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. lovel. A. M.  
LONDON, Printed by J. Heptinstall, for Henry Faithorne and John Kersey at the Rose in St. Paul's Churchyard. MDCLXXXV.   

THE TRANSLATOR TO THE READER.  
IF at anytime a Book of this nature hath been useful, 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 trimmed under a disguise of Conformity: And therefore to prevent the mistakes and disappointments that those who labour about so good a Work, as the Uniting 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 Persuasions, 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 rectify mistakes, or confirm the truth amongst men. In order to that useful discovery, probably none of those many, who have laboriously sifted the truth by their Critics, deserve the Title of Candid and Impartial Judges, better than Father Simon, the Learned Author of this Treatise, who through the whole Book has employed his great Talon 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, do better service to the public, 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 Author 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 Judgement, a meaner Argument either for or against that Doctrine, than the belief of an ignorant and oppressed 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 Author of a Discourse lately published against Transubstantiation manages the Controversy 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 enjoined by the second Council of Nice; which to me is as strong an Argument as any that Father Simon has produced, 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 only 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 careful not to offend in any thing against the public) 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 convinced) to acknowledge a mistake.  
A. lovel.   

A Table of the Chapters of this Book, and of the Pieces subjoined 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 Schismatics. p. 33.  
Chap. III. Of the Adoration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Whether it be in use amongst the Greeks. p. 57  
Chap. IU. 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, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. 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 Belief and Customs of the Modern Greeks.  
SEEING all the Sects that are at present in the Eastern Countries, have sprung from the Greeks, and that excepting some particular Points, for which they have separated from them, they agree in the rest of their Belief and Ceremonies, it is necessary that we treat first of the Religion of the Greeks, before we come to those others that depend upon it.  
The Greek Church subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople was not always of that vast extent, to which it attained after that it pleased the Eastern Emperors to lessen other Patriarchates for greatening that of Constantinople: which they could the more easily do, because their Power, as to things of that Nature, hath been far greater than that of the Emperors of the West, and that for erecting of new Bishoprics, or granting new Rights and Jurisdictions, they stood but very little on the consent of Patriarches; whereas in the Western Church, the Popes by Degrees have become Supreme in these Affairs, and Princes must now have their recourse to them.  
There are several Lists of Churches which are subject to that of Constantinople: but because they are ancient, and do not sufficiently inform us of the Extent to which that Church pretends, we shall produce two that are later, one made by a Greek not much known, called Nilus Doxapatrius, 
(1) See the Lists that are at the End of the Book. A.  and related by Leo Allatius. And the other mentioned in the Letter of Mr. Smith 
(2) In the same Place. B.  concerning the Present State of the Greek Church, which he assures us he had from some Greeks of Constantinople. Both these Lists are in Greek and Latin, subjoined to the end of this Treatise. Let it now suffice us to observe here, that most of the Greek Metropolitans still retain certain Dignities or Titles of Honour, which distinguish them one from another; so that when the Patriarch of Constantinople writes to the Archbishops, nay and to some Bishops, he never fails to give them their Titles, even in the miserable State to which they are at present reduced. The Greeks, in all times, have been nice in distinguishing themselves by Titles of Honour, and by lofty and magnificent Names: which by many is attributed to an Oriental vanity: whilst they who are more sparing in Censure, will attribute it to their Politeness and Civility. Though the Church of Constantinople hath lost the great Splendour, which it enjoyed under Christian Emperors, yet the Churchmen still take to themselves Titles of Honour and Pompous Names, of which they are proud. Nor are the Monks and Religious free from that Ambition; And that's the reason why Modern Greek Writers attribute commonly to themselves such kinds of Titles, and prefix them to their Books; as, for instance, Doctor of the Great Church, and the like, which do not always excuse them from the ignorance wherein they are plunged. But let us now speak of their Belief.  
Since the Greek Church hath been reduced to the sad State wherein we see it at present, the Latins have imposed many things upon them without cause, and the Emissaries have often called them Heretics without any ground. But, at length, some Learned Men at Rome under Pope Urban VIII. perceived the ignorance of the Latin Divines, that condemned for Heresy what ever they had not learned in their Schools. This hath been already observed by an Author who published his Travels to Mount Libanus, with some pretty large Remarks, wherein he explains the Theology of the Eastern Churches. That Author alleges, that the Latins often accuse the Greeks of Innovation, without any reason, and that if Theology were traced to its source, it would be found that the Greeks have stuck closer to Antiquity than the Latins have done.  
We have, of late, some learned Works on that Subject, which seem to have been composed by an Author, that hath solidly refuted what the ablest Protestants of France alleged in that matter. However, I think the Author of the Notes upon Gabriel of Philadelphia hath come nearest the Truth, by keeping a mean betwixt both Parties, and distinguishing the new Greeks who have read the Books of the Latins, or have studied in their Schools, from those who have had no Commerce with them; he confesses that the former agree more with the Latins than the other, at least as to the manner of Expression. The Author of the Remarks on the Voyage to Mount Libanus hath gone farther: for the affirms that the Modern Greeks do for most part but Copy the Books of the Latins; not following in all things the Sentiments of their Forefathers; and besides, that their minds being raised but little above Popular traditions, they take no pains to search for Divinity in its Original. Nay he adds, that the Works of Gabriel Archbishop of Philadelphia, though he be in the Number of those who are not reunited to the Latin Church, are no more but a medley of the Theology of the Greeks and Latins; which is chief to be understood of the method and expressions. P. Morin was also of that opinion, when in his Works of Penance and Ordinations, he speaks of the Archbishop of Philadelphia.  
If we follow that Principle, which is very well grounded in these two Authors, we shall more easily discover what the Belief of the Greeks is, and it will be no hard matter to reconcile the different Opinions of those who have written on that Subject. I could not, in my Judgement, make the Belief of the Modern Greeks more apparent; than by inserting the Catalogue which Caucus Archbishop of Corfou hath made of the Errors which he imputes to them; and by adding at the same time, some necessary Reflections for distinguishing what is true from what is false in that matter, which hath been variously treated by different Authors.  

(1) Caucus in Hist. de Graec. recentiorum Haeresibus.  Caucus a Noble Venetian and Archbishop of Corfou, in the Book that he wrote concerning the Errors of the New Greeks, dedicated to Pope Gregory XIII. observes the following Errors.  
I. They re-baptise all the Latins that embrace their Communion.  
II. They delay the Baptism of Children until the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, tenth and eighteenth Year of their Age.  
III. Of the seven Sacraments of the Roman Church, they admit not Confirmation, nor Extreme Unction.  
iv They deny Purgatory, though they pray for the Dead.  
V They acknowledge not absolutely the Primacy of the Pope.  
VI They deny that the Church of Rome is the true Catholic Church, and that she is Mistress of all other Churches. They even prefer their own Church before the Latin Church, and on Holy Thursday excommunicate the Pope, and all the Latin Bishops as Heretics and Schismatics.  
VII. They deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son.  
VIII. They refuse to adore the Holy Sacrament in the Mass of Latin Priests who consecrate in unleavened bread, according to the ancient Custom of the Roman Church confirmed by the Council of Florence. Nay they wash the Altars on which the Latins have celebrated, and will not suffer Latin Priests to celebrate upon their Altars, because they pretend that the Sacrifice ought to be performed with leavened bread.  
IX. They say that the Ordinary words wherein the Latins make the Consecration to consist, are not sufficient to change the Bread and the Wine into the Body and Blood of our Lord, if some Prayers and Benedictions of the Fathers be not added.  
X. They affirm that the Communion under both kinds is to be given to Children, even before they can distinguish that Nourishment from another, because that is a matter of Divine Right. And therefore they give the Communion to Children immediately after Baptism, and they account the Latins, who are of a contrary Judgement, Heretics.  
XI. They hold that Laymen are by Divine Law obliged to communicate under both kinds, and call the Latins Heretics for maintaining the contrary.  
XII. They affirm that Believers when they have attained to years of discretion, are not to be forced to communicate every Year at Easter; but that they are to have liberty of Conscience.  
XIII. They show no Respect, Worship, nor Veneration to the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, even when their Priests celebrate, and they carry it to the Sick without Torchlight. Besides, they keep it in a little Bag and Box, without other Ceremony, than fastening it to the Wall; whereas they light Lamps before their Images.  
XIV. They believe that the Host consecrated on Holy Thursday, is much more efficacious, than those which are consecrated on ordinary Days.  
XV. They deny that the Sacrament of Marriage is a Bond which cannot be broken. And therefore they accuse the Church of Rome of Error, for teaching that Marriage cannot be dissolved in the Case of Adultery, and that it is not allowed to marry again in that Case. But the Greeks teach the contrary, and practise it daily.  
XVI. They condemn fourth Marriages.  
XVII. They solemnize not the Festivals of the Virgin, Apostles and other Saints instituted by the Catholic Church and the Fathers, on the same Days that the Western Church celebrates them: and besides that they do it after another manner, they also despise the Feasts of many very ancient Saints.  
XVIII. They say that the Canon of the Latin Mass ought to be abrogated, as being full of Errors.  
XIX. They deny that Usury is a mortal Sin.  
XX. They deny that Subdeaconship is at present a sacred Order.  
XXI. Of all the General Councils that have been celebrated in the Catholic Church by Popes at different times, they admit of none after the seventh General Council which is the second of Nice, that was called against those who rejected Images. The Greeks acknowledge none of the rest, and submit not to their Decrees.  
XXII. They deny Auricular Confession to be of Divine Right, pretending it only to be a Positive and Ecclesiatical Constitution.  
XXIII. They say that laymen's Confessions ought to be arbitrary. And therefore amongst them, Laics are not constrained to confess once a year, and they are not excommunicated for neglecting it.  
XXIV. They pretend that in Confession it is not necessary, nor of Divine Right, that men should confess all their Sins in particular, nor yet tell all the Circumstances that altar the nature of a Sin.  
XXV. They give the Communion to Laics, both in Health and Sickness, though they have not before confessed their Sins to a Priest; and that, because they are persuaded that Confession is arbitrary, and that Faith is the only and true Preparation for receiving the Eucharist.  
XXVI. They slight the Vigils of the Latins, before the Festivals of Our Lord, the Virgin and Apostles; aswell as the Fasts of the Ember-weeks. Nay on these Days they eat Flesh in contempt of the Latins.  
XXVII. They accuse the Latins of Heresy, because they eat flesh that hath been strangled, and other Meats that are condemned in the Old Testament.  
XXVIII. They deny that simple Fornication is a mortal Sin.  
XXIX. They affirm that it is lawful to deceive an Enemy, and that it is no Sin to do him Injury.  
XXX. As to Restitution they are of the Opinion, that it is not necessary to Salvation to restore what one has rob.  
XXXI. In fine, they believe, that he who hath once been a Priest, may return again to a Lay-condition.  
These are the Opinions that distinguish the Greeks from the Latins, if we credit Caucus, who attributes that Belief not only to the Greeks of Corfou, but also to the other Greeks who are separated from the Church of Rome.  
But if we listen to 
(1) Caucus Venetus Archiepiscopus Corcyrensis, vir nullius plane doctrinae vel Judicii ... Libello edito de Graecorum recentiorum haeresibus, Graecos omnes non sine evidenti calumnia diffamavit ... an mendacio, an scelere, an fraud, an falaciis ... summorum Pontificum gratia demerenda est? Leo Allat. lib. 3. de Consens. cap. 10.  Leo Allatius, Caucus is an Ignorant, a Slanderer and a Man without Judgement, who thought to oblige the Pope by multiplying the Errors of the Greeks, and hath attributed to all, what he learned and saw in Corfou. Nevertheless, it is no hard matter to justify Caucus in most part of the Opinions which he imputes to the Greeks, unless, perhaps, in what concerns Morality, the Corruption whereof proceeds rather from private Persons, than an universal and approved Belief; and it is to be feared that it may be objected to Allatius, that he hath softened a great many things in the Opinions of the Greeks, through a Design of Reconciliation, and to curry Favour with Pope Urban VIII. who at that time proposed to himself the Reunion of the Greeks to the Church of Rome, by soft and mild ways. In effect, if we carefully examine the Errors which Caucus imputes to the Modern Greeks, we shall find that few Men have more exactly observed them. And, indeed, the Pope having enjoined him to do it, there is no probability that he would have imposed upon the Pope, in an affair of that importance. Seeing he was not learned in the Divinity of the Ancients, he hath referred all to School-Divinity, and the Decisions of the Council of Trent, which he took to be the Rule according to which he ought to condemn as erroneous, what ever did not conform thereunto; and in that his sincerity appears the more. For, for a long time he had informed himself wherein they agreed with the Church of Rome, and wherein they differed, condemning, nevertheless, too boldly what suited not with the Practice of his Church. But let us consider more particularly, whether Caucus be so great a Slanderer, and whether he hath imposed so much on the Greeks, as Leo Allatius would have the World believe.  
In the first Place, as to the re-baptising of the Latins, it is certain that they have done it in other Places, besides Corfou; and that because of the Enmity they bear towards them, looking upon all their Ceremonies as abominable. And for the same reason they condemn the Mass of the Latins, wash their Altars after a Latin Priest hath celebrated on them, as if they had been polluted, and consider the Unleavened bread consecrated by the Latins as an impure thing. Proofs of this may be had not only in Catholic Writers, but even in the Oriental Canon Law, and especially in 
(1) Resp. Demetrii Archiep. Bulgar.  the Answers of the Patriarches, where most cases that concern the Ceremonies of the Latins, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  are proposed, and resolved against those who made appear so great an Aversion to the Ceremonies of the Latins. Whence it may be inferred, that most part of the Greeks rejected the Ceremonies that are observed in the Church of Rome, as impure and profane, and that none but some Learned Men amongst them, have endeavoured to moderate that great Aversion which was generally had against the Ceremonies of the Latins. And we ought not to be surprised at this, seeing the Latins have not been more favourable to the Baptism and Leavened bread of the Greeks, as Appears by several Letters of the Popes 
(1) Epist. Clement. VII. apud Allat. lib. de interst.  who have written in their favour. Besides that some School Divines have doubted of the Validity of their Baptism, and their other Sacraments, as might easily be proved.  
Secondly, that which hath made Caucus say, that the Greeks acknowledge not the Sacraments of Confirmation and Extreme Unction, is because he considered them with relation to the Practice of the Church of Rome, wherein the former of these Sacraments is administered separately from Baptism; and is at present one of the great Functions of Bishops (to whom it is reserved,) in their Visitations. The other is never administered in the Church of Rome, but to those who are at the Point of Death; from whence that Sacrament hath been called Extreme Unction. But the Greeks administer that first Sacrament at the same time they do Baptism, and the Oriental Church hath always retained that Custom, which differs from the Practice of he Western. Besides, amongst the Greeks, as in all other Parts of the East, the Priest administers that Sacrament, as may be seen in the Dissertation which 
(1) Luc. Holsten. dissert. de sacr. Confirm. apud Graecos.  Holstenius made on that Subject, and which was Printed at Rome by Order of Cardinal Francisco Barbarini. That Learned Man affirms, that that Practice is so ancient in the Greek Church, that the Power of confirming is become common to Priests, as if established by Law. As for Extreme Unction, the Greeks delay it not, as the Latins do, till the sick Person be at the Point of Death, nor do they call that Sacrament Extreme Unction: On the contrary, the Sick go to the Church to receive it, when they can conveniently, and it is administered to them as often as they are sick, because they think that St. James in his Epistle speaks of those that are sick, and not of such as are at the Point of Death.  
In the third Place, as to Adoration which they render not to the Holy Sacrament after the Consecration, that ought not neither to be generally understood, because it is certain they adore that Sacrament, but only with relation to the Adoration which the Latins pay to the Eucharist, so soon as the Priest hath pronounced these words, This is my Body. Seeing the Greeks place not the Consecration in these words, but in some Prayers that come after, it is not to be thought strange, if Caucus, who made the Practice of his Church his Rule in judging of the Errors of the Greeks, hath said that they adored not the Eucharist: nay more, when they have consecrated, which, in their opinion, is done after the invocation of the Holy Ghost, they use none of that Ceremonial adoration which is observed in the Latin Church; but they think it enough to adore Jesus Christ who is presented to them by elevating the Host after their way, a little before the Communion. However Caucus is not to be excused in that he took all his measures according to the Practice of his own Church, unless, probably he had Orders to reform all things according to that Standard.  
Fourthly, it is of Public Notoriety, that the Orientals communicate in both kinds, and that they pretend to be warranted in that by the words of Jesus Christ himself. In that manner the Patriarch Jeremy speaks in his first answer to the Divines of Wittenberg. 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Hierom. Patriar. Constant.  Ye say that one must communicate in both kinds, and in that ye say right: which they extend even to Children, to whom they give the Communion after Baptism in a spoon. In a word, all the Oriental Church observes that Custom; and our chief School Divines do even agree, that that Practice of communicating under both kinds was religiously observed in the Latin Churches until these latter Ages, when for good reasons it was thought fit to change it.  
Fifthly, as to Confession, it is not to be thought strange that they believe it to be only of Positive and Ecclesiastical right, because they are persuaded that 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Id. Hieron. Patriarch.  properly speaking only Baptism, and the Eucharist have been instituted by our Lord, and that the rest have been appointed by the Church; as may be seen in the second answer of the Patriarch Jeremy, to the Divines of Wittenberg. Caucus then hath asserted nothing as to that Point, which does not agree to the real Belief of the Greeks. However it cannot be denied, but that Auricular Confession is in use in the Greek Church, as well as in the Latin, and that the Greeks confess their Sins in particular, that they may receive Penance according to the Nature of their Offences, of which, by consequent, they must discover the nature and kind to their Confessor. 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  It is necessary, saith the Patriarch Jeremy after St. Basil, to declare all Sins to the Confessor. And this may be seen more at large in the Book of Christopher Angelus, of the Discipline of his Church. There is, nevertheless, this difference, if we will credit Metrophanes Critopulus, that the Confessor informs himself not of the Place where the sin hath been committed, nor of those who have been concerned in it, nor yet of the manner, because, according to the same Author, that is both needless and too curious, which is sufficient to justify Caucus. For as to the Eastern Communion, which ought yearly to be received in the Latin Church, it is a Custom peculiar to that Church.  
Sixthly, Caucus attributes nothing to the Greeks in what concerns Marriage, which they do not positively maintain, and pretend to be agreeable to the New Testament, the Fathers, the Oriental Canon Law, and the Ordinances of the Emperors. They say that there is nothing clearer than these words of the Gospel, 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Matth. 19.9  Whosoever shall put away his Wife, except it be for Fornication, and shall marry another, committeth Adultery. It is manifest then, say they, that the Gospel permits the dissolving of Marriage in the Case alleged; and declining the Authority of St. Augustine, and some other Latin Fathers as to that Point, they affirm that the Greek Fathers never explained that Passage otherways, and that besides, the whole Eastern Church therein agree with the Greeks. Nay, it is easy to prove by the Histories of the Councils of Florence and 
(1) F. paolo nella sua Istoria del Concil. Card. Palavic. nella sua Istor. deal Concil. di Trent.  of Trent, that it is the Practice of all the Greek Church. And therefore it was, that the Ambassadors of Venice addressed themselves to the Council of Trent, for obtaining some qualification to be made in the Canon which was ready to be published against those who said, that Adultery dissolved Marriage. And the thing that set the Republic of Venice upon this was, that the Greeks of Candia, Cyprus, Corfou, Zante, and some other Places, Subjects of the State, practised that which the Council was about to condemn. In effect, the Ambassadors had satisfaction, because their reasons were thought good, as Cardinal Palavicini acknowledges in his History of the Council. It is nevertheless true, that the Greeks dissolve their Marriages too easily, and not in the Case of Adultery alone; But they still pretend that therein they Conform to the Canon and Civil Laws, which ought to be moderated, because of the too great Liberty they have taken to themselves. However, Caucus having only mentioned the Case of Adultery, seems to have been too reserved, inasmuch as he might have told a great many other Cases of less importance, wherein the Greeks make no scruple to divorce.  
Seventhly, it is not to be thought strange, that the Greeks eat no flesh that hath been stifled or strangled, blood, nor other meats that are not only forbidden in the Old Testament, but also in the New, as appears in the Acts of the Apostles; a thing not singular to the Greeks of Corfou only; but which is generally practised by all the Christians of the East, and not very long since it was wholly abolished in the West.  
In the Eighth place, as to the Article which concerns the Supremacy of the Pope, it may be thought strange, that Leo Allatius should fall so foul on Caucus in that Point, as if he were one of the greatest Impostors in the World. It is but too true, that the Greeks who are not Latinised, nay and all the rest of the Eastern Churches, do not at present own that Primacy of Rome over the other patriarches, in the manner that it is acknowledged in the Western Church. 
(1) Metroph. Critop. in Epit. Doctr. Eccl. Orient.  Metrophanes Critopulus assures us, that the Eastern Church acknowledges no other Head but Jesus Christ, who hath the Qualities of Head of the Church; that amongst the Patriarches there is no difference, unless it be of the See, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as he speaks. The Patriarch of Constantinople takes the first place, He of Alexandria the Second, the Patriarch of Antioch the Third, and he of Jerusalem the Fourth. Every one is Supreme within his own Jurisdiction, and if they all meet together in one place, they mutually kiss one another's hands. So that none of them takes the Title of Head of the Catholic Church, as the same Critopulus observes, who would thereby condemn the Pope who assumes these Titles. As to what Leo Allatius adds 
(2) Leo Allat. de Consens. Eccl. Occid. & Orient.  that Caucus imposes upon the Greeks, when he saith that they excommunicate the Pope and Latin Bishops on Holy Thursday, that is a thing which hath not only been observed by Caucus in Corfou, but by many other Travellers also in several places. The Jesuit Dandini who traveled to Mount Libanus, in Quality of Nuncio under Clement VIII. in the description that he makes of the Isle of Candy, speaks of the Greeks in these terms. 
(1) Girolamo Dandini in Miss. Apost. cap. 5.  I should have a great many things to say, if I would relate all the impurities of the Prelates, Priests and other Churchmen of that Nation, their separation from the Latin Church, the Maledictions and Excommunications which they thunder against her on the most Holy Days, and at the same time when we pray to God for their Conversion.  
Ninthly, we may easily believe, that the Greeks reckon Sub-Deaconship amongst the inferior Orders, which are not Sacred, to speak in the Terms of the Latins, since it is not very long since the Latins themselves have made it a sacred Order.  
In the tenth Place, it may be seen in the Books of Greek Writers, that to own but seven General Councils, is not a thing peculiar to the Greeks of Corfou. Nay one would think it a little too much, to oblige them to receive the Latin Councils wherein they have had no share, or those others wherein they say, they were forced to be present, more for the Interests of State, than the Concerns of Religion. They are permitted to live in this Belief, in the States of the Republic of Venice.  
Lastly, as to what concerns Festival Days, Fasts, and many other Matters of Discipline, it is certain, the Greek Church does not agree therein with the Latin, and Caucus had reason to say, that the Greeks admitted them not, nor yet part of the Saints of the Roman Church, which they laugh at when they see them in Churches, as may be seen in the History of the Council of Florence, written by Syropulus, where he saith, 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  When I enter into any Church of the Latins, I salute none of the Saints whom I see, because I know none of them. Nay, I have much ado to know Jesus Christ there, whom I do not adore neither, because I know not in what manner they represent him.  
I think this may be enough to justify Caucus in what he attributes to the Greeks: and if that Author hath been pleased sometimes to exaggerate their Errors, and to impose upon them, it may also be said, that Leo Allatius hath not always kept within bounds in making their Defence. I confess the way that he hath taken to reunite the two Churches, would be more effectual for reconciling the Greeks to the Roman Communion, than the Course that hath been followed by the Emissaries who have increased their Errors, and continue to do so daily, instead of lessening them: but for all that, we may know the true Sentiments of the Greeks, if we can but lay aside our ordinary Prejudices, and distinguish those who are Latinised, from those that are not.  
We forgot to observe their Belief as to Purgatory, Hell and Paradise. 
(2) Caucus, ib. ac supra.  Caucus with many other Writers does affirm, that the Greeks deny Purgatory, and that notwithstanding they pray for the Dead: which is to be understood with relation to the Opinion of the Latins, who commonly establish a Place of Purgatory, and a Fire which torments Souls. But the Greeks deny both, though they acknowledge a certain State of Purgatory; and therefore they pray to God for the Dead. It is certain that Prayers for the Dead have been appointed in the Church in the very first ages, as appears by Tertullian and the Ancientest of the Fathers, aswell as by the most Ancient Liturgies. Perhaps the Church took that Ceremony from the Jews, who likewise pray to God for the Dead; which was a Custom practised in the Synagogues long before the Birth of Christianity, and is to be found practised at that time when the Jews were under the Dominion of the Grecians. There is this difference, nevertheless, betwixt the Greeks and the Latins, as to their praying for the Dead, that the latter have explained themselves more fully; whereas the former, and all the other Orientals, have continued in more General Terms. The Latins, however, in their Prayers for the Dead at Mass, retain the Ancient form, which agrees pretty well with what the Greeks believe of Hell, Purgatory and Paradise. This is the manner of praying for the Dead in the Mass of the Latins. Domine Jesus Christ, libera animas omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis inferni & de profundo lacu: libera eas de ore I eonis, ne absorbeat eas Tartarus, ne cadant in obscurum, etc. These words seem to confirm the Opinion of the Greeks and other Christians of the East, for they suppose but one Place, which is Hell, where the Souls are detained as in a dark Prison, and they pray that the Souls may pass from that obscure Place, to a Place of Light and Rest, which is Paradise: and this exactly agrees with the Prayer that the Priest says at the Mass which is called in die obitus.  
As to what concerns Hell, we shall not speak here of the Opinion of Origen, who hath nevertheless been followed by some Greek Doctors; we shall only mention what is most generally approved by them. When they pray that God would deliver Souls out of Hell, that is to be understood of the State of Purgatory; I mean, that in that obscure Prison which they call Hell, there are two sorts of Souls; one sort whose Sins are not so enormous as to be condemned for them to Eternal Punishment there; and another who are really condemned to Hell, there to abide for ever. Of these last it may be said, that in inferno nulla est redemptio; whereas in respect of the first sort of Souls, it may be said, that in inferno est redemptio. This may serve to explain the Liturgies and Books of the New Greeks, which seem to suppose that the Souls shall not remain in Hell for ever, and that so the Punishment of the damned is not Eternal. If we take this Rule along with us, we may have an easy explication of all the Prayers that are said for the Dead in the Greek Church.  
As to Paradise, the Greeks and other Orientals are in this persuasion, that Souls enjoy not Eternal Bliss, and that they are not punished with the Pains of Hell, before they receive Sentence from God at the last day of Universal Judgement. And therefore according to the Sentiment of the Greeks we must distinguish two Paradises. The first is that Place of Light and Rest, mentioned in their Prayers and Liturgy, where the Souls of the Blessed repose expecting the last Judgement. That Place is called in the public Office, that is said for the Dead, Paradise, Light, Life, Blessedness, Abraham's Bosom, the Land of the Living, etc. The second Paradise is that Eternal Bliss which they shall enjoy in heaven after the Universal Judgement; and they think that Opinion to be more agreeable to the Texts of Holy Scripture, than that of the Latins: for it shall not be, say they, but at that day, that Jesus Christ who will come in quality of Judge, shall say to the Elect, 
(1) Matth. 25.  Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the World, etc. They pretend that the Opinion of the Latins concerning Paradise and Hell before the last day of Judgement is not founded on Antiquity. Besides, we may observe, that the Greeks have not subtilised so much upon the Light of the Glory of the Blessed, as most of the Latin Divines have done, who have spoken of it with extraordinary nicety. Nay, there are some who affirm, that the Greeks Fathers deny, that the Angels and Blessed see the Essence of God in Heaven; relying upon these words of Theodoret, 
(2) Theod. Dial. immut.  The Angels see not the Divine Essence, which comprehends all things, and cannot be comprehended, nor known, but they see a certain species which is proportionate to their Nature. And this they confirm also by the Testimony of many Fathers.  
There remains somewhat to be said of the Morals, Discipline, and Ceremonies of the Greeks. As to their Morality, seeing they have the same Principles as the Latius have, it cannot be much different from theirs; unless it be, that wanting the use of School Divinity, they are not so great Metaphysicians as the Latins; wherein they are not to be blamed, when they mingle no Logic nor Metaphysics in their Books of Morality, if you except some Greeks who have studied in the Schools of Italy, or have read the Books of the Latins.  
It may be, notwithstanding, that the Greeks and other Christians of the East do not walk up to the strictness of the Rules of Morality, because of the sad condition to which they are at present reduced. Their Churchmen are accused of Simony, because the Bishops sell Orders; and the Priests the Administration of Sacraments: but if matters be throughly examined, perhaps they are not so  as people think. There is a necessity that they live by their Calling; and seeing they have no Benefices, as they are at present established in the Church of Rome, why are they not to be allowed to take money for the Administration of Sacraments? There is no fault found with the Custom that is introduced into the West, of taking money for Masses, Confessions, and many other things; and shall a poor Papas be accused of Simony, for being paid for an Absolution that he giveth, and for having rated it according to the nature of the Sin? Nor do we think it strange, neither, that certain Sins are rated at Rome, because we are accustomed to the practice. Will the new distinction of Divine Right and Ecclesiastical Right, that some Divines and Canonists have invented in these last Ages, put the Pope without the reach of Simony; and shall not that extreme necessity to which the Patriarch and Greeks Bishops are reduced render them at all excusable before God and Man, in that they take money for Ordinations? It is not that I would excuse the Greeks in all things: for it is certain they many times take too much Liberty to themselves, and that they are not careful enough to square their Consciences according to the Rules of Christian Morality. But the Ignorance and Poverty wherein they are at present, are the cause of their Disorders, which nevertheless the virtuous Men amongst them prevent as much as they can, as the Patriarch Jeremy, who openly 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Jerom. Patr. Const.  reproves Confessors who make a Traffic of Holy Things, and exact Presents. He says that such deserve to be punished by God, and that when he finds any amongst his People, he chastises them, and deprives them of their Office.  
As to Ecclesiastical Discipline, they conform not in all things to the Prescript of their Canons. For instance, they observe not exactly the Age that is required for Priesthood and Episcopacy; besides, they mind but very little the Intervals, and take several Orders together at one time. The Election of their Patriarch is not always Canonical; for he that gives most to the Grand Signior, is commonly preferred before the rest: And therefore there are many times several that take the Title of Patriarch. Monsieur de Nointel Ambassador for the French King at the Port 
(2) Monsieur 'Noint. Tom. 3. de la Perpet.  takes notice of four Patriarches alive in the Year 1671. The Greeks are ambitious, and therefore they take all courses to rise to that Dignity; which is the Cause of great Troubles in that Church.  
Besides the money that the Patriarch Elect gives to the Grand Signior for Letters of Confirmation, he is also obliged to buy the Voices of the Bishops who elect him: and every one upon that Occasion is willing to make the most of his Voice. But, on the other hand, the Patriarch knows very well how to make himself amends, when he makes any Bishop: which the Bishops also do in regard of their Papas, to whom they sell Orders and Cures as dear as possibly they can; and all, at length, falls upon the poor People, who pay very dear for the Administration of Sacraments; and that's the reason they go but seldom to them.  
The Patriarch and Bishops are not married; but the Priests marry before their Ordination: and that Practise which is General over all the Levant is ancient. I do not here examine whether it be agreeable to the Primitive Canons of the Church, or a Deviation for the Ancient Canons. It is certain the Greeks pretend to be warranted, as to that, by the Canons called the Canons of the Apostles, and 
(1) Council, in Trullo.  they accuse the Latins of having contravened the Ancient Canons of the Church. If a Priest happen to marry after that he hath been called to be a Priest, he cannot afterward perform any Functions of the Priesthood, which is according to the Council of Neocaesarea; but the Marriage is not therefore dissolved: whereas in the Latin Church the Marriage is null, because Priesthood is an impediment that breaks it. I believe Caucus meant of those Priests that marry after ordination, when he saith, 
(2) Cauc. in Hist. de Graec. errorib.  that the Greeks believe that he who hath been once a Priest, may again return to the State of Laymen. In effect, he retains nothing of Priesthood, unless it be some Honour in the Church, where he hath a Seat separate from the Place of Laics.  
Monachism is in great esteem amongst the Greeks, as appears by the Answer which the 
(1) Jerem. Patriarch. Respons. 1. & 2.  Patriarch Jeremy made to the Germane Divines, who spoke of Monks as of useless Members; to which Divines he opposes St. Basil, and the other Greek Fathers, who have made an Elegy of the Monastic Life, and have looked upon it as a Pure and Angelical way of living: And this he confirms, besides, by the Authority of Councils wherein many good regulations were made concerning Monks. Metrophanes Critopulus also praises Monachism, as a most ancient thing in the Church, 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  saying, that it is an Ornament to it. Their way of living, according to the same Author, is very austere, because they never eat Flesh, though they be not engaged to that by any Vow, but only by Custom which they never violate. None of them ever sleep more than four Hours, and some but two. They go to Prayers in the Church thrice a day, and they who apply themselves not to study, work with their hands; so that there is no Monastery, where all sorts of Workmen may not be found.  

(3) Leo Allat. de Consens. Eccl. Occid. & Orient. l. 3 c. 8.  Leo Allatius treats more at large of the Greeks Monks that are  in the Levant, and that very exactly: which obliges me to give here an Abridgement of what he hath observed.  
Though there be different kinds of Monks amongst the Greeks, yet they all derive their Original from St. Basil, who is the first and sole Author of Monastic Discipline▪ All the Monks look upon him as their Father, and it would be a Crime amongst them to deviate in the least from his Rule. There are to be seen all over Greeks many fair Monasteries with well built Churches, where these Monks sing day and night. However, they have not all one and the same way of living; for there are some called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The first live together in Society, eat in the same Refectory, have nothing singular amongst them as to their Habit; and, in fine, have all the same Exercises, none being exempted. There are nevertheless two Orders amongst them; for one is of 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the Great and Angelical Habit, who are of a Degree more elevate and perfect than the rest, and profess a more perfect way of living: these are in greatest number. The others who are of 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the Little Habit, otherways 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, are of an inferior rank, and lead not so perfect a life. The second, which are named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, live according as they please themselves, as their Name does import. And therefore before they take the Habit, they give some money for a Cell, and some other Necessaries of the Monastery. The Yeoman of the Cellar or Butler furnishes them with Bread and Wine as he does the rest: and so being exempted from the Duties of the Monastery, they mind their own business. These last leave by Will what they possess, aswell within as without the Monastery, to their Servant or Companion, whom they call Disciple, and whom they have chosen from among the Monks to assist them in their occasions. This Man after the Death of the other, by his management improves the goods that he hath inherited, and leaves by Will what he hath purchased, to him whom he hath chosen for his Companion: the rest of the goods which he possessed, that is to say, what his Master left him when he died, falls to the Monastery, which afterwards sells them to those that please to purchase. Nevertheless amongst these last Monks there are some so miserably poor, that having nothing to purchase a piece of Land with, are obliged to work and labour for the Monastery, and to apply themselves to the basest employments. These do all for the profit of the Convent, and therefore the Convent supplies them with Necessaries; and if they have any spare time after their work is done, they employ it in Prayers.  
There is a third Order of these Monks, who go by the Name of Anchorites. These not being able to work, nor support the other Duties of the Monastery, have, notwithstanding, a mind to live in the repose of solitude. They buy a Cell out of the Monastery, with a little piece of Land on which they may live, and never go to the Monastery but on Holy days, to assist at the Office; after which they return to their Cells, where they mind their own Affairs, having no hours appointed them for Prayers. There are, nevertheless, some of these Anchorites who have left their Monastery with the Consent of their Abbot, that they may lead a more retired life, and apply themselves more to Meditation and Prayer. The Monastery sends them once a month Provisions to live on, because they possess neither Lands nor Vineyards: but those who will not depend upon the Abbot, hire some Vineyard near to their Cell, of which they eat the Grapes; others live on Cherries or such like Fruit. They also sow Beans in the Season of the year; and some gain their living by transcribing Books.  
Besides the Monks, there are Nuns also who live in Community, and are shut up in Monasteries under the Institution of St. Basil. They are no less strict than the Monks, as to Fasting, Praying and the other Offices of the Monastic Life. They choose one of the Ancientest and most virtuous of their Community to supply the place of Abbess; and these Abbesses are the same with them, as the Abbots are with the Monks. Nevertheless, that Monastery of Women depends always on an Abbot, who assigns them one of the oldest and most virtuous Monks to confess and administer the Sacraments to them. This Monk lives near their Monastery, that he may be at hand to assist them readily in their occasions. He says likewise Mass for them; and orders the other Offices.  
These Nuns wear all the same Habit, and a Cloak of the same colour. Their Arms and Hands are covered to their Finger's ends; and their Habit is of plain Woollen Cloth. Their Heads, besides, are shaved, and every one hath a Cell apart where they lodge conveniently. The richer sort have a Maid; and sometimes they bring up in their Houses young Girls, whom they bring up in the Duties of Piety and Devotion. When they have performed their ordinary Duties, they work with their Needle; and the Turks who bear a respect towards these Nuns, come to their Monasteries to buy Girdles of their making. The Abbesses willingly open the Doors of their Convent to the Turks who come to buy the Manufacture of these good Nuns, who return to their Apartment so soon as they have sold their Wares.  
I have read a Manuscript Relation, that speaks not so much to the advantage of these Nuns. The Author of that Relation observes that the Nuns called Caloyeres, who live at Constantinople, are Widows, some of which have had several Husbands, and that they embrace not that Profession, but when they are well stricken in years: Then he adds, that they make no Vows, that all their Sanctity consists in wearing a Black Veil upon their Head, and declaring that they will Marry no more; that, after all, they live most commonly at home, where they mind their House-wifery, their Children and Relations. He confesses, nevertheless, that there are some of them who live in Community, but that these are more miserable than the former: that both go about wheresoever they please: and that, in fine, they have more Liberty under that Religious Habit, than they had before.  
The Fasts of the Greeks are different enough from those of the Latins: for the Fasts of the latter would be Festival Days, and Days of good Cheer amongst the Orientals, in regard they not only abstain from Flesh, and all that comes from it, as Butter and Cheese; but they eat not so much as Fish, contenting themselves with Fruits and Pulse, with some small portion of Oil, and drink very little Wine. The Monks are more strict in their Fasting, because they never taste Wine nor Oil, unless on Saturdays and Sundays. Yet the Moscovites are allowed to eat Fish, because they have neither Wine nor Oil. Wednesdays and Fridays they abstain from Flesh, and all that comes of it; but on these days they are allowed to eat Fish. I shall say nothing of their Lent, nor private Fasts; only must observe that the Greeks and other Eastern Nations exceedingly blame the Saturdays Fast of the Latins, because they say, that Day is a Festival as well as Sunday; which they prove by the Ancient Canons and the practice of the first Ages. In fine, as to their Ceremonies, it may be said in general, that no Nation in Christendom hath so many. Their Euchology or Ritual, with the Notes of P. Goar, may be consulted as to that point. So excessive is the Worship they render to Images, that in a Manuscript which I have read concerning the Errors of the Latins, they upbraid them 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. MS. Biblioth. Bodlei. Oxon. Tit. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  with want of respect to Images; which cannot well be understood, unless it be that the Latins omit an infinite number of Ceremonies before their Images, which are observed by the Greeks. On the Festival day of a Saint 
(2) Metroph. Critop.  they place his Image in the middle of the Church, and that Image or Picture, represents the History of the Festival that is Celebrated: for instance of the Nativity or Resurrection of our Lord: Then they that are present kiss the Image; which in their Language is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in Latin, Adorare. That Adoration is not performed by Kneeling, Bowing, or any other Gesture of Body, but only by kissing the Image. If it be the Image of our Lord, they commonly kiss the Feet: if an Image of the Virgin, they kiss the Hands: and in a word, if it be the Image of some Saint they kiss the Face.  
These and many other Ceremonies, which the Greeks observe in the Adoration of their Images, have been much augmented since the second Council of Nice, where the Patrons of Images obtained a great Victory over the Iconoclasts. And it is chief since that time that the Greeks have published the Miraculous Histories of their Images, of which their Books are full: and as if they had not had enough amongst themselves at home, they have searched at Rome and other places for Miracles that have been wrought by virtue of Images.  
After all, the Greeks ground most of their Ceremonies upon their Traditions. They take no great care to examine, whether these Traditions be Ancient, or 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 surprising, they render Extraordinary Honours to the Bread and Wine before they are consecrated, and only barely blessed. Amongst their Ceremonies which are only 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 Author of them. All these Sacraments are accompanied with a great many Ceremonies, because they are persuaded, 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 publicly 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 Music 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 only 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 Schismatics.  
(*) 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 Doctor in his Book of the Perpetuity; because, say they, he gives only 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 Authentic 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, aught to be preferred before all the Attestations that can be brought from the Levant; because the Jesuits will not only be suspected by Protestants, but they will not fail also to say, that these Attestations have been gained by artifice, and that the modern Greeks may be made to do 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 Terms asserts Transubstantiation, in the same manner as the Latins do. But seeing he had not the Book of that Author, 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 Authors whom he citys, related only 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 Author, 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 Subtleties, until 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 traveled 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 Blood, 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 Authentic and Public a Confession, that though he could not accuse the Authors of Falsehood, as Mr. Claude not very judiciously hath done, yet he hath his recourse to other Niceties, which have some show 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 Tampering of those of the Church of Rome, had asserted that by a new word, which Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople, by whom he was consecrated Bishop, was wholly ignorant of. He farther adds, that since Gabriel of Philadelphia, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, hath been but little used by the Greek Writers: that the Synods held against Cyrillus Lucaris have forborn it: that it is a word unknown to the Ancient Fathers: that it is neither to be found in their Liturgies nor Confessions: that, in fine, Transubstantiation is so far from being believed amongst the Greeks, that the contrary is evidently to be proved from their Liturgy, where the Symbols, even after they have been consecrated and called the Body and Blood of Christ, are nevertheless at the same time 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  called the Antitypes of the Body and Blood of Christ. And these are the strongest Arguments that the Protestants have to object against the Modern Greeks who acknowledge Transubstantiation; whereby they think to confute all the large Volumes composed by Mr. Arnaud upon that Subject. This hath obliged me to examine these answers particularly, and to show the weakness of the same.  
In the first Place, it is not true that Gabriel of Philadelphia is the first Author of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among the Greeks. Gennadius, who lived above an Hundred years before that Archbishop, and who is thought to have been the first Patriarch of Constantinople after the taking of that City by the Turks, in one of his Homilies 
(2) See the Collections at the end of the Book C.  makes use indifferently of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Besides he explains how it can be, that in that wonderful change, there remains 
(3) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  no more but the Accidents of Bread, without any thing of the Substance of the same Bread, and that the real Substance of the Body of Jesus Christ is hid under the same Accidents. I shall not here examine the particular Qualities of Gennadius, and whether or not he was one of the Latinized Greeks: It is sufficient that I make appear, that Gabriel of Philadelphia is not the first Author of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, since it is to be found in Greek Books written above an hundred Years before him. At least it cannot be said, that Gabriel, who makes use of it, hath been corrupted by the Latins, as Mr. Smith affirms without any Proof. That is so far from being true, that Gabriel of Philadelphia wrote a Book against the Council of Florence, having openly declared himself for the Party of Mark of Ephesus, against those of his Church who had adhered to that Council; and besides, he was linked in intimate Friendship and Interest with one Miletius, a great Enemy of the Church of Rome. I confess he followed his Studies at Milan, where he learned School-Divinity, of which he uses the Terms in his Books. But Cyrillus Lucaris, who wrote a Confession of Faith in favour of the Calvinists, and which he hath taken almost verbatim out of the Works of Calvin, studied also at Milan, and was more learned in Divinity than Gabriel, who only made use of the Terms of the Latin Divines, because he thought they explained his Belief more clearly, and not for authorising a Novelty. That affectation of the Language of the Schoolmen, which appears in all the Writings of Gabriel, concerns only the Method and Expressions, and not the Substance of the Matter; and so he ought not to be blamed for having introduced new Terms into his Church: and instead of concluding with Mr. Smith, that he hath at the same time introduced Novelties, it ought, on the contrary, to be inferred, that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Greeks, which signifies only a change, and which is to be found in Ancient Authors, is the same with the Term transubstantiatio invented by the Latins; seeing a Greek, learned in the Expressions both of the Greeks and Latins, makes use indifferently of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is the same as transubstantiatio, for expressing the Change of the Symbols into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ.  
But Jeremy Patriarch of Constantinople, who consecrated Gabriel of Philadelphia, and made Learned Answers to the Divines of Wittenberg upon that Subject, say they, never made use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. It is true, that Patriarch make use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, because it is Greek, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not. He was not willing to bring into fashion a barbarous word unknown to the Ancients. Nevertheless he makes it apparent enough, that by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, he means the same thing as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or the transubstantiatio of the Latins. The Divines of Wittenberg, who caused his Answers to be Printed, and who have no less Aversion to Transubstantiation, than the Protestants of England and France have, were so strongly persuaded that the Patriarch meant the Transubstantiation of the Church of Rome by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that on the margin opposite to that word, they have placed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as signifying the same thing in the thought of Jeremy; and on the margin of the Latin Translation they have placed opposite to Mutari, the Term transubstantiatio. The same Divines in their answer to the Patriarch show clearly, that in the question that was betwixt them; they reckoned the words. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be changed, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to be transubstantiated, to be synonymous. Jeremy wrote to them, that 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  according to the Belief of the Catholic Church, the Bread and the Wine after the Consecration, were by the Holy Ghost changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. To which those of Wittenberg answered. 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that they believed that the Body and Blood of Christ were really in the Eucharist; but that they do not believe for all that, that the Bread was changed into the Body of Christ. They make use of no other Terms in their Answer to express the Transubstantiation of the Latins, than the Greek verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which the Patriarch had also employed. In fine, Jeremy having read the reply of the Divines of Wittenberg, returns them this Answer, 
(3) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that the Bread becomes the Body of Christ, and the Wine and the Water his Blood, by means of the Holy Ghost that changeth them; and that that change is above the reason of Man. From whence it is easy to gather that these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and other such like, which the Greeks commonly make use of to denote the change of the Symbols, signify the same thing as the barbarous word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which hath been made according to that of transubstantiatio by the latter Greeks, who had read the Books of the Latins, and studied in their Schools. The new Greeks only adopted that word, because they thought it expressed very well the change of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, and that it suited every way with their Belief. And, which is most remarkable in that matter, Gabriel of Philadelphia employs hardly any other word but that, in an Apology, that he wrote on purpose for those of his Nation against some Divines of the Church of Rome, who unjustly accused them of Idolatry.  
It is moreover objected, that since Gabriel of Philadelphia, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occurs not in the books of other Greek Writers, nor yet in the two Synods of Constantinople held against Cyrillus Lucaris; but that Objection seems to have less ground than the former. In the year 1635. there was Printed at Venice under the Name of a Greek Monk and Priest called Gregory, a small Abridgement of the Divinity of the Greeks, by way of a Catechism, where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is not only to be found; but the manner also how Transubstantiation is made, is therein declared at length. The Author showing the difference betwixt the Eucharist and the other Sacraments, says that the other Sacraments contain only Grace, whereas 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greg. in Synopsi Dogmat. Ecclesiae.  the Eucharist contains Jesus Christ present; and that it is for that reason, that the change which is made in that Sacrament is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or transubstantiatio. This Greek takes the Title of Protosyncelle of the great Church, and resided in a Monastery of the Isle Chios. In his Preface he acknowledges himself indebted for the best part of his Work to George Coressius, whom he calls one of the Learnedest Divines of his Church, and who, in effect, takes the Title of Divine of the great Church, being besides a Physician by Profession. This Coressius who bitterly wrote of the Errors of the Latins, prefixed his approbation to that Book, affirming, 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that it contains nothing but true and Orthodox Doctrine.  
Besides this Work, there was a far more considerable Book written in the year 1638. by Meletius Syrigus against the Confession of Faith attributed to Cyrillus Lucaris Patriarch of Constantinople, which was Printed in Greek and Latin at Geneva. The Title of that Book which was not Printed, runs in these Terms. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Author vigorously refutes that pretended Confession of the Eastern Church, by a great many Arguments taken from the Fathers and other Ecclesiastical writers down to our times, and makes it evidently appear that the Confession of Cyril hath been taken out of the Works of Calvin: then towards the End of his Book he adds, a particular Dissertation about the word 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Transubstantiation; and by many instances shows that though that word was not anciently used, yet there was reason for making use of it or some such at present, because of Heretics. And for the better Explication of the change that is made in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, you may consult that 
(3) See the Collections at the end of this Book D.  Dissertation subjoined to this Book in Greek, which Mr. Arnaud hath inserted in French in his last Tome of the Perpetuity.  
We have besides two Editions of the Book of Agapius a Greek Monk of Mount Athos, the first Printed in the Year 1641, and the second in 1664. both at Venice, with the Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Salvation of Sinners. Though that Author still retains the ancient words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and the like, yet in formal Terms he asserts Transubstantiation, and acknowledges that Jesus Christ 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Agap. Monach. Graecus.  hath hid as under a Veil, the Divine Substance under the Accidents of Bread and Wine. I omit the many Miracles, that the same Agapius mentions to prove the Truth of Transubstantiation, because these Miracles, whether they be true or false, make nothing to our purpose.  
To the Monk Agapius, we may join Michael Cortacius of Crete in the Sermon which he preached, and dedicated to the Patriarch of Alexandria. That Sermon was Printed at Venice in the Year 1642. with the Title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A Discourse concerning the Dignity of Priesthood. In that Discourse Cortacus compares the Priest with God, and amongst other things says, that as 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Mich. Cortac. Serm. de ign. Sacerd.  God hath changed the Water into Wine so the Priest changes, or, to use his word, transubstantiats the Wine into the Blood of Christ. Besides he declames against those that believe not the truth of that Mystery; and the better to distinguish them, he calls 
(3) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Luther a wicked and abominable Heresiarch and Apostate, who by his Doctrine had seduced an infinite Number of People. After all, we ought not to be surprised, to see a Greek inveigh so bitterly against Protestants, nor infer from thence, that that Sermon hath been suggested to him by some Latin Monk an Enemy of theirs. They who know what happened at Constantinople under the Patriarchate of Cyrill a great Favourer of Protestants, and who engaged a great many Bishops in that Party, will not at all be astonished at the Invectives of Cortacius, which at that time were seasonable.  
After this, I think Mr. Smith dare hardly affirm that there are no Authors who have made use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in imitation of Gabriel of Philadelphia. It may be said with better reason, that there are but very few that have not made use of it since that time: And had I been so happy as to have traveled into the Levant, as well as Mr. Smith, I could have furnished the Public with a great many more.  
But the two Synods held at Constantinople against Cyrillus Lucaris, make no mention, says Mr. Smith, of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whence he infers, that they purposely forbore it, that they might not countenance a Novelty: there cannot be a worse grounded Objection. The business of these two Synods was to condemn some Propositions published by Cyrill, in name of the Eastern Church. And so these Synods thought it enough to mention the Propositions of cyril in his own Terms, and to Anathematise them. If cyril in his pretended Confession of Faith had made use of the Term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Bishops of these two Councils would not have failed to have made use of it. These are the Terms of the first Synod held under cyril of Borrhea in the Year 1638. 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Anathema to Cyrill, who teaches and believes, that the Bread and the Wine which are upon the Altar of Proposition, are not changed into the real Blood and Body of Christ by the Benediction of the Priest, and the Descent of the Holy Ghost. That alone is a convincing argument, that among the Greeks the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is the same as the new word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 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 show, what their Belief is concerning that Mystery, when in the same place they Anathematise these words of cyril, 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 cyril 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 Judgement upon Articles that were presented to them, wherein the Protestants of France attributed their own Errors 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 Errors were condemned. Amongst other Books, they allege the answers of the Patriarch Jeremy to the Divines of Wittenberg, 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 Translator hath rendered, 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 Signior 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 Errors to the Eastern Church. In fine, the same Bishop's endeavour to justify the Memory of Cyrillus Lucaris, by opposing other Works of his, to his pretended Confession, which show him to be of a contrary Judgement. There are many other things in the same Synod for Authorising Transubstantiation; especially, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not left out; but seing there is a second and more Correct Edition come forth, I shall insist no longer on that Synod. Only 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 entered 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 Milan 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 Country, 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 written 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 Ambassadors of England and Holland then at the Port, especially with the latter, who proved afterward useful 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 traveled in the Levant, and who being afterward come back to Constantinople in Quality of Envoy from the State's 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 Country. 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 Heretic; 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 cyril 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 forefather's. 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 Sums 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 cyril 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 Ruin. cyril'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 powerful 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 public approbation. cyril gave it privately to the Dutch Ambassador, whose assistance he needed to defend him against the Jesuits of Constantinople. That work of cyril's is much like the Book that is said to have been made by William Postel for a Nun, whom he persuaded, that he might squeeze a little Money from her, that the Messiah came into the world only for Men, and that she Lady Jean was to be the Messiess of the Women. There is as much likelihood of truth in that Confession of cyril'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 Catholics that pretended Confession. Grotius gave a better Judgement 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 Patriarches, Archbishops or Bishops. Now, after all, I have related the History of this cyril 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 only 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 ago to the Dutch, that he would translate Calvin's Institutions into Greek, and teach his Countrymen Calvinism, provided they gave him the Sum 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 ago 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 Authors 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 only 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 Scriptures impeditàque 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 show the fallacy of that way of reasoning, I shall oppugn it by no other Author, than John Calvin in his Institutions, where he judiciously refutes the Heresy of Servetus concerning the Trinity of the Persons in God. He lays down this for a Maxim, (1) that it is lawful to invent new words to explain things more clearly (2) especially when we have to do 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 Author, 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 only 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 chief 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 only given them that Appellation before the Consecration. In that they agree with the Opinion of all the Greek Authors 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 Blood of Jesus Christ. St. John Damascene, Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople, and, in a word, all the Defenders of Image-worship, are of that Judgement, and object it to the Iconoclasts as a strong Argument to authorize 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 that the Ancient Fathers gave the Name of Antitypes to the Symbols, even after their Consecration, not thinking that that word signified any thing contrary to the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. It appears manifestly by the Dispute, that was betwixt the Iconoclasts and the Patrons of Images, that there was no Difficulty betwixt them concerning the Body of Jesus Christ, which both Parties acknowledged to be in the Eucharist after the Consecration. They differed only in this, to wit, whether after the Consecration, the Bread ought still to be called an Antitype. The Iconoclasts affirmed it, and had Antiquity on their side, the Defenders of Images denied it, and fell into a mistake of a matter of fact, which did not the least prejudice the Affair in Question. So that what way soever the word Antitype be interpreted, Protestants can draw no consequence from it against the Belief of Transubstantiation.   

CHAP. III. Of the Adoration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist: whether it be in use amongst the Greeks.  
THough this Adoration be a necessary Consequent of Transubstantiation, yet there are some Protestants, who freely confess that the Greeks are much of the same Judgement with the Latins as to the Matter of Transubstantiation; but they deny that they adore Jesus Christ in the Consecrated Symbols, pretending that their Worship terminates on Jesus Christ in Heaven. They are confirmed in this Opinion chief, because the Greeks in the Celebration of their Liturgy, render not much Honour to the Sacred Symbols after their Consecration, as the Latin Church doth. But we are not always to pass a Judgement on things by the External Worship; and in that many Emissaries have been mistaken, aswell as Protestants, when they would measure the Orientals by the Practice and Custom of their own Church. It is certain, we show greater Respect and Veneration to Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, than we did before the time of the Berengarians, nay and before the time of the Protestants too, at least in what concerns the exterior. It is chief but since the Birth of Nestorianism, that greatest Respect has been shown to the Virgin. Besides, the Greek Church never rendered such excessive Honours to Images, but since the Iconoclasts were so incensed against them. 
[*]  [*] It must not, therefore, be said, that before that time no Honour was rendered neither to the Virgin nor Images. The case is the same with the Greeks and other Eastern Christians, who have continued in their Ancient simplicity, because they have not had the same reasons as the Latins had to come out of it; and if they be accused that they adore not the symbols, the Ancients are likewise to be accused for not having adored them, because there is nothing to be found neither in their Books nor Liturgies that comes near the External Worship of our times. In this manner we are to understand the words of Caucus, when he affirms that no Nation under the Sun renders less Honour to the Sacrament of the Eucharist than the Greeks do; and it is not to be denied but that he goes too far in what he relates, comparing them to some Reformers of the West. But after all, we cannot make a better Judgement of the Practice of the Greeks, than by the Books the have written on that Subject. Gabriel Archbishop of Philadelphia, whom we have mentioned before, asserts so vigorously that Adoration in a Book that he wrote on purpose against the Latins, that it is impossible to doubt of it. That Archbishop established two sorts of Honour or Adoration, which are rendered to the Symbols of Bread and Wine. The first is but a bare respect paid to them, whilst they are as yet but Blessed and Antitypes. But the second wherewith they are honoured after Consecration 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Gabr. Philad. in Apol. Orat. Lat.  is not a simple Veneration, saith Gabriel, but a Worship of Latria, or real Adoration. This he explains more at large after Cabasilas, Simeon of Thessalonica and many others, who also assert those two sorts of Honour rendered to the Holy Gifts both before and after the Consecration. Nay he remarks the time when the last and real Adoration is performed, to wit, when the Symbols have been consecrated, and when the Priest standing at the door of the Sanctuary, cries with a loud Voice, let all draw near with Faith, Reverence and Love. Then they do not say, continueth the same Gabriel, as they do, when they honour the Antitypes, Lord, Remember me in thy Kingdom, but 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  I believe, Lord, that thou art Jesus Christ the Son of the Living God: which words are directed to Jesus Christ under the Symbols of the Bread and Wine that are presented to the People. And at that time, saith Gabriel, the Priest 
(3) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ibid.  gives them notice to adore with a Worship of Latria.  
We are to expound the thought of Cabasilas with relation to the same time and to the words of the Liturgy, when he speaks of those that draw near to the Holy Mysteries 
(1) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  who, says he, as an Expression of their Piety and Faith, adore, bless and praise Jesus Christ as God, whom they acknowledge to be in the Consecrated Symbols. Simeon of Thessalonica, whom Gabriel of Philadelphia follows in all his Works, distinguishes, as well as he, two Honours rendered to the Symbols, in one of his answers related by Allatius, where he says, that 
(2) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  if they honour the Holy Gifts whilst they are but Antitypes or Images, by stronger reason they ought to honour them after their Consecration, when they are become the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. To these Authors may be added Metrophanes Critopulus, whose Testimony is the more considerable, that he hath done all he could in his Book, to disguise the Belief of his Church in favour of the Protestants of Germany. He acknowledges the change of the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, and saith, 
(3) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that the manner how that change is wrought, is unknown to us, and inscrutable: then he only blames the Latin Church in that they carry the Body of Jesus Christ with Pomp about the Streets, acknowledging nevertheless, that it is carried to the Sick to be given them as a viaticum: and in the same Place 
(4) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  he proves that the Symbols never lose their Consecration, if they have been once consecrated; for that end alleging the Example of Wool, which being once died, never loseth its Tincture. Whence it may be clearly gathered, that that Author acknowledges the Body of Jesus Christ in the Symbols when they are not applied to use, and by consequent that they ought to be adored, not condemning the Adoration and Honour, that those of the Church of Rome render ingeneral to Jesus Christ in that Sacrament, but only that great Pomp and Ostentation, when it is carried about the Streets on Corpus Christi day.   

CHAP. IU. Of the Belief of the Melchites.  
HAving treated at length of the Greeks, there remains but little to be said of the Melchites, who differ hardly in any thing from them, either as to Belief or Ceremonies. The name of Melchites or Royalists, was only given them because they followed the common Opinions of the Greeks, who submitted to the Decisions of the Council of Chalcedon, and as if they had only done so to comply with the Will of the Emperor, their Enemies called them Melchites, thereby intimating that they were of the Emperor's Religion. However, at present we give the Name of Melchites to the Syrians, Cophties or Egyptians, and other People of the Levant, who not being true Greeks, are nevertheless of their Persuasion: And therefore Gabriel Sionita calls them indifferently Greeks or Melchites; who besides observes that they are spread over all the Levant; 
(1) Purgatorium nullum existere pessimè crediderunt, indèque illis odium intestinum in summum Pontificem, ita ut eidem veracissimo Christi in terris Vicario primatum pertinaciter abnegent. Gabr. Zion. de Rel. & Mor. Orient.  that they deny Purgatory; that they are sworn Enemies to the Pope, whose Supremacy none of the East do so vigorously oppugn. But it is no wonder they are so great Enemies to the Church of Rome, seeing they retain all the Sentiments of the Greeks that are not Latinized. As to their Opinion concerning Purgatory, they differ not neither from the true Greeks; and though both deny that there is a particular place called Purgatory, where the Souls are punished by a material and real Fire, yet they deny not the truth of a Purgatory in the manner as we have explained it, when we spoke of the Greeks. Besides, the Judgement of the Melchites, concerning the Primacy of the Patriarch of Rome, is also the same with that of the Greeks who have not submitted to the Decisions of the Council of Florence. In a word, if you except a few Points of small Importance concerning Ceremonies and Ecclesiastical Discipline, the Melchites are in all things true Greeks; they have even rendered into Arabic the Greek Euchology or Ritual, and most of their other Books of Offices in which they are not singular, because the other Sects of the East have also translated for their own use the Greek Euchology and other Books of Ceremonies. But their Translations are commonly faulty, and the Arabic. Canons of Councils are of no great Use; yet I think, the Arabic versions of the Melchites ought to be preferred before all others, because they are true Greeks, though they want not their prejudices, which sometimes hinders them from being sincere. In general, the Christians of the East are so far from being exact in their Translations of Greek Books, that they think it lawful to paraphrase, after their way, upon the Authors which they translate. Every Sect defends their Opinions by all manner of ways; and I make no doubt, but that is the cause of the supposititious Canons, which have been published under the Name of the Canons of the Council of Nice translated from the Arabic. The great Authority of the Council of Nice hath given occasion of inventing those Arabic Canons, which the several Sects have accommodated to their own Sentiments. The Melchites find enough in these Canons attributed to the Council of Nice, to defend them against the Jacobites: And the Jacobites, on the contrary, by the same Canons defend their Opinion concerning the Unity of Nature in our Lord. Both of them make the Council of Nice to speak in their favour. The Jacobites accuse the Melchites of having corrupted these Canons. The Maronites, who in the beginning were of the Sect of the Jacobites, reproach them with the same fault. John Baptista Leopard a Maronite, Archbishop of Esdron 
(1) Abrah. Ecchel. Not. in Can. Ar. Conc. Nic.  in the Book which he entitled, The Vintage of the Sacraments, accuses the Melchites of having added to the 55th. Canon of the Council of Nice, some words that favoured their Opinion concerning the Repudiation of Wives; and he upbraids them that they had taken that Custom from the Mahometans, which they afterward inserted into that Canon. But there is no ground for that reproach, since it is certain that the Greeks and other Eastern Nations may divorce from their Wives, and marry others, especially in the case of Adultery. The Melchites inserted nothing into that pretended Canon of the Council of Nice, but what was agreeable to the Practice of the Greek Church.   

CHAP. V Of the Belief and Customs of the Georgians or Iberians, and of those of Colchis or Mangrelia.  
IN the History 
(1) Clem. Galan. in Concil. Armen. cum Rom. Edit. Rom. typ. Congreg. de propag. fide. Ann. 1650.  which Galanus hath caused to be Printed at Rome, concerning the Reconciliation of the Armenian Church with the Roman, there are some Curious Pieces relating to the Present State of the Iberians, and other neighbouring People. Pope Urban VIII. sent Emissaries to these People, of which Father Avitabolis a Regular Priest was the chief: And this Monk wrote from that Country a Letter to the Pope, wherein he marks the Errors of the Iberians exactly enough, which are the same that are attributed to the Greeks; to wit, they acknowledge, indeed, a Purgatory, but not in the manner the Latins do, because 
(2) Purgatorium affirmant, non tamen per ignem, sed animas cruciari in loco obscuro & maestitudinis.  they only believe that the Souls are in a Place of Obscurity and Sadness, without being tormented by Fire: they deny the particular Judgement of Souls, being persuaded that when one dies, his Soul is by his Guardian Angel carried into the Presence of Christ; and if it be the Soul of a just Man that is without Sin, it is immediately sent into a Place of Light and Joy: if it be the Soul of a wicked Man, it is put into an obscure Place; if that Person die in the Act of Repentance, it is sent for a time into the Place of Horror and Obscurity, whence it is afterwards conveyed into the Place of Joy; and all expect the day of General Judgement, because they absolutely deny that the Souls see God before that time. The Iberians, besides, according to the same Author, believe that Infidels are only judged in a particular Judgement, and not at the General Judgement. They ground themselves upon these words of the Gospel, 
(1) John. 3.  He that believeth not is condemned already. Nor do they believe 
(2) Inferorum poenas non faciunt aeternas.  that the Pains of the Damned are Eternal: but they say, that if a Christian dye in Mortal Sin, without Repentance, he may be relieved out of Hell before the Universal Judgement, by praying to God for him. However, I think that that Belief which comes near to that of Origen, and which seems to have been followed by some new Greeks, is not the real Belief of the Iberians, who exactly conform to the Faith of the Greek Church; but that which hath given occasion of imputing it to them, is because they own but one Place after Death where they put the Souls of the Damned, and those who are thought to be in Purgatory. Now seeing they pray indifferently for all the Souls which are shut up in that Place which they call Hell, that God would deliver them from the Pains of Hell, and that he would remove them from that obscure Prison to the Place of Light and Joy which is Paradise; it hath easily been inferred from thence, that they believed not Hell to be Everlasting, which is to be understood with Limitation, and in regard of some Souls only who endure their Purgatory in that Place.  
The Iberians agree also with the Greeks, as to their Opinion of Confession, and speak of it after the same manner. They work on the most solemn holidays, even on Christmas-day: but that is not contrary to the Practice of the first Ages. This is their way of baptising. In the first Place the Priest reads a great many Prayers over the Child; and when he comes to the words wherein we make the Form of Baptism to consist, he does not stop, but reads on, without Baptising the Child at that time: then so soon as he hath done reading, the Child is stripped, and is at length baptised by the Godfather, and not by the Priest; which is done without pronouncing other words, than those that were pronounced some time before. They are not very pressing to receive Baptism; and they rebaptise those who return again to the Faith after Apostasy. The Priest alone, amongst them, is the true Minister of Baptism. 
(1) In periculo obitûs si desit sacerdos, infans non baptizatur.  So that for want of a Priest the Child must die without Baptism; and some of their Doctors are of opinion, that in that case the Baptism of the Mother is sufficient to save the Child. With Baptism they administer to Children Confirmation, and the Eucharist. They confess for the first time, when they marry: which they do also when they are at the Point of Death; but their Confession is made in three or four words. If a Priest fall into any uncleanness which he confesses, the Confessor deprives him of the Power of celebrating Mass. And therefore the Priests, have a care not to confess those Kind's of Sins. 
(1) Pueris morientibus praebent Eucharistiam.  They give the Communion to Children when they are a dying, and those that are come to Age receive it but seldom. The Prince forces the Churchmen, and even the Bishops to go to the Wars: and when they return home again, they celebrate Mass without any Dispensation for their irregularity. They are of the Opinion, that no more than one Mass should be said in one Day upon one Altar and in one Church. They consecrate in Chalices of Wood, 
(2) Eucharistiam deferunt ad infirmos maxima cum irreverentia, sine comitatu & luminibus.  And they carry the Sacrament to the Sick with great irreverence, without light or attendance. On some holidays the priests together assist at the Mass of the Bishop, who gives them the Sacrament in their hands, and they themselves carry it to their Mouths. The Churchmen do not daily say their Breviary; but one or two only say it, and the rest listen. He that recites the Office is commonly a Priest, and they who are present for most part do not hear. Most of the Iberians hardly know the Principles of Religion. If they have no Children by their Wives they divorce from them with the Permission of the Priests, and marry others; which they do also in case of Adultery and Quarrelling. They allege that there are no more Miracles wrought in the Church of Rome, and 
(3) Sentiunt Pontificem in jure duntaxat positivo dispensare posse, sed in re levi, non gravi.  that the Pope can give no Dispensations but in matters of positive Right, nor in these neither if they be of great consequence.  

(4) Avitab. Rel. Theatin.  Father Avitabolis in the same Letter to Pope Urban VIII. describes the Politic State of the Iberians; and amongst other things observes, the great Authority of the Princes and Nobles: for the Princes without any regard to that which is called Ecclesiastical Liberty or Immunity, use Priests as Servants. They slight the Bishops and punish them. They obey not the Patriarch, who takes the Title of Catholic or Universal; and yet it is not he who is the chief in Spiritual Affairs, but the Prince, who is Supreme both in Spirituals and Temporals. The Nobles do the same within their own Lands in regard of the Bishops and Priests. The Prince has his Voice with the Bishops in the Election of the Patriarch, and all choose him whom he desires. The Will of the Prince and of the several Lords within their Territories stands for Law, and they have no Judges for examining the Justice of Causes; neither have they any particular Statutes to walk by, not so much as admitting Witnesses. The Prince's dispose at their Pleasure of the Estates of their Subjects, as well as of their Persons. In fine, the Patriarch of Constantinople sends Caloyers often into that Country, to entertain them in their Enmity against the Pope.  
That Letter was written in the Year 1631. by Father Avitabolis to Pope Urban VIII. from Goris in Georgia or Iberia; and in the same Book of Galanus are inserted the Letters of the Prince of the Georgians to Pope Urban VIII. which are kept amongst the Records of the Congregation de propaganda fide. That Prince amongst other things affirms that the Faith hath been preserved pure in his Dominions since Constantine the Great to his time, and he allows a Chapel to the Missionaries of Rome, that they may pray to God for him. This Letter is dated in the Year 1629. Pope Urban wrote back to that Prince, and sent a Letter also to the Metropolitan named Zachary.  
What the Prince of the Georgians wrote to Pope Urban concerning the Faith which he pretends to have been in his Dominions since the time of the Emperor Constantine, is consonant 
(1) Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 6.  to the History of Socrates. 
(2) Balsam. Annot. in Can. 2. Conc. 2. General.  And Balsamon reckons the Churches of Iberia amongst those Churches which were absolute, and owned no Head on which they depended. he observes that that was done in the time of Peter, Patriarch of Antioch, by a Synodal Statute: and that at that time that Church depended on the Church of Antioch. And for that reason the Metropolitan of Georgia took the Title of Patriarch.  
Galanus joins to the Iberians those of Colchis or Mengrelia, saying, that as they are Neighbours, so they have the same Belief, only with this difference, that the Mengrelians living on the Mountains, and in the Woods, are a wickeder sort of People than the Georgians; that they are so ignorant in Religion, that they know not so much as the words necessary for Baptism, which they administer after the manner of the Georgians, and to render it the more solemn, they sometimes Baptism with Wine without Water; but we have said enough of the Georgians. The exposition that hath been made of their Faith, confirms the Belief of the Greeks: And it would not be difficult to prove it to be very Ancient, and that the manner also of their administering Baptism, Marriage and other Sacraments is lawful; though it differ from the Practice of the Church of Rome. What we at present call Matter and Form of Sacraments amongst us, ought not to be a Rule to other Christian Nations who are ignorant of these Names. It is certain the Orientals acknowledge no other Form of these Sacraments, but the Prayers which they make in administering them. I shall say nothing in this Place of the Religion of the Muscovites, because in all things they follow the Belief of the Greeks, of whom we have treated at large.   

CHAP. VI A Supplement concerning the Belief and Customs of the Georgians and Mengrelians.  
I Have lately read a 
(1) Breve compendio nel quale si rachiude tutto cio che à sacri riti e al divino cultos ' aspetta della natione de Colchi dettis Mengreli e Georgiani.  Manuscipt Relation, attributed to Father Zampi, a Theatin, wherein are described at large the Ignorance and Errors of these people, and especially of the Mengrelians, most of whose Priests, if we will credit that Author, cannot be certain that they have really received Priesthood, because it many times happens, that they who ordain them have not been baptised. The Bishops who are commonly more ignorant than the Priests, never examine their Capacity, but only if they have Money to pay for their Ordination; which amounts to the Price of a Horse. These Priests may not only marry, according to the Custom of the Greek Church, before they are ordained, but they may also marry a second time, by procuring a Dispensation from their Bishop which costs a Pistol. Neither does the Patriarch ordain a Bishop, without he pay him the Sum of 500 Crowns. When any Man falls sick he presently sends for a Priest, to assist him rather as a Physician, than as a Ghostly Father, who never speaks to his Patient of Confession; but by turning over the Leaves of a Book very attentively, he seems to search for the true Cause of the Distemper, which he imputes to the Anger of some of their Images; for these People have a Belief, that their Images are sometimes angry with them. And therefore the Priest order the Patient to make an Offering to appease the Wrath of the Image, that Offering consists in Cattle or Money, and all the Profit comes to the Priest alone.  
It is farther observed in that Relation, that so soon as a Child is born into the World, the Priest does not more but anoint it with Oil, making the sign of the Cross on its Forehead, and that Baptism is deferred until the Child be about two years old. Then they baptise it dipping it in hot-water, and anointing it all over; at length they give it Bread that hath been blessed to eat, and Wine to drink: which appears to be the Ancient way of Baptism, when they administered at the same time Baptism, Confirmation and the Eucharist. These People believe that Baptism, consists chief in the anointing with the Oil that hath been consecrated by the Patriarch: which does not disagree with the Doctrine of the Orientals, who call that Unction the Perfection of Baptism.  
Father Zampi who was no less full with the prejudices of the Theology of the Latins, than the other Emissaries we mentioned before, put many questions to them relating to that Theology. Amongst other things he asked them, whether when they administered any Sacrament, they had a real intention to administer it? And 
(1) Circal intention, non sanno che sia, solo per usanza celebrano e per l' Elemosina, per cio se sia valida la consecratione mi rimetto o' dottori.  thereupon he doubts, whether they truly consecrate the Bread and the Wine, because they know not what that intention means. He asked them besides, wherein they made the Form of Consecration to consist? And having put that Question to many of them, there was but one who gave him any satisfaction, and who in effect rehearsed the words of Consecration. But it is easy to judge, that the Mengrelian who thereupon satisfied Father Zampi, speaks rather in the Sense of the Father, than according to the Sentiment of those of his Nation. What is strangest of all, and which some will hardly believe, a Mengrelian Priest being by the same Father asked the Question, 
(2) Interrogai uno di questi Reverendi, se fatta la consecratione del pane e vino con le sodette parole verament dopo que pane e vino fosse il corpo e sangue di Christo? Questo soridendo, come se gli havessi detta una facetia, disse, chi porta Christo nel pane, e come puo venirvi e come puo stare in cosi poco pane, e perche si vol partire dal cilo per venir in terra, ne mai si è vista simil cosa.  whether after the Consecration of the Bread and the Wine, the same Bread and Wine were really changed into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ! the Mengrelian smiling made answer, that one could not conceive how Jesus Christ could leave Heaven to come down upon Earth, and that he could be lodged in so small a Morsel of Bread. But this does not at all agree with the Testimony, that Father Zampi gives in another Place of the Belief of that People concerning the Eucharist. And seeing such kind of Questions are impertinently made by the Emissaries to the People of the East, who are not at all acquainted with our Disputes about that Sacrament, we are not to wonder at their Answers, if they suit not always with our Principles. The Mengrelian Papas on that occasion consulted only his Senses, and made an answer much like to that which the Capernaites made to our Lord, How can this Man give us his Flesh? Father Zampi added another Question as impertinent as the rest. He asked the same Papas, whether in Case the Priest should forget the words of Consecration, would the Maze be good? to which he answered, why not? The Priest, indeed would sin; but the Mass would still be good. It is strange an Emissary should put such Questions to People whom he knows to be in profound ignorance, and who are so far from understanding the Questions that have for some Ages only been handled in the Schools, that they have but a slight Tincture of the Principles of Christian Religion.  
But that which scandalized Father Zampi the most, was the little Respect that the Papas of Mengrelia have for the Sacrament of the Eucharist, which they keep not, as the Latins do, in precious Vessels, but in a little bag of Leather or Cloth, which they always tie to their Girdle, carrying it about with them wheresoever they go, to be made use of upon occasions, when they are to give the Viaticum to the sick. Nor do they make any Difficulty to give it to be carried by others, whether it be Man or Woman: and seeing the Consecrated Bread is hard, they break it into little Pieces to be moistened, without much regard to the small Crumbs of that Consecrated Bread that fall upon the ground, or that sick to their Hands. 
[*]  [*] I confess these People pay not Veneration enough to that August Sacrament: but, on the other hand, it is not reasonable, to exact from them all the External Worship that is rendered to it in the Western Church, seeing they have not the same reasons to do it, having no Berengarians amongst them, that might oblige them to give those Exterior Marks of their Belief. We can expect no more from them, than what was practised in the first Ages of the Church: And it is not peculiar to the Mengrelians alone to keep in a leathern Bag the Sacrament which is to serve for a Viaticum; the same is also observed in some Greek Churches, who in that manner keep it fastened to the Wall in their Churches.   

CHAP. VII Of the Belief and Customs of the Nestorians.  
THere are many Sects of Christians in the East, who bear the Name of Chaldeans or Syrians; but the most considerable of these Chaldeans, are those whom we call Nestorians, who, in effect, reverence Nestorius as their Patriarch, and invocate him in their Prayers. That Nation, aswell as the other Orientals, have several times desired to be reunited to the Church of Rome: which happened under the Pontificate of Julius III. to whom the 
(1) Ep. Nestor. ad Jul. III. ex Syro in Latin. conversa per Andr. Mass.  Nestorians wrote, demanding of him the Confirmation of the Election which they had then made of a Patriarch; and praying him at the same time to protect him against a Family which for a long time had kept Possession of the Patriarchate. This is to be observed, because the Orientals commonly have no recourse to the Pope, unless for some particular Interest; which is also the reason that these kinds of Unions are not very lasting.  
The Reunion of the same Chaldean Nestorians with the Church of Rome, under the Pontificate of Paul V is more considerable than the former, and seeing the Acts of these Reunions have been Printed at Rome, we shall here extract out of them what may conduce to the Discovery of the Belief of those People, and add some Reflections thereupon.  

(2) Pet. Stroza de Dogm. Chald. Edit. Roma. 1617.  Stroza who hath caused these Acts to be Printed, affirms that the Sect of the Nestorians is so great, that their Patriarch has Jurisdiction over more than three hundred thousand Families, most of which have submitted themselves to the Pope by means of the Jesuits. Pope Clement VIII. gave them a Jesuit to govern them in Quality of Metropolitan. Until the time of Julius III. the Nestorians acknowledged but one Patriarch, who took the Title of Patriarch of Babylon: but Division happening amongst them, because they could not endure that the Patriarch should always continue in one Family, as it had for the space of above an hundred years, which appears by the Letters 
(1) Epist. Nestor. ad Jul. III.  they wrote to Julius III. for having Confirmation of their new Election; the Patriarchate was also divided, for the Pope gave them for Patriarch Simon Jubacha a Monk of the Order of St. Pachome, who held his Residence at Caremit in Mesopotamia, where, in that Quality he ordained several Bishops and Archbishops. After the Death of Simon Jubacha, Abdjesu or Hebedjesu, to pronounce it after the manner of the Chaldeans, was made Patriarch in his Place. Abraham Ecchellensis, 
Abrah. Ecchel.  who hath published a little Syriack Treatise of Abdjesu, gives him the Title of Metropolitan of Soba, in the Preface which he presixes to that Book. He takes notice of several Books composed by the same Hebedjesu, in favour of the Religion of the Nestorians: but that being come to Rome under Julius III. he made an Abjuration of Nestorianism. It is of him that mention is made in the Life of Pius iv In whose Pontificate he made a second Voyage to Rome, for obtaining the Confirmation of his Patriarchship; and was present at the Council of Trent. Being a Man of Parts, he had so much Address as to draw over many Nestorians to the Church of Rome. But they who succeeded him could not retain them, having neither his Parts nor Address.  
Abathalla, who was also a Monk of St. Pachome, succeeded to Hebedjesu, and having lived but a very short time, Denha Simon was his Successor, who before was Archbishop of Gelu: but he was forced to leave Caremit and to retire to the Province of Zeinalbech in the utmost Bounds of Persia, having been obliged to yield to the Power of the Patriarch of Babylon. His Successor whose Name also was Simon, resided in the same place: which lessenned much the Authority of that second Patriarch. And this was the State of the Affairs of the Nestorians from the time of Julius III. until Paul V in whose Pontificate, Elias Patriarch of Babylon made a solemn Reconciliation with the Church of Rome.  

(1) Stroza in proleg.  This Elias having received Presents from Paul V and a Formulary of Faith, sent some in his Name, to thank his Holiness, and to submit himself wholly to him, acknowledging the Church of Rome as the Chief of all other Churches. He made a Profession of Faith in the 
(2) Ep. Patriarch. Babyl. ad Paul. V.  Letter which he wrote to the Pope, wherein he Anathematises even those who believe not that the Church of Rome is the Mother of all Churches. Then he adds, that his Church of Babylon differs from other Churches of Heretics, which have multiplied Patriarches, without any Title, and without the Participation of the Church of Rome: whereas the Patriarchate of Babylon hath been established by the Authority of the See of Rome, as is to be found in their Annals, where it is mentioned that the Patriarches of the Eastern Church were ordained at Rome, whither they sent afterwards for obtaining the Confirmation of their Election. But seeing it happened often, that those who were sent were killed by the way, it was at length after a long time, concluded by the Pope in Council, that he would ordain them a Patriarch, and give them Liberty of Election for the future. And this, says the Patriarch Elias, is the Original of the Patriarchal See of Babylon, which we have not usurped, having received that Dignity from the Church of Rome.  
It is easy to perceive that all this History concerning the Original of the Patriarchate of the Nestorians, hath been made on purpose by the Patriarch Elias who stood in need of the Assistance of Rome. The same Judgement 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 Patriarches, but that, according to them, is only 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 fullness 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 only 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 only 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 only 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 only here relate a Summary, without speaking of the two last Articles which are common to all the Orientals; the three first only, relating particularly to the Nestorians; and I find that that Abbot evidently proves that the Modern Nestorianism, is but a Heresy in Name, and that it hath only been condemned, because not understood.  
In the first place, the Abbot makes appear, that it is easy 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 only true Son: insomuch that there is in Jesus Christ but one Filiation, and one only 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 Judgement.  
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 only 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 only 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 Judgement is only 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 Person because of one Filiation; so they of the East acknowledge one Virtue or Power because of one Filiation.  
In the third place, he reconciles the Opinion of the Nestorians, who assign but one Will and one Operation in Christ, with that of the Latins who acknowledge two Wills and two Operations in him. For compassing that, he insists upon the same Principle of one Filiation, which making but one Jesus Christ; the Nestorians say with relation thereunto, that there is but one Will and one Operation in him, because he is really one and not two. This, nevertheless, hinders them not from acknowledging two Wills and two Operations, with relation to the two Natures, as the Latins do: but they do not express themselves after their manner, because these two Natures making but one Compositum, which is Jesus Christ, they also say that he hath but one Will and one Operation; which excludes not the two Wills and Operations that the Latins attribute to Christ, because the Nestorians own him to be perfect Man. But seeing these two Natures are united together, and that the one Will is never separated from the other, they make both together but one and the same thing: and in that Sense they assert this Unity of Will; in which manner Christ also speaks, when he saith, I am not come to do my own Will, but the Will of him that sent me. Then he concludes with these words: Are there two contrary Wills in Jesus Christ? Not at all: but without any repugnance made by the Will of his Humanity, he wills that which the Will of his Divinity wills, to which it is submitted, not by constraint; and therefore he saith to his Father, not my Will be done, but thine.  
In this manner the Nestorians justified to Paul V the Belief of their Churches, and that Justification or Reconciliation was not the Work of one Man, but of the ablest Men of the Nation whom the Patriarch Elias consulted. The truth is, there is flattery in the Articles which relate to the Sovereign Power of the Pope, and the Christians of the Levant are not so submitted to the Court of Rome, as the Nestorians in these Acts do testify: but that is pardonable in poor Wretches that solicit the Protection of that Court, because there was no other means of approaching it, without giving the Pope that Supreme Power and Jurisdiction over all the Churches in the World. As to the other Propositions which are peculiar to the Nestorians, it will be found that Modern Nestorianism is but an imaginary Heresy, and that the Diversity of Sentiments consists only in Ambiguities, inasmuch as the Nestorians take the word Person in another acceptation than the Latins do. However, seeing Councils had condemned the Heresy of Nestorius, it was, it seems, necessary that Nestorianism should appear at Rome to be a real Heresy, since it had been condemned in the Church by a General Council. That Course Stroza hath taken in the Collection he hath made of these Acts; for he heaps together all that hath been said by the Fathers and Councils against the Opinion of Nestorius: Nevertheless, that he may not altogether thwart the Patriarch of the Nestorians, who affirmed that all the difference that was betwixt the Church of Rome and his own, in relation to their Belief, consisted only in Ambiguities; he frankly confesses, that it is probable enough that the Error of the Modern Nestorians, is more in the Understanding than Will, that is to say, that they are not Heretics, as not being obstinate; but only ignorant of true Theology, which makes them erroneous; as if it were an Error not to know the Terms which have not been in use but in some latter Ages amongst the Divines of the West.  
I do not think it needful to produce in this Place all that Stroza alleges for condemning the Propositions of the Nestorians, because he says nothing but what may be found in the Acts of Councils. I shall only observe, that from the same Acts some might infer, that Nestorianism is only a Heresy in Name, and that if Nestorius and St. Cyrill had understood one another, they might have reconciled their Opinions, and thereby hindered a great Scandal in the Church. But the Greeks have been always great Disputants; and therefore we find that most of the first Heresies had their Original amongst them; and that most commonly their Disputes were only metaphysical, and about Ambiguities, from which afterwards, according to their Custom, they drew Consequences, and, at length, came to reproaches; whereby matters became irreconcilable: whereas if the parties had modestly explained their thoughts, there had not been, for most part, the least appearance of Heresy in them. It seems to them that Nestorius hath always acknowledged two Natures in Christ, which united together, made but one Compositum; and that he called a Person in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whence the Chaldeans have taken their Parsopa. Now it is certain, the Term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the Ancient Greek Fathers, signifies that which we call Person and Hypostasis. For as to the two Persons which Nestorius assigned to be in Christ, it was only to explain that there were really two Natures in him, and that both remained entire without Mixture or Confusion. In effect, besides those two Metaphysical Persons which were not distinguished in Nature, he admitted another real visible Person, in the manner as it is defined by the Ancient Fathers. Nay it will appear, that the Sentiment of Nestorius, if we bar the Consequences that St. Cyrill draws from it, is less perplexed with Difficulties, because it is more simple, and always regards Jesus Christ in himself and as Son; whereas the other Opinion, most frequently considers him only by parts, that is to say, sometime as God, and sometime as Man. Nor was the Opinion of Theodore of Mopsuestia, the Master of Nestorius, condemned in the Beginning, and it was never thought on, until the Nestorians made use of his Authority. It is, nevertheless, certain, That this Theodore, from whom Nestorius had learned the Opinion, acknowledged two Natures and one Person in Jesus Christ, as appears by his words mentioned in the fifth General Council: And if he denied that the Virgin was the Mother of God, it was only to refute the Heresy of Apollinarius, and in that Sense only, that the Virgin could not conceive the Divinity, though otherways he whom she brought forth was very God. Let us now proceed to the other Articles of the Belief of the Nestorians.  
Seeing the Sect of the Nestorians hath been rend from the Greek Church, it hath the same Opinions as she hath, except that which is peculiar to it, and which was the Cause of the Separation. It may be, however, the Nestorians are greater Libertines as to some Points of Morality and Discipline, than the Greeks are; and without doubt it is in that Sense that we ought to understand 
(1) Brerew. of Lang, and Religions, Chap. 19  what Brerewood relates concerning Confession, which he denies to be amongst them. It is true they neglect it very much, and the Archbishop Joseph, a Nestorian, who some years since was reconciled to the Church of Rome, had much ado to re-establish it in Diarbequer, because the Nestorians, though most of them Latinized, would not submit to it, as I have learned from another Chaldean Archbishop, a great Friend of Joseph's, who hath suffered much for maintaining the Interests of Rome. We must then explain all the other Points of the Religion of the Nestorians, with relation to the Sentiments of the Greek Church, which is the source of all the Christianity in the East.  
It is not to be denied, but that the Nestorians consecrate in Leavened bread. They moreover, put into their Bread Salt and Oil, as may be seen in the Notes upon the Works of Gabriel of Philadelphia, where the way of making and preparing that Bread, to make it proper for Consecration, is related. They have, for that end, a great many Prayers which they say; however they observe fewer Ceremonies than the Greeks, who to the Ancient have added an infinite Number of new ones.   

CHAP. VIII. Of the Indians, or Christians of St. Thomas.  
THE Indians or Christians of St. Thomas, and the Nestorians may be comprehended under one Head, because it is certain they make but one Sect, and have but one Patriarch, whose Jurisdiction extends as far as India: and the Chaldeans who live at Goa, Cochim, Angamala, and other Places of those Quarters, are really of the Nestorian Sect. The Pope's have often sent Emissaries into those Countries, especially since the Portuguese settled there. But he that laboured most in reconciling these Christians of St. Thomas to the Roman Church, was Alexis de Meneses of the Order of St. Austin, who was made Archbishop of Goa, and took the Title of Primate of the East. Seeing there hath been a History made out of his Memoires, the relation of those who accompanied him into that Country, and of some Jesuits who have been in the same Places, we shall relate the State and Religion of those People at the time of that Famous Mission, which happened in the Year 1599 Many before Meneses had attempted the Reunion of the Christians of St. Thomas with the Church of Rome. Don John Albuquerque, 
(1) Hist. Orient. des progrés d' Alex. Men. en la reduct des Crestiens de St. Thomas. Imprimée à Brusseles en. 1609.  of the Order of St Francis, was the first Archbishop of Goa; and under him, in the Year 1546. there was a College erected at Cangranor for instructing Children in the Ceremonies of the Latins. But the Jesuits who were more sagacious, soon perceived, that the Young Chaldeans bred after the manner of the Latins, were useless, and that it was in vain to think of converting the Christians of that Country without the Knowledge of the  or Syrian Language. They therefore erected another College about a League from Cangranor in the Year 1587. where they taught Children the Chaldaic Tongue, to the end that being grown up, they might be received into the Ministry as real Chaldeans. But neither did this do any great Service, because it was not enough to be instructed in the Language of the Religion, there must be, besides, an agreement in Sentiments with the Prelates, to have the Liberty of Preaching in their Churches; whereas being taught by the Jesuits, their Doctrine and way of speaking were very different from what was commonly received in the Country. And therefore it was impossible for the Jesuits to make them forsake their ancient Customs, and to withdraw them from the Submission which they rendered to the Patriarch of Babylon, who was not in the Pope's Communion, no more than the Bishops that were under his Jurisdiction.  
The Remedy therefore that was found for that, was to seize the Person of a certain Bishop called Mar Joseph, who had been sent by the Patriarch of Babylon, to the end that by that means the People having no Pastor, the Design might the more easily be brought about. But that Bishop Mar Joseph ordered that Mass should be celebrated according to the Custom of Rome with Ornaments after the Latin Fashion, and that they should even make use of the Wine and Wafers of the Latins. Nevertheless he still persisted in Nestorianism, and taught the Portuguese who served him, to say, Holy Mary Mother of Christ, and not Mother of God: which obliged the Archbishop and Viceroy to arrest him, in order to his being carried to Rome. But arriving in Portugal, he so well managed his Affairs, that he obtained Letters again to be received into his Bishopric of Serra. In the mean time, there was another Bishop already put in his Place, called Mar Abraham, who to maintain himself in his Bishopric, went afterwards to Rome to submit to the Pope, where having made an abjuration of his Heresies, he was re-ordained. He had all the Orders given him anew, from the Tonsure to Priesthood; then he was consecrated Bishop, and the Pope empowred him by Bulls for governing the Church of Serra, adding thereunto Letters of Recommendation to the Viceroy, which stood him but in little stead: for he was no sooner arrived, but that the Archbishop of Goa caused his Bulls to be examined; and finding that the Pope had been misinformed by Mar Abraham, and that his Holiness had been imposed upon, he was shut up in a Monastery, in expectation of an Answer from Rome. But he escaped and retired into the Churches of his Bishopric, where he was very well received by the Nestorians, who hoped no more for any Bishop from their Patriarch. In the mean time, Mar Abraham who still disinherited the Portuguese, retreated far up into the Country; and to show that he was sincerely in the Pope's Communion, he ordained anew all those whom he had already ordained, that he might conform to the Roman Rite, and did all he could both with the Viceroy and the Archbishop, that he might appear to be really in the Judgement of the Latin Church. But he still preached Nestorianism in his Church of Serra, and would not suffer the Pope to be called Head of the Church, as owning no other Patriarch, but the Patriarch of Babylon. On the other hand, the Ancient Bishop of Serra Mar Joseph was accused of teaching the Heresies of Nestorius, and being thereupon questioned, he answered freely, that he had had a Revelation from God, assuring him that the Religion which he had received from his Ancestors was the true Religion. So he was immediately made Prisoner, and sent to Rome where he died.  
From this History it may be gathered that the Portuguese have used great Violence towards the Nestorians about Matters of Religion; that the Emissaries, being Men unacquainted with the Theology of the East, have disturbed and molested them for Ceremonies of little or no Importance, and that they have thereby occasioned the temporizing of the Nestorian Bishops, by introducing Novelties into their Churches, to which they were constrained by Violence. And therefore it was that the same Mar Abraham having been obliged by the Pope's Brief, and more by the fear that he had of the Viceroy, who gave him a Passport, to repair to a Council, he there again abjured all these Errors, and made Profession of the Roman Catholic Faith. But no sooner was he come back to his Church, but that he taught Nestorianism as before; and even wrote to his Patriarch of Babylon, that the Portuguese had forced him to be present at the Synod of Goa. The sequel of that History discovers more plainly the Violences used by the Portuguese towards the Nestorians, to bring them to an Union with the Church of Rome, and to oblige them to subscribe to the Confession of Faith of Pius IU. which happened in the time of Alexis de Meneses Archbishop of Goa, who went into the Indies with a Brief of Clement VIII. to inform against Mar Abraham. In that whole Relation there appears great Zeal in the Nestorian Christians of that Country, for the Defence of their Faith, which they pretended to retain as being once delivered unto them by St. Thomas: In so much that they put their hands before their Eyes at the Mass of the Latins, when the Priest elevated the Host to be adored by those that were present. Above all, they showed themselves zealous for their Patriarch of Babylon; and when they were asked whether the Pope was not Head of the Church, they made answer that he was Head of the Church of Rome, which is a particular Church, otherwise called the Church of St. Peter, and not of the Church of St. Thomas, as being independent one of another, which they obstinately maintained. They, moreover, resolutely withstood the Sacrament of Confirmation which Archbishop Meneses would have administered unto them; and they accused him of Envy and Ambition, alleging that he endeavoured to overturn the Religion of St. Thomas, to make them embrace that of Rome, to the end that by that Artifice, he might remain absolute Master of all the Churches of the Indies. And therefore, say they, that Archbishop calumniated the Patriarches of Babylon; protesting, however, that they would persevere in Submission and Obedience to their patriarch, and that they would never forsake their Religion to embrace that of Rome.  
Notwithstanding all these oppositions on the Part of the Nestorians, Archbishop Meneses still persisted to inculcate to them that their Patriarch was an Heretic and Excommunicated; and that therefore they could not pray for him. This he did so vigorously, sparing neither Pains nor Money, that at length he softened them. Sometimes he used Violence, and was therefore often in danger of his Life. For under Pretext that he had full Power from the Pope, he exercised his Jurisdiction in all Places, without minding the Ordinaries of the Places, even before they had acknowledged his Character. And in this manner that Envoy of the Pope planted the Roman Religion in that Country, and spared no means to accomplish his Design. He gave Orders in spite of the Diocesan Bishops, and made those whom he Ordained first abjure the Errors of the Nestorians. Besides the Confession of Faith, they who entered into Orders were obliged to swear Obedience to the Pope, and to acknowledge no other Bishops, but such as were sent from him. But let us now come to the Errors of which Meneses accuses the Christians of St. Thomas.  
I. 
(1) Hist. Orient. des progr. d' Alexis Meneses, Chap. 20.  They obstinately maintained the Errors of Nestorius, and besides that, they received no Images, admitting only the Cross which they much honoured. Nevertheless, there were Images of some Saints in Churches adjacent to the Portugese.  
II. They affirmed that the Souls of the Saints did not see God before the Day of Judgement.  
III. They acknowledged but three Sacraments, to wit, Baptism, Orders, and the Eucharist: and in the Form of Baptism there was so great an abuse amongst them, that in one and the same Church, different Forms of Baptism were in use; and by reason of that, it happened often that the Baptism was null: So that Archbishop Meneses secretly rebaptised most Part of that People. There were also a great many, especially the Poor, who lived in the woods, who had never been Baptised, because Baptism cost Money: And nevertheless though they had never been baptised, yet they went to Church, and received the Sacrament. Besides, they often enough delayed Baptism for several Months, nay and for several Years.  
iv They made no use of Holy Oil in the Administration of Baptism; unless that finding in their Rituals that there was mention made of anointing after Baptism, they anointed Children with an Unguent made of Indian Nuts, without any Benediction; and they esteemed that Unction Holy.  
V They had no Knowledge of Confirmation nor Extreme Unction; nay not so much as the Names of them.  
VI They abominated Auricular Confession, except a few that were Neighbours to the Portuguese: And as to the Eucharist, they communicated on Holy Thursday and many other Festival-days, without other Preparation, than coming to the Sacrament fasting.  
VII. Their Books were full of considerable Errors, and in their Mass there were a great many Additions inserted by the Nestorians.  
VIII. They consecrated with little Cakes made with Oil and Salt, which the Deacons and other Churchmen, who were but in inferior Orders, baked in a Copper Vessel, having for that purpose a separated Place in the Form of a little Tower; and whilst the Cake was a baking, they sung several Psalms and Hymns: and when they were ready to consecrate, through a Hole that was in the Floor of that little Tower, they let the Cake in a little Basket made of Leaves slide down upon the Altar. Moreover, they made use of Wine made of Water, in which some dry Grapes had only been infused.  
IX. They said Mass but very seldom, and he that served at it, wore a kind of a Stole over his ordinary , though he was not a Deacon. He had always the Censer in his Hand, and said almost as many Prayers as he that celebrated, adding thereto many unknown and impious Ceremonies.  
X. They had so great a Veneration for Orders, that there was not a Family where some Body was not in Orders: and the reason of that was, because as Orders made them not incapable of other Employments, so they had every where the Precedence.  
Besides, they observed not the Age requisite for Priesthood, and the other Orders; for they made Priests at the Age of 17, 18. and 20. Years: and when they were Priests, they married, even with Widows, and past to second or third Marriages. The Priest's Wives had some Place before others, aswell in the Churches as elsewhere, and they were to be known by a Cross which they carried about their Neck, or some other. thing that distinguished them.  
XI. They went daily to Church to read the Liturgy aloud in the  Tongue: but they did not think themselves obliged to repeat it elsewhere; neither had they any Breviaries for saying it in Private.  
XII. They committed Simony in the Administration of Baptism and the Eucharist, setting rates of the Price they were to receive for them. For their Marriages, they made use of the first Priest that they found, especially those who lived in the Country.  
XIII. They had an extraordinary respect for their Patriarch of Babylon, a Schismatic, and Head of the Nestorian Sect: on the contrary they could not endure that the Pope should be named in their Churches, where most commonly they had neither Curate nor Vicar, but the ancientest presided in them.  
XIV. Though on Sundays they went to Mass, yet they did not think themselves obliged to it in Conscience; so that they were at Liberty not to go, nay there were some Places where Mass was said but once a Year, and others where none was said in 6, 7. and 10. Years.  
XV. The Priests discharged Secular Employments. The Bishops were Babylonians sent by their Patriarch, and lived only by sordid Gain, and Simony, selling Publicly Holy things, as the Collation of Orders, and the Administration of other Sacraments.  
XVI. They are flesh on Saturdays; and were in this Error in regard of the Fasts of Lent and the Advent, that if they had failed to Fast one day, they fasted no more, thinking themselves not obliged to it, because they had already broken their Fast.  
These are the greatest Part of the Errors which Archbishop Meneses pretends to have found amongst the Christians of St. Thomas, and which the Compiler of that History exaggerates, to show that extraordinary Labour was needful for gaining these People. But if that Archbishop and other Emissaries into the East, had been well acquainted with the Ancient Theology, they would not have so multiplied Errors. In effect, seeing they measured all things by the Rule of the Theology which is taught in the Schools of Europe, it is not to be thought strange, that they would needs reform the Oriental nations according to that Standard. I confess, there were abuses there that needed amendment; but they ought not to have been rectified according to our Customs. The Course that was to have been taken on these Occasions was to have turned back unto their Ancient Books, and to have reform them according to the Contents thereof; and that might have been easily done, as will appear in the Sequel of this Discourse. But we must first relate the rest of that History, that we may be able to make the better Judgement on the Conduct of Meneses, and of the pretended Errors of the Nestorians.  
Archbishop Meneses called a Synod the 20th. of June 1599 where the Deputies of the Nestorians were present, to deliberate jointly with the Archbishop about Matters of Religion. And that it might appear that the Nestorians had all the Liberty that is necessary upon such Occasions, and that on the other Hand, they might give their Consent to all that should be decreed there, the Archbishop gained Eight of the most Famous Churchmen, and fully informed them of his Design, and of the ways that were to be taken for succeeding in it, giving them the particulars of all the Decrees that were to be made there, and ask their Opinion upon every distinct Point, as if nothing had as yet been resolved upon; to the end that being present in the Synod, they might do the same, and thereby oblige the rest to follow their Example. He took many other measures for succeeding in his Designs, which, it would be to no purpose, to relate; and all that hath been hitherto alleged, is only to show the manner how the Roman Religion hath been established in the East, and that it is not to be thought strange, that all the Reconciliations that have been made with those People whom we call Schismatics, have been of no long Duration.  
It was then decreed in that Synod, that the Priests, Deacons, Subdeacons', and besides all the Deputies of Towns that were present should sign the Confession of Faith, that the Archbishop had privately made by himself; which was done, and all solemnly swore obedience to be Pope, whom they acknowledged to be Head of the Church, swearing also that they would entertain no more Commerce with the Patriarch of Babylon. Moreover they Anathematised the Person of Nestorius and all his Errors, owning cyril Patriarch of Alexandria for a Saint. Besides, a great many particular Statutes were made in that Synod, for reforming the Errors that Archbishop Meneses pretended to be in the Administration of their Sacraments, and in their Books. And therefore he caused their Liturgies and other Offices to be rectified. He regulated the matter of Marriage, according to the Decrees of the Council of Trent. The Sacraments of Penance, Confirmation and Extreme Unction were likewise reform, according to the Practice of the Church of Rome. Priests were for the future prohibited to marry, and regulations were made for those who were already married. In a word, the Archbishop introduced the Religion of the Latins amongst the Chaldeans, as well in that synod, as in the Visitations which he made of several Churches. But let us now consider, if he had reason to introduce so many Novelties amongst the Christians of St. Thomas; which will serve to discover the Religion of those People.  
I. As to what concerns the Errors which Archbishop Meneses imputes to them; we have in the foregoing Chapter reconciled the Sentiments of the Nestorians, with those of the Church of Rome; and that was the way that the Archbishop should have proceeded with them, if he intended to have established a lasting Reformation: for he ought to have heard them, before he condemned them for being called Nestorians. When it had been made clear to them, that all the Disputes which they had with the Church of Rome, consisted only in the Ambiguity of Terms, they would have become a great deal more tractable and docile.  
II. As to Images, the Chaldeans reverence them not so much as the Greeks do, because that great Veneration of Images was not so firmly established in the Greek Church, but since the second Council of Nice, which was posteriour to all the Sects of the Chaldeans, who commonly are satisfied with a Cross in their Hand; and that Cross wherewith the Priest blesseth the People, is of plain Metal without any figure. The Archbishop might very well have let the Christians of St. Thomas alone in that Ancient simplicity, because all that hath been since that time decreed concerning Images, is but barely matter of Discipline.  
III. It is very true they administer not Baptism after the manner of the Latins; but it is not therefore to be thought, that the form of their Baptism is invalid; and it was far less necessary to rebaptize those who had been baptised according to the Chaldean rite. That which deceives the Emissaries, when they treat about Affairs of Religion with the Orientals, is the prejudices which they have learned in the Schools concerning the Matter and Form of Sacraments. When, for instance, they see that the Child is not baptised at the same time that the words which denote the Action are pronounced, they take the Baptism to be null; without considering that the manner of administering the Sacraments amongst the Orientals, consists chief in certain Prayers which they say, and that they are not so great Metaphysicians as the Latins; which makes them ignorant of a vast number of Difficulties, that our Divines handle with much subtlety; but the Belief of the Nestorians is not therefore less pure, nor less Ancient.  
iv The Unction which they use after Baptism, is with them the Sacrament of Confirmation, that differs much from that of the Latins: And it was not needful that Archbishop Meneses should have introduced another Unction that was practised in his Church, and which at most was no more than a Ceremony. He ought to have known that the Nestorians, according to the Ancient Practice of the Eastern Church, administer to Children Confirmation and the Eucharist with Baptism. It had been then fit, to have examined their Rituals, to see whether any abuse might not have crept into the Administration of that Sacrament: whereas Meneses his chief care seems to have been, to abolish most Ancient Customs, because they were not agreeable to the Practices of the Latins.  
V The Archbishop is mistaken, when he says that the Christians of St. Thomas had no Knowledge of Confirmation, nor of Extreme Unction, and were ignorant of the very Names. It may be, they might have been ignorant of the Names of these Sacraments, especially of Extreme Unction, which is not where known, but in the Latin Church: for though the Eastern Church hath the Custom of anointing the Sick, according to the words of St. James, yet she calls not that Ceremony Extreme Unction, for the reasons we mentioned before, when we spoke of the Greeks: and the same reasons may be also applied to Confirmation. The Priests administer that Sacrament amongst the Nestorians, as well as amongst the Greeks, at the same time they do Baptism, of which, according to them, it is a perfection that ought never to be separated from it. As to Auricular Confession, which they had in abhorrence, it is certainly an abuse introduced into that Church, because the use of Confession is in all the East, though most part think not themselves obliged to it by Divine Right.  
VI As to the Errors which the Archbishop pretends to have found in their Books, so far as that they would have entirely abolished the Office of Advent, it was easy to have given a good meaning to all these pretended Errors; besides that, the Reformation which he made in their Liturgy was improper: for there is nothing worse digested than the Mass of the Nostorians, in the manner as it hath been reform by Meneses, and as it is found inserted in the Bibliotheca Patrum. The whole Order of it is changed, in endeavouring to accommodate that Liturgy to the Opinion which the Latin Divines have of Consecration, which they make to consist in these words, This is my Body, etc. whereas the Nestorians believe, as all the Orientals do, that the Consecration is not completed, till the Priest hath ended the Prayer, which they call the Invocation of the Holy Ghost. Nevertheless Meneses makes the Nestorian Priests adore the Host, so soon as they have pronounced these words, This is my Body, though they believe it not to be as yet consecrated. About this Question the Notes on Gabriel of Philadelphia may be consulted, where the Author particularly justifies the Nestorians, and proves clearly, that their Liturgies, even that which carries the Name of S. Nestorius, contain nothing but what is Orthodox: which is far from the Sentiment of Meneses, who calls them impious and heretical, and who only defends the Correction that he hath made, by these general Terms, that their Liturgies were full of Blasphemies. The same Author affirms that in one of the Liturgies for the use of the Nestorians, which he had from a Babylonian Priest, the Name of Nestorius with many other things were blotted out, and others added that were not of the same hand writing, because the Nestorian Priest who made use of that Liturgy, was reconciled, at least in appearance, to the Roman Church; which obliged him to reform in his Missal all that might disgust the Divines of Rome. The Nestorians have also done the like on another occasion, as Stroza 
(1) Petr. Stroza de dogm. Chald.  relates: for so soon as they come to Rome, and hear Nestorius spoken of as an impious Person and Heretic, they tear out the Leaves of their Books where mention is made of him, taking away all that they believe to be contrary to the Theology of the Church of Rome.  
VII. Their Custom of consecrating with Leavened bread, mingling therein Oil and Salt, ought not to be reckoned amongst their Errors, since that does not alter the Nature of Bread. The Ceremony, besides, which they observe to render, in some sort, the Bread more Holy before the Consecration, is Laudable, nay and Ancient. They thereby distinguish, as the Greeks do, the Bread that is destined to be made the Body of Christ, from all common Bread, which they look upon as profane, before they have said over it a certain Number of Prayers and Psalms.  
VIII. It is no matter of wonder, that the Chaldeans do not say Mass so often as the Latins do, and that many Priests are present at the Bishop's Mass, and take the Communion from his hands. That is an ancient Practice in the Church: whereas the Custom of saying so many Masses in the Latin Church, is very late, and hath been chief introduced by Mendicant Monks, as it is observed by Cardinal Bona; which Practice hath been much fortified since the Introduction of the new Law. It is also a very ancient Custom that they who serve and are present at Mass, rehearse a good part of it; and that, because the Liturgy is a Public Action which concerns the People, and may be easily proved even by the Prayers of the Latin Mass.  
IX. It is true the Nestorians and other Orientals, are grown remiss, in the Ancient Discipline as to what relates to Orders, and that they observe not the Age required by the Canons: But if that wanted to be reform, as well as what concerns the Marriage of Priests, the Reformation should have been taken from their Laws, rather than from those of Rome. All Men know that in the Eastern Church Priests are allowed to marry before their Ordination. This, Archbishop Meneses ought to have considered in reforming them, and not to have dissolved the Marriage of Priests, that he might conform to some Statutes made in the Synods held at Goa by some Latin Emissaries.  
X. Meneses seems to have been mistaken in reckoning the Custom of not saying the Breviary out of the Church, amongst their Errors, because that Practice is new, and that the Breviary was not made to be said in private.  
XI. I doubt whether the Rates that the Nestorian Priests set for the Administration of the Sacraments, aught to be called Simony, because that is to them instead of a Benefice; and what hath been said before when we spoke of the Greeks, may be applied to them.  
XII. I think the Submission that the Nestorians have for their Patriarch, ought not to be reckoned an Error 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 Error: 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 Error 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 only 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 Heresy 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 chief 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 Patriarches 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 Heretics, though in effect they differ not from the Latin Divines, but only 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 only 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 Christ's. 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 only 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 Errors 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 Jesus; 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 ancient Custom, 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 alleges 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, Arabic being the Language of the Country: 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 only 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 respectful 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 persuaded 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, Pastor of Pastors, and Head of all Churches; he made answer, that since the Council of Chalcedon and the establishment of divers Patriarches 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 Error, he ought to be judged by the other Patriarches. He farther answered, that as to the Letters which he had written to the Pope, it ought not to be taken strictly, what was only meant for Civility and Modesty; and that though he spoke of Obedience and Submission, yet that was no more than Friends commonly do 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 Errors 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 Errors, 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 Jesus 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 go neither to Heaven nor Hell before the Day of Judgement. I shall not spend time in refuting many Errors of Brerewood concerning the Religions of the East: It is enough I relate matters of fact as really they are, without giving myself the trouble to refute Authors 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 chief 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 Author 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 Morsels with as many Spoonfuls 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 in the Church; that they consecrate with Leavened bread, which before the Consecration they all Baraca, that is to say Benediction; and Corban, or Communion and Eucharist, after it is consecrated; that they make use of little Loaves about the Bigness of somewhat less than a Crown piece, whereof they bake a great Number the Night before the Liturgy; and that they distribute them at the End of Mass to those who have been present.  
He farther says, that they use not Tavern-wine, because they think it profane, and that in Places where no Wine is to be had, they infuse Rasins in water; that they never confess and communicate but in Lent; that the Laics communicate in both kinds, and that they receive the Wine in a Spoon from the Hands of the Priest; that they give the Communion also to Children so soon as they are baptised; that all read the Holy Scripture in the Arabic Tongue, which is the Language of the Country; that they celebrate on Saturday as well as Sunday; and that in one Year they have two and thirty Festivals of the Virgin, which are reckoned up by the Author: and amongst others, he takes notice of the Festival of a certain Image of the Virgin, which miraculously was changed into Flesh, the History whereof is written in an Ethiopian Book, which treats of the Miracles of the Virgin.  
The same Father Vanslebio relates at large the Ceremonies which they observe in Baptism, and are performed in this manner: for that purpose they celebrate a Mass after Midnight, accompanied with many Prayers; and after they have sung for some time, the Deacons carry the Children to the Altar, who are anointed with Holy Oil: and then they say that the Children are become new Spiritual Men. This being done, they begin to sing, and the Children are anointed a second time, making upon them the sign of the Cross seven and thirty times; which serves them for Exorcism. Again they continue to sing, and the Women who are present at the Ceremony make a loud Noise in token of Joy. In the mean time, water is put into the Baptismal Fonts, and the Priests draw near. He that baptises, blesses the water, pouring in Form of a Cross Holy Oil into the same: then with one Hand he takes the Child by the Right Arm and Left Leg, and with the other Hand, by the left Arm, making a kind of a Cross with the Limbs of the Child, which they cloth in a little white Garment; and during all this, the Priests still continue to read and sing, and the Women to cry, or rather to howl. At length the Priest breathes three times in the Child's face, to the end, say they, that he may receive the Holy Ghost. No sooner is the Child baptised, but the Priest gives it the Communion; which he doth, by dipping his Finger into the Chalice, and putting it into the Child's Mouth. All these Ceremonies being ended, they light the Tapers, and make a Procession, singing in the Church. The Deacons carry the Children in their Arms, and the Priests go before them; after them follow the Men and Women who have been present at the Ceremony, the Women howling after their ordinary manner.  
They have, according to the same Author, four great Fasts in the Year, the first whereof gins before Christmas, and lasts 24 days: The second is Lent, which lasts 60 days: The third is called the Fast of our Lord's Disciples, which gins the third Holy Day of Pentecost, and lasts 31 days: And the fourth, which lasts fifteen days, is the Fast of our Lady in August.  
Images are held in great Veneration amongst them, though they have no Statues; and the most usual Images are those of Our Lord, of the Virgin, of St. George, of Angels, to wit, St. Michael, St. Gabriel, St. Raphael, and many others. They kiss those Images, and burn Lamps before them, with the Oil of which they anoint themselves when they are sick. It is probable they have no other Sacrament of Extreme Unction, but that kind of anointing; unless perhaps they do it with a little more Ceremony.  
It is to be observed that Father Vanslebio in his relation speaks of the Abyssines, aswell as of the true Cophties or Egyptians, because, in effect, they are both Cophties in Religion, and Subject to the same Patriarch, who commonly resides in Cairo; and because there are but a few Cophties in Alexandria, which ought to be the Place of his Residence. This Patriarch takes the Title of Patriarch of Alexandria and Jerusalem, and calls himself the Successor of St. Mark. He extends his Jurisdiction over both Egypt's, over Nubia and Abyssinia. He hath besides eleven Cophty-Bishops depending on him, to wit, the Bishops of Jerusalem, Behnese, Atfih, Fiur, Moharrak, Montfallot, Sÿut, Abutig, Girgium, Negade on Girge, and lastly the Metropolitan of Abyssinia. After the Bishops, the Archpriests are next in degree, and are very numerous amongst them; next to them come in order, the Priests, Deacons, Readers and Chanters.  
As to their Office; on Saturday in the Evening after Sun set, the Priest attended by his Ministers goes to Church to sing Vespers which last about an Hour; and those who are present sleep afterwards in the Church. They who do not sleep, smoke Tobacco and drink Coffee, or otherwise discourse about what they please. Two Hours after Midnight they say matins, and afterwards Mass, to which many do resort. When they enter the Church, they take off their shoes, and kiss the ground near the Door of the Sanctuary; then drawing near to the Archpriest, they kiss his Hand, bowing that they may receive his Blessing. If the Patriarch be present, and do not officiate, he sits on a Throne raised above the Priests, having a Copper Cross in his Hand; and after all have made the usual Reverence before the Sanctuary, they make it again before the Patriarch, and kiss the ground near him, afterwards they rise and kiss the Cross and Patriarch's Hand.  
Seeing most of these Ceremonies are common to all the Orientals, I shall insist no longer upon them, nor upon their way of celebrating Mass, which may be seen in the Relation of Father Vanslebio; besides, they differ but little from the Greeks, from whom they have borrowed a great Part of their Ceremonies. That which is observable, and which might be brought into practice in the Latin Churches is, that they have a Book of Homilies taken out of the Chief Fathers, of which they read somewhat, after the reading of the Gospel; and that serves as an Explication or Paraphrase upon the same Gospel, so that there is no need of Preachers to instruct them.   

CHAP. XI. Of the Belief and Customs of the Abyssines or Ethiopians.  
SEEING we have treated at large of the Religion of the Cophties, and that the Abyssines differ not from them therein, we shall not be long on that Subject.  
Ancient Ethiopia is at present called Abassia, and the People who inhabit it Abyssines. They have but one Bishop to govern them, who is sent to them by the Patriarch of Alexandria, that resides at Cairo; so that in all things they follow the Religion of the Cophties, excepting some Ceremonies that are peculiar to them. They have also a particular Language which they call Chaldaick, because they think it has been derived from Chaldea, though it be very different from the ordinary Chaldaick, and therefore it is called the Ethiopian Language. They use that Tongue in their Liturgies, and in other Divine Offices, though it be old, and different from the vulgar Ethiopian. They who understand Hebrew, may easily learn that Language, because there are many words common to both: yet it hath particular Characters; and whereas in the Hebrew Language the Points which serve for Vowels are not joined to the Consonants, in the Ethiopian Tongue there is no Consonant but which at the same time makes its Vowel.  
The Abyssines have made many advances towards a Reunion with the Church of Rome. And there are several of their Letters written to Popes, of which the most considerable is 
(1) Epist. David. ad Clem. VII.  that of David, who takes the Title of Emperor of the greater and upper Ethiopia and many other Kingdoms, written to Clement VII. to whom he made great Submissions, and protested that he would obey him. But it is certain that the Ethiopians have never had recourse to Rome and to the Portuguese, but for settling their Affairs, when they have been in Disorder; and that they have slighted them so soon as they were any ways successful, as may be seen in the Histories of the Portuguse, which need not to be mentioned in this Place. All Men know what became of John Bermudes, who was made Patriarch of Ethiopia, and consecrated at Rome; at the solicitation of the Abyssines themselves, who pretended that for the future they would have no metropolitans but such as should be sent them from Rome. But no sooner had they mastered their Difficulties, but that they rejected those Patriarches, and sent to Cairo for a Metropolitan from the Patriarch of the Cophties, despising the Church of Rome, and abusing the Portuguese that remained in their Country, without any respect to the great Services which they had rendered them. 
(1) Alex. Menes. Hist. Orient.  Alexis Meneses, whom we mentioned before, thought himself obliged to use his utmost endeavours for reconciling those People to the Church of Rome, and having taken the Title of Primate of the Indies, he pretended to extend his Jurisdiction also over Ethiopia. And therefore he sent Emissaries with Letters to the Portuguese living in that Country, writing at the same time to the Metropolitan of the Abyssines, whom he earnestly exhorted to submit to the Church of Rome. He farther urged, that he ought not to make any difficulty of obeying that Church, since the Patriarch of the Cophties and his whole Church, had lately submitted to it; which he proved by the very Acts and Instruments of that Patriarch's Legation, which are inserted in the End of the fifth Tome of the Annals of Baronius, whereof he sent him a Copy, but he knew not that the Court of Rome had been overreached in that Point, and that Baronius had too easily published these Acts under the Name of the true Patriarch of Alexandria, and of the Church of the Cophties.  
Moreover, it is to be observed, that Meneses and many others are mistaken, when they accuse the Ethiopians of Judaizing in their Ceremonies, because some of them observed Circumcision; that besides, they celebrated Mass on Saturday as well as Sunday, and that they abstained from Blood and Flesh that had been Strangled. The Circumcision of the Ethiopians differs from that of the Jews, who look upon it as an indispensable Precept, whereas the former reckon it only a Custom that relates not at all to Religion; the Women amongst them being even Circumcised. This makes me think, that that Ancient Custom hath been only introduced amongst them for rendering the Parts that are circumcised more proper for Generation. As to Saturday and things Strangled, that is not peculiar to the Abyssines: all the Oriental Church observes the same practice, without being dyable for that to the Censure of Judaisme; since Saturday, according to the Ancient Canons, is a Festival day as well as Sunday. And as to their abstaining from Blood, and Meat that hath been Strangled, it is a Constitution of the New Testament, which hath ever been observed in the Western Church. From this last remark, it may be concluded, that the Jesuit Roderigo ought not to have pressed the Cophties so much in the Conference that he had with them, to lay aside all those Ceremonies; and besides that, the Cophties did not speak sincerely, when they told him that they erred in their opinions concerning the Repudiation of Wives, Circumcision of Children, and their abstaining from Flesh that was Strangled. Besides these remarks, we are also to take notice, that many things are imputed to the Abyssines which are remote from their belief. For instance, it is alleged that they agree with the Latins as to the Procession of the Holy Ghost; which is confirmed by the Ethiopian Liturgies Printed at Rome, wherein it is said that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son. But we are not always to rely upon what is Printed at Rome: for it is certain that the Abyssines differ not from the rest of the Orientals touching the Procession of the Holy Ghost.  
Nor are we to believe neither, all that Thomas à Jesus hath written concerning the belief of the Abyssines; Nay and the 
(1) Thomas à Jesus.  Acts that he hath inserted in his Book, touching their belief, are not always true, though the Confession of Faith which he produces comes from Tecla an Abyssine Priest: for it saith expressly, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son, which nevertheless is not their belief. It is likewise observed, that the Abyssines believe that the Transubstantiation of the Bread and Wine is made, when the Priest pronounces the words, wherein the Latins make the Consecration to consist. It is notwithstanding certain that the Liturgy of the Ethiopians is in that point agreeable to all the other Oriental Liturgies, and that the Consecration is not performed, according to their opinion, but when the Priest invokes the Holy Ghost, in a particular Prayer, which is to be found in all the Missals of the Eastern Nations. I wave a great many other points, which are not altogether well expressed according to the belief of the Abyssines, especially those that relate to the Sacraments: but these mistakes may easily be corrected by what we have said before, when we spoke of other Oriental Nations; so that we shall not insist any more upon that Subject; and it will be easy by that Method, to rectify what Brerewood hath related upon the Credit of these Authors.   

CHAP. XII. Of the Belief and Customs of the Armenians.  
THE Victories obtained by Scha-Abas King of Persia over the Armenians, within these late Years when he entered Armenia, have almost ruined that Church, which nevertheless still retains the Names of some Archbishoprics, Bishoprics and Monasteries, but which are, for most Part, in great Disorder. I have informed myself exactly enough of the Present State of the Church of Armenia, having had many Conferences upon that Subject with an Armenian Bishop, who took the Title of Bishop of Uscovanch, and who was at Amsterdam in the Year 1662. for Printing an Armenian Bible, according to the Commission he had from his Patriarch: For seeing the Manuscript Armenian Bibles were excessively dear, and that that hindered private Persons from reading the Scripture, the Patriarch took a resolution of causing it to be Printed. From that Bishop, who was called Uscam, I had the Memoirs of the Armenian Churches, which I have subjoined 
(1 See the Collections at the End of the Book. F.  at the End of this Book; and since that time I have conversed with him freely at Paris; but having consulted him about several Points relating to the Theology of the Armenians, I found him not to be very skilful in those matters. He died at Marseilles, whither he went by permission from the King to cause several Armenian Books to be Printed, for the use of his Countrymen. The Cardinals of the Congregation de propagandâ fide at Rome, were surprised that a Liberty of Printing all sorts of Armenian Books had been so easily granted in France; because, perhaps, he might have caused bad Books to be Printed, which might have favoured the Armenian Sect. But his Conduct during the time that he was in France, was very respectful towards the Church of Rome.  
Now concerning the Belief and Ecclesiastical Discipline of the Armenian Church, no Man hath treated of it more amply than Galanus, in the Book which he published at Rome concerning the Reconciliation of the Armenian Church with the Roman. 
(1) Galan. Cler. Reg. in Concil. Eccl. Arm. cum Rom.  That Book is divided into two Parts, of which the first is but an Abstract of the Histories of the Armenians: but seeing the Armenians have been divided amongst themselves for several Ages, and that they have had recourse to Rome in their Necessities, aswell as the other Orientals, I have found these Histories not to be always sincere and exact. And therefore what I here take from Galanus touching the Armenians, I shall accompany with some Reflections. The same Author hath added Notes upon his History: but because he was an Emissary and wrote at Rome, we must not, before we have examined him, give credit to all he saith. Nevertheless that Book contains a great many Curious things concerning the State and Religion of the Armenians.  
It is to be observed then. I. That the Armenian Histories translated by Galanus, mention a certain Instrument of Reunion betwixt the Roman and the Armenian Churches under the Emperor Constantine and Tyridates King of the Armenians, Sylvester then possessing the See of Rome, and Gregory who is the great Patriarch of the Armenians possessing that of Armenia But besides that there are many things in that Instrument which appear to be fabulous, it is probable that that Piece, as to the greatest part of it, hath been forged in the following Ages, especially in the time of Innocent III. when the Armenian Church sought to be reconciled to the Church of Rome. For there are in it ways of speaking concerning the Supremacy of Popes, which were not in use at that time. The Armenians, however, as Galanus observes, make use of that Instrument to prove the Antiquity of their Patriarchate, which was, according to them, erecten by Pope Sylvester: And they have even alleged it in their Disputes with the Greeks. But that will appear to be a weak Foundation to those who know Ecclesiastical History, and shall consider the great extent of Jurisdiction that Pope Sylvester takes to himself in that Instrument.  
II. All Men know that the Armenians are of the Sect of the Monophysites, who acknowledge but one Nature in Jesus Christ. But as we have already observed when we treated of the Jacobites; that is but an imaginary Heresy, consisting only in the Ambiguities of words. And yet it occasions great Disputes at this day amongst the Armenians; for though they be for the most part ignorant in Divinity, yet they talk rationally of the Mystery of the Incarnation, and of the Council of Chalcedon which they reject. We are to observe, however, that a good many Armenians are at present reconciled to the Church of Rome, whose Sentiments they follow, and that Galanus hath had a great hand in that Reconciliation in the time of Pope Urban VIII.  
III. It is not true that the Armenians deny the real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, as 
(1) Brerew. of Lang. and Rel. Chap. 24.  Brerewood from no good Author does affirm: for the Armenians and Orientals have not disputed so much about that Sacrament, as the Latins have, especially since the time of Berengarius; and in respect the Armenians have never examined that difficulty, they have continued in the general Terms of the Change of the Symbols into the Body and Blood of Our Lord. Galanus, who mentions some of their Synods, and the Disputes they have had with the Greeks, takes no notice at all of that, but only that they mingle no Water with the Wine in celebrating the Liturgy, and that they consecrate in Unleavened bread, after the Manner of the Latins. What the same Brerewood affirms concerning Purgatory is to be understood according to what we have mentioned before of the Greeks and other Orientals; and it is very probable, that what is said in the same place, that they deny that the Sacraments have the Virtue of conferring Grace, is the Chimaera of some Scholastic Doctor, who imagined that the Orientals were acquainted with all the Niceties of the Latins. Nor do I think it true that the Armenians refuse to eat of all Animals that are esteemed unclean in the Jewish Law, which Brerewood imputes also to the Abyssines: But that which hath given occasion to this Belief is, that the Armenians and Abyssines with the rest of the Eastern Christians abstain from blood and things strangled; wherein there is no Superstition.  
It is to no purpose to enlarge upon the Belief of the Armenians who are not Latinized; since there hath been enough said of that when we spoke of the Jacobites, from whom they differ in nothing but in some Ceremonies, and in what concerns Ecclesiastical Discipline. However, I think it will not be taken amiss, if I give here a Catalogue of the chief Errors, which 
(1) Joan. Hernac. apud Galan.  a certain Latinized Armenian attributes to them; and that will serve for a Confirmation of what we have already alleged, and at the same time give occasion of clearing some other Points. That Author reproaches his Countrymen who are not reconciled to the Pope, that they follow the Errors of Eutyches and Dioscorus concerning the Unity of Nature in Christ; that they believe that the Holy Ghost proceeds only from the Father; that the Souls of the Saints deceased go not to Heaven, nor those of the damned to Hell, before the last Day of Judgement; that there is no place called Purgatory and Hell, and that the Church of Rome hath no Supremacy over other Churches. He farther adds, that the Armenians detest the Memory of Pope Leo, and of the Council of Chalcedon; that they observe not the Festivals of Our Lord after the Manner of the Church of Rome; nor Fasts according to the Canons of the Church; that they acknowledge not seven Sacraments, inasmuch as they use not Confirmation, nor Extreme Unction; and more, that they are ignorant of the real essece of the other Sacraments; that at Mass they put no water into the Chalice; that they pretend that the Eucharist is not to be given to the People but in both kinds. He objects to them also their Custom of consecrating in Wooden and Earthen Chalices; that all Priests indifferently give absolution for all Sins, there being no reserved Cases amongst them; that they are subject to two Patriarches, who severally take the Title of Patriarch of all Armenia; that the Curates and Bishops succeed to one another, as if their Dignities were Inheritances; that the Sacraments are bought and sold amongst them; that Divorces are given for Money, without any reason; that they make no Holy Oil for Baptism and Extreme Unction; and that in fine, they give the Communion to Children before they attain to the use of reason.  
From this whole Catalogue it appears that the Armenian who is the Author of all these pretended errors, was Latinized; for as we have observed before, most part of these Opinions are common to all the Christians of the East, in the Manner as we have explained them when we treated of the Greeks. The Armenians are, indeed, to be blamed that they are too scrupulously addicted to certain Fasts which they have in great Number, and that they are not exactly enough instructed in the Mysteries of Religion. There are none in the Eastern Church that set a greater Value upon Fasts than the Armenians; and to hear them speak, one would say that their whole Religion consisted in fasting. As to their obstinate Perseverance in celebrating the Festival of Our Lord's Nativity, and the Epiphany always on one and the same day; they seem not to be  therein; because it was a Custom long practised in the Church; and in effect the Epiphany or Apparition of Our Lord is properly nothing but his Birth.  
The Title of Master or Doctor is so great amongst the Armenians, that they give it with the same Ceremonies that they confer Orders; 
(1) Galan. in Concil. Eccles. Armen. cum Rom.  and they say that that Dignity imitates the Title of Our Lord; who was called Rabbi, or Master. These are the Doctors who are consulted in Points of Religion, and who decide in them. The Bishops being looked upon rather as Persons proper for administering Orders, than as Doctors. These are also the Doctors who Preach in the Churches, and who are the Judges of Differences that happen betwixt private Persons. In a word, they hold the same rank amongst them, as the Rabbins did amongst the Jews.  
The Monastic Order hath been also in great reputation amongst the Armenians, since the time that Nierses one of their Patriarches introduced that of St. Basil: but since their Reunion with the Church of Rome, they have wholly altered their Rule, accommodating themselves to that of the Latins; and the Armenian whom we mentioned before to have made a Catalogue of Errors which he imputes to his Nation, being come to Rome, made a Vow that so soon as he returned home into the East, he and his Companions would live according to the Rule of St. Austin, and the Constitutions of St. Dominick. One Bartholomew, a Monk of St. Dominick, was the first that gave occasion to this Reformation not only in Religion but Monachism. He made great Progresses in Armenia in the time of Pope John XXII. having by his Preaching drawn many Monks over to his Party, who were useful to him in reuniting the two Churches. About that time was the Order of St. Dominick settled in Armenia, and these Monks were called United Friars, because of the new Reunion. This Order which was only established to destroy the Ancient, got in a short time great Reputation; insomuch that the United Friars built Monasteries not only in Armenia and Georgia, but also on the other side of the Euxine Sea, especially at Caffa, which at that time was subject to the Genoese. But since the Turks and Persians are become Masters of that Country, the Number of the United Friars is much decreased; and there remains but a few of them at present who have retired into the Province of Nascivan in the greater Armenia, where being at length, reduced to utmost Extremity, they have united themselves with the Dominican Monks of Europe; and are at present subject to the General of that Order, who sends thither a Superior Provincial.  
They perform their Office in the Armenian Language, which is a rough Tongue, and but little known. Yet the Modern Armenian is different from the Ancient, and the People have much ado to understand the Liturgy, and other Offices that are written in Armenian. They have the whole Bible also Translated into their Language, and that from the Septuagint Greek. This Translation of the Bible was made about the time of St. John chrysostom by some of their Doctors who had Learned the Greek Language, and amongst others by one named Moses the Grammarian, and another called David the Philosopher. We may observe that the Armenians make one Mesrop and Holy Hermit to be the Author of their Characters, who invented them in the Town of Balu near Euphrates, and lived in the time of St. John chrysostom.   

CHAP. XIII. Of the Belief and Customs of the Maronites.  
THE Jesuit 
(1) Girolamo Dandini nella sua missione Apostolica.  Dandini, who was sent by Clement VII. in Quality of Nuncio to the Maronites of Mount Libanus, hath written a Relation of his Travels in Italian, which hath been lately Translated into French, with Notes, declaring at large the Religion of those People. Seeing the Author of these Notes hath played the Critic upon the Mistakes of that Jesuit, and of many others who have spoken of the Maronites, I thought I could not do better, than here to give an Abridgement aswell of the Relation of the Jesuit Dandini, as of the Critical Remarks, from whence we may learn the Belief and Present State of those People.  
It is hard to know exactly the Original of the Maronites. They who bear that Name pretend they derive it from one Maron an Abbot, whose life Theodoret hath written, and who lived about the beginning of the fifth Century. This Opinion, which is followed by Brerewood, is strongly confirmed by the Jesuit 
(1) Sacchini in hist. Societ.  Sacchini, who pretends aswell as the Modern Marcnites do, that these People were never separated from the Unity of the Church, and that that which gave occasion of making them to be thought Schismatics was, that the renewing of their Reconciliation to the Catholic Church hath been taken for a real Conversion to the Catholic Faith, and that the Errors which have been found amongst them, have been imputed to them, as if they had been the Authors of the same; whereas they were only the Errors of Heretics amongst whom they lived. But though this Opinion appear at first Glance to have some probability in it, yet there is no ground for it; and the Testimonies of Eutychius 
(2) Eutych. in Annal.  patriarch of Alexandria, of Gulielmus Tyrius, Jacobus Vitricensis, and many others, are evident Arguments to prove that that Nation hath really been of the persuasion of the Monothelites: and they who look upon Monothelism as an Heresy, ought also to consider Maron as an Heretic, though the Maronites honour him with the Title of Saint in all their Offices. It is to be believed then, as a certain truth, that these People having been separated from the Church about the space of five hundred Years, abjured their Heresy, whether true or imaginary, before Aymeric Patriarch of Antioch, who lived in the time of Gulielmus Tyrius. Before that time they professed that they acknowledged but one Will and one Operation in Christ, though they confessed there were two Natures in him.  
The Maronites have a Patriarch who resides in the Monastery of Cannubin on Mount Libanus, and takes the Title of Patriarch of Antioch. He meddles not at all in temporal Affairs; but there are two Lords who take the name of Deacons or Administratours, who govern the whole Country being under the Dominion of the Turk, to whom they pay great Tributes. The Election of that Patriarch is made by the Clergy and the People, according to the Ancient Discipline of the Church: but since they have been entirely reconciled to the Church of Rome, he is obliged to take Bulls of Confirmation from the Pope. He, and his Suffragan Bishops never Marry; and it is to be observed that there are two sorts of these Bishops: for some are really Bishops, having a true Title and People whom they govern; the others are properly no more than Abbots of Monasteries, and have no Cure of Souls. These last wear not the Habit of a Bishop, nor any Mark of that Dignity; but they are clothed like other Monks, though, they are distinguished from them, by the Mitre and Crozier when they celebrate Mass. The Patriarch not being able alone to visit all Mount Libanus, hath always two or three Bishops about him; and besides the Bishops of Mount Libanus, there are others also at Damascus, Aleppo, and in the Isle of Cyprus.  
As for the other Churchmen, they may all Marry before their Ordination; and the Patriarch himself not long since obliged the Priests to do so, before he gave them Orders, unless they would become Monks: for the People who are jealous, are not pleased to see young Priests without Wives. However, since they have had a College at Rome, where part of their Churchmen are bred, they are allowed to live a single Life, without being molested for it. Before they studied at Rome, they were as ignorant as the common People, affecting no more but to learn to read and write: And they passed for learned Men amongst them, who besides the Arabic, which is the Language spoken in the Country, had any Knowledge of the Chaldaic Tongue; because their Liturgies and other Books of Offices are written in that Language.  
The Monastic Life is no less esteemed amongst the Maronites, than it is in all other places of the Levant. Their Monks are of the Order of St. Anthony: And it is probable they are a remnant of those Ancient Hermit's, who inhabited the Deserts of Syria and Palestine; for they are retired into the most hidden and secret places of the Mountains, remote from all Commerce. Their Habit is mean and course, they never eat flesh, even in their greatest sickness, and drink Wine but very seldom. They know not what it is to make Vows: but when they are received into the Monastery, one of the Monks holds a Book in his hand, and all he does is, to read in it somewhat that Concerns them, and admonish them of their Duty, for instance, that they observe continence; which is enough to preserve their Chastity without being engaged to it by Vows, as those of the Church of Rome are. They have Goods and Money in property, which they may dispose of at their Death; and when they are weary of one Monastery, they go to another, without ask their Superiors leave. They can perform no Ecclesiastical Function, such as preaching and confessing; so that they are wholly their own Men, having no spiritual Exercise in common for the service of their Neighbour. They work with their hands and cultivate the ground according to their Institution. In fine, they signally practise Hospitality, especially in the Monastery of Cannubin, where there is an open Table kept during the whole Year. We shall not here treat of their Belief, because it differs not from the other Orientals, except in that which caused their Schism, wherein they are no more at present, being entirely submitted to the Church of Rome. They even consecrate with Unleavened bread; but it is probable that they have taken up that Custom since their Reunion with the Church of Rome, though the Modern Maronites pretend that they never consecrated with Leavened bread.  
Their Mass differed much from that of the Latins: But their Missal has been reform at Rome, and they are prohibited to make use of any other Missal but of that which is reform. They perform no Office without much censing, especially at Mass, wherein they neither use Maniple nor Stole, as the Latins do, nor so much as Chasables, unless since they have been sent them from Rome; but instead of Maniple, they wore on each Arm a little piece of silken or woollen stuff died, which is sewed to the Albe, or even sometimes lose. The Priests say not Mass privately, as Latin Priests do, but they say altogether standing round the Altar, where they assist the Celebrating Priest, who gives the Communion to all, and to the Laics under both Kind's: but the Emissaries of Rome daily introduce the Communion in one kind. They made not the Consecration to consist in these words, This is my Body, etc. This is my Blood, etc. But in more words which contained the Prayer commonly called the Invocation of the Holy Ghost. Nevertheless, at present, in that and many other things they follow the Sentiments of the Latin Divines, which have been taught them at Rome. As to the other Offices, they say them in the Church, whither they go at Midnight to sing their Matins, or rather their Nocturns. They say their Laudes which may be called Prime, at break of day; their Tierce comes before Mass, after which they say their Sixth; their Nones are sung after Dinner; Vespers at Sun set; and at last, their Compline after Supper, before they go to bed. Every Office is composed of a Preface, of two, three, and sometimes more Prayers, with a like Number of Hymns betwixt them. They have moreover proper Offices for Holy days, Lent, the movable Feasts, and for other days. The Priests and other Churchmen who are in Holy Orders, think not themselves obliged to say the Office, when they cannot be present in the Choir, unless it be since the Latins have thought fit to oblige them to it.  
Their Fasts differ much from ours; they only observe Lent, and then they do not eat till two or three Hours before Sun set. They fast not in the Emberweeks, nor in the Vigils of Saints, or of any other Festival; but instead of that they have other abstinences which they strictly observe; for they eat no Flesh, Eggs nor Milk two days of the Week, to wit, Wednesday and Friday, and on these two days they taste not of any thing, before Noon; but afterwards, every one is free to eat as much and as often as he pleases. In the same manner they fast twenty days before Christmas, and the Monks prolong that Fast. At the Feast of St. Peter and St. Paul, they all fast during a fortnight, and as long at the Festival of the Assumption of the Virgin.  
Bishops expect not the Emberweeks for conferring of Orders, as they do in the Latin Church; but they administer them indifferently on all Holy days: and before the late Reformation was brought in amongst them, they gave in one day to one and the same Man, the Orders of Lector, Exorcist, Acolyte, Subdeacon, Deacon, Priest, Archpriest and Bishop; and all in two or three Hours time. It is to be observed also, that they use as many Ceremonies in making an Archpriest, as in conferring other Orders; and it seems they look upon it as an Order distinct from the rest.  
They keep no Water in their Baptisinal Fonts, that hath been blest on Holy Saturday, for administering the Sacrament of Baptism; as is done in the Latin Church: but as often as any is presented to be baptised, they bless the Water, by saying a great many Prayers; then they dip the Person to be baptised three times in the Water, or besprinkle it thrice therewith, it being first a little warmed. Yet they pronounce but once the necessary words when they name the Person; they make no use of Salt: but they anoint not only the Head, but also the Breast with their open Hands. They anoint also the Body before and behind from head to foot; and besides that Unction which is performed before Baptism, they have another also after, which is properly the Confirmation of the Orientals: but since their Reconciliation to the Church of Rome, they have abolished it, that they may administer the Sacrament of Confirmation after the Manner of the Latins.  
Heretofore they took no great care to confess before the Communion: but the Emissaries of Rome have obliged them to it at present. All the Priests also were equal in Jurisdiction in Matters relating to Penance, before their Reformation. There were no cases reserved to the Patriarches and Bishops. Neither before that time, did they use great Reverence towards the Sacrament of the Eucharist, which they kept in their Churches without any lamp-light, shut up in a little box, and hid in a hole in the wall, or in some other place.  
Nor did they then publish their Marriages in Churches, before the Ceremony was celebrated: nay, and for that they took all sorts of Priests indifferently, not thinking it necessary to have recourse to the Curate. There were besides, some who Married before the Age of 12. and 14. Years. And as to the Impediments of Marriage, they differed much from the present practice of the Church of Rome: for in counting the Degrees of Kindred, they reckoned not only from the Head and first of the Line, but thought also that two branches springing from the stock, as two Brothers are, made two Degrees; so that imagining they Married not but in the sixth Degree, they married, in effect, in the third. On the contrary, they held that for an impediment which was none; for they suffered not two Brothers to Marry two Sisters, nor the Father and the Son to Marry the Mother and the Daughter.  
They practise a certain Unction for the Sick, which they call Lamp, because, in reality, they make use of the Lamp-oil for it, in this manner. They make a little Cake somewhat bigger than an Host, wherein they put seven Matches twisted of little straws, and place all in a Basin with Oil, then reading a Gospel and an Epistle out of St. Paul, with some Prayers, they light all the Matches. That being done, they anoint with the Oil the Forehead, Breast and Arms of all that are present, and of him who is sick, saying at every Unction, by this Unction God pardon thy sins, strengthen and corroborate thy Members, as he strengthened and corroborated those of the Paralytic. Afterward they let the Lamp burn so long as the Oil lasts; and seeing that Oil hath only been blessed by a simple Priest, many have believed, that that Ceremony was not the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, since it is administered to those who are not dangerously sick. But they who are acquainted with the Oriental Theology, will easily be persuaded that those People had no other Sacrament of Extreme Unction, before the Latins reform them: nor indeed is the word Extreme Unction any where in use but amongst the Latins, because they anoint not the sick but when they are at the Point of Death; a thing not observed amongst the Christians of the East.  
Before I conclude this Discourse concerning the Maronites, I will here subjoin an abstract of what 
(1) P. Besson, Syrie saint.  Father Besson the Jesuit hath observed in his Book entitled La Syrie saint, where he chief speaks of the Maronites who inhabit that Part of Mount Libanus, which is called Quesroan. This Jesuit thinks that the Maronites derive their name from St. Maron a Syrian Abbot, and not from Maron the Heresiarch; and amongst other Arguments that he alleges to prove this, he saith that the Maronites have been accustomed after that the Clergy and People had chosen a Patriarch, to apply themselves to the Pope for obtaining his Confirmation. But he ought to have minded, that they had no recourse to the Pope before their strict Conjunction with the Church of Rome. He farther adds that Johannes Damascenus could not be ignorant of the Heresy of the Maronites, if they had really been Heretics, because he was their Neighbour; and yet in the List that he makes of Heresies, he speaks not of them. But that was needless, seeing they are comprehended under the Heresy of the Monothelites.  
The same Author in a few words takes notice of what the Jesuit Dandini, and some others of the Society have done amongst the Maronites; which we have mentioned more fully with necessary Reflections on it. All that can be said, is that that Emissary Jesuit, seems to me to be sillier than the rest, when he speaks of the Belief of the Maronites. And therefore I think there is no credit to be given to a Miracle which he relates as an evident Proof of the Orthodox Faith of the Maronites. He affirms that three Miles from Cannubin, near to a Village called Eden, there is a Metropolitan Church that goes by the Name of St. Sergius, and that above that Church there is a Chapel dedicated to St. Abdon and St. Sennan, where there is a Fountain of Spring-water, which runs under the Altar during Mass, the Day on which the Festival of those two Saints is celebrated. He says, besides, that though that Feast be movable, falling always on the first. Sunday of May, yet there is never any change in the course of that Fountain, which is always constant to the first Sunday of May even since the Calendar hath been reform by Gregory XIII. But I make no doubt but that this is a made story, possibly to authorise the Gregorian reformation of the Calendar, which that People have on many occasions refused to admit. And the rather it appears to be suppositions, in that the Author assures us that that Fountain which runs during Mass, sends forth water in greater abundance, when the Priest elevates the Host; not minding that the Elevation is not in use amongst the Maronites, in the manner that it is practised amongst the Latins. However Father Besson relates this Miracle, as an evident Argument against the other Eastern Nations, for authorising the Devotion which the Maronites have towards the Church of Rome, and at the same time for confirming the Reformation of the Calendar. That Relation likewise affirms that the Maronites are of a very soft and sweet temper, and that they give good words at least, promising to do what ever they are desired; that it is often in their Mouth, that God is bountiful, and that he will prosper the thing that is proposed to them; and that they frequently pronounce the Name of God, or some of his Attributes. But as these People are of a good and easy Nature, adds the same Author, so they are also very inconstant. After they have heard a good Sermon, you shall see them fully resolved to be converted, and to make an exact Confession of their Sins; but when they are to come to performance; they appear insensible. Their Women, are indeed, very modest, but the greater they are in Quality, the less they come to Church: insomuch that to enhance the Quality of a Lady, they say of her, that she never hears Mass but on Easter-day; nor does that happen yearly neither. When a Maid is Married she keeps at home two years without going to Mass, and in the mean time she frequents the Baths and Weddings. It seems they are banished the Churches, as the Mahometan Women are excluded the Mosques. There is nevertheless a Monastery of Nuns of the Order of St. Anthony, who are held in great Reputation of Sanctity. Their whole Fabric is hardly any more than a Church, where these Nuns are lodged, like Pigeons in their Nests, in little odd holes made betwixt the Arch and the Floor. These little Cells are so low that they cannot stand upright in them, and hardly is there room enough to hold their Bodies. All their employment is to sing the Office, Meditate, Pray and Work. Their Prayers begin about two in the Morning; and they work from day break, busying themselves in cultivating their Gardens, and the Grounds of their Monastery.  
In fine, Father Besson assures us in the second Part of his Book, wherein he shows the great Antipathy that is betwixt the Syrians, and the Franks, that in Syria they say commonly but one Mass a day, even on Sundays; that they have but few Altars, and sewer Priests; that all, except the Maronites, consecrate with Leavened bread; that the Priests who celebrate not, are notwithstanding present at Mass, and take their places, but in an ordinary Habit, unless they be those that serve as Deacons and Subdeacons'; and lastly, that all communicate in both kinds, except the Maronites, whose Priests that communicate without celebrating the Liturgy, receive a little Piece dipped in the Blood of Our Lord.   

CHAP. XIV. A Supplement to what hath been said concerning the Maronites.  
THough what hath been mentioned before relating to the Maronites, seems to be built upon good grounds, yet a Learned Maronite Professor of the Arabic Language in the College Della Sapienza at Rome, hath used all his endeavours to prove that his Country was never guilty of the Heresy that it is accused of, and that Maron was really Orthodox and a Saint, and not an Heretic. Gabriel Sionita, and since him Abraham Ecchellensis, form also a design of making an Apology for those of their Nation, and for their pretended St. Maron; but these Apologies have not appeared abroad in the World. Faustus Nairon, the Kinsman and Successor of Abraham, hath lately undertaken to make that Apology in a 
(1) Dissert. de origine, nom. ac relig. Maron. Autore Fausto Nairone. Edit. Rom. Anno. 1679.  Dissertation Printed at Rome, wherein, according to the common Opinion of the Maronites, he proves by the Testimonies of Theodoret, St. John chrysostom and some other Authors, that Maron from whom the Maronites take their Name, in the same who lived about the year 400. and who is mentioned in the Menology of the Greeks. He adds that the Disciples of that Abbot Maron spread themselves over all Syria, where they built several Monasteries, and amongst others a very famous one called by the Name of Maron near the River Orontes. This Author farther pretends, that all those Syrians who were not infected with Heresy, sheltered themselves with the Disciples of Abbot Maron, whom the Heretics of those times called Maronites for that reason. It were to be wished that M. Nairon, had brought Arguments of less distance from those times to prove that Opinion; and I think we ought not absolutely to give credit to the Authority of Thomas Archbishop of Kfartab, who lived, as it is pretended, towards the Eleventh age, though he was of the Sect of the Monothelites: For if these Authors be carefully examined, they will not be found very exact in matters of History, and most frequently they relate for Matters of Antiquity, what happened in their own time, and which they have even drawn out of the Books of the Maronites, since their Reconciliation with Rome.  
That which hath greatest appearance of truth in the Apology of M. Nairon for those of his Country, is the Argument he uses against the Testimony of Gulielmus Tyrius, who is an Author exact enough, and who hath spoken of the Heresy of the Maronites, as an ocular witness. He affirms that Gulielmus Tyrius took most part of his History, out of the Annals of Said Ebn Batrik, otherwise called Eutychius of Alexandria; and seeing Eutychius is not very exact in a great many matters of fact which he relates, it is not to be thought strange that Gulielmus Tyrius hath fallen into the same mistakes. Eutychius, says M. Nairon, affirms that Maron the Monothelite lived in the time of the Emperor Mauritius; and nevertheless Monothelism was not as yet known at that time. But if the Authority of the Arabian Historians be rejected, because of their not being exact in Chronology, there is not one of them but must be wholly laid aside. The Authority of Gulielmus Tyrius is not so much made use of in the matter in hand, for what he relates out of the Annals of Eutychius; as for his own Testimony, speaking of a thing that happened in his own time, under Aymeric Patriarch of Antioch, who made the Maronites of that Country abjure their pretended Errors.  
There is no likelihood of truth in the story that M. Nairon alleges, and which hath been already mentioned by 
(1) Quaresm. in dilucid. Terrae sanctae.  Quaresmius, to wit, that Maron went from Antioch to Rome with a Legate or Envoy of Pope Honorius, who created the same Maron Patriarch of Antioch, because of his Orthodox faith. I pass over some other Acts of this nature, which are not to be found but in Arabic Books written since the Reconciliation of the Maronites to the Church of Rome. The least knowledge in Ecclesiastical History is enough to convince us that these Histories have no ground in Antiquity, and that the Maronites and other Eastern People who are unskilful Critics in Historical Learning, have referred to Ancient times, what hath been only in use amongst them for some latter Ages. According to this Principle, we must not easily give credit to the Authority of Johannes Maron, whose 
(2) Joan. Maro. Comm. in Liturg. St. Jacobi.  Commentary upon the Liturgy of St. James, is not so very Ancient as some would have it, seeing it contains matters of fact that are Posteriour to it by many Ages. After all, the Maronites, who pretend to have always preserved the Purity of their Faith, cast the errors that are to he found in the works of their own undoubted Authors, upon their Neighbours who were Heretics, that had sown these errors amongst them, and who had even won over to their Sect some of the Maronites themselves: And so, though the Maronites pretend that they have always preserved the true Faith, yet they cannot deny but that some of their Nation, have entertained the Sentiments of the Jacobites, 
(1) Petr. in Epist. Arab. ad Card. Caraff. Anno, 1578.  Peter Patriarch of the Maronites, in a Letter which he wrote to Cardinal Carraffa, says that the errors which occur in their Books, aught to be imputed to their Neighbours: but the 
(2) Steph. Petr. in Epist. ad Faust. Naw. Ann. 1674.  present Patriarch writing to M. Nairon, affirms that they have preserved many Books that are free from all these errors; and gives us hopes of a Volume of Oriental Liturgies which he pretends to reconcile with the Latin Mass. That must needs be a very useful Work, and will clear to us a great many matters of Fact concerning that affair, which lie as yet wrapped up in obscurity.   

CHAP. XV. Of the Religion and Customs of the Mahometans.  
THE Religion of the Mahometans being for most part but a medley of the Christian and Jewish Religions, we have thought it pertinent to give an Abridgement thereof in this place, to the end that they who travel into the Levant, may lay aside a great many prejudices that they have conceived against that Religion, and that they may consider that it is indebted to the Jews and Christians for all the good that is in it, especially in relation to Morality. Mahomet, who was persuaded that all Religion ought to be founded on the word of God, and not upon the Dictates of Men, was obliged to take to himself the Title of God's Messenger; and the more to impose upon Christians, he feigned himself to be that Paraclet or Comforter promised in the Gospel. Nay he hath borrowed part of their Maxims, and acknowledged Our Lord to be a great Prophet inspired by the Spirit of God. On the other hand, being willing also to gain the Jews, and of these two to make but one more perfect Religion, he hath brought into his pretended Reformation a great part of Judaisme: and that makes the Mahometans pretend, that the two Laws, aswell that of Moses as that of Our Saviour, are at present abolished, and that so, Men are obliged to embrace Mahometanism, if they would be true Believers. They confess that both these Laws have been grounded upon the word of God; but still add, that they are no longer in force, since he hath empowered Mahomet to reform Religion. There are even some Mahometans who affirm, that neither the Jews nor Christians can have certain and infallible Principles of their Religion, because their Sacred writings have been corrupted. The Jews, say they, lost their Law and all their Holy Books during the time of the Captivity in Babylon, and what they call Canonical Books, are not so indeed, but only some scraps of those Ancient Books which the Jews have pieced together, as well as they could after their Captivity. As for the Christians, they say that the Books of the New Testament have been corrupted by the different Sects, that have arisen amongst the same Christians.  
Mahomet then feigned, that during the space of 23 Years, God sent him by the Ministry of the Angel Gabriel, a certain Number of Pieces of Writing, whereof he composed the Book which is called the Alcoran; and that Book is to them the Holy Scripture, being the chief groundwork of their Religion. But as among the Jews, besides the 24 Books of scripture, there is also the Talmud which contains their Traditions; so the Mahometans have their Assonna, that declares to them the Traditions which they are to follow. They have likewise Expositions on those Books, to which they submit; and besides, they distinguish, aswell as we, that which is of Precept, from that which is only Advice.  
The Chief Article of their Belief is founded upon the Unity of God; and therefore it is their ordinary saying; There is no other God but God; God is one; and they call those Idolaters, who acknowledge any Number in the Deity, thereby, condemning the Trinity of Persons which the Christians acknowledge to be in God.  
The second Fundamental Article of their Religion consists in these words, Mahomet is the Messenger of God. By that they pretend to exclude all other Religions, because they say that Mahomet is the most excellent, and last of all the Prophets whom God was to send to Mankind: And as the Jewish Religion was abrogated by the coming of Jesus Christ, so, in their Opinion, the Christian Religion was not to subsist any longer, after the appearance of their Prophet Mahomet.  
They who introduce a new Religion, aught to show some Miracles, that so their words may be the better believed. And therefore the Mahometans attribute some to their Legislatour. They affirm that he made water flow out of his Fingers, and that pointing to the Moon with his Finger he clavae it asunder. They say also, that Stones, Trees and Beasts acknowledged him to be the true Prophet of God, and they saluted him in these Terms, You are the true messenger of God. They farther affirm, that Mahomet went in one Night, from Mecha to Jerusalem, from whence he ascended up into Heaven, where he saw Paradise and Hell; that he talked with God, though that be an Honour reserved to the Blessed after their death; and that, in fine, he came down from Heaven the same Night, and was again in Mecha before Day.  
Besides the Miracles of Mahomet, the Mahometans ascribe some also to their Saints, but with this difference, that they are not to be compared to those of their Prophet. They speak very well of God and his Perfections, removing from him every thing that can mark the least imperfection. They farther add, that these Angels who execute the Commands of god, and affirm that there is no distinction of Sex amongst them. They farther add, that these Angels differ in Dignity, and that they are appointed for certain Offices aswell in Heaven as on Earth; and that, in fine, they writ down the Actions of Men. They attribute extraordinary Power to the Angel Gabriel; to wit, that he can in the space of an Hour come down from Heaven to Earth, and overthrow a Mountain with one Feather of his wing. The Angel Asrael is appointed to take care of the Souls of those that die: and another named Esraphil holds a great Trumpet always at his Mouth, ready to sound to the Day of Judgement. It would be needless and tedious to mention the Employments of the other Angels. They believe the General Resurrection of the Dead, and reckon up all the Signs that are to precede it: For than they pretend an Anti-Mahomet shall come, that Jesus Christ shall descend from Heaven to kill him, and establish the Mahometan Religion, to which they add a great many more Extravagances concerning Gog and Magog, and the Beast that is to come out of Mecha. They affirm besides, that at that time all living Creatures shall die, that the Mountains shall fly in the Air like Birds, and that, at length the Heavens shall melt and drop upon the Earth. Nevertheless they say that some time after, God shall renew the Earth, and then he shall raise the Dead, who shall appear stark naked from Head to Foot; but that the Prophets, Saints, Doctors and Just Men shall be clothed with Garments, and carried by Angels and Cherubims to the Empyrean Heaven; that for the rest, they shall suffer Hunger, Thirst and Nakedness, and that the Sun coming within a Mile over their Heads, they shall sweat in a strange manner, and endure many other Torments which we mention not. I shall only observe, that they extend not the Pains which all are to suffer with Proportion to their Sins, beyond fifty thousand Years. Farthermore it is not only amongst us that St. Michael is to be seen holding a Balance in his hand to weigh the good and bad Actions of Men, the Mahometans affirm also, that at the Day of Judgement there will be a Balance, wherein good and evil are to be weighed; that they whose good Deeds shall weigh more than their bad, shall go into Paradise; and that, on the contrary, they whose Sins are more heavy than their good Actions, shall go into Hell, unless the Prophets and Saints intercede for them.  
This Belief of the Mahometans concerning Paradise and Hell, comes pretty near that of the Jews and Christians, especially of the Orientals. 'Tis farther to be observed, that they acknowledge a kind of Purgatory; for they hold that they who die in the Faith, whose Sins nevertheless have been heavier than their good Actions, and who have not been assisted by the Intercessions of the Just; they hold, I say, that these shall suffer in Hell in Proportion to their Sins, and that afterward, they shall go into Paradise. And much after the same manner the Eastern Church acknowledges also a Purgatory, without admitting any other place besides Hell.  
Besides that General Judgement wherein the Mahometans believe that God himself in Person, shall make all Men give account of their Actions, they acknowledge also a particular Judgement, which they call the Torment of the Grave; and that Judgement, in their Opinion, is performed in this manner. So soon as any one is dead and buried, two of the greatest Angels, of which the one is called Munzir, and the other Nekir, come and interrogate the dead Person, ask what Belief he has concerning God and the Prophet, and concerning the Law and the Kiblé, that is to say, to what side one is to turn in Praying to God. The Just are then to answer, Our God is he that hath created all things: our Faith is the Mussulman and Orthodox Faith: and the true direction of our Prayers is the Kiabé. Unbelievers on the contrary not knowing what to answer, are condemned to suffer great Pains.  
In the General Resurrection, they pretend that those who are destined for Paradise, shall, before they enter into it, drink of the water of certain Fountains appointed for that purpose, and that every Prophet shall have his Fountain or particular Source, where he and his followers shall drink. The Fountain where Mahomet and all of his Sect are to drink, shall be much larger than that of all other Prophets, and shall contain in length as much extent of ground as one can travel in a Month. there shall be, say they, on the brinks of that Fountain, more Lavers than there are Stars in the Firmament, and its water shall be sweeter than Honey, and whiter than Milk. They who once drink of it shall never thirst again.  
It is very probable that all these things are rather parables than true Relations: And therefore we are not always to take literally what we find in the Books of Mahometan Doctors and other Orientals; in which sense we ought to understand a great part of that which they say of Paradise and Hell. For instance, in the Description they make of Paradise, they affirm that it is all full of Musk; that its Buildings are of Bricks of Gold and Silver; that they who have once entered into it, never come out again; that their  never wear out; that all sorts of delicious meats are there; and that whatever one desires to have, comes ready dressed to their hand; that none are subject to sleep in that place, nor to the other Necessities of the Body; that there are Divine and Celestial Women and Virgins there, who are free from all incommodities. And in this manner they describe their Paradise. As for Hell, they say that Unbelievers shall there remain Eternally with the Devils; that they shall be tormented by Serpents bigger than Camels, and Scorpions greater than Mules, Aswell as by Fire and Scalding water; that being burnt and turned into a Coal, God shall raise them again for fresh Sufferings, and that so their Torments shall never have an end.  
They commonly believe Predestination, and say that good and evil only happen because God hath so ordained. He hath, say they, from all Eternity written on a Table, the things that are, and are to be, and it is impossible that they can be otherwise. The unbelief and wickedness of the Infidel are as much according to his Knowledge and Desire, as the Obedience and Faith of the Believer. They farther say, that if it be asked why God hath created the wicked and unbelievers, we are to answer, that it does not become us to inquire too curiously into the Secrets of God; that he does what he pleases, and no man ought to ask the reason of what he does. And therefore a true follower of Mahomet ought to say, I believe in God, in his Angels, in his Books and in the Day of Judgement. I farther believe that good and evil happen according as he hath ordained, and that, in fine, it is he that hath created both.  
As to Believers who die without repentance, they maintain that they continue in suspense after their death, and that God disposes of them according to his good Will and Pleasure; that some he pardons, and condemns others to suffer the Punishment which they deserve because of their Sins, being still assured to go into Paradise after the Expiation of their Crimes. They are, in fine, persuaded that God pardons all sorts of Sins, except Atheism and Idolatry: and that is the reason why in the Prayers they make for the dead, they pray for the wicked aswell as for the good. They have a great esteem for Prayers, Charity, and other pious Actions that are performed for the dead, because that contributes to the Comfort and repose of Souls. They have a kind of Office appointed for that purpose, where are set down the Prayers to be said at Bury, and the Surrates of Chapters of the Alcoran that are to be read at the Grave of the deceased; which reading being done, they who have been employed in that Office, say with a loud voice, With all our heart we give to this Person deceased, the Merit of all our reading. It is not out of Vanity that they erect Tombstones over their Graves, but that Passengers may remember to pray to God for the rest of their Souls.  
The Mahometans not only perform the internal Acts of Faith, but also accuse themselves of all their Sins, which they confess in the Presence of God, and to him alone. Penance, say they, is but Repentance for the Sins which we have committed, with a firm resolution not to fall into the like again.  
Their Morality consists in doing good, and eschewing Evil: which is the reason why they examine very carefully the Nature of Virtues and Vices; and their Casuists are no less subtle than ours are. I shall here mention some of their Principles, whence we may the more easily judge of their Morality. They are so persuaded that all Actions which are not accompanied with Faith, are Sins, that they maintain that he who denies it, loses the Merit of all his good Works; that as often as he lies with his Wife, he commits so many Adulteries; in a word, that all he does during that time cannot be acceptable to God, until he hath repent of his Sin; and that then he becometh a Mussulman or Believer anew, and must marry again a second time: and if he hath made the Journey to Mecha, he must make it over again, because all his good Actions have been blotted out by that denial; and Repentance cannot again revive them.  
When they demand any thing of God in Prayer, they are to resign themselves wholly to his Will, and say to him, O my God, I beg of thee, not to grant what I ask, if it be not for my good. And when they have obtained of God the favour they desired, they ought to thank him, confessing themselves unworthy of the Mercies they have received, and that of themselves they are able to do nothing.  
They recommend nothing so much, as trust and confidence in God, whom they acknowledge to be their only support; and they particularly praise Humility, which, according to them consists, in esteeming others more than themselves.  
They give excellent Precepts for bridling the Passions, and shunning vice. If thou wouldst, say they, have Hell shut its seven Gates, take heed thou sin not with thy seven Members, which are they Eyes, the Ears, the Tongue, the Hand, the Foot, the Belly and the Privities which they dare not name: and they reckon up all the particulars from which every one of these Parts ought to abstain. Slander and Backbiting is one of the Vices against which they most declaim; and there is nothing they so much condemn as the Censuring of other People, even when they are true. Upon that Principle they ground this Maxim, that we ought not to speak of things that are hidden from us. For instance, they forbidden to say, such a Man is dead, or shall die in the Faith, because it belongs not to us to judge of things which God hath concealed: that, say they, can be done only, when the Prophet hath spoken of them; and so it may be affirmed, that Abubekir, Homer, Osman and Haly deserve Paradise. For the same reason also, they say, that it is not lawful to say that such a Person is dead in Unbelief, or that he deserves Hell; unless they speak of those who are expressly mentioned by the Prophet, as the Devil, Abusaheb and Abugehel.  
I wave the rest of their Morals, in respect that what I have alleged is sufficient to show the Nature of it; and I dare affirm it is not so remiss as that of some Casuists of our Age. Only let me add, that they have a great many good Precepts concerning the Duties of Private Persons towards their Neighbour, wherein they also prescribe Rules of Civility. They have also written of the Duty of Subjects towards their Prince; and one of their Maxims is, that it is never lawful to kill him, nay nor to speak ill of him under Pretext that he is a Tyrant.  
The Devotion of the Mahometans extends even to Holy Names: as when they pronounce the Name of God, they must bow, and add thereunto, most High, most Blessed, most Mighty, most Excellent, or the like, If one has pronounced the Name of Mahomet, he must add, may God augment his Graces: to the Names of other Messengers, they add, that God is satisfied with them. And, lastly, to the Names of other Doctors, they add, may the Mercy of God rest upon them.  
There are no Monachal Constitutions that so much oblige Monks to obey their Superior, as the Precepts of the Mahometan Doctors oblige Disciples to respect their Masters, whom they ought to obey in all things, without gainsaying, and in whose Presence they are not to speak too loud.  
As they distinguish that which is of Divine obligation from what is only of Humane Constitution, and that which is of Precept from that which is only of Council; so there are to be found amongst them Devout People that obey Councils as punctually as Commands, as for instance, to go to Prayers at Nine in the Morning, which is not of obligation, to prostrate themselves there twice at least, or eight times at most. In fine, the Mahometans besides their Belief and Morality, have also their Ceremonies, which they strictly enough observe. To distinguish them from the Jews, who are obliged to go to Prayers but three times a day, Mahomet obliges his Followers to pray five times a day, as a Mark of greater Sanctity. They have a great many Traditions about the manner of praying, which would be tedious to relate.  
They have some Prayers that are necessary upon Divine obligation, and others only or Counsel and Decency. There are some Conditions which being neglected, render the Prayer invalid. For instance, in the Noon and Afternoon Prayers, which are of Divine obligation, they must read them with a low Voice; but in that which is said in the Morning, and at Night before they go to bed, it is to be read aloud, if there be an Imam, that is to say, a Priest present. But if one pray alone, it is a Matter indifferent. Moreover, the Men ought at first to lift up their Hands to the Tip of their Ears, and the Women only to their Jaws. When one standeth having the Right Hand upon the Left, if he be a Man, he ought to place his Hands below his Navel; and if she be a Woman, she is to put them upon her Bosom. To pray with Order, they must accompany the Imam with a low voice, and imitate all he doth. I should be too tedious if I would reckon up the particular Postures they have in praying, especially when they prostrate themselves, and touch the ground with their Forehead and Nose: that is better understood by seeing them when they themselves a are at Prayers.  
Their Modesty at Prayers is so much the greater, that they are obliged to observe a great many things, if they expect to be heard: for their Prayers are esteemed ineffectual, if they talk or laugh in time of Prayer so as they may be heard; it is the same, if they weep too loud, by reason of any Misfortune that hath befallen them, or for other Causes, unless it be because mention hath been made of Paradise or Hell, for then the Prayer is nevertheless good. There are also a great many other Cases which render then Prayers null, as to scratch three times in one Place, to pass before the Imam during a Prostration, to advance or go the space of two ranks, to turn their Face from the Kiblé, to begin a Prayer, when they hear the Imam begin another, to commit any mistake in reading, to salute any one voluntarily; for if it happen by inadvertency, the fault is expiated, by making a Prostration, which is the usual Penance in that case.  
They are moreover prohibited to pray to God in a habit, wherein they commonly work at home, and in which they would not pay a visit to Persons of Quality. Nor can they pray to God before the fire, though they are not hindered from doing it by a Candle or Lamp. But we should never make an end, if we mentioned exactly all that they are prohibited to do during the time of Prayer. Let us now say somewhat of their Washings. Amongst the Mahometans it is of Divine Obligation, to wash the Mouth, the Face, and then the whole Body: and the Tradition of Mahomet enjoins, that this Ablution be made with intention of doing so; that for better cleansing the Body, Water is to be poured three times upon it, beginning from the right Shoulder to the left, then upon the Head, and afterwards upon all the parts of the Body. If one break wind during the Abdest, or Ablution, all that hath been done is good for nothing; for then the Ablution is null.  
They reckon amongst the Commands of God, the washing of the Face once and the Arms up to the Elbow, to wash the fourth part of the Head and the Feet once: and the tradition of Mahomet ordains the Hands to be washed three times, the Teeth to be cleansed with a certain kind of Wood, and the Mouth after that to be washed three times, and the Nose as often, without interruption after one hath once begun; then the Ears are to be washed with the rest of the Water that was used for the Head. They are always to begin their washings by the right side: and when they wash their Hands or Feet, they are obliged to begin with the Fingers and Toes. There are many things also that render these Ablutions null: but we have insisted but too long upon these Ceremonies.  
What I have hitherto said of the Religion of the Mahometans, is extracted out of a Book of Mahometan Divinity written by one of their Doctors who lived in the last age. That Doctor professes to follow the Doctrine most generally received at Constantinople, and the most approved by good Men. This is worth the observing, because the Mahometans are divided into a great many Sects, not to speak of the Persians, who differ much from the Turks. And that we may have some knowledge of these Sects, I shall relate what that Mahometan Divine hath judiciously said of them, and which deserves to be taken notice of.  
He affirms that the matters which concern their Religion are indeed, written in their sacred Books; but that there are part of them which are obscure and hard to be understood, and that none but the Learned can dive into them: which has been the will of God, to the end that the Learned should busy themselves in the study of these Books, and teach his mind to others. Seeing these Books are obscure, the Interpreters happen many times to mistake; but their Errors are not Sins, and it is even the will of God that they who have not applied themselves to study, should follow the judgement of Doctors, without examining too scrupulously, whether or not they tell the truth, because it is their part to submit; and if they be deceived, they are not therefore guilty of Sin.  
Those who came after Mahomet, though they have written many things for the Confirmation and Explication of the Law, yet they could not write all; besides that, there was no great Necessity for it in those times, when there were not so many Novelties, and so many Cases of Conscience, as have happened since. But after that the number of Believers increased, they began to be divided in opinions, and it was Necessary that some should apply themselves to the study of the Law, that they might digest into writing the Precepts which they drew out of Divine Books. And that gave occasion to the different Sects of Doctors: for every one explained the Law according to their Capacities and Talents, and gave their Interpretations to the People. So that, in a short time the People were divided into Factions: some followed Abuhanifé; others Chasihié; some Maliké; others Ahmed; others again Dudzahimé; In a word, the number of these Doctors was very great, and hath continued so to this present.  
After all, these Sects have all the same belief as to the Fundamentals of the Faith, but they differ much one from another as to Morals and Ceremonies: which diversity, say they, has undoubtedly come to pass by the permission of God; so that there is no danger to their followers, for there is no Sect wherein one may not be saved. However, the Sect of Abuhanisé is to be preferred before all others, because he, being the most Ancient and best instructed, hath explained the difficulties the best of any: and he ought to be followed especially in what concerns Morals; and therefore it is more meritorious to follow his Sentiments, than those of the other Doctors that came after him. In that sense these words are to be understood, I am of the Sect of Abuhanisé in what relates to Actions, the Worship of God and the Ceremonies. Ireceive all that he hath drawn from the Word of God and Traditions. I have chosen his Opinions for regulating my Actions. Thus ye have in a few words the Sentiment of our Mahometan Doctor concerning the Sects which are very numerous in his Religion, and which occasion no Schism nor Division that can be prejudicial to the State: For the Fundamental Articles of Mahometanisme consist only in Professing that there is but one God, and that Mahomet is his Messenger, in being exact in Prayers and Almsdeeds, in performing the Pilgrimage to Mecha, and in observing the Fast of Ramazan. These five Principal Articles contain others of less importance: for that of Prayer ought always to be attended with whatever can render the Prayer pure, such as are Ablutions; and Circumcision also belongeth to that External Purity which ought to be the Sign of the Internal. I might enlarge more on this Subject: But I think what I have already mentioned will be sufficient to make known the Religion of the Mahometans.   
FINIS.   

A List of the Churches depending on the Patriarchate of Constantinople, composed by Nilus Doxapatrius, and related by Leo Allatius. lib. 1. de Cons. Eccl. Occid. & Orient. cap. 24.  
1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1. CAesarea Cappadociae habens Episcopatus 8 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. Ephesus Asiae habens Episcopatus 34 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 3. Heraclea Thraciae in Europa, habens Episcopatus 15 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 4. Ancyra Galatiae habens Episcopatus 8 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 5. Cyzicus Hellesponti habens Episcopatus 12 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 6. Sardes Asiae habens Episcopatus 25 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 7. Nicomedia Bithyniae habens Episcopatus 12 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 8. Nicaea ejusdem Bithyniae habens Episcopatus 6 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 9 Chalcedon ejusdem Provinciae fine subditis. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 10. Side Pamphyliae habens Episcopatus 16 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 11. Sebastia secundae Armeniae, habens Episcopatus 7 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 12. Amasea Helenoponti habens Episcopatus 7. cujus Episcopatus erat & ipsa Iberia. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 13. Melitene Armeniae habens Episcopatus 9 ex quibus est & Episcopatus Cucusus, quò in exilium missus est aurea lingua Joannes. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 14. Tyana secundae Cappadociae habens Episcopatus 3 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 15. Gangra Paphlagoniae habens Episcopatus 3 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 16. Thessalonica Thessaliae habens Episcopatus 8 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 17. Claudiopolis Honoriadis habens Episcopatus 5 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 18. Neocaesarea Ponti Polemoniaci habens Episcopatus 7 19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 19 Pisinus secundae Galatiae habens Episcopatus 7 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 20. Myra Liciae habens Episcopatus 33 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 21. Stauropolis Cariae habens Episcopatus 26 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 22. Laodicaea Phrygiae Capatianae habens Episcopatus. 21 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 23. Synada Phrygiae salutaris habens Episcopatus 20 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 24. Iconium Lycaoniae habens Episcopatus 15 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 25. Antiochia Pisidiae habens Episcopatus 21 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 26. Perge, five Sylaeum Pamphiliae, habens Episcopatus 17 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 27. Corinthus Peloponnesi habens Episcopatus 7. 1. Damalorum. 2. Argi. 3. Monembasiae, five Tenarusiae. 4. Cephaloniae. 5. Zacinthi. 6. Zemenes. 7. Maïnae. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 28. Athenae Graeciae habens Episcopatus 11. 1. Eurypi. 2. Dauliae. 3. Coroniae. 4. Andri. 5. Oraei. 6. Scyri. 7. Caristi. 8. Porthmi. 9 Aulonae. 10. Syrae & Seriphi. 11. Cei & Thermiorum. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 29. Mocysus Cappadociae habens Episcopatus 4 30. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 30. Crete habens Episcopatus 10 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 31. Rhegium Calabriae habens Episcopatus 13 32. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 32. Patrae Peloponnesi habens Episcopatus 5. 1. Lacedaemonis. 2. Methonae. 3. Coronae. 4. Bolenae. 5. Olenae. 33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 33. Trapezus Lazicae habens Episcopatus 15 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 34. Larissa Graeciae habens Episcopatus 17 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 35. Naupactus Nicopolis habens Episcopatus 9 36. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 36. Philippopolis Thraciae habens Episcopatus 10 37. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 37. Trajanopolis Rhodopes habens Episcopatus 7 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 38. Rhodos Cycladum Insularum habens Episcopatus 12 39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 39 Philippi Macedoniae habens Episcopatus 7 40. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 40. Adrianopolis Haemimonti habens Episcopatus. 11 41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 41. Hierapolis Phrygiae Capatianae habens Episcopatus 9 42. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 42. Rhodostolum seu Distra Haemimonti, habens Episcopatus 5 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 43. Dyrrhachium habens Episcopatus 4 44. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 44. Smyrna Asiae habens Episcopatus 5 45. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 45. Syracuse Siciliae habens Episcopatus 21. 1. Cataniae. 2. Taurominae. 3. Messenae. 4. Cephaludii. 5. Thermorum. 6. Panormi. 7. Lilybaei. 8. Trochalorum. 9 Acragantis. 10. Tyndarii. 11. Carines. 12. Leontines'. 13. Alesae. 14. Gaudi insulae. 15. Melitae insulae, quae dicitur Malta. 16. Liparis insulae. 17. Vulcani. 18. Didymi. 19 Ustinae. 20. Tenari. 21. Basiludii. 46. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 46. Catania, quae cùm Syracusani effet Episcopatus, propter Sanctum Leonem in Archiepiscopatus dignitatem provecta est. 47. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 47. Ammorium Phrygiae habens Episcopatus 5 48. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 48. Camachus Armeniae habens Episcopatus 8 49. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 49. Coryaium Phrygiae habens Episcopatus 13 50. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 50. Sancta Severina Calubriae habens Episcopatus. 5 51. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 51. Mitylenae Lesbi insulae habens Episcopatus 6 52. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 52. Novae Patrae Graeciae habens Episcopatus 4 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 53. Thebae Graeciae habens Episcopatus 3 54. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 54. Serrae Thessaliae habens Episcopatus 57 55. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 55. Aeonis. 56. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 56. Corcyra. 57 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 57 Mesembria. 58. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 58. Amastris Ponti. 59 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 59 Conae Phrygiae. 60. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 60. Pompeiopolis. 61. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 61. Attalia à Sylaeo avulsa. 62. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 62. Paronaxia à Rhodo avulsa. 63. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 63. Lacedaemonia à Patris Peloponnensi avulsa. 64. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 64. Madyta ab Heraclea avulsa. 65. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 65. Abydus à Cyzico avulsa. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . An hiepiscopatus item qui Throno Constantinopolitano subjacent, nulli tamen Metropolitancrum obnoxii, neque sub se habe●tes Episcopacus, omnes sunt 1. Biz●a. 2. Leontopolis. 3. Parium. 4. Proconesus. 5. Cius. 6. Aspros. 7. Cypsela. 8. Psice. 9 Neapolis. 10. Selga. 11. Cherso. 12. Mesenae. 13. Garela. 14. Brysis. 15. Dercus. 16. Carabyza. 17. Lemnus. 18. Leucas. 19 Misthia. 20. Pedachtoê. 21. Perme. 22. Kosporus. 23. Cotradia. 24. Codrae. 25. Carpathus. 26. Cotro. 27. Rhizeum. 28. Gothia. 29. Sugdia. 30. Phulli. 31. Aegina. 32. Pharsala. 33. Anchialus. 34. Heraclei. Hae omnes civitates & Provinciae Throno Constantinopolitano annumerantur.   

Another List of the Churches depending on the Patriarchate of Constantinople, published by Mr. Smith, in his Discourse concerning the Present State of the Greek Church.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Catalogus Provinciarum, seu Metropolium & Episcopatuum Throno Constantinopolitano hodie subjacentium.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, cujus Metropolita dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ephesus.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Heraclea, penes cujus Archiepiscopum consecrandi Patriarcham jus usque manet. Dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Habet sub se quinque Episcopos, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Calliopoleos, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rhodosti, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tyriloes, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Metrorum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Myriophyti.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ancyra.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Cizycus.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Philadelphia.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Nicomedia.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Nicaea.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Chalcedon.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Thessalonica, cujus Metropolita 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dictus, haber sub se novem Episcopatus, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Citros, olim Gydriae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Scrviorum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Campaniae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Petrae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ardemerii, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Hieriffi & Sancti Montis, five Athonis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Plantamonis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Polianinae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Athenae, sub quibus continentur Episcopaius quatuor, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Talantii, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Scirri, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Solonis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mindinitzae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Prusa.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Trapesus.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Philippopolis.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Philipporum & Dramae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Thebae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Methymna.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lacedaemonia habet sub se Episcopatus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Catiopoleos, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Amyclarum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Btestenae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Larissa, cuius Episcopatus sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Demetriadis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Zetunii, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Stagonis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Thaumaci, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Cardicii, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Radobisdii, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Schiathi, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Loidoricii, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Letzae & Agraphorum.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Adrianopolis, cui solus subjacet Episcopatus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Agathopoleos.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Smyrna.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mitylene.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Serrae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Christianopolis, quae & Arcadia.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Amasia.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Neocaesarea.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Iconium.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Corinthus, sub qua solus Episcopus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Damalonis.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rhodus.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Novae Patrae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Aenus.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Drystra.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tornobus, cuius Metropolita dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, haber sub se Episcopatus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lophitzi, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tsernobi, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Presilabae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, joanninorum Metropoliza habet Episcopos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Bothronti, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Bellae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Chimarrae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Drynopoleos.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Euripi.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Artae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Metropolita Monembasiae haber Episcopos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Eleos, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Maiinae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rheontis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Andrusae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Nauplii.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Phanarii & Neochorii Archiepncopus.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sophiae Metropolita.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Chii.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Paronaxiae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Tziae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Siphni.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sami.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Carpathi.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Andri.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Barnae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Cous.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Leucadis.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Veterum Patrarum Metropolita habet Episcopos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Olenae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Methonae, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Coronae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Proconnesi.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gani.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Sunt adhuc Episcopi & Metropolitae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Mediae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sozopoleos.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Proelabi.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Caphae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gotthiae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Bindanae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Didymotichi.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Lititzae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Buziae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Selymbriae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Zychnarum.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Neurocopi.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Melenici.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Berrhoeae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Pogogianae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Chaldaeae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Pisidiae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Imbri.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Myrae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Santorinae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Aeginae.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Ungarovalachiae.  
In Moldavia quatuor tantum Episcopi regimini Christianorum Ecclesiastico praesunt. Metropolita Cretensis cum tribus ipsi subjectis Episcopis Sedem Constantinopolitanam agnovit.   

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.  

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

Gennadii primi Patriarchae Constantinopolitani postquam à Turcis capta est, qui vixit circa annum salutis 1453.  
MAximum itaque omnium Dei miraculorum est hocce mysterium. Idcirco multa, uti jam dictum est, contra illud objectant ex una quidem parte infideles, ex alia haeretici, & ex alia idiotae, qui rationem mysterii illius nequeunt intelligere: quas objectiones in hoc sermone modo solvimus. Alii siquidem dubitant, quomodo in momento temporis panis & vini substantia convertatur in corporis substantiam. Alii verò dubitant, quâ ratione fieri possit, ut substantia panis in corporis substantiam transmutata, remaneant panis accidentia, illius videlicet longitudo, gravitas, latitudo, color, odor, & quae in gustu est qualitas; ita ut sint panis accidentia, absque ejusdem panis substantia, & vera corporis substantia lateat sub alterius substantiae accidentibus. Alii dubitant, quomodo fieri possit, Christum extare in parva rei quae apparet extensione. Alii rursus dubitant, quomodo mysticum Christi corpus, etiam in partes divisum, remaneat integrum, & partium quaelibet sit totum Christi corpus, idémque perfectum. Dubitant alii, & haec dubitandi ratio videtur maxima, quomodo idem Christi corpus unum fit in coelo & in multis simul altaribus super terram. Verùm istas dubitandi rationes jam solvimus, possumúsque solvere, gratià Christi noe illustrante. In primis autem sapientissimi Ecclesiae Doctores, gratiae quae in vobis est ac studii duces, easdem solvunt. Vobis autem incumbit credere absque ulla haesitatione, similiter & Christiani omnes credere debemus, mysticum illud corpus esse ipsummet Dominum nostrum Jesum, Mariae Virginis Filium, qui crucifixus est, quique nunc est in coelo, ille omnino idem est, qui sub panis accidentibus delitescit. Extat autem secundùm substantiam in Sacramento, non verò secundùm gratiam & efficaciam tantùm; neque mysticum Christi corpus veri corporis figura est, sed purum putum illius corpus: nunc enim figuris & umbris, sicut olim, minimè servimus, sed ipsismet rebus. Si quis autem Sanctorum sacrificium istud Dominicae illius coenae vocet antitypum, inde fir quòd istud sacrificium illius fit figura, sicut & hodierni sacrisiculi figura sunt Jesu Christi, qui tunc fecit sacrificium: utriusque autem sacrificii eadem est perfectio, nimirum transubstantiatio.    

An Extract from a Manuscript Book, whereof the TITLE is,  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Meletii Syrigi Monachi refutatio Confessionis Fidei Christianae, quae exposita est à Cyrillo Patriarcha Constantinopolitano, inscriptae nomine Christianorum totius Ecclesiae Orientalis.  

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

De nomine (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) Transubstantiationis.  
IN confesso quidem est apud nos, ipsam (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) transabstantiationis vocem non extare apud priscos Theologos: nordum enim ussa haeresi circa mysterium illad exorra, si eos excipias, qui veram Verbi Incarnationem negabant, nova formare nomina Sanctis Patribus non curae fuit. Verùm de voce nobis non est disputatio: non enim in verbis, potiùs quàm in rebus, pietatis vim sitam esse volumus. Itaque, si apud Theologos invenerimus quod nomine transubstantiationis significatur, quid vetat quominùs ista dictione, vel alià huic simili utamur? Quippe Patrem absque principio, & immortalem & ingenitum, nusquam in scriptura invenimus; similiter nec Filium ejusdem cum illo substantiae, nec Spiritum Deum esse expresso verbo deprehendimus. Sed nihil vetat, imò pietatis est ac necessitatis, ob haereses quae nascuntur ex aliis quibusdam quae eodem tendunt, voces istas formare, ut res quae intelligitur meliùs percipiatur, & two, qui aliud sentiunt, refellantur, Quid enim unquam detrimenti possit iis accidere, qui pietare erga Deum affecti sunt, si vocibus diversis eundem conceptum religiosum exprimant, minimè video. Unanimi autem consensu Theologos profiteri panem sanctificatum in substantiam carms Dominicae verè transmutari, quod idem est ac transubstantiatio, jam allata testimonia manifestè profestè probant. Justinus enim dixit, cum quà ratione potuit carnem assumere, eddem etiam potuisse panem in suum corpus convertere. Secundum autem Cyprianum, Panis quem Dominus ministrabat Apostolis, mutatus non specie, sed naturà, omniporente verbo factus est caro. Cyrillus Hierosolymitanus dixit, Cùm aquam suàpte voluntate in vinum mutaverit in Cana Galilaeae, à fide non videtur alienum, illum vinum convertiffein sanguinem. Iterum, panis qui videtur panis, non est, quamvis id gustus praemonstret, sed Christi corpus: ita quod videtur vinura, non est vinum, etsi illud gustus monstret, sed est Christi sanguis. S. Ambrose ait, Panis ille ante verba quibus Sacramenta peraguntur, panis est; sed postquam sanctificatus fuit, è pane fit caro Christi. Gregorius Nyssenus ait, Rectè igitar credimus, panem qui Dei verbo sanctificatus fuit, in corpus Dei Verbi converti. Joannes etiam Chrysostomus Homilia 28. in Matth. Nos vices ministrorum gerimus: ille autem est qui ea sanctificat & efficit. Joannes Damascenus, Panis propositus, vinúmque cum aqua per invocationem & illapsum Sancti Spiritus divinitùs convertuntur in Christi corpus & sanguinem. Theophylactus Bulgariae, Jesus erga homines benevolus, speciem quidem panis & vini servat, sed in virtutem carnis & sanguinis transmutat. Caeterum, quâ ratione prisci Ecclesiae Doctores sumpserunt productionem, aut transmutationem, aut conversionem, aut existentiam, aut transelementationem, aut quid fimile, eadem nuperi Theologi transubstantiationem intelligunt. Sicut enim illi per illas voces panem propriè ac verè in corpus Christi converti affirmant, ita hi eadem omnino ratione idem intelligunt per vocem transubstantiationis, novo invento vocabulo, ob haereseos novitatem. Cùm enim quidam Berengarius & illius Discipuli asseruissent, panem accipere quidem gratiam aliquam corporis Dominici secundùm accidens à Deo, non verò substantialiter converti in Christi corpus, sed manere non mutatum, & qualis erat ante consecrationem, qui tunc saniores erant Theologi, ut insanam illius doctrinam everterent, dixerunt panem transubstantiari in corpus Christi, non verò in aliquod corporis Christi accidens per quamdam alterationem mutari, sed panem substantialiter fieri Christi corpus. Nam sicut ante insanam Arii haeresim, nomen (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) consubstantiale, neque in scripto, nec extra scriptum audiebatur; ubi autem impudenter Filium à Patris substantia ille separavit, publicatum est nomen illud à primi Concilii Patribus, qui confessi sunt Filium consubstantialem esse Patri, ejusdémque ac unius substantiae, ut illos everterent qui amarulenter divinitatem separabant. Ita & in omni aetate, qui rectè Ecclesiam gubernant, novorum autores sunt vocabulorum propter novitates obortas, quod & in praesenti Sacramento factum videtur: nam ante septimam Synodum ferè omnes de eo simpliciter locuti sunt; post septingentos autem à Christo annos, ubi qui venerandas imagines impugnabant in quadam Synodo à Constant congregatà, quam falsò septimam appellabant, impudenter publicassent, unicam esse imaginem Christi, panem scilicet, qui datur in Eucharistia, ex eo tempore qui postea fuerunt Patres coeperunt in scriptis suis declarare, panem consecratum non esse figuram corporis Christi, sed veritatem, uti videre est in septima Synodo, & apud Joannem Damascenum & qui eum secuti sunt Patres. postquam autem Berengarii haeresis, qui negat Christi corpus & sanguinem esse substantialiter in divinis symbolis, pervenit in nostras Provincias, vox (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) transubstantiatio inventa est, quae nullatenùs differt quoad sensum à transmutatione, aut conversione, aut transelementatione, quam prisci Patres adhibuerunt, uti jam dictum fuit. Si cui igitur Religio fit antiqua mutare vocabula, quasi alienum fit à pietate illorum voces mutare in alias, quae ejusdem omnino sint significatûs, quamvis illud sit ridiculum, modò tamen has voces eà ratione suscipiat, quâ usi sunt Patres, non erit our nos ei opponamus; sed illum uti nobiscum conscientem recipimus, illius quidem pietatem laudantes, at simplicitati ejus nos accommodantes. Verùm illum non existimo debere ab iis alienum esse, qui rem eamdem exprimunt verbis quae majoris videntur esse significatûs, minúsque accedunt ad Haereticorum sermonis ambiguitatem, aut quae Patrum mentem clariùs explicent: quippe nihil eo contensiosus est, quàm differre nominibus, cùm res ipsa est in confesso. Si verò transubstantiationem inficietur ob vocis illius virtutem, quia scilicet non putat panem & vinum mutari in Christi corpus & sanguinem, tunc illum ut alienum à nostra Ecclesia & Fide respuimus, atque uti novatorem damnamus, ac illius novitates. Aliud siquidem à Divinis Patribus accepimus, nos scilicet esse participes corporis Domini nostri, modo sensili illud oculis aspicientes, sumentésque manibus, & illud ad os allatum manducantes, sicque ejusdem cum Christo corporis fieri, illius carne & ossibus mysticè nutritos. Cùm enim modo corporali participes simus sensilis panis qui in Christi corpus substantialiter conversus est per omnipotentem Verbi Divinitatem, ad illud accedere didicimus modo quidem sensili, quatenus illud spectat panem & vinum, spiritualiter autem & mysticè, quòd non conspiciatur corpus humanum carnem habens & ossa, neque modo corporali & eàdem ratione qua reliqui ubi corporales eorum qui illum sumunt corda reficiat, sed spiritualiter ob Divinitatem quae inest, uti jam dictum fuit. Sed de his satis: jam enim praeter modum differere nos coegit quae nunc in nostras Ecclesias inferre conatur Calvinianorum haeresis.    

An Extract from M. Claude's Copy of a Manuscript Letter ascribed to Meletius Archbishop of Ephesus, and pretended to have been written to some Divines of Leyden.  

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

ILlis vero qui rogant me, utrum necesse sit Religionis cultu preces offerre Beatae Virgini, vel Angelis, vel Joanni Baptistae caeterisque Sanctis; sique oporteat credere in Eucharistia, hoc est in coena Domini fieri transubstantiationem in pane, aut putare oleum, exorcisma & exsufflationes expellere Daemones, aut adorare imagines Sanctorum, tam pictas quàm sculptas. Respondeo ac dico, nihil horum observandum esse, quandoquidem non licet opiniones humanas profiteri, sed ea solùm placita, quae à Domino & ab illius Discipulis atque Apostolis Spiritu Sancto afflatis nobis tradita sunt, cum pietate & inviolabiliter observare debemus.    

A List of the Churches depending on the Patriarch of Armenia Residing at Egmiathin, which was Dictated by USCAN Bishop of Uscavanch, and Proctor General to the Patriarch.  
EGmiathin, sedes Patriarchae Armenorum, Episcopatus immediatè subjecti Patriarchae.  
Algusgvanch vel Akusvanch, Episcopatus Parvus.  
Aring, Episcopatus parvus propè Ervan Archiepiscopatum: ibi etiam est Conventus, unde vocatur etiam Aringshusvanch.  
Bitlis apud Turcas, vel Balesch apud Armenos, in Provincia Varaspuracan Episcopatus: ibi sunt tres Conventus Monachorum S. Basilii.  
Elevard Episcopatus anteà, sed à 30. annis extinctus: Ecclesiae tamen inserviunt Sacerdotes seculares. Est in Provincia Ararath.  
Gesargel, Episcopatus magnus in Provincia Ararath prope Aring, qui est propè Egmiathin.  
Goscavanch, Episcopatus prope Egmiathin Provinciae Ararath.  
Hoi, seu Coy, Episcopatus prope Salmast & Lacum magnum.  
Johanavanch, id est, S. Johannes, Episcopatus magnus in Provincia Ararath: distat quatuor leucis ab Egmiathin.  
Karenus, Episcopatus & Monasterium: distat 6. leucis ab Egmiathin.  
Kiekart, Episcopatus deletus prope Egmiathin. Kiekart, id est., lancea Christi, quae erat in hac Ecclesia.  
Mueni, Episcopatus novus à 90. annis: distat 4. leucis ab Egmiathin versus Septentronem.  
Macharavanch, Episcopatus deletus Provinciae Altsteu: distat ab Erevan 15. leucis versus Septentrionem.  
Salmasavanch, Episcopatus prope Mueni: distat 5. leucis ab Egmiathin. In hac Ecclesia olim erat perpetua psalmodia. Psalms Armeniacè est Psalmus, unde dictum est Salmasavanch.  
Tieceravanch, vel Tiecheravanch, Episcopatus: 3. leucis distat ab Egmiathin.  
Tiplis, seu Teflis, Episcopatus. Dominatur ibi Princeps Georgianorum, in quem tamen Persae & Turcae habent aliquod Dominium.  
Varthehair, Episcopatus deletus Provinciae Casvan sub Turcis prope Van civitatem.  
Virap, Episcopatus; sed vocatur Archiepiscopatus, quia habet sub se tres Conventus nempe, 1. Vanstan. 2. Urzavanch. 3. Musahbiuruvanch. Distat ab Egmiathin 12. leucis versus Meridiem Orientalem, no longè à monte Ararath.  
Ouscohvanch, Episcopatus, cuius Episcopus Dominus Uscan Anno 1670. qui haec mihi dictavit.  
Praeter hos 17. vel 18. Episcopatus Suffraganeos Patriarchatûs Egmiathin, sequentes Abbatiae aut Monasteria Ordinis S. Basilii.  
Surb-Astuasasin, id est, Sancta Dei Genitrix in Provincia Ararath, alio nomine vocatur Niggara, quod est nomen villae, in qua erat Monasterium, & Surb-Astuasasin nomen est Ecclesiae.  
Surb-Astuasincal, Monasterium etiam deletum, 2. leucis, distans à Niggara.  
Praeterea tres sunt Conventus, Monialium S. Basilii in Armenia.  
Armenaperkhich dicitur Archiepiscopatus, quia habet sub se multa Monasteria: sed verè est tantùm Episcopatus sub Egmiathin. Monasteria illa sunt Hogevanch, Masctos Vardapiet, & alia destructa.  
Agulii Archiepiscopatus in Provincia Golthan prope Naxuvan, à quo distat 15. leucis versùs Orientem Meridionalem. Nullos habet sub se Episcopatus, quia sunt destructi, sed tantùm hos 5. Conventus S. Basilii, 1. Hamasravanch, Ecclesia est Surb-Mesrop. 2. Bestuvanch, Eclesia est Surb-Uscan. 3. Est Pharracuvanch, Ecclesia est Surb-Stephanus & Surb-Jacob. 4. Tsenuvanch, Ecclesia est Surb-Stephanus. 5. Est Surb-Joannes.  
Acthamar, seu Altamar, Archiepiscopatus in insula Lacûs magni Varaspunacani. Habetur Archiepiscopus Schismaticus à Patriarcha Egmiathin & Ecclesia Armenâ, quia ab annis 500 & ampliùs dicit se Patriarcham contra decretum Ecclesiae Armenae. Habet sub se 8. vel 9 Episcopatus, ferè omnes circa Lacum Varaspuracani & Van, nempe Sasan, Gasgi, Basti & alios, nec non aliquos Conventus. Ecclesiae verò paulatim collapsae ruinis non reaedificantur sub Tutcis  
Basti Episcopatus, Gasgi Episcopatus, Sasan Episcopatus. N. N. N.  
Amenaphreic, vel Ameniaperkhik Archiepiscopatus, id est, omnium redemptor, est Monasterium in quo Archiepiscopatûs sedes in Provincia Ararath, juxta civitatem Garni: 10. leucis distat ab Egmiathin versùs Orientem. Gubernat civitatem Erevan, quae est circiter quatuor mille domorum, à qua distat 5. leucis. Dicitur Archiepiscopatus, quia habet sub se multos Conventus, Chogevanch, Masctos, Vardapiet & alios deletos: sed verè est tantùm Episcopatus sub Egmiathin.  
Bardulimeos, Archiepiscopatus, id est, S. Bartholomaeus in Provincia Hacbac: habebat olim Episcopatus sub se, qui nunc sunt destructi: nunc autem est Suffraganeus Archiepiscopatus maximi Van.  
Betchnu, vel Bgnu, Archiepiscopatus in Provincia Salcunus-Stuer, antea magna civitas, nunc destructa à Persis, octo leucis distans ab Erezan versùs Septentrionem: habet sub se Episcopatus sequentes.  
1. Hair-Johan, vel Hairuvanch, Episcopatus in Provincia Gelarchuni.  
2. Kietcharvasvanch, Episcopatus in villà Provinciae Salcunus-Stuer.  
3. Schalvachuvanch Episcopatus: deleta civitas & Episcopatus: nullus Monachus superest in conventu.  
Sevan, Episcopatus in Provincia Salcunus-Stuer.  
Karienusvanch Monasterium S. Basilii sub Archiepiscopatu Besenu.  
Caesarea, Archiepiscopatus Provinciae Cappadociae: habet tantùm duos Suffraganeos.  
1. Surb-Astuasasin, Sta. Dei Genitrix, Episcopatus 3. leucis distans à Caesarea versùs Meridiem.  
2. Hisia Episcopatus, 6. leucis versùs Septentrionem distat à Caesarea: ibi etiam est Monasterium Ordinis S. Basilii, quod dicitur Surb-Sargis, S. Sergius.  
Surb-Carapet, Archiepiscopatus, vel Karapiet, id est, praecursor S. Joannes, in provincia Taron, Vulgò Muse propè Bitlis. Habet subse.  
1. Matnavanchmscu, Episcopatus in eadem Provincia.  
2. Bitlis, Episcopatus in eadem Provincia.  
Opar, antè Archiepiscopatus, nunc deletus, & Provincia propè civitatem Ranni & Provinciam Sciracvam Armeniae magnae.  
Derganavanch, Archiepiscopatus in Provincia Dergan inter Arzerum & Arsingam: subjecta Turcis est illa regio.  
Fahrapat, vel Ferah-bat, vel Ferawavu, Archiepiscopatus, vel potiùs Episcopatus in Provincia Mansanderam. Surb-Grigor, id est, S. Gregorius, Archiepiscopatus, idem qui vocatur Lusavaric, & idem Monasterium in Provincia Carin vel Arzerum. Vocatur quoque Archiepiscopatus Arzerum, nam Monasterium Lusavarich distat tantùm leucà versùs Orientem ab Arzerum.  
1. Surb-Astuasasin S. Dei Genitrix, Episcopatus in Provincia Karin: distat autem 4. leucis versus Orientem Septentrionalem ab Arzerum.  
2. Ginisuvanch, Episcopatus sub Turcis: distat 8. leucis versùs Occidentem ab Arzerum.  
3. Mamruanavanch, Episcopatus in Provincia Mamruam prope civitatem Ohtic.  
Hacbat, Archiepiscopatus magnus in Provincia Armeniae Fascir, vulgò Lorri: distat Hacbat 20. leucis circiter versùs Meridiem Orientalem à Tiplis. Habet Suffraganeos.  
1. Goruvanch, Episcopatus in Provincia Gori prope civitatem Gori in regione Georgianorum.  
2. Hacartinwanch, Episcopatus deletus.  
3. Macaravanch, Episcopatus deletus.  
Hamith, Archiepiscopatus, seu Caracmit, sed Sylli Chaldaei & Armeni vocant tantùm Hamith. Car, lingua vulgari significat nigrum; & quia sita est ad radicem montis in quo sunt multae partes nigrae, ideo dicitur Car-Hamith. Armeni volunt esse antiquam Tigranatensem. Ibi sedet quoque Patriarcha Syrorum Jacobitarum ab anno 1662. qui sedebat ante in Orfa. Sedet quoque ibi Suffraganeus Episcopus Patriarchae Nestorianorum, qui nunc sedet in Elchong, 8. leucis distante versùs Septentrionem à Mozul seu Ninive antiqua, ut fert illorum Traditio. Habet Suffraganeos Episcopos  
1. Ael, vel Agel, distat unâ leucâ ab Hamith.  
2. Arcni, distat 2. diebus ab Hamith.  
3. Balu Episcopatus, distat ab Hamith 3. diebus.  
4. Edesia Episcopatus, distat 4. diebus ab Hamith versus Meridiem Occidentalem.  
5. Germuc Episcopatus, 3. diebus distat ab Hamith.  
6. Merdin Episcopatus, Orientis Meridionalis respectu Hamith.  
7. Senchuse, Episcopatus distans ab Hamith 4. diebus.  
8. Thulguran Episcopatus, distat ab Hamith 2. diebus.  
Harberdu, vel Harberd Archiepiscopatus in Provincia Harberd, Ecclesia aut Monasterium est Surb-Astuasasin prope Hamith ipsi Occidentalem: habet sub se 4. Episcopatus & 3. Conventus, quorum nomina ignorabat D. Archiepiscopus Uskan.  
.....  
Hispahan, vulgò Armenis Sphuhun, Archiepiscopatus, regia civitas Persarum à tempore tantùm Scha-Abas, qui Armenos plurimos collegit in parte civitatis, aut suburbio quod dicitur Gulfa, aliis Ciolfa, in quo sunt Armenorum Ecclesiae 20. 1. Surb-Astuasasin. 2. Surb-Nicolaus. 3. Surb-Jacub. 4. Surb-Amenaphreic, id est, omnium redemptor, & est Monasterium S. Basilii. 5 Surb-Grigor. 6. Surb-Johan. 7. Amirrasthenesi. 8. Karametichens 9 Portuens. 10. Norascencim. 11. karachein. 12. S. Jacub. 13. Anapatinn. 14. Erevaneseos magnus. 15. Erevaneseos minor. 16. Gazge. 17. Schsapanin. 18. Ckocin. 19 Est Conventus Monialium. 20. Chogia Abedik.  
In Gulfa vel Ciolfa & Erevan, villa vicina Hispahan, sunt circiter octo mille Armeni ferè omnes mercatores. Habet Suffraganeos.  
1. Pharia, Episcopatus versùs Occidentem: distat ab Hispahan tribus circiter diebus.  
2. ....  
.....  
Karmiuvanch Archiepiscopatus, id est, ruber Conventus, quia lapides sunt rubri, est in Provincia Ecegazor: distat ab Erevan & Naxuvan 2. diebus. Habet Suffraganeos.  
1 Capisvanch, Episcopatus & Monasterium S. Basilii propè civitatem Capis, quae nunc est deserta.  
Caputusvanch, id est, caerulei coloris Monasterium aut atri in Provincia Ecegazor: nunc non est Episcopatus, sed tantùm Monasterium: olim erat Episcopatus.  
2. Derbavanch, Episcopatus Provinciae Ecegazor.  
3. Hermonivanch, Episcopatus Provinciae Ecegazor.  
4. Azpter, Episcopatus Provinciae Sabhunissor: distat ab Erevan versùs Orientem circiter 20. leucis.  
Machienusvanch, Archiepiscopatus propè villam Machienus in Provincia Gelarchuni: distat versùs Orientem 15. leucis circiter ab Erevan: nullos habet sub se Episcopatus, quia sunt destructi & Monasteria.  
Macu, Archiepiscopatus magnus in Provincia Artaz: in Cathedrali Ecclesia est Corpus S. Thaddaei. Habet sub se  
1. Auhar, Episcopatus: distat versùs Meridiem Orientalem à Macu 5. diebus.  
2. Hoi, Episcopatus: distat versùs Meridiem à Macu 2. diebus.  
3. Jormi, Episcopatus: distat unâ die à Tabris, tribus verò versùs Orientem Meridionalem à Macu.  
4. Maratha, Episcopatus ad Occidentem Tabris. Ibi sedebat Episcopus Italicus à 300. annis, & vertit multos libros Armenicè, & fecit multos Vardapiet.  
5. Salmast, Episcopatus propè Maraga.  
Surb-Narcavea, id est, S. primus Martyr Stephanus, Archiepiscopatus versùs Meridiem Occidentalem: distat 12. leucis à Naxuvan: Suffraganeos habebat olim multos & Monasteria; sed praeter Astapat omnia sunt destructa. Olim Gulfa d'Hispahan erat sub ditione Archiepiscopi,  
1. Astapat, vel Surb-Stephan, cui Ecclesia est dicata.  
2. Nachiovan.  
.....  
.....  
Surb-Uscan, id est, signum Stae. Crucis, quia ibi est pars Sanctae Crucis: est idem Archiepiscopatus quàm Sebaste sub Turcis. Habet sub se  
1. Azptiruvanch, Episcopatus Provinciae Ascharu.  
2. Andreasic, Episcopatus Provinciae Acscan: Ecclesia est Surb-Astuasasin.  
3. Surb-Hresctacapet, id est, S. Archangelus, Episcopatus in Sebastia.  
Sanachim, Archiepiscopatus in Provincia Tascir, vel Lorri, versùs Tiplis: qui erant sub illo Episcopatus & Conventus, sunt destructi.  
Scammachi, vel Acuanis, Archiepiscopatus propè mare Caspium: quierant sub eo Episcopatus & Conventus, sunt destructi.  
Tathevanch, Archiepiscopatus, magnus in provincia Kapan. Habet sub se  
1. Mecri Episcopatum.  
2. 3. 4. Sunt alii Episcopatus, quorum non recordatur D. Uskan. Habet etiam Archiepiscopus Tathevanch sab se Monasteria.  
1. Surb-Carapiet.  
2. Tanzapharac.  
3. Vagathevanch.  
4. Anapat, in quo sunt plusquam centum Eremitae in deserto.  
5. 6. Duo Conventus Monialium, unus Schriher, alius Zanzaparach.  
Thivatavanch, id est, S. Anna, Archiepiscopatus propè civitatem Thucat vicinam Amasiae, olim Eudochia versùs Occidentem Septentrionalem, distat ab Egmiathin 150. leucis circiter. Habet sub se  
1. Nazianzenum, Episcopatus sub Turcis.  
2. Marzuanavanch, Episcopatus provinciae Marzuan sub Turcis.  
3. Neucaesaria, Episcopatus sub Turcis.  
Van, Archiepiscopatus magnus, idem qui & Varach, est Conventus in quo sedet Archiepiscopus, & Van est civitas vicina juxta Lacum magnum Varaspuracani. Habet sub se Suffraganeos  
1. Arces, vel Arciscuvanch, Episcopatus, seu Argens prope Lacum magnum.  
2. Clath, Episcopatus, seu Chelath juxta Lacum.  
3. Ctusuvanch, vel Ctus, juxta Lacum versùs Occidentem: ibi sunt tres Conventus Monachorum & Eremitarum, quibus praeest Episcopus.  
4. Limb in ipso Lacu versùs Occidentem, Episcopatus.  
5. Ustan, Episcopatus versùs Septentrionem laci Varaspuracani.  
6. Husanus Episcopatus.  
S. Ephannivanch, Monasterium tantùm prope Van.  
Virap, id est, caverna vel abyssus, in qua S. Grigor latuit & vixit 13. annis: ibi celebratur Missa: est tantùm Episcopatus sub Egmiathin, a quo versùs Meridiem Orientalem circa Ararath distat 12. Leucis; sed dicitur Archiepiscopatus, quia sub se habet tres hos Conventus.  
1. Vanstan.  
2. Uzavanch.  
3. Muscacbiurvuanch.  
Subscripsi Vscanus Episcopus Vschavanch & Vardapiet ac Vicarius generalis in Armenia, sigillúmque apposui.   

A Catalogue of Books Printed for Henry Faithorne, and John Kersey, at the Rose in St. Paul's Churchyard.  
THE Case of the Church of England, Briefly and Truly stated, in the three first and Fundamental Principles of a Christian Church. I. The Obligation of Christianity, by Divine Right. II. The Jurisdiction of the Church, by Divine Right. III. The Institution of Episcopal Superiority, by Divine Right. By Samuel Parker. D. D. Archdeacon of Canterbury, in Octavo.  
The Song of Songs; being a Paraphrase upon the most. Excellent Canticles of Solomon, in a Pindaric Poem. By John Lloyd. A. M. Late of Wadham College in Oxon. To which is annexed another Pindaric Ode, being an Hymn on the Works of the Six Days, by the same Author, in Octavo.  
The several ways of resolving Faith by the Controvertists of the Roman and Reformed Religion. With the author's Impartial thoughts of each of them. And his own Opinion at length shown, wherein he conceives the Rule of Faith to consist. The second Edition enlarged in several of its Sections; with an Addition also of an Appendix of divers Objections and their Answers; and an Explanation of the different Acceptations of the Word Tradition as it is used in the Book. By a Layman, in Octavo.  
The Christian Tutor, or a free and rational Discourse of the Sovereign Good and Happiness of Man, and the infallible way of attaining it, especially in the practice of Christian Religion: Written in a Letter of Advice to Mr. James King in the East-Indies. By Henry Jenkes Fellow of Gonvil and Caius College in the University of Cambridge, and of the Royal Society. And now published for the Benefit of all others, in Octavo.  
The Situation of Paradise found out; being an History of a Late Pilgrimage unto the Holy Land. With a necessary Apparatus prefixed, giving Light into the whole Design, in Octavo.  
The History of the Council of Trent. In eight Books. Whereunto is prefixed a discourse containing Historical Reflections on Councils, and particularly on the conduct of the Council of Trent, proving that the Protestants are not obliged to submit thereto. Written in French by Peter Jurieu, Doctor and Professor of Divinity. And now done into English, in Octavo.  
The History of the Original and progress of Ecclesiastical Revenues. Wherein is handled according to the Laws, both Ancient and Modern, whatsoever concerns matters Beneficial, the Regale, Investitures, Nominations, and other Rights attributed to Princes. Written in French by the Learned Father Simon. And now done into English.  
Methodus Plantarum nova, brevitatis & perspicuitatis causa synopticè in Tabulis exhibita; Cum notis Generum tum summorum tum subalternorum Characteristicis, Observationibus nonnullis de seminibus Plantarum & Indice Copioso. Autore Jo. Rayo, A. M. è Societ. Reg. In Octavo.  
Medulla Chymiae, variis Experimentis aucta multisque Figuris illustrata. Authore Johanne Francisco Vigani Veronensi, In Octavo.  
Summum Bonum, seu vera, atque unica Beatitudo Hominibus per Christum communicanda, sex Dissertationibus aliquatenus explicata. Per Edmundum Elysium, Ecclesiae Anglicanae Presbyterum, In Octavo.  
Observations on the Mineral Waters of France, made in the Royal Academy of the Sciences, by the Sieur Du Clos, Physician in Ordinary to his most Christian Majesty. Now made English, In Duodecimo.  
Wounds of the Brain proved Curable, not only by the Opinion and Experience of many (the best) Authors, but the remarkable History of a Child four years old cured of two very large Depressions, with the loss of a great part of the Skull, a Portion of the Brain also issuing through a penetrating Wound of the Dura and Pia Mater. Published for the Encouragement of young Surgeons, and Vindication of the Author, James Yonge, in Octavo.  
Ephemeri Vita: Or the Natural History and Anatomy of the Ephemeron; a Fly that lives but five hours. Written originally in Low-Dutch by Jo. Swammerdam, M. D. of Amsterdam, In Quarto. stitched.  
Poeta de tristibus; Or the Poet's Complaint. A Poem, in four Cantos, In Quarto. Stitched.  
Lisander, or the Soldier of Fortune. A Novel. In 12.  
Weekly Memorials for the Ingenious: or an Account of Books lately set forth in several Languages. With some other Curious Novelties relating to Arts and Sciences. In 4 to.  
FINIS.