Ruler of his Church (status exinanitionis and st. exaltationis); Chapter IX., of faith in general; Chapter XVI., of baptismal regeneration.

The remaining ten chapters breathe the Reformed spirit. Chapter II. asserts that 'the authority of the Scriptures is superior to the authority of the Church,' since the Scriptures alone, being divinely inspired, can not err.' In the appendix to the second (the Greek) edition, Cyril commends the general circulation of the Scriptures, and maintains their perspicuity in matters of faith, but excludes the Apocrypha, and rejects the worship of images. He believes that the Church is sanctified and taught by the Holy Spirit in the way of life,' but denies its infallibility, saying: 'The Church is liable to sin (åμaprávuv), and to choose the error instead of the truth (ἀντὶ τῆς ἀληθείας τὸ ψεῦδος ¿kλéyeσdαı); from such error we can only be delivered by the teaching and the light of the Holy Spirit, and not of any mortal man' (Ch. XII.). The doctrine of justification (Chapter XIII.) is stated as follows:

'We believe that man is justified by faith, not by works. But when we say "by faith," we understand the correlative of faith, viz., the Righteousness of Christ, which faith, fulfilling the office of the hand, apprehends and applies to us for salvation. And this we understand to be fully consistent with, and in no wise to the prejudice of, works; for the truth itself teaches us that works also are not to be neglected, and that they are necessary means and testimonies of our faith, and a confirmation of our calling. But, as human frailty bears witness, they are of themselves by no means sufficient to save man, and able to appear at the judgment-seat of Christ, so as to merit the reward of salvation. The righteousness of Christ, applied to the penitent, alone justifies and saves the believer.'

2

The freedom of will before regeneration is denied (Ch. XIV.). In the doctrine of decrees, Cyril agrees with the Calvinistic system (Ch. III.), and thereby offended Grotius and the Arminians. He accepts, with the Protestants, only two sacraments as being instituted by Christ, instead of seven, and requires faith as a condition of their application (Ch. XV.). He rejects the dogma of transubstantiation and oral manducation, and teaches the Calvinistic theory of a real but spiritual presence and fruition of the body and blood of Christ by believers only (Ch. XVII.). In the last chapter he rejects the doctrine of purgatory and of the possibility of repentance after death.

1 'Credimus Scripturam sacram esse Iɛodíðakrov (i. e., a Deo traditam) habereque auctorem Spiritum Sanctum, non alium, cui habere debemus fidem indubitam. . . . Propterea ejus auctoritatem esse superiorem Ecclesiæ auctoritate; nimis enim differens est, loqui Spiritum Sanctum et linguam humanam, quum ista possit per ignorantiam errare, fallere et falli, Scriptura vero divina nec fallitur, nec errare potest, sed est infallibilis semper et certa.'

• Πιστεύομεν ἐν τοῖς οὐκ ἀναγεννηθεῖσι τὸ αὐτεξούσιαν νεκρὸν εἶναι. This is in direct opposition to the traditional doctrine of the Greek Church, which emphasizes the liberum arbitrium even more than the Roman, and was never affected by the Augustinian anthropology.

2

§ 16. THE ORTHODOX CONFESSION OF MOGILAS, A.D. 1643. The ORTHODOX CONFESSION OF THE CATHOLIC AND APOSTOLIC EASTERN CHURCH' was originally drawn up about the year 1640 by PETER MOGILAS (or MOGILA), Metropolitan of Kieff, and father of Russian theology (died 1647), in the form of a Catechism for the benefit of the Russian Church. It was revised and adopted by a Provincial Synod at Kieff for Russia, then again corrected and purged by a Synod of the Greek and Russian clergy at Jassy, in 1643, where it received its present shape by MELETIUS SYRIGA, or STRIGA, the Metropolitan of Nicæa, and exarch of the Patriarch of Constantinople. As thus improved, it was sent to, and signed by, the four Eastern Patriarchs. The Synod of Jerusalem gave it a new sanction in 1672 (declaring it a óuoλoyía, ἣν ἐδέξατο καὶ δέχεται ἁπαξαπλῶς πᾶσα ἡ ἀνατολικὴ ἐκκλησία). In this way it became the Creed of the entire Greek and Russian Church. It has been the basis of several later Catechisms prepared by Russian divines.

1 Ορθόδοξος ὁμολογία τῆς καθολικῆς καὶ ἀποστολικῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ἀνατολικῆς. It is uncertain whether it was first written in Greek or in Russ. First published in Greek by Panagiotta, Amst. 1662; then in Greek and Latin by Bishop Normann, of Gothenburg (then Professor at Upsala), Leipz. 1695; in Greek, Latin, and German by C. G. Hofmann, Breslau, 1751; by Patriarch Adrian in Russian, Moscow, 1696, and again in 1839, etc.; in Kimmel's Monum. I. 56-324 (Greek and Latin, with the letters of Nectarius and Parthenius). Comp. Kimmel's Proleg. pp. lxii. sqq. The Confession must not be confounded with the Short Russian Catechism by the same author (Peter Mogilas).

The following account of Mogilas is translated from the Russian of Bolchofsky by Blackmore (The Doctrine of the Russian Church, p. xviii.): 'Peter Mogila belonged by birth to the family of the Princes of Moldavia, and before he became an ecclesiastic had distinguished himself as a soldier. After having embraced the monastic life, he became first Archimandrite of the Pechersky, and subsequently, in 1632, Metropolitan of Kieff, to which dignity he was ordained by authority of Cyril Lucar [then Patriarch of Constantinople], with the title of Eparch, or Exarch of the Patriarchal See. He sat about fifteen years, and died in 1647. Besides the Orthodox Confession, he put out, in 1645, in the dialect of Little Russia, his Short Catechism; composed a Preface prefixed to the Patericon; corrected, in 1646, from Greek and Slavonic MSS., the Trebnik, or Office-book, and added to each Office doctrinal, casuistical, and ceremonial instructions. He also caused translations to be made from the Greek Lives of the Saints, by Metaphrastus, though this work remained unfinished at his death; and, lastly, he composed a Short Russian Chronicle, which is preserved in MS., but has never yet been printed. He was the founder of the first Russian Academy at Kieff.' It was called, after him, the Kievo-Mogilian Academy. He also founded a library and a printing-press. See a fuller account of Peter Mogilas in Mouravieff's History of the Church of Russia, translated by Blackmore (Oxford, 1842), pp. 186–189. It is there stated that he received his education in the University of Paris. This accounts for the tinge of Latin scholasticism in his Confession.

The Orthodox Confession was a defensive measure against Romanism and Protestantism. It is directed, first, against the Jesuits who, under the protection of the French embassadors in Constantinople, labored to reconcile the Greek Church with the Pope; and, secondly, against the Calvinistic movement, headed by Cyril Lucar, and continued after his death.1

It is preceded by a historical account of its composition and publication, a pastoral letter of Nectarius, Patriarch of Jerusalem, dated Nov. 20, 1662; and by a letter of indorsement of the Greek text from Parthenius, Patriarch of Constantinople, dated March 11, 1643, followed by the signatures of twenty-six Patriarchs and prelates of the Eastern Church.

The letter of Parthenius is as follows:

'Parthenius, by the mercy of God, Archbishop of Constantinople, New Rome, and Ecumenical Patriarch. Our mediocrity,' together with our sacred congregation of chief bishops and clergy present, has diligently perused a small book, transmitted to us from our true sister, the Church of Lesser Russia, entitled "The Confession of the Orthodox Faith of the Catholic and Apostolic Church of Christ,” in which the whole subject is treated under the three heads of Faith, Love, and Hope, in such a manner that Faith is divided into twelve articles, to wit, those of the sacred [Nicene] Symbol; Love into the Ten Commandments, and such other necessary precepts as are contained in the sacred and divinely inspired books of the Old and New Testaments; Hope into the Lord's Prayer and the nine Beatitudes of the holy Gospel.

"We have found that this book follows faithfully the dogmas of the Church of Christ, and agrees with the sacred canons, and in no respect differs from them. As to the other part of the book, that which is in the Latin tongue, on the side opposite to the Greek text, we have not perused it, so that we only formally confirm that which is in our vernacular tongue. With our common synodical sentence, we decree, and we announce to every pious and orthodox Christian subject to the Eastern and Apostolic Church, that this book is to be diligently read, and not to be rejected. Which, for the perpetual faith and certainty of the fact, we guard by our subscriptions. In the year of salvation 1643, 11th day of March.'

The Confession itself begins with three preliminary questions and answers. Question first: 'What must an orthodox and Catholic Christian man observe in order to inherit eternal life?' Answer: 'Right

1 See § 15. Mouravieff, in his Hist. of the Church of Russia, p. 188, distinctly asserts that the Confession was directed both against the Jesuits and against the Calvinistic heresy,' which, ‘under the name of Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople,' had been disseminated in the East by crafty teachers.' As Cyril and the Calvinists are not mentioned by name in the Orthodox Confession, another Russian writer, quoted by Blackmore (The Doctrine of the Russian Church, p. xx.), thinks that Mogilas wrote against the Lutherans rather than the Calvinists; adding, however, that it is chiefly directed against the Papists, from whom danger was most apprehended.

* This is the date (axμy) given by Kimmel, P. I. p. 53, and the date of the Synod of Jassy, where the Confession was adopted. Butler (Hist. Acc. of Conf. of Faith, p. 101) gives the year 1663; but the Confession was already published in 1662. with the letters of the two Patriarchs. See Kimmel, Proleg. p. lxii.

3 ǹ μetpiótns ǹ μŵv, a title of proud humility, like the papal 'servus servorum Dei,' which dates from Gregory I.

faith and good works (πίστιν ὀρθὴν καὶ ἔργα καλά); for he who observes these is a good Christian, and has the hope of eternal salvation, according to the sacred Scriptures (James ii. 24): "Ye see, then, how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only;" and a little after (v. 26): "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." The divine Paul adds the same in another place (1 Tim. i. 19): "Holding faith and a good conscience; which some having put away, concerning faith have made shipwreck;" and, in another place, he says (1 Tim. iii. 9): "Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience." This is essentially the same with the Roman Catholic doctrine. It is characteristic that no passage is cited from the Romans and Galatians, which are the bulwark of the evangelical Protestant view of justification by faith. The second Question teaches that faith must precede works, because it is impossible to please God without faith (Heb. xi. 6). The third Question treats of the division of the Catechism. according to the three theological virtues, faith, hope, and charity.

The Catechism is therefore divided into three parts.

1. Part first treats of Faith (Epì tíσrews), and explains the Nicene Creed, which is divided into twelve articles, and declared to contain all things pertaining to our faith so accurately that we should believe nothing more and nothing less, nor in any other sense than that in which the fathers [of the Councils of Nicæa and Constantinople] understood it' (Qu. 5). The clause Filioque is, of course, rejected as an unwarranted Latin interpolation and corruption (Qu. 72).

2. Part second treats of Hope (Epì iλπídos), and contains an exposition of the Lord's Prayer and the (nine) Beatitudes (Matt. v. 3-11).

3. Part third treats of Love to God and man (TEρì Tñç iç DEÒv Kai Tòν πλŋσíοv åɣáπns), and gives an exposition of the Decalogue; but this is preceded by forty-five questions on the three cardinal virtues of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving, and the four general virtues which flow out of them (prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance), on mortal and venial sins, on the seven general mortal sins (pride, avarice, fornication, envy, gluttony, desire of revenge, and sloth), on the sins against the Holy Ghost (presumption or temerity, despair, persistent opposition to the truth, and renouncing of the Christian faith), and on venial sins. In the division of the Ten Commandments the Greek Confession agrees with the Reformed Church in opposition to the Roman and Lutheran

Churches, which follow the less natural division of Augustine by merg ing the second commandment in the first, and then dividing the tenth. § 17. THE SYNOD OF JERUSALEM AND THE CONFESSION OF DOSITHEUS, A.D. 1672.

HARDOUIN: Acta Conciliorum (Paris, 1715), Tom. XI. pp. 179–274.

KIMMEL: Monumenta Fidei Ecclesiæ Orientalis, P. I. pp. 325-488; Prolegomena, pp. lxxv.-xcii.

On the Synod of Jerusalem, comp. also ITTIG: Dissert. de Actis Synodi Hieros. a. 1672 sub Patr. Hiers. Dositheo adv. Calvinistas habitæ, Lips. 1696. AYMON: Monuments authentiques de la religion des Grecs, à la Haye, 1708. BASNAGE: Hist. de la religion des églises réformées, P. I. ch. xxxii. J. COVEL: Account of the present Greek Church, Bk. I. ch. v. SCHROECKH: Kirchengeschichte seit der Reformation, Bd. ix. (by TZSCHIENEE), pp. 90-96. Gass: Symb, der griech. Kirche, pp. 79-84.

The Synod convened at Jerusalem in March, 1672, by Patriarch Dositheus, for the consecration of the restored Church of the Holy Nativity in Bethlehem,' issued a new DEFENSE OF APOLOGY of Greek ORTHODOXY, It is directed against Calvinism, which was still professed or secretly held by many admirers of Cyril Lucar. It is dated Jerusalem, March 16, 1672, and signed by Dositheus, Patriarch of Jerusalem and Pales tine (otherwise little known), and by sixty-eight Eastern bishops and ec clesiastics, including some from Russia."

This Synod is the most important in the modern history of the Eastern Church, and may be compared to the Council of Trent. Both fixed the doctrinal status of the Churches they represent, and both condemned the evangelical doctrines of Protestantism. Both were equally hierarchical and intolerant, and present a strange contrast to the first Synod held in Jerusalem, when 'the apostles and elders,' in the presence of 'the brethren,' freely discussed and adjusted, in a spirit of love, without anathemas, the great controversy between the Gentile and the Jewish Christians. The Synod of Jerusalem has been charged by Aymon and others with subserviency to the interests of Rome; Dositheus being in correspondence, with Nointel, the French embassador at Constantinople. The Synod was held at a time when the Romanists and Calvinists in France fiercely disputed about the Eucharist, and were anxious to secure the support of the Greek Church. But although the Synod was chiefly aimed against Protestantism, and has no direct polemical ref

1 Hence it is sometimes called the Synod of Bethlehem, but it was actually held at Jerusalem. * Its title is Ασπὶς ὀρθοδοξίας ἢ ἀπολογία καὶ ἔλεγχος πρὸς τοὺς διασύροντας τὴν ἀνατολι τὴν ἐκκλησίαν αἱρετικῶς φρονεῖν ἐν τοῖς περὶ Θεοῦ καὶ τῶν θείων, κ.τ.λ. Clypeus orthodora fidei sive Apologia adversus Calvinistas hæreticos, Orientalem ecclesiam de Deo rebusque divinis hæretice cum ipsis sentire mentientes. The first edition, Greek and Latin, was pub lished at Paris, 1676; then revised, 1678; also by Hardouin, and Kimmel, 1. c.