The Catholick doctrine of the Eucharist in all ages in answer to what H. Arnaud, Doctor of the Sorbon alledges, touching the belief of the Greek, Moscovite, Armenian, Jacobite, Nestorian, Coptic, Maronite, and other eastern churches : whereunto is added an account of the Book of the body and blood of our Lord published under the name of Bertram : in six books.

CHAP. III.

Mr. Arnaud's Twenty first Illusion, is, his charging me with maintaining the Greeks never knew the Latins believed Transubstantiation. His Twenty second, consists in offering the Formulary of the Re-union proposed to the Greeks by the Latins. Twenty third, in that he produces the Passages of Latiniz'd Greeks. Twenty fourth, in alledging supposed Authors, or at least doubtful and justly suspected ones. The Twenty fifth, is his producing the Testimonies of several false Greeks link't to the Interests of the Latine Church.

HAD Mr. Arnaud left out of his Dispute, touching the Greeks, the Illusions I already observed (as it was very reasonable he should) he would have suppressed several whole Chapters, and abridged others, and by this means, we should not have had such just cause to complain of his prolixity. And we should have had yet less, had he been pleased to retrench all that he has written to prove, the Greeks could not be ignorant of the Doctrine of the Latins, in reference to Transubstantiation. This is the most reasonable thing in the World, for his charging me with at∣tributing to them this ignorance, and the whole Sequel of his Histories, Ar∣guments, and Reflections, whereby to shew the absurdity of this Supposition, all this I say is but a meer Illusion. I never pretended the Greeks knew not what the Latins held on this Article; and he that shall read with a little more Equity than Mr. Arnaud has done, what I wrote in my Answer to the Perpetuity, will find, that I have been so far from asserting this Proposition, that I have on the contrary, in several places, supposed they knew it. The Author of the Perpetuity having told me the Greeks and Latins lived together in several places, and yet 'twas never known, there was any Dispute raised amongst them on this Point; I answered, that the Greeks content themselves with their own Belief, without making it a matter of contest with Strangers. Now this Answer supposes, that they are not ignorant of what the Latins hold. I likewise mentioned upon this account a Passage of Phaebadius, who tells us, that an humble Conscience contents it self with keeping its own Opinion, and sup∣poses 'tis better to preserve its own Faith, than to trouble it self with examining the Belief of Strangers, which also supposes they knew the Opinion of the Ro∣man Church, but did not trouble themselves about it. This Author alledging afterwards the Re-union of the two Churches made in the Council of Flo∣rence, I expressly acknowledged, that the Greeks seem, to have tacitly suffered the Transubstantiation of the Latins, which does still moreover suppose, they were not ignorant of it, for men are not ignorant of what they tolerate. The same Author producing the Answer of the Greeks of Venice, to the Car∣dinal de Guise's Questions; I said, that 'twas an Answer contrived on purpose

not to provoke Strangers; ever supposing, as 'tis evident, that they well knew the Doctrine of the Latins.

WHAT could then induce Mr. Arnaud to charge me with a thing I ne∣ver so much as imagined, and the contrary of which appears throughout all the Sequel of my Discourse? The Author of the Perpetuity, told us, that * 1.1 Breerwood, who wrote a Book touching the diversity of Religions; and exactly denotes all things in which he pretends they differ from the Church of Rome, yet dared not affirm, the Greek Church differed from the Latine in the Point of Tran∣substantiation. That he neither does pretend it of the Assyrians, or Melchites, Nestorians, Jacobites, Eutychites, Copticks, Egyptians, nor Abyssins, but on∣ly * 1.2 Armenians. These are his Words, and this my Answer, As to other Churches, the Author of the Perpetuity alledges only the Silence of Breerwood, in a Treatise he wrote of Religions, wherein he does not observe, that either the Greeks, Assyrians, Melchites, Nestorians, Jacobites, Eutychites, Copticks, E∣gyptians, nor Abyssins, do differ from the Doctrine of the Church of Rome, in the Point of Transubstantiation. But certainly our Author is very bare of Proofs, that he must have recourse to the Silence of a man that transiently observes the most noted Differences of Religions, contenting himself with saying, what Points such a People hold, or positively reject, without proceeding to things which they do not believe by way of Negation, as not having heard of them.

THESE last Words, as not having heard of them, have it seems given occasion to all this coyl. But first, Mr. Arnaud may consider, if he pleases, that my Answer refers to other Communions, which are called Schismaticks, and that the Greeks are mentioned only accidentally and occasionally. Which appears from my own Expressions, for having seperately handled what con∣cerns the Greeks, passing to another Subject, I immediately add, As to what concerns People of other Communions, the Author alledges to us only, &c. Whence it is evident, that my intention respects only those other Communi∣ons, that I name the Greeks only, because they are comprehended amongst the rest in the Author of the Perpetuitie's Objection; but yet my Answer primarily respects only the other People. If it be said, that the Objection including the Greeks amongst the rest, my Answer must include them also; that in effect it is general, and that otherwise I should have left the Objection relating to the Greeks, without an Answer. I reply to this, that my Answer cannot be extended beyond the other Schismatical Communions, to the pre∣judice of my own expressions, which restrain and determinate it. A man would think People might be so just, as not to charge Persons with those things which are contrary to their express Declarations. Mr. Arnaud might accuse me for leaving the Objection drawn from the Silence of Breerwood, in relation to the Greeks without an Answer. He might have brought it again into the Dispute, if he would, but he could not apply my Words to the Greeks, seeing I mentioned them in reference to the other Communions, in opposition to the Greeks, of whom I came from treating. What I said before, and what I said even there touching the other Communions, sufficiently shewed what might be answered in this respect to the Objection taken out of Breer∣wood, it not being necessary to make thereof a particular Article, nor to com∣prehend them amongst the rest. I confess the sence of my Answer in gene∣ral may be extended as far as the Greeks, in observing the differences of them with other People, but to apply them to even the very least of my Terms, and make the World believe that 'twas of them I spake, is that which Justice and Equity cannot suffer, having positively said, as I have done, that I spake of other Communions.

BUT supposing my Answer was to be understood of the Greeks them∣selves; could not Mr. Arnaud understand, that I spake of People in general, and not of particular Persons, and meant that the Doctrine of Transubstan∣tiation has made no noise amongst the People; that their Pastors, never proposed it to 'em in order to its being received by them, nor declaimed a∣gainst it, to make them reject it; and in a word, that they never made of it an Article of Faith, nor Controversie. My Sence appears by the bare reading of my Answer. Breerwood, said I, has only transiently observed the common differences of Religions, contenting himself with telling us what People imbrace, or what they positively reject, without proceeding to the things they do not believe by way of Negation, as not having heard speak of them. It is clear I distinguish three sorts of Points, some which these People profess positively to believe, others which they profess likewise positively to reject, and the third which they do not believe, or expresly reject. 'Tis in this third Rank, I put Tran∣substantiation in respect of them. They never heard of it, as a Point they ought to believe, or an Errour they ought positively to reject. They meet not with it either amongst the Articles their Religion teaches, nor amongst those which it opposes, and expresly condemns. And this is what I call in respect of this People, the not believing a thing by way of Negation, as not having heard speak of it. I ought not for this to be charged with an abso∣lute denial, that the Greeks never heard the Latins believed Transubstantia∣tion, for there is a great deal of difference betwixt these two things. I speak of People in general, and not of particular Persons, and I speak moreover of Points which are not found either amongst the Articles, which are to be be∣lieved, nor amongst those that are actually to be rejected; and not of those concerning which we may be historically informed that other People hold them.

LET any man judge then of Mr. Arnaud's Character, and with what kind of Person I am concerned. Besides what I come from observing, we shall immediately see how he abuses what I said, touching the Halcyon days of the Church. He catches at the least expressions, and if he can turn any of 'em into a counter sence, he makes thereof a matter of Triumph. This proceeding seems wholly unworthy a Person of his Reputation. Had he designed to inrich himself with the Spoyls of Allatius and Raynaldus, and to transcribe as he has done their Histories, could not he find a juster occasion than this to introduce them into his Volum? Or if he could find no better, must the love he has to Stories, and the pleasure he takes in imposing on us, prevail over his Conscience, which forbids him to charge me with a false meaning, with a Sence (as is apparent) I never had, and which has no relation to the Sequel of my Discourse.

AND yet 'tis on no better Grounds than these, that he makes me draw Systems and build Machines; that he makes general Divisions of the World, assembles Councils, sends out Ambassadours, transports Armies, fills Jerusa∣lem with Pilgrims, preaches Croisado's, and conquers the Holy Land, Con∣stantinople and the Grecian Empire; that he fills the East with Bishops, Ab∣bots, Religious, and Latin Inquisitors; that he introduces Princes, Kings, Em∣perours, and Popes, and sets on foot Negotiations, makes Treaties of Peace, and Re-union between the two Churches; and all this to prove the Greeks were not ignorant the Latins held Transubstantiation, which is to say, to prove a thing I never denied. Who could think that all this costly and state∣ly

Pageantry should be carried about to so little purpose; and all these great Figures be put upon their motion without any necessity, to con∣vince us of a thing we never denied? Yet is it true that 'twas only a false equivocation that has occasioned all this preparation and bustle, an equivoca∣tion, which had he but been pleased to consult me about for a fuller meaning of it (supposing there were need of it) I could have saved him all this trou∣ble of Translating Allatius and Raynaldus, and several other Passages from the Greek of Pachimerus and Anne Comnenus.

I would have told him I never intended to deny, but 'tis possible the Greeks knew what was the Opinion of the Latins concerning the Substantial Conversion. But withal, that since the Eleventh Century to this present, this Nation has been so prodigiously ignorant and careless in matters of Re∣ligion, and so perplexed with their Temporal Affairs, that 'twould be no Paradox to affirm the greatest part amongst them knew little of what the Latins believe in this particular, seeing 'tis certain they scarcely know what they believe themselves. That which I asserted in the beginning of this Con∣troversie touching their ignorance, confirms what I say. But observe here moreover what Thomas à Jesu has written. The Greeks, say's he, since their * 1.3 Separation from the Catholick Church, are faln into a most desperate ignorance, which will more plainly appear, if we cast our eyes on the Ages which preceded the Separation, wherein Greece was the Mother of all Arts and Sciences. He after∣wards relates a Passage taken out of Bozius, in these Words. Since the Six∣teenth Century, when the Greek Church began to separate from us, there has scarce∣ly any Person been found amongst them, excelling in any Science: 'Tis certain Gre∣gory relates, that in the Emperour Andronicus his time (which is about 250 years since) there was not a Person in all Greece that was able to dispute with our People about Religion; and now there is not one that can be truly said to be in∣differently learned. If any amongst them desire to learn any thing, they must leave Constantinople, and come to the Colledge at Rome, which Gregory the Thirteenth built for the Greeks. All the Bishops amongst them are taken out of the Order of Monks, who have a Law amongst them to this effect, that all those that study Philosophy shall be excommunicated, as testifies Belon in the first Book of his Observations. Now there is nothing more useful to men for the finding of the Truth than solid Philosophy. And therefore, the Devil to keep the Greeks in this ignorance, has so ordered it, that the Bishops are still elected from amongst the Monks, and that moreover the Monks should lay this necessity upon them∣selves of being ignorant.

'TIS likely Persons in these Circumstances do not trouble themselves with Inquiries into the Opinions of the Latins touching the Mystery of the Eucharist; and in effect amongst all those that have written since the Ele∣venth Century to this present, (excepting the Latinizing Greeks) there will be found very few that mention the Belief of the Roman Church, touching the Conversion of Substances, which shews that they are not well instructed in it.

YET do not I believe this ignorance has been so Universal, but that there have been some from time to time, who sufficiently understood the Opinion of the Latins, and especially those that have had most Commerce with them; as for instance, such as negotiated the Re-unions, those that conferred with the Emissaries, and were Assessors at the Council of Florence, and such as were forced to live under the Jurisdiction of Latine Bishops. Mr. Arnaud

needed not trouble himself with proving this, for 'tis a thing we grant him.

SO that here are already several of Mr. Arnaud's Illsions, and yet we are not at the end of all those he has imposed on us, touching this single Article of the Greeks.

WE may moreover reckon into this number the perpetual Quotation of this Form of a Re-union, which was so often offered to the Greeks, and which the Greeks have sometimes received when they were at accord with the La∣tine Church. He tells us, that the Emperour Michael Paleologus his Deputies * 1.4 being arrived at the Council of Lyons, presented the Emperours Letters to the Pope, containing in express Terms the Confession of Faith, which was sent them by Clement the Fourth, and Gregory the Tenth, wherein Transubstantiation is ex∣pressly inserted in these Terms. Sacramentum Eucharistae ex Azymo conficit Ro∣mana Ecclesia, tenens & docens quod in ipso Sacramento, Panis verè transubstan∣tiatur in Corpus, & Vinum in Sanguinem Domini Jesu Christi. He adds, that this Profession of Faith was sworn to on the Emperour's part by George Acro∣politus, and that the Legate of the Council of the Greeks presented likewise a Let∣ter to the Pope, as from the Metropolitain of Ephesus, and thirty Greek Bishops, and that he swore in their name, after the same manner the Ambassador had done to imbrace intirely the forementioned Confession of Faith, wherein Transubstanti∣ation was expressed. He tells us moreover, that in the Confession of Eaith, which * 1.5 John Veccus inserted in his Letters aswell in his own Name, as in the Name of the Greek Bishops, that Transubstantiation was expressly contained in it, altho occasionally upon account of the Azymes; credentes & nos ipsum Azymum panem in ipso Sacro Officio Eucharistae verè transubstantiari in Corpus Domini nostri Jesu Christi, & Vi∣num in Sanguinem ejus per Sanctissimi Spiritus Virtutem & Operationem. That they likewise do believe the unleavened Bread is transubstantiated into the Body of Christ. He afterwards observes, this Confession of the Greek Bishops was not ex∣pressed in the same Terms, as that which was sent thence by Clement the Fourth, and Gregory the Tenth; but that this difference has no after effect in respect of the Article of the Azymes, and that of Transubstantiation, but that 'tis expressed more plainly than in the Confession of Faith compiled by Clement.

SO that if we will believe Mr. Arnaud, we have here Transubstantiation formally received and acknowledged by the Greek Church. But all this is but a meer Delusion. This Confession of Faith in the Latin of Raynoldus, from whom Mr. Arnaud has borrowed whatsoever he has alledged concern∣ing it, has indeed these Words, Panis verè Transubstantiatur in Corpus, & Vi∣num in Sanguinem, but as I alreay observed, in the Greek which Allatius cites * 1.6 touching the Re-union of the Emperour John Paleologus, there are these Words, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, The Bread is really changed into the Body, and the Wine into the Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Changed, is not transubstantiated. I have already shown there is a great deal of difference between these two Terms. The Greeks hold that the Bread is changed into the Body, which is not the Point in question; but whether they believe 'tis transubstantiated. Mr. Arnaud was not ignorant of the difference between the Latine and Greek Copy of this Confession of Faith, for he has taken notice of it himself else∣where upon the Subject of the Re-union of the Emperour John Paleologus, and has no better defence for it, than saying, that the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of the Greeks, and the Transubstantiatur of the Latins are Synonimous Terms. Why did he not mention this difference in this place, and wherefore has he

grounded his Proof on the Latin Expressions? The Doctrine of Transubstan∣tiation, say's he, is expressly inserted in this Confession of Faith. I will shew Mr. Claude Transubstantiation solemnly approved by the Greek Church in the * 1.7 same manner as men approve things they ever believed, and of which they have not the least doubt. And a little after. And thus I obliged my self to shew him the Doctrine of Transubstantiation signed and sworn to by the Greeks. And this in∣deed he does shew us, if we only consider the Latin Text; but if we consult the Greek, we shall find quite another thing, than what he pretends. We shall find indeed the Latins do believe Transubstantiation, and endeavour to insinuate it amongst the Greeks; but we shall likewise find that the Greeks depart not from their general expressions. For to tell us that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and transubstantiatur are Synonymous Terms, is what I deny, and have refuted already, and shall again refute in the following Discourse. This whole Proof which Mr Arnaud has been so earnest upon, reduces it self to a thing which we do not deny him, which is, that the Greeks hold the Bread is really changed into the Body, and the Wine into the Blood. This Confession of Faith in∣forms us of no new thing, but that which I already acknowledged is to be found amongst the Greek Authors. Why then must this be made a matter of Triumph? It remains still to inquire whether they understand it of a change of Substance, which is our only Question. Moreover Mr. Arnaud must not think to draw advantage from John Veccus the Patriarch of Con∣stantinople's Letter in that the Confession of Faith contained therein is not expressed in the same Terms, as that sent by Clement and Gregory, which was signed and sworn to by the Emperours Ambassadour, and by the Greeks Le∣gat in the Council at Lyons, for it appears by reading this Letter, and com∣paring it with the Formulary of Clement and Gregory, that in respect of the Articles of Pennance, Purgatory, and the Sacraments, 'tis the same thing, and the same expressions, excepting some slight alterations which were ne∣cessarily made, either to make the Greek Church speak in its own name, or to reserve as they do the Custom of Confirmation by the Priests, or else moreover to apply to their leavened Bread, what is not said in the other, but only of the Azyme. But as to essential Terms, and those that respect the Doctrinal Part, they are absolutely the same, and we must make the same Judgment of them.

WE may likewise justly rank amongst the number of Mr. Arnaud's Illu∣sions the Testimonies of several latinizing Greeks, who left their Religion to embrace the Roman. He cites Passages out of Emanuel Calecas, concerning * 1.8 whom he say's himself, That he was of the Order of Fryar Preachers, and wrote four Books against the Errour of the Greeks touching the Procession of the Holy Ghost. He quotes Cardinal Bessarion, and one Gregory, who both of 'em wrote against Marc of Ephesus in favour of the Latins to defend what passed in the Council of Florence. He alledges several Passages out of John Plusia∣denus, Gennadius, Scholarius, and a certain Religious man named Hilarion, all zealous Defenders of the same Council, all of 'em openly engaged in the Defence and Propogation of the Roman Doctrines. Every man sees that such kind of Persons as these are no more fit to decide our Question, than Thomas Aquinas would be, or the Trent Fathers, and that 'tis not fair to bring in such Persons for Witnesses in this Controversie.

MR. Arnaud will say without doubt he has alledged them only, because they reproached not the Greeks with their not believing Transubstantiation. But if he proposed to himself no other advantage, it was not necessary for

this to cite their Passages at length, as he has done, nor mark in great Cha∣racters the places wherein they assert the change of Substance, to dazle the Reader's Eyes. It were sufficient to rank these Authors in general amongst the Latins, and reduce the advantage he would draw from their Silence to this negative Argument, which we will examine in the sequel of this Discourse; which consists in that the Latins never accused the Greeks for their not be∣lieving the substantial Conversion. But howsoever it were a just thing to lay aside all these Passages, as absolutely fruitless and impertinent, and if there be any reflexion to be made on their Silence, it shall be taken notice of in its proper place.

NEITHER is it less just to retrench from this Dispute all doubtful Authors, which is to say, such concerning whom we have no assurance, whe∣ther the Works attributed to them are theirs, nor indeed whether there were ever any such Authors in the World. I put immediately in this Rank Samo∣nas the pretended Bishop of Gaza. Mr. Arnaud bestirs himself to prove con∣trary to Mr. Aubertin's Conjecture, that in the Thirteenth Century, which is to say, in the time wherein this Archbishop of Gaza is reckoned to have lived, there were Greek Bishops in Palestine. But he does not undertake to shew that Samonas was of this number, nor that any Person ever mentioned him. There are, say's he, five hundred Treatises of the Fathers, which must be rejected, if it were sufficient to respect them as Apochryphal, that they were not cited by others. His five hundred Treatises I grant; but there are not five hundred Fathers of whom no body ever made mention, and which are not named by others. When a name of an Author is unknown to Authors that lived in the same Age, and those that follow, this is certainly a sufficient rea∣son to make his Book suspected. Mr. Arnaud then needed not find it strange, if we place his Samonas in this order, till such time as he has more clearly proved his Authority. Supposing Mr. Aubertin was mistaken in his Conje∣cture, and that there were indeed Greek Bishops in Palestine, when the Sara∣cens possessed it, this does not conclude that Samonas was of this number, nor that his Dispute against Achmet was real. Mr. Arnaud's Custom is, that when he finds any trivial matter, altho of never so little importance to our Controversie, to stick at it, and use his utmost skill thereon, to the end, that under the favour of these vain Triumphs, he may conceal his weakness in Matters of greater moment. Which is what he has done in this occa∣sion; for seeing he could not give any colour to the Testimony of this Samo∣nas, he therefore falls upon Criticising; and heats himself to shew there were in the Thirteenth Century Greek Bishops in Palestine, under the Empire of the Saracens, and by this pretence would obtrude on us this Passage of Samonas.

WE may likewise reckon amongst this Rank of suspected Authors, One Agapius, whom Mr. Arnaud say's was a Monk of Mount Athos, from whom * 1.9 Mr. Arnaud has taken some Passages. I believe his Collections are true, and that he has faithfully translated them. But what assurance have we this was not a counterfeit Author? Mr. Arnaud tells us, that he lately met with this Book written in Vulgar Greek. This accidental meeting does already disgust me, as if 'twere meer chance that brought him acquainted with this Author. And yet we know well enough how careful those of the Roman Church are, to gather up these kind of pieces that are favourable to them; and which may serve them as well against the Greeks as Protestants, especially such as this, which expressly denotes Christ's Substance under the Accidents and Appear∣ances

of Bread and Wine. They could find nothing so emphatical in any o∣ther Author; how then comes it to pass they neglected this Agapius, and that in such a manner, that, Mr. Arnaud who has his Correspondents every where, in Italy, Greece, Sweedland, Moscovia, and Syria, yet should light of this Book on∣ly by Chance? He tells us this Book, was perhaps wrote during the time where∣in Cyrillus was Patriarch, for Cyrillus dyed but in the Year 1638, and this Re∣ligious's Book was Printed at Venice till 1641. If this be all that can be said in this Matter, every one will judge this is not sufficient to give Credit to a Book. The Printing Presses at Venice are no more free from Fraud and Fiction, than those of other Cities.

Tam ficti pravique tenax quam nuncia veri.

CYRILLUS his Confession, offended the Latins sufficiently enough to Oblige them to Oppose against him a Testimony so Express and Authentick as this is. Being an Author, a Religious of Mount Athos, of this Mount which accord∣ing to Mr. Arnaud is the Seminary of Religious for the whole East, and whose Faith he says, is that of all the Greek Churches, how then has it hapned they have so much slighted him, as not to produce him against Cyrillus: Caryophy∣lus wrote a Treatise on purpose to Refute this Patriarchs Confession; but he * 1.10 makes no mention therein of Agapius. Leo Allatius has outragiously used the same Patriarch in his Book, de Perpetua Consensione, and has not fail'd to de∣scribe at length the Councils of Cyrillus de Berrhaea, and Parthenius; but he mentions not a word of Agapius. The aforesaid Allatius wrote a Book against Dr. Creygton, wherein he indeavours to prove the Greeks believe Transub∣stantiation. He has made a Collection of whatsoever favours his Cause out of all Authors, whether Prints or Manuscripts. Mr. Arnaud knows it very well, seeing 'tis from thence he has taken his most specious Arguments; but he tells us not a Word of Agapius, which makes me justly Suspect, that 'tis the Work of some Imposture: But be it as it will, 'tis silly to Triumph with it, till 'tis proved Authentick.

IN fine, to clear the Dispute of all Impertinencies, and Illusions with which Mr. Arnaud has pestered it, we must retrench the Testimonies of the false Greeks, that is to say of those, who having bin brought up in Latin Semina∣ries, (and being in their Hearts Romanists) yet Live in the Communion of the Greek Schismatical Church, and even sometimes Possess the highest Dig∣nities. Gerganus Bishop of Arta in the Epistle before his Catechism complains * 1.11 very much against these sort of People. He says they are secret Enemies, outwardly seem to be Greeks, but are Latins in their Hearts, and Caryophi∣lus that relates this Complaint of Gerganus, agrees in this Particular. We have already seen by Report of the Jesuits themselves, that one of the chief∣est Employs of the Missionaries in the East, is to gain privately the Bishops and Priests, to make use of them upon Occasion, or insensibly to insinuate the Romish Faith into the Minds of the Greek Youth, under Pretence of teach∣ing them Languages and Philosophy, that by this means they may fill by de∣grees the Ecclesiastical Charges with their Creatures. We have already seen even by the Testimony of Allatius and Thomas a Jesu, that this is the Ad∣vantage received from the Seminary at Rome, wherein Greek Children are brought up in the Opinions and Maxims of the Roman Church, and from whence they are sent into their own Countries, to receive Orders from Schis∣matical Bishops, to the end they may be promoted to Bishopricks by the Schismatical Patriarchs, and carry on the Latin Interest under this false Pre∣tence.

I do not pretend to decide here the Question whether this way of Pro∣ceeding be justifiable or not, this being not my Business: Let every Man judg thereof as he pleases. But I Affirm, 'tis not possible for People to be more disingenuously dealt with, than we are by Mr. Arnaud, in making use of the Testimony of these Persons, whereby to decide the Question between us. If this be his way of Confounding Ministers, and Triumphing at their De∣feat, his Victories indeed will be easy, but his Triumph neither Honourable nor Just: Is it not a disingenuous Artifice thus to make use (as he hath done) of the Mystery of the Missions and Seminaries to blind the World, imagining his indirect Dealing will scape being taken Notice of.

AND thus does Mr. Arnaud gloriously retayl out to us the Testimony of Pay∣sius Ligaridius together with the Letters of Mr. de Pompone his Nephew. He first produces some Collections out of him, Translated into our Language, and in fine has Translated his Treatise into Latin, and inserted it in his 12th. Book. Would we know who this Paysius Ligaridius is, observe what Mr. Pom∣pone has writ of him in his Letter. He is a Greek, say's he, by Nation, and a Religious of the Order of St. Basil: He was sometime a Student at Rome and Pa∣doua, and being returned from thence to Constantinople, was made Archbishop of Gaza in Palestine. Mr. Pompone seems to make this Acknowledgment with some kind of Constraint. I the rather tell you, say's he, whatsoever I know of this Archbishop, because I do not doubt, but some Calvinists here, have given notice of this Treatise to Mr. Claude, and informed him he ought to be Suspected, seeing he was Educated at Rome, and went out Doctor at Padoua, so that he may think his Testimony ought to be rejected, being brought up in our Religion. Should we not have known then of Mr. Pompone, what kind of Man this Archbishop was, were it not for that he feared some Calvinists at Stockholm would give an Ac∣count of him to Claude the Minister? Alas, we are not beholding to him for his Account, for we can be informed elsewhere, by a Latiniz'd Greek at Ve∣nice, who goes under the Name of Signor Gradenigo; observe what he late∣ly Wrote concerning him. Paysius Ligaridius studied at Rome, and when he left that City, was a Zealous Defendor of the Latins, but I heard since he has publick∣ly abjured the Romish Religion, when made Metropolitain of Gaza.

TO give the World a more particular Character of this Person, and such as are like him, it will not be amiss to relate at large this Abjuration menti∣oned by Signor Gradenigo. Observe here then what Dr. Bazire an English Divine, (whose Testimony I have already Cited) wrote to me, who was pre∣sent at Jerusalem, when Paysius was made Archbishop of Gaza. In the Year 1646, say's he, during the Troubles in England, King Charles the first of Blessed Memory, sent me over from England to France, to his Son then Prince of Wales, my now gracious Sovereign Charles the Second, whom God grant long to Reign. After an abode of two Years in France, I resolved to make a long Voyage, and to visit all Syria, Mesopotamia, and Palestine, which I did in five Years time. Be∣ing in the Year 1652 at Jerusalem in the Temple of the Sepulchre, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to pray and behold the Holy Places, in Imitation of that Alex∣ander mentioned by Eusebius in the sixth Book of his Ecclesiastical History, Pay∣sius Ligaridius, came to me from the Patriarch of Constantinople, (whose Name likewise was Paysius,) to present me with a Cake, on which was described the whole History of our Saviour from his Annunciation to his Ascension, and in leaving me, Invited me to be present on the Morrow at his Spiritual Marriage; these were his Expressions, meaning his Installment into the Dignity of Metropolitain of Gaza. The next Day being the fourteenth of September 'twas performed, and I was pre∣sent

at the Ceremony. The Patriarch sat upon his Throne, which was hung with rich Turky Carpets, and under him sat the Metropolitains, and a little lower the Bishops, Archimandrites, &c. Whilst the Office was Celebrating, Ligaridius rehearsed a Confession of Faith, a Copy of which he afterwards gave me: Before his Consecration, he twice or thrice, trampled under his Feet a Picture which repre∣sented a City scituated on seven Hills, with a two headed Eagle, soaring over it: The Latins there present were extreamly offended thereat, for they knew well e∣nough this City represented Rome. After the Consecration was ended, I with∣drew into a publick House of Entertainment in the City, where the Latins usually resorted, where being at Dinner, I shared my Cake amongst the Company, giving part of it to the Popes Vicar, the Gray Fryers and Priest that dined with us, who kindly accepted it. But when I would have done the like to the Laity there pre∣sent, they refused it with the greatest Detestation, saying 'twas the Cake of that Schismatick Ligaridius, who even now trampled under his Feet the City and Church of Rome. After Dinner the Popes Vicar, who was a learned and honest Man, began a Discourse with me touching the Invocation of Saints, and especially of the Holy Virgin; and as I was about alledging to him a Passage out of St. Epipha∣nus, Ligaridius came in and interrupted our Discourse. He began immediately to desire the Company not to be offended at what he had done: his Excuse was plea∣sant, for he told us he thought of nothing less than the City of Rome in this Acti∣on, but by this Ceremony practised in the Greek Church, he meant the trampling under his Feet the Vanities of the World represented by this City, and the renounc∣ing of them; Yet this Excuse was not well taken by the Vicar, who was a wiser Man than to be content therewith. When he was gon, he told me that he was a notorious Hypocrite, and received an Annual Pension from the Pope, which he had paid him for several Years, but he should have it no longer for the future. And this is this Paysius Ligaridius, of whom I shall say no more, but leave the Reader to judg of the Validity of such a Mans Testimony.

ANY Man may likewise judg of the Writings of a certain Moldavian Gen∣tleman, called the Baron of Spartaris, whom Mr. Arnaud Cites together with Mr. Pompone his Nephews Letter. In which amongst other things there are these Expressions: He agrees in general with us in all things, excepting one Par∣ticular, namely the Procession of the Holy Ghost. He comes every Holyday to my House to Mass, and excepting the Creed wherein he forgets the Filioque, there is not a better Catholick in the World. Is not this the exact Character of one of those false Greeks already mentioned by us, who are Greeks with the Greeks, and Latins with the Latins? Who knows not that the Greeks, I mean the Re∣conciled ones, as they are called, differ from the Latins, not only in that they omit the Filioque in the Creed; but likewise in the use of Leavened Bread, in the Communion under both kinds, and in abundance of Ceremonies? That those called Schismaticks abhor carved Images, and Invoke not the Latin Saints, nor Believe Purgatory, reject the Primacy of the Roman and Bishop, and will not Communicate with the Latins, and so greatly abhor their Sacri∣fice, that when a Latin Priest says Mass on one of their Altars, they Wash and Purify it several times, as having bin Polluted? Mr. Pompone was deceiv'd when the supposed the nearer his Barons Religion approached to that of the Latins, the more his Uncles Cause was advantaged, when on the contrary by this Means, the Quality of this Witness is discovered, and his Testimony appears plainly Invalid. An Excess of Zeal made Mr. Pompoue go too far, but thus it pleased God to order it, to the end our Innocency and Simplicity might not be Surprized with these kind of Delusions. As to what remains, I shall only here Observe the Imprudence of his Witness, who assures us, that

every Year on the first Sunday in Lent, which the Greeks call the Orthodox Sun∣day, the Patriarch of Constantinople excommunicates in his Patriarchal Tem∣ple in the Presence of the Archbishops, and Bishops, and also of the Ambassadors of Christian Kings and Princes, all Hereticks, and especially those, says he, that Op∣pose Transubstantiation; Mr. Arnaud has caused to be Printed in great Charact∣ers these Words, Maxime vero qui Transubstantiationi adversantur. Not Remembring that he himself related the Terms of this Excommunication, wherein there is not a word said touching Transubstantiation, nor those that Oppose it. Were what the Baron Spataris says true, Mr. Arnaud has bin Treacherous to his own Cause in suppressing so important and decisive a Clause, and has bin at a great deal of Pains to no purpose in all this Dispute, seeing he might have produced this Excommunication and stuck to it.

THAT which we have already seen touching Paysius Ligaridius, and the Moldavian Gentleman, may serve as a Rule whereby to judge of the Testimo∣ny of some Greek Priests, under the Patriarchate of Antioch. The Care the Emissaries take to make Proselytes in this Country, will make us cease won∣dering that there should be six Greek Priests found ready to acknowledg and sign whatsoever was offered them. Moreover they live near the Maronites, who have bin (as it is well known) long since Reunited to the Church of Rome, and governed by Persons who favour the Propagating of the Latins Doctrines. Cyrillus when Patriarch of Alexandria, seems to have foretold what has now hapned, in his Letter to Wytemboyard; The Principal, says he, of the Maronites professes the Roman Religion, and the Patriarchate of Antioch lying near them, I am afraid it will be Corrupted, altho they are advertised of this Danger by that Patriarch, and also by my self. As to the Synod held at Cyprus in the Year 1688: 'tis well known this Island has bin under the Direction of the Roman Prelate and Latin Bishops, since the thirteenth Century to the Year 1571, in which time the Turks took it from the Venetians. We need not then wonder if the People thereof follow the Doctrine of the Latins, especial∣ly considering the Pope has still kept up his Emissaries there from that time. The two Treatises mentioned by Mr. Arnaud, carry with 'em such Marks as will easily discover them: For the first of them begins thus, some generous * 1.12 French Priests have addressed themselves to us, and requested our Opinion touching the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist. The other, that it was Transcribed from the Acts of the Synod, at the Request of the Reverend Father Francis de Brisac a Capucin and one of the Emissaries of the Holy Mission of Larnece. All this is only an Effect of the Missions; and Mr. Arnaud would have bin never the less esteemed, had he made no use of these Testimonies, for such kind of Proofs as these will never terminate the Difference betwixt us, seeing there are on the other side solid Reasons, and authentick Testimonies against him.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Perpetuity of the Faith, 3. part. cap. 8.
• * 1.2

  Answer to 2. Treat. 3. part. cap. 8.
• * 1.3

  Thomas à Jesu de proc. Salv. omn. gent. lib. 6. cap. 5.
• * 1.4

  Lib. 3. cap. 3. pag 275.
• * 1.5

  Ibid. pag 277.
• * 1.6

  Allat. de Perp. Concil. lib. 2. cap. 17.
• * 1.7

  Lib. 2. cap. 3. pag. 273. cap. 2.
• * 1.8

  Lib. 3. cap. 9.
• * 1.9

  Lib. 4. cap. 8.
• * 1.10

  Apud Habert in Archierat.
• * 1.11

  In Refuta. Caryophr.
• * 1.12

  Vide lib. 12. Mr. Arnaud.