1786, the request of the English prelates, as to the first two points, was acceded to, but 'the restoration of the Athanasian Creed was negatived.' As the opposition to this Creed was quite determined, especially on account of the damnatory clauses, the mother Church acquiesced in the omission, and granted the desired Episcopal ordination.1

In the Greek Church it never obtained general currency or formal ecclesiastical sanction, and is only used for private devotion, with the omission of the clause on the double procession of the Spirit.2

'White's Memoires, 26, 27. Bishop White himself was decidedly opposed to the Creed, as was Bishop Provost, of New York. The Archbishop of Canterbury told them afterwards : 'Some wish that you had retained the Athanasian Creed; but I can not say that I feel uneasy on the subject, for you have retained the doctrine of it in your Liturgy, and as to the Creed itself, I suppose you thought it not suited to the use of a congregation' (1. c. 117, 118). 2 Additional Lit. on the Athan. Creed.-Swainson: The Nic. and App. Creeds, with an Account of the Creed of St. Athanasius, London, 1894.-Burn in Robinson's Texts and Studies, 1896.-Ommanney, London, 1897, is inclined to ascribe it to Vincens of Lerins about 450.-Bp. Gore, Oxf., 1897.-J. B. Smith in Contemp. Rev., Apr., 1901.-Oxenham, London, 1902.-J. A. Robinson, London, 1905.-Bp. Jayne, 1905.-W. S. Bishop: Devel. of Trin. Doctr. in the Nic. and Athanas. Creeds, 1910.-H. Brewer (S.J.), Das sogenannte Athanas. Glaubensbekenntniss, 1909.-Burkitt, 1912.-Loofs in Herzog, ii, 177–194, who places its probable origin in Southern France, 450-600.-Badcock inclines to the Ambrosian authorship and calls it a hymn to be memorized. The Abp. of Canterbury, following a resolution of the Lambeth Conference, 1908, appointed a commission of seven, including Bp. Wordsworth of Salisbury, Prof. Swete and Dean Kilpatrick, to prepare a revision of the English translation of the Athanas. Creed. Their report proposed thirteen minor changes. The Anglican Book of Common Prayer prescribed that the Creed be said or sung at morning prayer on thirteen feasts, including Christmas, Easter, Ascension day, and Trinity Sunday. By the order of both Convocations it was omitted and a new rubric inserted, making its use optional on Trinity Sunday. In the "Revised" Book of Common Prayer, recommended by the House of Bishops and rejected by Parliament, 1928, the following rubrics are printed side by side, making the use of the creed optional: "may be sung or said at morning or evening prayer" on the first Sunday after Christmas, the feast of the Annunciation, and Trinity Sunday. 2. On Trinity Sunday, the recitation beginning with clause 3, "The Catholic faith is this," etc., and closing with clause 28. 3. On the Sunday after Christmas and Ascension day, the recitation being from clause 30 to clause 41. 4. On all the thirteen festivals mentioned in the original Book of Common Prayer. A "revised translation is added" which differs from the translation of 1909. See the Translation of 1909 with Latin Text, by H. Turner, London, 1910, 15 pp. and 1918, 23 pp. Also the Book of Com. Prayer with the Additions and Deviations Proposed in 1928, with Pref., Cambr. Press, 1928. By Roman Cath. usage the creed is prescribed for Trinity Sunday and at prime on all Sundays except Easter and such other feasts for which a special service is provided.—ED.

THIRD CHAPTER.

THE CREEDS OF THE GREEK CHURCH.

General Literature.

Orthodoxa Confessio catholicæ atque apostol. ecclesiæ orientalis a PET. MOGILA compos., a MELETIO SYRIGO aucta et mutata, gr. c. præf. NEOTARII curav. PANAGIOTTA, Amst. 1662; cum interpret. lat. ed. LAUB. NORMANN, Leipz. 1695, Svo; c. interpret. lat. et vers. german, ed. K. GLO. HOFMANN, Breslau, 1751, 8vo. Also in Russian: Moscow, 1696; German by J. LEONH. FRISCH, Frankfurt and Leipzig, 1727, 4to; Dutch by J. A. Senier, Haarlem, 1722; in Kimmel's Monumenta, P. I. 1843.

Clypeus orthodoxæ fidei, sive Apologia ('Aonis optodofias, ǹ ùzoλoyía kai éλerxos) ab Synodo Hierosolymitana (A.D. 1672) sub Hierosolymorum Patriarcha Dositheo composita adversus Calvinistas hæreticos, etc. Published at Paris, Greek and Latin, 1676 and 1678; then in HARDUINI Acta Conciliorum, Par 1715, Tom. XI. fol. 179–274; also in KIMMEL'S Monum. P. I. 325-488. Comp. also the Acts of the Synod of Constantinople, held in the same year (1672), and publ. in Hard. 1. c. 274–284, and in Kimmel, P. II 214–227. Confessio cathol, et apostolica in oriente ecclesiæ, conscripta compendiose per METROPHANEM CRITOPULUM. Ed. et. lat. redd. J. HORNEJUS, Helmst. 1661, 4to (the title-page has erroneously the date 1561).

CYRILLI LUCARIS: Confessio christ. fidei græca cum additam. Cyrilli, Geneva, 1633: græc. et lat. (Condemned as heretical.)

Acta et scripta theologorum Wirtembergensium et patriarchæ Constantinop. HIEREMIE, quæ utrique ab a. 1576 usque ad a. 1581 de Augustana Confessione inter se miserunt, gr. et lat. ab iisdem theologis edita, Wittenb. 1584, fol. This work contains the Augsburg Confession in Greek, three epistles of Patriarch Jeremiab, criticising the Augsb. Conf., and the answers of the Tübingen divines, all in Greek and Latin. E. J. KIMMEL and H. WEISSENBORN: Monumenta fidei ecclesiæ orientalis. Primum in unum corpus collegit, variantes lectiones adnotavit, prolegomena addidit, etc., 2 vols., Jenæ, 1843-1850. The first part contains the two Confessions of Gennadius, the Confession of Cyrillus Lucaris, the Confessio Orthodoxa, and the Acts of the Synod of Jerusalem. The second part, which is added by Weissenborn, contains the Confessio Metrophanis Critopuli, and the Decretum Synodi Constantinopolitanæ, 1672. Kimmel d. 1846. W.GASS: Gennadius und Pletho, Aristotelismus und Platonismus in der griechischen Kirche, nebst einer Abhandlung über die Pestreitung des Islam im Mittelalter, Breslau, 1844, in two parts. The second part Contains, among other writings of Gennadius and Pletho, the two Confessions of Gennadius (1453) in Greek. By the same: Symbolik der griechischen Kirche, Berlin, 1872.

R. W. BLACKMORE: The Doctrine of the Russian Church, being the Primer or Spelling-book, the Shorter and Longer Catechisms, and a Treatise on the Duty of Parish Priests. Translated from the Slavono-Russian Originals, Aberdeen, 1845.

§ 11. THE SEVEN ECUMENICAL COUNCILS.

The entire Orthodox Greek or Oriental Church,' including the Greek Church in Turkey, the national Church in the kingdom of Greece, and the national Church of the Russian Empire, and embracing a membership of about eighty millions, adopts, in common with the Roman communion, the doctrinal decisions of the seven oldest œcumenical Councils, laying especial stress on the Nicene Council and Nicene Creed. These Councils were all summoned by Greek emperors, and controlled by Greek patriarchs and bishops. They are as follows:

'The full name of the Greek Church is 'the Holy Oriental Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Church.' The chief stress is laid on the title orthodox. The name гpairóç, used by Polybius and since as equivalent to the Latin Græcus, was by the Greeks themselves always regarded as an exotic. Homer has three standing names for the Greeks: Danaoi, Argeioi, and Achaioi; also Panhellenes and Panachaioi. The ancient (heathen) Greeks called themselves Hellenes, the modern (Slavonic) Greeks, till recently, Romans, in distinction from the surrounding Turks. The Greek language, since the founding of the East Roman empire, was called Romaic.

I. The first Council of Nicæa, A.D. 325; called by Constantine M. II. The first Council of Constantinople, A.D. 381; called by Theodosius M.

III. The Council of Ephesus, A.D. 431; called by Theodosius II. IV. The Council of Chalcedon, A.D. 451; called by Emperor Marcian and Pope Leo I.

V. The second Council of Constantinople, A.D. 553; called by Jus tinian I.

VI. The third Council of Constantinople, A.D. 680; called by Constantine Pogonatus.

VII. The second Council of Nicæa, A.D. 787; called by Irene and her son Constantine.

The first four Councils are by far the most important, as they settled the orthodox faith on the Trinity and the Incarnation. The fifth Coun cil, which condemned the Three (Nestorian) Chapters, is a mere supplement to the third and fourth. The sixth condemned Monothelitism. The seventh sanctioned the use and worship of images.1

To these the Greek Church adds the Concilium Quinisextum,2 held at Constantinople (in Trullo), A.D. 691 (or 692), and frequently also that held in the same city A.D. 879 under Photius the Patriarch; while the Latins reject these two Synods as schismatic, and count the Synod of 869 (the fourth of Constantinople), which deposed Photius and condemned the Iconoclasts, as the eighth œcumenical Council. But these conflicting Councils refer only to discipline and the rivalry between the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Pope of Rome.

The Greek Church celebrates annually the memory of the seven holy Synods, held during the palmy days of her history, on the first Sunday in Lent, called the 'Sunday of Orthodoxy,' when the service is made to

1 Worship in a secondary sense, or δουλεία, including ἀσπασμὸς καὶ τιμητικὴ προσκύνησις, but not that adoration or aλŋwvn λarpɛia, which belongs only to God. See Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, Bd. III. p. 440.

2 This Synod is called Quinisexta or wɛvýíkтy, because it was to be a supplement to the fifth and sixth œcumenical Councils, which had passed doctrinal decrees, but no canons of discipline. It is also called the second Trullan Synod, because it was held in Trullo,' a saloon of the imperial palace in Constantinople. The Greeks regard the canons of this Synod as the canons of the fifth and sixth œcumenical Councils, but the Latins never acknowledged the Quinisexta, and called it mockingly erratica.' As the dates of the Quinisexta are variously given 686, 691, 692, 712. Comp. Baronius, Annal. ad ann. 692, No. 7, and Hefele, 1. c. III. pp. 298 sqq.

reproduce a dramatic picture of an oecumenical Council, with an emperor, the patriarchs, metropolitans, bishops, priests, and deacons in solemn deliberation on the fundamental articles of faith. She looks forward to an eighth cecumenical Council, which is to settle all the controversies of Christendom subsequent to the great schism between the East and the West.

Since the last of the seven Councils, the doctrinal system of the Greek Church has undergone no essential change, and become almost petrified. But the Reformation, especially the Jesuitical intrigues and the crypto-Calvinistic movement of Cyril Lucar in the seventeenth century, called forth a number of doctrinal manifestoes against Romanisın, and still more against Protestantism. We may divide them into three classes:

I. Primary Confessions of public authority:

(a) The Orthodox Confession,' or Catechism of Peter Mogilas, 1643, indorsed by the Eastern Patriarchs and the Synod of Jerusalem.

(b) The Decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem, or the Confession of Dositheus, 1672.

To the latter may be added the similar but less important decisions of the Synods of Constantinople, 1672 (Responsio Dionysii), and 1691 (on the Eucharist).

(c) The Russian Catechisms which have the sanction of the Holy Synod, especially the Longer Catechism of Philaret (Metropolitan of Moscow), published by the synodical press, and generally used in Russia since 1839.

(d) The Answers of Jeremiah, Patriarch of Constantinople, to certain Lutheran divines, in condemnation of the doctrines of the Augsburg Confession, 1576 (published at Wittenberg, 1584), were sanctioned by the Synod of Jerusalem, but are devoid of clearness and point, and therefore of little use.

II. Secondary Confessions of a mere private character, and hence not to be used as authorities:

(a) The two Confessions of Gennadius, Patriarch of Constantinople, 1453. One of them, purporting to give a dialogue between the Patriarch and the Sultan, is spurious, and the other has nothing characteristic of the Greek system.

(b) The Confession of Metrophanes Critopulus, subsequently Patri

arch of Alexandria, composed during his sojourn in Germany, '1625. It is more liberal than the primary standards.

III. Different from both classes is the Confession of Cyril Lucar, 1629, which was repeatedly condemned as heretical (Calvinistic), but gave occasion for the two most important expositions of Eastern orthodoxy. We shall notice these documents in their historical order.

$ 12. THE CONFESSIONS OF GENNADIUS, A.D. 1453.

J. C. T. OTTO: Des Patriarchen Gennadios von Konstantinopel Confession, Wien, 1864 (35 pp.). See also the work of Gass, quoted p. 43, on Gennadius and Pletho (1844), and an article of Prof. Orro on the Dialogue ascribed to Gennadius, in (Niedner's) Zeitschrift für historische Theologie for 1850, III. 399–417. The one or two Confessions which the Constantinopolitan Patriarch GENNADIUS handed to the Turkish Sultan Mahmoud or Mahomet II., in 1453, comprise only a very general statement of the ancient Christian doctrines, without entering into the differences which divide the Oriental Church from the Latin Communion; yet they have a historical importance, as reflecting the faith of the Greek Church at that time.

Georgius Scholarius, a lawyer and philosopher, subsequently called Gennadius, was among the companions and advisers of the Greek Emperor John VII., Palæologus, and the Patriarch Joasaph, when they, in compliance with an invitation of Pope Eugenius IV., attended the Council of Ferrara and Florence (A.D. 1438 and '39), to consider the reunion. of the Eastern and Western Catholic Churches. Scholarius, though not a member of the Synod (being a layman at the time), strongly advocated the scheme, while his more renowned countryman, Georgius Gemistus, commonly called Pletho (d. 1453), opposed it with as much zeal and eloquence. Both were also antagonists in philosophy, Gennadius being an Aristotelian, Pletho a Platonist. The union party triumphed, especially through the influence of Cardinal Bessarion (Archbishop of Nicæa), who at last acceded to the Latin Filioque, as consistent with the Greek per Filium.1

But when the results of the Council were submitted to the Greek Church for acceptance, the popular sentiment, backed by a long tradition, almost universally discarded them. Scholarius, who in the mean time had become a monk, was compelled to give up his plans of reunion, and he even wrote violently against it. Some attribute this inconsist

See, on the transactions of this Council, Mansi, Tom. XXXI., and Werner: Geschichte der apologetischen und polemischen Literatur, Vol. III. pp. 57 sqq.