GREEK
770
GREEK
1902); Idem, Kirche und Kirchen im Lichte griechischer For-
schung (Leipzig. 1903); Papadopoulos, The Present Hierarchy
of the Orthodox Church of the East (Greek, Athens, 1895); SoKo-
LOV, The Church of Constantinople in the Nineteenth Century
(Russiaa, St. Petersburg, 1907); Delicanes, Three volumes of
texts on the relations of the Church of Constantinople with Mount
Athos and the various autocephalous Churches (Constantinople,
1902-05); LopouKHlNE, History of the Christian Church in the
Nineteenth Century (Russian, St. Petersburg, 1901), I, 1-216;
Gelzer, Geistliches und Wettliches aus dem Orient (Leipzig,
1900); Kyriakos, Dos System der autokephalen selbstnndigen
orthodoxen Kirchen in Revue Internationale de Theologie (Berne,
1902), 99-115; 273-286; ZHlSHMAn. Die Synoden und die Epis-
copaldmler in der morgenldndischen Kirche (Vienna, 1867);
Petit, Reglements generaux de VEglise orlhodoxe en Turquie in
Revue del' Orient Chretien. III. 39:i-A2'l; IV, 227-46; Semknof,
Collection of Ecclesiastical Regulations in the Patriarchate of
Constantinople (Russian, Kazan, 1902); Gedeon, UarpiapxiKOL
n.Vaice! (Constantinople, 1890).
On the domestic arrangements of the Greek churches, see the various reviews, e. g. EcAos (i' Orient,- La Terre-Sainte: Revue de V Orient Chretien; Bessarione. etc.
On music: Gaisser. Le Systcme musical de VEglise grecque (Maredsous, 1901); Rebours, Traite de psaltique: Theorie et pratique du chant dans VEglise grecque CPsiris. 1906); Thibaut, Origine byzantine de la notation neumati^ue de VEglise latine (Paris, 1907). — A fuller bibliography of Byzantine Chant will be found in Echos d'Orient. I, 366-68.
Even after the taking of Constantinople by the Turks and the apostasy of the Greeks, the one aim of the popes was to drive back the Turks into Asia and to save the Bj'zantines in spite of themselves. Nicholas V, Callistus III, Pius II, Paul II, Sixtus IV, Innocent VIII, and Alexander VI all followed this policy. Julius II sought to convert the Shah of Persia, and to draw him into an alliance against the Sultan; the struggle against the Turks was the great concern of the whole pontifical life of Leo X. If the plan to drive back the Turks into Asia finally failed, the fault lay not with the popes, but with the nations of Christendom, jeal- ous of each other and attentive to their own private gain rather than the interests of Christianity. It must not be forgotten that the victory of Lepanto (1571) was the work of a pope ; that a pope worked for the preservation of Candia (1669), and that, had it not been for another pope, John Sobieski would never have relieved Vienna (1683).
From 1453 until the French Revolution the rela- tions between the popes and the Cireek patriarchs were very different from what we find to-day. Cordial letters passed frequently between them; priests of either rite were recommended to one another's care, and the popes often intervened in the internal affairs of the Greek Church. Many Greek Patriarchs of Constantinople — among others, Cyril II — and the Greek Archbishops of Ochrida, Porphyrins about IfiOO, Athanasius in 1606, Abraham in 1629, Melecius in 1640, Athanasius about 1660, profes.sed the Catho- lic Faith ; at different times many Greek bishops did in like manner. It would be impossible to s.ay how far their conversion was sincere. Po.ssibly the need of monetary help or the wish to make a stand against Protestantism was the motive power. It must at least be acknowledged that their conduct and attitude towards Catholics gave evidence of genuine good will. Thus, to take some well-known examples, in the seven- teenth and eighteenth centuries the Jesuits and Ca- puchins were allowed to preach and hear confessions in the Greek Churches, by the express permission of the patriarch and the bishops. That they made use of this privilege we learn from their correspondence. It is hard to explain the exact reason for the changed attitude of Catholic missionaries since the end of the eighteenth century. Perhaps the change came with the suppression of the Jesuits and the outburst of the French Revolution, which led to the substitution of a new body of missionaries in the East. To-day, as a matter of fact, missionaries of all religious orders and every nationality ob.serve rigidly the rules of Propaganda concerning communicalio in sacris. They practically ignore the higher Greek clergy — not the best way, perhaps, to break down prejudice and win esteem. It is no doubt true that as a rule the
higher Greek clergy are noted for their anti-Catholic
fanaticism and are never weary of railing against
Roman missionaries and of insulting Catholics. Then,
too, the Greek people do not distinguish between reli-
gion and nationality, a confusion mainly due to the
teaching of their clergy; consequently, a Greek will
refuse to become a Catholic lest he should cease to be a
Greek. Yet great progress has been made during the
past twenty or thirty years, thanks to the schools of
the French congregations which have been opened in
nearly every town in Turkey. In spite of the anath-
emas of the Greek clergy, boys and girls flock to
these Catholic schools, and the con.sequence is a grow-
ing spirit of toleration and sympathy towards Catho-
lics everywhere.
PiiLs IX and Leo XIII tried to reopen official rela- tions with the Greeks, but unsuccessfully. The reply, of the Patriarch Anthimus VI to the Encyclical of Pius IX (1848) was far from friendly; the invitation to assist at the Vatican Council the Patriarch Gregory VI refused even to accept. During his long pontificate Leo XIII was unceasing in his efforts to bring back the Greeks to unity, but they remained unmoved, and when, on 20 June, 1894, in the Encyclical " Praeclara", he invited the Greek Church in all charity to recognize the successor of Peter, the answering encyclical from the Patriarch Anthimus VII was remarkable for its rudeness. The present patriarch, Joachim III, opened a purely theoretical consultation with his subjects on the matter a few years ago, but his attempt was not well received.
The first Protestants with whom the Greek Church sought to unite were the Lutherans. About 1560 the Greek deacon Demetrius Mysos visited Wittenberg to learn at first hand the doctrines of Luther, but his visit had no result. In 1573 two professors of Tubin- gen, Andrea; and Crusius, assisted by the chaplain, Gerlach, opened a correspondence with the Greek patriarch Jeremias II, which lasted until December, 1581. The patriarch and his theologians set forth over and over again very courteously and very fully the many dogmatic differences between their Church and that of the Reformers. At last Jere- mias II refu.sed to answer further letters, and wrote to Pope Gregory XIII in June, 1582, that he "de- tested those men and their like as enemies of Christ and of the Catholic and Apostolic Church." Later on Calvinist doctrines found favour with the pa- triarch himself, Cyril Lucaris, who occupied the oecumenical throne seven times between 1612 and 1638. The French and Austrian Embassies sided with the Orthodox Greeks; Geneva and Holland fa- voured the Calvinisers. The conflict lasted through the greater part of the seventeenth century. The main quarrel was over Lucaris's confession of faith, drawn up in Latin, which appeared at Geneva in March, 1629, and in the West stirred up both Catho- lics and Protestants. Many councils of the Greek Church, especially those of Constantinople in 1638 and 1642, of Jassy in 1642, and of Jerusalem in 1672, extir- pated the Calvinist heresy from the Orthodox Churches. Through Peter Mohila, Metropolitan of Kiev, the Russian Church took an active part in the controversy. The personalities that disfigured these disputes embittered the whole of the .seventeenth cen- tury, and made it the most repulsive in the existence of the Church of Constantinople. Four patriarchs at least were strangled, while in the space of one hundred years there were twenty-nine patriarchs anil fifty-four patriarchal elections, i. e. an average of one election every twenty- two months.
After the Lutherans and Calvinists came the Angli- cans, or that section of them known as the Non- jurors. Negotiations set on foot with the Greek and Ru.ssian Churches lasted from 1716 to 1725, but nothing ever came of them. Then came Zinzendorf, founder of the Moravian Brethren C1740). Finally, ia
