerning the Maronites p. 144. Chap. XV. Of the Religion and Customs of the Mahometans p. 148. A List of the Churches depending on the Patriarchate of Constantinople Composed by Nilus Doxopatrius and related by Leo Allatius Lib. 1. de Cons Eccl. Occid Orien c. 24. p. 165 Another List of the Churches depending on the Patriarchate of Constantinople Published by Mr. Smith in his Discourse of the Present State of the Greek Church p. 171. The Testimony of Gennadius concerning Transubstantiation taken out of a manuscript Book of Meletius Syrigus against the Confession of Faith Published under the name of Cyrillus Lucaris Patriarch of Constantinople p. 174. An Extract from a Manuscript Book whereof the Title is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. p. 176. An Extract of M. Claude's Copy of a Manuscript Letter attributed to Meletius Archbishop of Ephesus and pretended to have been written to some Divines of Leyden p. 183. A List of the Churches depending on the Patriarch of Armenia residing at Egmiathin which was dictated by Uscan Bishop of Uscavanch Proctor General to the Patriarch p. 184. THE Critical History OF THE Belief and Customs OF THE EASTERN NATIONS CHAP. I. Of the
not It is enough that they are in practice to make them pass for Apostolical And seeing there are but few able Men amongst them they are incapable of Judging whether or no their Traditions be really founded on Antiquity One of the Ceremonies which hath most astonished the Latins is that which they observe with great Pomp in respect of the Mysteries when they are upon the little Altar which they call the Altar of Proposition and that before the Consecration For which is surprizing they render Extraordinary Honours to the Bread and Wine before they are consecrated and onely barely blessed Amongst their Ceremonies which are onely grounded on Tradition but Apostolical may be reckoned most part of their Sacraments because as we have observed before they do not believe that Jesus Christ was the immediate Authour of them All these Sacraments are accompanied with a great many Ceremonies because they are perswaded that too much external respect cannot be given to Holy things And therefore they Celebrate their Liturgy and other Offices with far greater Pomp than the Church of Rome doth They have besides a great many Books of their Offices but no Breviaries for the use of private Persons as the Latins have because say they the Office ought to be said publickly in the Church and not privately in a Chamber (1) Jan. Nic. Erythr in Pinacoth Francis Arcudius having thought fit to make a kind of Breviary for the use of the Greeks which he compiled out of their Books of Offices met not with the Satisfaction that he proposed to himself for the Greeks despise that Breviary and there are none but the Monks of St. Basil of the Monastery of Crypta Ferrata Fifteen Miles from Rome who use it in their Travels We shall not insist longer on the Ceremonies of the Greeks for it requires a whole Volume to describe them fully Most part of these Ceremonies have a Mystical Sense if we will Credit some of their Doctors who have written on that Subject But all Men know that there is nothing worse grounded than that Mystical and Allegorical Divinity I could rather have wished that I could have represented here in Abridgement the Singing and Musick of the great Church of Constantinople but besides that that would be too tedious there would be need also of a great many Figures I shall onely add by way of Supplement a Discourse concerning belief of Transubstantiation which is at present no less known to most of the Greeks than it is to those of the Church of Rome CHAP. II. Of Transubstantiation Whether it be acknowledged by the Greeks who are commonly called Schismaticks * THough this Question hath been largely handled by Mr. Arnaud in his Books against Mr. Claude yet it still lies under great difficulties Nay there are a great many especially amongst the Protestants who do not altogether credit the great number of Attestations produced by that Doctour in his Book of the Perpetuity because say they he gives onely a Vulgar Translation of all these Attestations without publishing the Originals and it may be they have been ill Translated besides that say the same Protestants some things are to be found in these Testimonies which are no ways the Belief of the Greeks and which by consequent give occasion to doubt of the Sincerity of these Records Wherefore some Jesuits have had a design of publishing more Authentick Attestations and in the same Languages they have been made in which will certainly be of great use However till that be done I shall here produce some Proofs of the Belief of the Greeks concerning Transubstantiation which in my Opinion ought to be preferred before all the Attestations that can be brought from the Levant because the Jesuits will not onely be suspected by Protestants but they will not fail also to say that these Attestations have been gain'd by artifice and that the modern Greeks may be made to doe any thing for Money whereas Testimonies taken out of Books that have been composed by Greeks before these Disputes are Proofs that cannot be excepted against Mr. Arnaud who saw the Force of such Proofs objected to Mr. Claude the Authority of Gabriel Archbishop of Philadelphia who in formal Termes asserts Transubstantiation in the same manner as the Latins do But seeing he had not the Book of that Authour he took it altogether upon the Testimony of Cardinal Perron who cited it in his Book of the Eucharist from whence Mr. Claude hath taken occasion to reject that Authority as being suspect in as much as the Cardinal who mentions commonly the Greek words of the Authours whom he cites related onely in French the Testimony of that Archbishop Monsieur Claude eluded also the Testimonies of the same Gabriel cited in Greek by Arcudius pretending that he had not Translated the words of that Greek Authour but that he had enlarged them by paraphrasing them after his way In this manner did that Minister elude many other Proofs of Fact by mere Subtilties untill Father Simon caused the Works of Gabriel of Philadelphia to be printed in Greek and Latin with many other Pieces taken out of Good Originals which cannot be called in Question * Since that Mr. Smith a Protestant of the Church of England who travelled into Greece hath published a Letter concerning the Present State of the Greek Church wherein he freely acknowledges that Transubstantiation is owned by the Greeks and that in a Confession of Faith not long since published in the Name of all the Greek Church the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies the same as the Latin Transubstantiatio is used These are the words of that Confession (1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Priest hath no sooner said the Prayer called the Invocation of the Holy Ghost but that the Transubstantiation is made and the Bread changed into the real body of Jesus Christ And the Wine into his real Bloud nothing more remaining but the bare Species or appearances These are as plain and formal words as any can be and contained in a Book that is generally approved all over Greece Nevertheless Mr. Smith is so far from submitting to so Authentick and Publick a Confession that though he could not accuse the Authours of Falshood as Mr. Claude not very judiciously hath done yet he hath his recourse to other Niceties which have some shew of reason and to which it is necessary to give an answer that the Faith of the Greeks may be clearly and undoubtedly known He pretends that the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath been lately invented for authorising a new opinion that Gabriel of Philadelphia is the first at least one of the first that hath made use of it that that Archbishop having lived a long time at Venice and having filled his head with School Divinity nay and being won by the Arts and Tamperings of those of the Church of Rome had asserted that by a new word which Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople by whom he
ancient Custome than a Ceremony of Religion There is a great difference to be made then betwixt the Jacobites when under that Name are comprehended the Cophties Abyssines and Armenians and those who are properly called Jacobites for though they all follow the Opinion of that same James from whom they have taken the Name yet for all that they differ in some Ceremonies Abraham Ecchellensis alledges that the Jacobites believe aswell as the Latins that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son but in that he is mistaken aswell as in many other things relating to the Belief and Customs of the Christians of the Levant CHAP. X. Of the Belief and Customs of the Cophties IT is probable that the Cophties or Copties have had their Name from a Town called Coptus which was heretofore the Metropolis of Thebais mentioned by Strabo and Plutarch The Christians of Egypt carry that Name at present and they have also a particular Language which is called the Coptick Tongue though they use it not but in their Offices Arabick being the Language of the Countrey And that Language which the Jesuit Kircher pretends to be a Mother-tongue independent of any other hath been much altered by the Greeks for besides that it still retains the Characters a very great Number of its words are pure Greek The Belief of these People is the same as that of the Jacobites for they are Monophysites as we observed when we spoke of the Jacobites and therefore it is to no purpose to repeat what we said in that Place They have at several times made several Reconciliations with the Church of Rome but onely in outward appearance (1) Sacchini in hist Societ The Jesuit Roderigo who was sent to that Nation by the Pope in the Year 1562 upon submissive and respectfull Letters which they had written to his Holiness as if they owned the Church of Rome for Chief and Mistress of all others will furnish us with a pretty instance of these counterfeit Reconciliations which most frequently have no better Foundation than mere humane Interest This Jesuit having had some Conference with two Cophties whom the Patriarch Gabriel had deputed for that purpose easily perswaded them of the Pope's Authority but when the Jesuit afterwards pressed the same Patriarch to send Letters of Submission and Obedience to the Pope telling him that he ought not to scruple at that seeing in his former Letters he had called the Pope Father of Fathers Pastour of Pastours and Head of all Churches he made answer that since the Council of Chalcedon and the establishment of divers Patriarchs independent one of another every one of them was chief and absolute Master in his own Church and that if even the Patriarch of Rome fell into any Errour he ought to be judged by the other Patriarchs He farther answered that as to the Letters which he had written to the Pope it ought not to be taken strictly what was onely meant for Civility and Modesty and that though he spoke of Obedience and Submission yet that was no more than Friends commonly doe one to another In fine he added that if there was any thing in those Letters which he wrote to the Pope that was not agreeable to the Doctrine of his Church it ought not to be imputed to him but to the Carrier of the Letters who without doubt had corrupted them In this manner did the Patriarch of the Cophties entertain the Pope's Envoys after that he had received from the Conful the Money that was sent him from Rome This History is more largely related by (1) Sacch in hist Societ Par. l. 6. the Jesuit Sacchini And I wave a great many other Reconciliations of that Church to the Church of Rome which have had no better Foundation than this The same Jesuit Roderigo observes amongst the Errours of the Cophties that they put away their Wives and Marry others that they circumcise their Children before Baptism that they acknowledge indeed seven Sacraments but that besides Baptism Confession the Eucharist and Orders they reckon in the same rank Faith Fasting and Prayer not to speak of others He says farther that the Cophties do not believe that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son that they admit but of three Councils to wit of Ephesus Constantinople and Nice But some of these pretended Errours are either common to all the Eastern Church or they particularly concern the Jacobites who have rejected the Council of Chalcedon As to their reckoning amongst the Sacraments Fasting Prayer and Faith they take not the word Sacrament in that strict Sense we do and that inclines me to believe that they call none properly Sacraments but the four first and that some Mystical Doctors have afterwards added the other three to make up the Mystical Number of Seven In fine we may observe that it is not true that the Cophties believe as the Latins do that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son as (1) Brerew of Languag and Relig. chap. 22. Brerewood after Thomas à Jesu does assure us for that belief is peculiar to the Church of the West Kircher the Jesuit adds to this that they pretend that none but their own the Armenian and Abyssine Churches are true Churches that they believe that the Souls of the departed goe neither to Heaven nor Hell before the Day of Judgment I shall not spend time in refuting many Errours of Brerewood concerning the Religions of the East It is enough I relate matters of fact as really they are without giving my self the trouble to refute Authours who have written on that Subject (2) P. Vasle Rel. della stato Pres dell Egitto Father Vanslebio who hath written the Present State of the Christians of Egypt Printed at Paris in Italian relates many other things which chiefly concern their Ceremonies He observes that when the Priest elevates the Host in time of Mass they who are present knock their Breasts casting themselves upon the ground and making the sign of the Cross and that they move their Cap a little which seems to me to be a Latin Ceremony nor do I think the Cophties elevate the Host unless it be after the manner of the Orientals to wit a little before the Communion which is of no long standing neither in their Church Possibly Father Vanslebio might have seen that Ceremony in some of the Churches of the Abyssines who might have taken it from the Portuguese that have had Churches in Ethiopia where Mass was celebrated after the manner of the Latins The same Authour remarks that when the Priest communicates he breaks the bread in form of a Cross and that he puts it into the Wine of which he eats three little Morcels with as many Spoonfulls of the Species of Wine ad that he communicates thereof to him who serves at Mass He adds that they keep not the Holy Sacrament after Mass and that they never consecrate in private Places but always
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answers to the Latin transubstantiari seeing Cyrillus Lucaris makes use of it to deny the Transubstantiation of the Church of Rome Moreover the Bishops of that Synod plainly shew what their Belief is concerning that Mystery when in the same place they Anathematize these words of Cyrill taken out of the 17th Article of his Confession (2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What is seen with the Eyes and received in the Sacrament is not the Body of our Lord. Can there be a clearer Argument to probe Transubstantiation than that Anathema The second Council held at Constantinople in the Year 1642. under Parthenius confirmed the Belief of the Latin Church with the same evidence as the former They do no more but relate the words of the Confession of Cyrill and condemn them as Heretical These words are taken out of the 17 th Article where Cyrill asserts (3) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Divine Eucharist was no more but a pure and simple Figure The Bishops assembled in that Synod object against that (4) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Jesus Christ said not this is the Figure of my Body but this is my Body to wit that which is seen received broken and which hath been already sanctified and Blessed To these two Synods I might add a third held at Jerusalem in the year 1672 printed at Paris in 1676. with a Latin Translation done by a Benedictine Monk who hardly could read the Greek so full of faults is that Translation but seeing that Synod was called on purpose against Mr. Claude who in the Preface is called (1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minister of the Calvinists of Charenton the Protestants I fear will hold it for suspected though nothing past in it but according to the Ordinary course These Bishops were at that time at Jerusalem for the Dedication of a Church and they were entreated to pronounce their Judgment upon Articles that were presented to them wherein the Protestants of France attributed their own Errours to the Greek Church They seem to have been very well informed of the matters in Question Judiciously making use of the Authority of several Books written by those of their Communion wherein these Errours were condemned Amongst other Books they alledge the answers of the Patriarch Jeremy to the Divines of Wittemberg a Book of John Nathanael Priest and Oeconomus of the Church of Constantinople which contains (2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Explication of the Liturgy Gabriel Severus Archbishop of Philadelphia whom they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Archbishop of their Brethren who reside at Venice which the Translatour hath render'd Archbishop of our Brethren of Crete They cite besides the Orthodox Confession of the Eastern Church which was published six or seven Years before since Corrected and Explained by Meletius Syrigus by order of a Synod of Moldavia and afterward printed by the care of Signor Panagioti From all these Acts they conclude that it is rather impudence than ignorance in the Protestants of France to impose upon the Simple People by attributing their Errours to the Eastern Church In fine the same Bishops endeavour to justifie the Memory of Cyrillus Lucaris by opposing other Works of his to his pretended Confession which shew him to be of a contrary Judgment There are many other things in the same Synod for Authorising Transubstantiation especially the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not left out but seeeing there is a second and more Correct Edition come forth I shall insist no longer on that Synod Onely I must subjoin somewhat by way of a Character of Cyrill who hath been so variously talked of according to the different interests that Men have defended which will not a little serve to prove the belief of Transubstantiation in the Greek Church Cyrillus Lucaris who is become so famous amongst the Greeks and Latins was born in Crete and entred very young into the service of Meletius Patriarch of Alexandria who was also of Crete and who having found him to be a Man of Parts and Studious ordained him Priest After that he went to Padua to prosecute his Studies from whence returning to Alexandria Meletius made him Head of a Monastery and sent him into Walachia which gave him occasion in passing through Germany to have Conferences with the Protestants of that Countrey understanding the Latin Tongue and School Divinity excellently well Being come back from his Commission he made use of the Money that he had gathered for the Necessary occasions of the Patriarch to get himself chosen Patriarch and being raised to that Dignity he entertained his Correspondence with the Protestants employing for that purpose Metrophanes Critopulus who has writton a Book concerning the belief of his Church Printed at Helmstadt This Metrophanes went in Name of his Patriarch into England and over a good part of Germany where he informed himself as exactly as he could of the State of the Protestants whereof he made a report to Cyrill whom he found at Constantinople where he was casting about how he might get into the Patriarchate of that Church This made him contract a Friendship with the Ambassadours of England and Holland then at the Port especially with the latter who proved afterward usefull to him for advancing his Affairs Cyrill being as yet but a Monk had got a particular acquaintance with the Heer Cornelius Haga who then travelled in the Levant and who being afterward come back to Constantinople in Quality of Envoy from the States General renewed his Ancient Acquaintance with Cyrill who at that time was Patriarch of Alexandria and who entreated him to send for some Books of the Protestant Divines professing to have some liking of their Opinions This being a desire which the Heer Haga could not refuse gave advice of it to his Masters who failed not presently to send as many Books to Constantinople as were sufficient to have corrupted all Greece had they been written in the Language of the Countrey It was impossible but that the affairs of Cyrill must make a Noise especially having the Jesuits of Constantinople for Enemies who in every thing opposed his designs publishing aloud that he was a Heretick and gave advice of it to the Jesuits of Paris that the King might be informed of the same The matter was represented to the Ambassador of the States at Paris who wrote about it to Constantinople From that time forward Cyrill observed no such measures with the Jesuits as he had done before He made no Scruple to give the Heer Haga a Confession of Faith written in Latin with his own Hand which some time after he turned into Greek It is the same Confession which was Printed at Geneva in Greek and Latin and which made the French Protestants say that the Greek Church agreed with them in the chief points of their belief especially as to the matter of the Eucharist Cyrill in the mean time who had a strong Party in
Constantinople against the Jesuits and Court of Rome was chosen Patriarch and for the space of five or six Months after made nothing appear in his Actions that might give any sign of Defection from the Religion of his fore-Fathers But seeing he had the Jesuits for Enemies he thought himself obliged to declare for the Hollanders that he might be seconded by them he engaged also in his party a considerable Number of Bishops and Churchmen who relished his opinions and were in the same Disposition as he was to introduce Novelties into the Greek Church But they were not the Stronger because the Jesuits who have a College at Constantinople where they teach the Youth Gratis easily gained the People who made an Insurrection against Cyrill The Greeks held an Assembly in the year 1622. wherein he was deposed from his Patriarchate and banished to the Isle of Rhodes Another Patriarch was chosen in his Place who by Letters submitted himself to the court of Rome that had forwarded his Election But seeing Cyrill still entertained a Party in Constantinople and that the Dutch supplied him with great Summs of Money it was not long before he was restored to his Patriarchate Then it was that he revenged himself on the Jesuits and those who had espoused the Interests of the Court of Rome and that Calvinism reigned at Constantinople This brought great Disorders into that Church for Cyrill set every thing to sale that he might pay the Money which he had borrowed of the Dutch The Jesuits and Court of Rome finding that Cyrill had absolutely got the better on 't endeavoured to gain him by proposing terms of accommodation and representing to him the danger of his Church if he continued those Intrigues with the Calvinists He seemed to be very willing to embrace an accommodation but seeing he still continued his Practices with the Dutch the Court of Rome made a fresh attempt to turn him out of his Chair which succeeded but for a very short time because the Dutch Money soon recalled him again to his Patriarchate The Court of Rome doubling their efforts against Cyrill sent one to Constantinople in Quality of Vicar of the Patriarch for maintaining the Orthodox Faith in that Church which seemed to be upon the brink of Ruine Cyrill's Party failed not to lay hold on that occasion to render the Jesuits and their Party odious to the Turks who were jealous of that Envoy of Rome Insomuch that he was very ill used by the Turks and Cyrill cruelly revenged himself on all the Greeks whom he thought to be his Enemies Nevertheless he rendered himself so odious by his great vexations and had so powerfull a Party as the Jesuits of Constantinople seconded by the Court of Rome to deal with that he at length fell and was strangled by express Orders from the Grand Signior This is the History of the Patriarch Cyrillus Lucaris in whose Name the Huguenots Printed a Confession of Faith boasting that they agreed in Opinions with the Greek Church But with the glance of an Eye one may judge what kind of a Confession of Faith it is It is true it was written by a Patriarch of Constantinople with the Title of The Belief of the Eastern Church but it was not written in name of that Church nor hath it any publick approbation Cyrill gave it privately to the Dutch Ambassadour whose assistance he needed to defend him against the Jesuits of Constantinople That work of Cyrill's is much like the Book that is said to have been made by William Postel for a Nun whom he perswaded that he might squeeze a little Money from her that the Messiah came into the world onely for Men and that she Lady Jean was to be the Messiess of the Women There is as much likelyhood of truth in that Confession of Cyrill's that went under the name of the Greek Church as there is in the Impostures of that famous Normand William Postel and I wonder that Protestants should still dare to object to Catholicks that pretended Confession Grotius gave a better Judgment of it in a Book that he published some time after that Confession came abroad in the word wherein he frankly says (1) Nuper Constantinopoli Cyrillus sine Patriarchis sine Metropolitis sine Episcopis novum nobis propinavit Symbolum Grot. de Antichrist that Cyrill forged a new Symbol without the assistance of any Patriarchs Archbishops or Bishops Now after all I have related the History of this Cyrill with all the exactness I could without any regard to what the Dutch have written of him nor to what Leo Allatius hath said who also exceeds the bounds of moderation I have scarcely mentioned any thing but what is agreed upon by both the opposite Parties Besides Cyrill there are other Greeks of less note who have written in favour of the Protestants and amongst others one Gergan a Bishop who hath published a Catechism wherein he openly denies Transubstantiation but with this difference from Cyrill that he follows not the Confession of Geneva but that of Ausbourg If we compare the Doctrine of this Catechism with that of the Greek Church we shall find it almost different in every Point that it may be accommodated to the Sentiments of Protestants as when it saith that Scripture alone is sufficient without the help of Tradition to prove the Articles of our Creed That the Scripture is plain and clear as to the Points of Faith and that Scripture ought to be interpreted by Scripture In a word Gergan is a Protestant and onely a Greek in Language and that too a base Vulgar Greek Nevertheless he dares boast that he is none of those false Brethren (2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who have been poisoned at Rome But it is generally known that the Greeks themselves who have no Commerce with Rome confirm neither the Confession of Ausbourg nor of Geneva in their Books Protestants may also reckon amongst the Greeks of their Communion Nathanael of Crete who promised some time agoe to the Dutch that he would translate Calvin's Institutions into Greek and teach his Countrey-men Calvinism provided they gave him the Summ of Money which he demanded Mr. Claude adds to all these Greek Calvinists the Testimony of one Meletius Metropolitan of Ephesus in an answer he made about thirty Years agoe to the Divines of Leyden as to several Questions that had been put to him Father Simon made answer to Mr. Claude that he doubted not but that that was the Act of some Greek gained by the Dutch Divines who answered their Questions as they themselves would have him and that to judge of that answer it would be proper to publish it in the Authours Language I procured by means of one of Mr. Claude's Friends whom he could not deny a Copy of that answer and having read it I found that Father Simon 's conjecture was a real truth For Meletius who in that Letter takes the Title of Archbishop of Ephesus not onely
denies Transubstantiation but also the Honour that is rendered to the Virgin and Saints and many other Points which all Men do agree the Greeks believe And that one may the better judge of it I shall subjoin at the End of this Book (1) See the Acts at the End of the Book E. the abstract which I had of Mr. Claude written by the Hand of one of his Friends It is sufficient to refer Protestants to the Confession of Faith composed by Metrophanes Critopulus who was one of their Friends and written at their Solicitation even when he lived amongst them By that Confession of Metrophanes they may judge whether that which Mr. Claude hath published under the Name of Meletius Archbishop of Ephesus have the least colour of truth But it is time now to return to the objections of Mr. Smith It is still objected against the Belief of Transubstantiation in the Greek Church that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to be found neither in the Fathers Liturgies nor Symbols nay and that in the Liturgy the Bread and Wine are called Antitypes even after the Consecration which seems wholly to exclude Transubstantiation [*] 1 Quid vetat quo minùs quae captui nostro perplexa in Scripturis impedità que sunt ea verbis planioribus explicemus Calv. lib. 1. Inst cap. 3. 2 Hujusmodi autem verborum novitas tum potissimum usu venit dum adversus calumniatores asserenda est veritas qui tergiversando ipsam eludunt Ibid. But that is a very frivolous negative Argument which from a single word concludes a positive thing If it were put to Protestants to stick to their Principle which is the Scripture alone and even to the Ancient Symbols they would find themselves much perplexed But that I may more plainly shew the fallacy of that way of reasoning I shall oppugn it by no other Authour than John Calvin in his Institutions where he judiciously refutes the Heresie of Servetus concerning the Trinity of the Persons in God He lays down this for a Maxime 1 that it is lawfull to invent new words to explain things more clearly 2 especially when we have to doe with Cavillers who by the help of words perplex things In that manner adds he the Church hath been obliged to invent the Names of Trinity and Persons We should have a care saith that Authour lest by rejecting Names which have not been rashly invented we be accused of Pride and Temerity Quando temerè non inventa sunt nomina cavendum esse ne ea repudiando superbae temeritatis arguamur (1) Hic efferbuit impietas dum nomen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pessimè odisse execrari Ariani coeperunt Ibid. Impiety immediately broke out says Calvin still when the Arians began to hate and abhor the word Consubstantial These Principles of Calvin may be easily applied to the matter in hand Both the Eastern and the Western Churches had no need of inventing new Terms in regard of the Eucharist so long as no body doubted the truth of that Mystery The Western Church was the first that made use of such nay and the onely Church for many Ages because she had the Berengarians to deal with There was no necessity then that the Greek Church should make use of that term because she had no occasion for it or any other of the like nature But since the new Berengarians became known to some of them and that they perceived that the word transubstantiatio invented by the Latins as happily expressed the change that is made in the Eucharist as their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explained the Consubstantiality of the Son with God the Father they have thought fit to make use of it and it hath been more frequently employed by them since the great Bustle they had with Cyrillus Lucaris their Patriarch And this I take to be the plain and natural reason of the omission of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Ancient Greek Books To which we may add that if the Argument of Mr. Smith were consequential it would in the same manner prove that the Latins believe not Transubstantiation because that word is not to be found neither in their Mass nor Symbols But let us at length come to the last objection The Symbols of Bread and Wine are called Antitypes or Figures even after the Consecration in the Liturgy of the Greeks whence it is inferred that in that they differ very much from the Belief of the Latins But it seems Mr. Smith is not very Learned in the Theology of the Greeks since he says generally that they call the Symbols Antitypes even after the Consecration There is not a Greek at present nor hath there been for these nine Hundred Years any of that opinion It is certain all the Modern Greeks pretend that the Consecration is not performed till after the Prayer which they call the Invocation of the Holy Ghost which Prayer in the Liturgy follows the words that call the Sacred Symbols Antitypes Mark of Ephesus who was Head of the Party against the Latins in the Council of Florence makes use of that Place of the Liturgy to prove that the Consecration consists not in these words This is my Body but in the Prayer or Benediction of the Priest made afterward by invocating the Holy Ghost That zealous Champion for the Faith of the Greeks grounds his assertion chiefly on this that St. Basil in his Liturgy calls the Symbols (1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Antitypes after the Priest hath said these words This is my Body whence he concludes that they are not as yet consecrated seeing they still retain the Name of Antitypes or Figures The Patriarch Jeremy speaks of Antitypes also in the same manner and he affirms (2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they who have called the Bread and Wine Antitypes have onely given them that Appellation before the Consecration In that they agree with the Opinion of all the Greek Authours since the Eighth Century when that Question was handled in the second Council of Nice The Deacon Epiphanes declared in name of all the Bishops in that Council that the Terms (1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Antitypes could not otherways be understood in the Liturgy of St. Basil that for the Gifts before the Consecration and that after the Consecration they were called the real Body and Bloud of Jesus Christ St. John Damascene Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople and in a word all the Defenders of Image-worship are of that Judgment and object it to the Iconoclasts as a strong Argument to authorise the Honour paid to Images since Honours say they are rendered to the Holy Gifts whilst they are as yet but Antitypes or Images before the Consecration Since that time all the Greeks speak the same Language They however who have any knowledge of the Greek Fathers are obliged to confess that the Bishops of the Council of Nice were mistaken in matter of fact and
on purpose by the Patriarch Elias who stood in need of the Assistance of Rome The same Judgment we are to make of the Letters which the Nestorians assembled at Mosul for the Election of a new Patriarch wrote to Pope Julius III. wherein they give him the Title of Head of all Bishops in the same manner as St. Peter was of all the other Disciples That is not the ordinary Language of the Orientals in regard of the Bishop of Rome whom they do indeed acknowledge to be the chief of Patriarchs but that according to them is onely a Primacy of Honour and not of Jurisdiction and Power over the rest The same patriarch Elias annexed to his Letter the Confession of Faith of his Church where amongst other Articles it is said that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father that the Son hath taken a Body of the Holy Virgin that he is perfect both in Soul and in Mind and in all that belongs to a Man that the Word having descended into a Virgin was united to the Man and became one thing with that Man in the same manner as the Fire and the Iron are united together that that Unity is without either Mixture or Confusion and therefore it is that the Properties of each Nature cannot be destroyed after the Union that they believe that Jesus Christ who is begotten of his Father from all Eternity as to his Divinity was born of a Virgin in the fulness of time and united with the Nature of his Humanity As to what is objected to them that they call not the Virgin the Mother of God but Mother of Jesus Christ he answers that they speak in that manner to condemn the Apollinarians who pretend that the Divinity is without the Humanity and to confound Themistius who affirmed that Christ was onely Humanity without Divinity He farthermore adds that that is the Belief of the Church of Rome and that he receives all which that Church teaches that he acknowledges the Pope to be Head of all Churches and that out of the same Church of Rome there is no Salvation Now seeing Elias Patriarch of Babylon otherwise of the Nestorians could not come to Rome himself He dispatched to the Pope some of the ablest and most prudent Men about him to make the Reconciliation of the two Churches They together framed an Explanation of the Articles of their Religion where they laid down at length the manner of reconciling their Belief with that of the Church of Rome Abbot Adam who was one of the Deputies was charged with that Commentary or Explanation and the Patriarch accompanied him with a Letter to the Pope (1) Epist El. Patr. ad Paul V. wherein he treats of that Reconciliation of Belief and makes it appear that the two Churches differ onely in Ceremonies but that as to the Doctrine of Faith all the Disputes with the Church of Rome are but nominal He reduces those Points of Belief wherein he pretends to differ onely in Name from Rome to five Heads to wit in that the Nestorians call not the Virgin the Mother of God but Mother of Christ in that they assign to J. C. but one Power and one Will in that they acknowledge in J. C. but one Person in that they say barely that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and in fine in that they believe that the Light which is made on Holy Saturday at the Sepulchre of our Lord is a Light truly miraculous The Patriarch Elias having taken the Advice of the most knowing Men about him pretends that in all these Points they understand not one another aright And in effect Abbot Adam endeavours to justify himself in a long Discourse of which we shall onely here relate a Summary without speaking of the two last Articles which are common to all the Orientals the three first onely relating particularly to the Nestorians and I find that that Abbot evidently proves that the Modern Nestorianism is but a Heresie in Name and that it hath onely been condemned because not understood In the first place the Abbot makes appear that it is easie to reconcile the Roman Church which calls the Virgin Mother of God with the Nestorian which calls her Mother of Jesus Christ because it is a Principle received by both Churches that the Divinity neither generates nor is generated so that the Virgin hath engendered Jesus Christ who is God and Man both together but that it is not therefore to be believed that there are two Sons but one onely true Son insomuch that there is in Jesus Christ but one Filiation and one onely visible Person which the Nestorians call Parsopa In fine he concludes that they deny not but that the Virgin may be called Mother of God because Jesus Christ is really God and that that Doctrine is agreeable to the words of St. John in his Gospel of St. Paul and St. Gregory Nazianzene wherefore says he according to these Principles the Church of Rome acknowledges really that the Virgin is the Mother of God and the Orientals with good reason say also that she is Mother of Christ and yet for all that differ not in Judgment In the second place he examines the difference that seems to be betwixt the Roman and Nestorian Churches touching the Natures and Persons in Jesus Christ It is certain the Latins acknowledge two Natures and one onely Person in Christ whereas the Nestorians say that there are two Persons in him and one Parsopa or visible Person and besides that there is but one Power and Virtue in him He reconciles those two Opinions that seem at first so different by the explication which he gives of that Mystery The Orientals or Nestorians says he according to the two Natures that are in Christ distinguish in their Mind two Persons but with their Eyes they see but one Christ who is onely the Parsopa or Appearance of one Filiation And it is in that Sense also that the Nestorians acknowledge but one Power or Virtue in Christ because they look upon him but as one Parsopa or visible Person and so by reason of that real and perfect Union which makes but one Compositum of two Natures the Divine and Humane they distinguish not a double Power or Virtue making the Terms to rest on the Unity of Filiation Whereas in the Church of Rome these Powers or Virtues are distinguished into Divine and Humane because they are considered with relation to the Natures and it may easily be concluded from thence that this Diversity of Judgment is onely apparent since in effect the Nestorians confess with the Latins that there are two Natures in Christ and that each Nature hath its Power and its Virtue and besides both Churches acknowledge that there is no Mixture nor Confusion of those two Natures each retaining the Attributes which are proper to them In fine for a greater Illustration of his Opinion he adds these words As the Fathers of the Church of Rome acknowledge one
Symony because that is to them instead of a Benefice and what hath been said before when we spoke of the Greeks may be applyed to them XII I think the Submission that the Nestorians have for their Patriarch ought not to be reckoned an Errour neither because the Orientals look upon all Patriarchates even that of Rome as Powers established by positive Law And if it be objected to them as a reproach that they have an Aversion to the Pope they answer that the Pope takes to himself Rights over the Churches of the East which these Churches do not acknowledge As to their not having Curates nor Vicars but that the Eldest Priest presides in their Assemblies that cannot rationally be called an Errour on the contrary it is an Excellent Discipline and it were to be wished that it were established in all Churches for a Remedy to many abuses which are at present in Benefices XIII In fine most part of that which Meneses calls Corruptions amongst the Nestorians is not so in effect unless it be in the Imagination of some Emissaries who measure Religion according to what they have been taught in their Schools Can it be said for instance that it is an Errour in these People and other Christians of the East to eat flesh on Saturday which amongst them is a Festival-day agreeable to the ancient Practice of the Church Can it be said also that the Nestorians err in relation to Marriage because they take the first Priest that they meet with to marry them We must know that in the Eastern Church the Priest is not barely a Witness of the Marriage but that he is the onely and true Minister of it as of the other Sacraments and Ceremonies CHAP. IX Of the Customs and Ceremonies of the Jacobites IF under the Name of Jacobites we comprehend all the Monophysites of the East that is to say all those to whom that Heresie is imputed of acknowledging but one Nature in Jesus Christ it is certain that that Sect is of a very large extent for it comprehends the Armenians the Cophties and the Abyssines but they who are properly called Jacobites are but very few in number and they live chiefly in Syria and Mesopotamia They are not in all at most above forty or five and forty thousand Families And these too are divided about Doctrine for some are Latinized and others sitll continue in separation from the Church of Rome Nay at present there is some Division among this last sort for they have two Patriarchs opposite the one to the other one residing at Caremit and the other at Derzapharan Besides them there is another Latinized Patriarch called Andrew who resides at Aleppo and depends on the Court of Rome to which he is wholly subject I have moreover been informed by a Jacobite Priest who lived at Aleppo that the Patriarch suffers much because of the Emissaries that were there and especially because of the Capuchins As to their Belief all the Monophysites whether Jacobites Armenians Cophties or Abyssines are of the Opinion of Dioscorus touching the Unity of Nature and Person in Christ and therefore they are accounted Hereticks though in effect they differ not from the Latin Divines but onely in the manner of expressing themselves The Learnedest of them acknowledge this at present as appears (1) P. Sacchini hist Societ Part. 2. lib. 6. by the Conference that Father Christopher Roderigo sent by the Pope into Egypt had with the Cophties about the Reunion of the two Churches for they confessed that they onely expressed themselves in that manner to distinguish them from the Nestorians but that in effect they differed not from the Church of Rome which asserts two Natures in Christ They even pretend that they explain the Mystery of the Incarnation saying that there is but one Nature because there is but one Christ God and Man better than the Latins do who speak say they of these two Natures as if they were separate and did not constitute a real Compositum In that Sense is it also that Dioscorus who softened some Terms of Eutyches which appeared too harsh said that he acknowledged that Christ was composed (1) Ex duabus naturis of two Natures but that he was not (2) Duas naturas two Natures which seems to be Orthodox for they will not acknowledge that there are two Natures in Christ for fear of asserting two Christs Nor do I doubt but that if some bold Expressions and the Consequences that are commonly drawn from them were laid aside in the Opinion of Eutyches it might be easily reconciled with the Doctrine of the Church of Rome All the difference proceeds onely from the different use of the words Nature and Person and the desire of maintaining what once hath been asserted as in effect Eutyches defended his Opinion with headstrong Wilfulness and Obstinacy so that all the Terms that he makes use of are not to be taken according to the Rigour of the Letter but they ought to be explained and limited according to the Idea which he had conceived of admitting but one Christ and therefore but one Nature after that the Union of the two Natures to wit the Divine and Humane is made in a manner which we cannot comprehend For that which is attributed to Eutyches that he believed that the Body of Christ was a Divine Body and of a Nature different from ours is rather the Oratory of the Preacher who might say that the Body of Jesus Christ after the Union was in a manner made Divine than a real and physical Truth However there was reason for condemning that Sentiment because such ways of speaking are to be avoided which may be wrong interpreted and occasion Errours in Religion As to the other Points both of the Belief and Ceremonies of the Jacobites what (1) Brerewood of Languag and Relig. Chap. 21. Brerewood relates of them is not always true For instance they deny not Purgatory nor the Prayers for the Dead as he affirms after Thomas à Jesu but they have the same Opinion as to that as the Greeks and other Orientals have Nor is it true that they consecrate in Unleavened bread unless it be understood of the Armenians and according to Alvares of the Ethiopians for the true Jacobites of whom we speak in this Place consecrate with Leavened bread and I make no doubt but that Gregory XIII who had a Design of erecting a College at Rome for the Jacobites as he had done for the Maronites would have permitted them to consecrate in Leavened bread in the same manner as it was allowed to the Greeks In regard of Confession neither is it true that it is not practised amongst them but seeing they believe it not to be of Divine Right no more than most of the Orientals do that is the reason why it is neglected As to Circumcision that cannot be true but of some Cophties and Abyssines nay and these look upon it rather as an