PART I.

CENT. Following the doctrine of Dioscorus, Barsuma, XVI. Xenaias, Fullo, and others, whom they conSECT. III. sider as the heads or chief ornaments of their sect, they maintain that in Christ the divine and human nature were reduced into one, and consequently reject both the decrees of the council of Chalcedon, and the famous letter of Leo the Great. That, however, they may not seem to have the least inclination towards the doctrine of Eutyches, which they profess to reject with the most ardent zeal, they propose their own system with the utmost caution and circumspection, and hold the following obscure principles: That the two natures are united in Christ without either confusion or mixture; so that though the nature of our Saviour be really one, yet it is at the same time twofold and compound [n]. By this declaration it appears, that those learned men, who look upon the difference between the Monophysites, and the Greek and Latin churches, rather as a dispute about words than things, are not so far mistaken as some have imagined [o]. Be that as it may, both the Asiatic

[n] Assemanni Biblioth. Orient. Clement. Vatican. tom. ii. p. 25, 26, 29, 34, 117, 133, 135, 277, 297, &c.-See, in the same work, Abulpharage's Subtile Vindication of the Doctrine of his Sect, vol. ii. p. 288. There is a complete and circumstantial account of the religion of the Abyssinians, in the Theologia Ethiopica of Gregory the Abyssinian, published by Fabricius, in his Lux evangelii toti orbi exoriens, p. 716. where there is also a list of all the writers who have given accounts of the Abyssinians.

[o] See La Croze, Hist. du Christianisme des Indes, p. 23. Assemanni loc. citat. tom. ii. p. 291, 297.-Rich. Simon, Histoire des Chretiens Orientaux, p. 119.-Jo. Joach. Schroderi Thesaurus Lingua Armenice, p. 276. The truth of the matter is, that the terms used by the Monophysites are something more than equivocal; they are contradictory. It may also be farther observed, that those who pretend to hold a middle path between the doctrines of Nestorius and Eutyches, were greatly embarrassed, as it was almost impossible to oppose the one, without adopting, or at least appearing to adopt the other.

XVI.

PART I.

Asiatic and African Monophysites of the present CENT. times are, generally speaking, so deeply sunk in ignorance, that their attachment to the doctrine SECT. III. by which they are distinguished from other Christian societies, is rather founded on their own obstinacy, and on the authority of their ancestors, than on any other circumstance; nor do they even pretend to appeal, in its behalf, to reason and argument [p].

XIV. The Armenians [q], though they agree The Armewith the other Monophysites in the main doctrine of that sect relating to the unity of the divine and human nature in Christ, differ from them, nevertheless, in many points of faith, discipline, and worship; and hence it comes to pass, that they I hold no communion with that branch of the Monophysites who are Jacobites in the more limited sense of that term. The Armenian church is governed by three patriarchs [r]. The chief of

[p] The liturgies of the Copts, the Syrian Jacobites, and the Abyssinians, have been published, with learned observaetions, by Renaudot, in the first and second volumes of his Liturgia Orientales.

[q] The first writer, who gave a circumstantial account of the religion and history of the Armenians, was Clement Ga lani, an Italian of the order of the Theatins, whose Conciliatio Ecclesia Armenicæ cum Romana, was published at Rome, in three volumes, in folio, in the year 1650. The other authors, who have treated of this branch of Ecclesiastical History, are enumerated by Fabricius, in his Lux Evangelli toti orbi exoriens, ch. xxxviii. p. 640.; to which must be added, Le Quien Oriens Christianus, tom. i. p. 1362.-The History of Christianity in Armenia, which the learned La Croze has subjoined to his account of the progress of the Christian religion in Abyssinia, and which was published at the Hague in 1739, is by no means answerable to the importance and copiousness of the subject; which must be attributed to the age and infirmities of that author. For an account of the particular institutions and rites of the Armenians, see Gemelli Carreri Voyage du tour du monde, tom. ii. p. 146.

[r] Sir Paul Ricaut mentions four; but his authority, were it more respectable than it really is, cannot be compared with that of the excellent sources from whence Dr. Mosheim draws his materials.

CENT. these, whose diocese comprehends the Greater XVI. Armenia, beholds forty-two archbishops subjected SECT. III. to his jurisdiction, and resides in a monastery at a

PART 1.

place called Echmiazin. The revenues of this spiritual ruler are such as would enable him to live in the most splendid and magnificent manner [s]; but there is no mark of pomp or opulence in his external appearance, nor in his domestic economy. His table is frugal, his habit plain; nor is he distinguished from the monks, with whom he lives, by any other circumstance than his superior power and authority. He is, for the most part, elected to his patriarchal dignity by the suffrages of the bishops assembled at Echmiazin, and his election is confirmed by the solemn approbation of the Persian monarch. The second patriarch of the Armenians, who is called The Catholic, resides at Cis, a city of Cilicia, rules over the churches established in Cappadocia, Cilicia, Cyprus, and Syria, and hath twelve archbishops under his jurisdiction. He also at present acknowledges his subordination to the patriarch of Echmiazin. The third, and last, in rank of the patriarchs above mentioned, who has no more than eight or nine bishops under his dominion, resides in the island of Aghtamar, which is in the midst of the Great Lake of Varaspuracan, and is looked upon by the other Armenians as the enemy of their church.

Besides these prelates, who are patriarchs in the true sense of that term, the Armenians have other spiritual leaders, who are honoured with

the

[s] R. Simon has subjoined to his Histoire de Chretiens Orient. p. 217. an account of all the Armenian churches that are subject to the jurisdiction of this grand patriarch. But this account, though taken from Uscanus, an Armenian bishop, is nevertheless defective in many respects. For an account of the residence and manner of life of the patriarch of Echmiazin, see Paul Lucas Voyage au Levant, tom. ii. p. 247, and Gemelii Carreri Voyage du tour du monde, tom. ii. p. 4-10.

SECT. III.

PART I.

the title of Patriarchs; but this, indeed, is no CENT. more than an empty title, unattended with the XVI. authority and prerogatives of the patriarchal dignity. Thus the archbishop of the Armenians, who lives at Constantinople, and whose authority is respected by the churches established in those provinces that form the connexion between Europe and Asia, enjoys the title of Patriarch. The same denomination is given to the Armenian bishop who resides at Jerusalem; and to the prelate of the same nation, who has his episcopal seat at Caminec in Poland, and governs the Armenian churches that are established in Russia, Poland, and the adjacent countries. These bishops assume the title of Patriarchs, on account of some peculiar privileges conferred on them by the Great Patriarch of Echmiazin. For by an authority derived from this supreme head of the Armenian church, they are allowed to consecrate bishops, and to make, every third year, and distribute, among their congregations, the holy chrism, or ointment; which, according to a constant custom among the eastern Christians, is the privilege of the patriarchs alone [t].

rians, or

XV. The Nestorians, who are also known by The Nestothe denomination of Chaldeans, have fixed their Chaldeans. habitations chiefly in Mesopotamia and the adjacent countries. They have several doctrines, as well as some religious ceremonies and institutions, that are peculiar to themselves. But the main points that distinguish them from all other Christian societies, are, their persuasion that Nestorius

[t] See the Nouveaux Memoires des Missions de la Campag nie de Jesus, tom. iii. p. 1–218. where there is an ample and circumstantial account, both of the civil and religious state of the Armenians. This account has been highly applauded by M. de la Croze, for the fidelity, accuracy, and industry, with which it is drawn up, and no man was more conversant in subjects of this nature than that learned author.-See la Croze, Histoire du Christianisme d'Ethiope, p. 345.

PART I.

CENT. was unjustly condemned by the council of Ephe XVI. sus, and their firm attachment to the doctrine of SECT. III. that prelate, who maintained that there were not only two natures, but also two distinct persons in the Son of God. In the earlier ages of the church, this error was looked upon as of the most momentous and pernicious kind; but in our times it is esteemed of less consequence, by persons of the greatest weight and authority in theological matters, even among the Roman Catholic doctors. They consider this whole controversy as a dispute about words, and the opinion of Nestorius as a nominal, rather than a real heresy; that is, as an error arising rather from the words he employed, than from his intention in the use of them. It is true indeed, that the Chaldeans attribute to Christ two natures, and even two persons; but they correct what may seem rash in this expression, by adding, that these natures and persons are so closely and intimately united, that they have only one aspect. Now the word barsopa, by which they express this aspect is precisely of the same signification with the Greek word πρόσωπον, which signifies a person [u]; and from hence it is evident, that they attached to the word aspect the same idea that we attach to the word person, and that they understood by the word person, precisely what we understand by the term nature. However that be, we must observe here, to the lasting honour of the Nestorians, that, of all the Christian societies established in the East, they have been the most careful and successful in avoiding a multitude of superstitious opinions

[u] It is in this manner that the sentiments of the Nestorians are explained in the inscriptions which adorn the tombs of their patriarchs in the city of Mousul.-See Assemanni Bibli◄ oth. Oriental. Valican. tom. iii. par. II. p. 210.-R. Simon, Histoire de la Creance des Chretiens Orientaux, ch. vii. p. 95. -Petrus Strozza, De dogmatibus Chaldeorum, published in 8vo, at Rome, in the year 1617.