FIRST APPENDIX.

HISTORY OF THE GREEK CHURCH.

[George Finlay, Greece and the Byzantine Empire, Greece and the Empire of Trebizond, and History of the Byzantine and Greek Empires, Lond. 1850-55. A. de Salvandy, Histoire du Bas Empire, Par. 2d ed. 1855. Dean Waddington, History of Greek Church, 2d ed. 1854. M. B. Poujoulat, Histoire de Constantinople, 2, 8. 1855. J. M. Neale, History of the Holy Eastern Church, 2. 8.]

§ 94.

INTERNAL RELATIONS.

Among the Greeks all freedom, including that of the Church, and of scientific inquiry, was stifled for a long time by the oppression of a despotic government.1 On the other hand, slavishness and insolence, falsehood and hypocrisy, were deeply rooted among them. They thought that in the classic age of Hellas the pinnacle of earthly civilization had been attained, in the ancient fathers of their Church the loftiest height of theological knowledge had been reached. So they battened on the lees of this twofold past, and by virtue of this their inheritance looked down with scorn on all other nations as barbarians. Michael Psellus the younger2 († about 1100) may be regarded as the representative of the Grecian learning of this age; as in him, so we find also in the sphere of theology, very few original creations, but still here and there the merit of a judicious collection and interpretation of former writ

Nicetas Choniata de Manuele Comneno, lib. vii. c. 5: Toìç nλeíooi Baoiλevoi 'Pwμαίων οὐκ ἀνεκτόν ἐστιν ὅλως άρχειν μόνον, καὶ χρυσοφορεῖν, καὶ χρῆσθαι τοῖς κοινοῖς ὡς ἰδίοις, καὶ διαδιδόναι ταῦτα καθὼς ἄρα καὶ οἷς βούλονται, οὐδὲ μὴν ὡς δούλοις τοῖς ἐλευθέροις προσφέρεσθαι· ἀλλ ̓ εἰ μὴ καὶ σοφοὶ δοκοῖεν, καὶ θεοείκελοι τὴν μορφὴν, καὶ ἥρωες τὴν ἰσχὺν, καὶ ὡς Σολομῶν θεόσοφοι καὶ δογματισταὶ θειότατοι, καὶ κανόνες τῶν κανόνων εὐθέστεροι, καὶ ἁπλῶς θείων καὶ ἀνθρωπίνων πραγμάτων ἀπροσφαλεῖς γνώμο νες, δεινὰ οἴονται πάσχειν· Ενθεν-οὐδὲ κατὰ τοῦτο τὸ μέρος δευτερεύειν ούτινοςοῦν ἀνεχόμενοι οἱ αὐτοὶ δογμάτων εἰσηγηταὶ καὶ δικασταὶ τούτων καὶ ὁρισταί, πολλαχοῦ δὲ καὶ κολασταὶ τῶν μὴ συμφωνούντων αὐτοῖς γίνονται.

Cf. Leo Allatius de Psellis et eorum scriptis diatriba (also in Fabricii bibl. Graeca, v. 1). On his works, which comprise almost the whole learning of the time, and are for the most part still unprinted, Oudinus comm. de scrippt. eccl. ii. 646, and Hamberger zuverlassige Nachrichten v. d. vornehmsten Schriftstellern, iv. 11, may be also compared. The theological works, however (Commentaries on certain books of the Old Testament -dogmatical Explanations de Trinitate, etc.—lib. de vii. sacris Synodis oecumenicis, etc.), are of no particular value.

5

ings. Such a reputation the two exegetical writers, Theophylact, archbishop of the Bulgarians in Acrida († 1107)3, and Euthymius Zygadenus, a monk at Constantinople († after 1118), have earned for themselves pre-eminently. This Euthymius Zygadenus also issued a work on polemical divinity in his Πανοπλία δογ ματικὴ τῆς ὀρθοδόξου πίστεως, as did the historian Nicetas Acominatus, from Chonae († after 1206, see above, s. 3), in the Onoavpòs oplodociaç. Works of greater research in defense of the Church, and certain Church doctrines, were published by Nicholas, bishop of Methone (about 1190). Lively pictures and criticisms of the moral and religious condition of the age may be found in the orations and lesser writings of Eustathius, archbishop of Thessa

6

3 Comm. in xii. Proph. minores, in iv. Evang., in Acta Apost. et Epistt. Pauli.-Epistolae. Lib. de iis in quibus Latini accusantur (see Div. 1, § 42, note 10), etc.-Opp. edd. Finetti, de Rubeis et al. Venet. 1755 ss. vol. iv. fol. (comp. Ernesti theol. Biblioth. Bd. 5, s. 771 ff.) cf. Rich. Simon. hist. crit. des principaux commentateurs du N. T. c. 28. • Zygadenus, not as he is commonly called, Zigabenus, see my Introduction to Euth. de Bogomilis. By him were written: Comm. in Psalmos (in Theophyl. Opp. ed. Venet.) -Comm. in iv. Evang. (ed. Ch. F. Matthaei. Lips. 1792, t. iii. 8.)-Comm. in epistt. Pauli (Ms. in bibl. Vat. no. 636, s. Anecdota literaria. Romae, 1783, vol. iv. p. 6), cf. Rich. Simon. 1. c. c. 29.

5 In 24 Titulis, according to Anna Comnena, lib. xv. p. 490, suggested and entitled by the Emperor Alexius, latine ex. vers. P. F. Zini Venet. 1555. fol. (also in the Bibl. PP. Lugd. xix. 1), in which, however, Titulus xiii. κατὰ τῶν τῆς παλαιᾶς Ρώμης, ἤτοι τῶν Ἰταλῶν, ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐκπορεύεται τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα (Ms. in Paris and Rome, see N. Fogginius in Anecdot. literar. iv. 10. Romae, 1783) is left out. The Greek text was printed in 1711 fol. at Tergowist, in Wallachia, but with some omissions in the first Tituli on the Trinity, and with the rejection of the whole Tit. xxiv. against the Mohammedans (which, however, J. J. Beurer, in Frid. Sylburgii Saracenicis, Heidelb. 1595. 8. had already published in Greek and Latin). Concerning Tit. xxiii. against the Bogomili, see below, 96, note 5. Cf. Fabricii biblioth. Graeca, vii. 461. Matthaei praef. ad Euthym. Zigab. commentarium in iv. Evang. p. 8. Ullmann in d. theol. Studien u. Krit. 1833, iii. 665. "On Nicetas, see Ullmann in the work quoted above, s. 674, Michael Akominatus of Chonae, archbishop of Athens, brother to Nicetas, by Dr. A. Ellissen. Gottingen, 1846. s. 7. The Oncavpóc in 27 books is written with the assistance of the Пavonλía of Euthymius, but it has more original matter, see Ullmann, s. 680, of the same work. The first five books are published in a Latin translation by P. Morellus. Paris, 1569. 8. (also in the Bibl. PP. Lugd. xxv. 54, lib. xxiii., the controversies under Alexius Comnenus, in Greek in Th. L. F. Tafel Annae Comnenae supplementa, historiam eccl. Graecorum saec. xi. et xii spectantia. Tubing. 1832. 4.). There is a description of the whole work to be seen in Montfaucon Palaeographia Graeca, p. 326 ss. Fabricii bibl. Graeca, vi. 420 ss. A. M. Bandinii Catalogus codd. mss. bibl. Mediceae Laurentianae varia continens opera Graecorum Patrum. Florent. 1764. fol. p. 430.

7 Concerning him, see Ullmann, s. 701, of the same work. Works by him: 'Avántvğıç TЯS DEоλOYLKŪS σrolɣelwoews Пpókλov, ed. J. Th. Voemel (Creuzeri initia philosophiae ac theologiae ex Platonicis fontibus ducta. P. iv. Francof. ad M. 1825); Nicol. Meth. Anecdoton (questions and answers on points at issue between Christians and heathens), ed. Voemel P. ii. (2 Schulprogramme, Frankf. 1825 and 1826. 4.); Lib. de corpore et sanguine Christi (in the Auctarium biblioth. vett. Patr. Ducaeanum ii, 272). The unprinted works against the Latins are, De primatu Papae, de processione Spir. s., de azymis.

lonica (about 1170), distinguished for his classic learning. The historian John Zonaras (after 1118, see Part 1, § 1), and particularly Theodore Balsamon," patriarch of Antioch († after 1203), have bequeathed to Constantinople useful illustrations of ecclesiastical law.

Since the Christian faith in general had settled down to a formal profession without inward life, many were led, by a narrow classical education, to seek for truth in the ancient philosophers;11 while others were carried away, by a system of theology grounded only in the understanding, to fruitless questions on points of doctrine;12 and, lastly, others even thought all insight into religion

The celebrated author of the Commentary on Homer, and on Dionysius Periegetes. His theological works are sermons, short treatises, letters: Eusthathii opuscula ed. Th. L. F. Tafel, Francof. ad M. 1832. 4.

' His Commentarii in canones ss. Apostolorum,—in canonicas aliquot Graecorum Patrum epistolas,-in canones ss. Conciliorum, formerly published separately, are best collected in Guil. Beveregii (Beveridge) Synodicon s. Pandectae canonum ss. Apostolorum et Conciliorum. Oxon. 1672. fol.

10 Concerning him, see Fabricii. bibl. Gr. ix. 184. His works are Commentarius in canones Apostolorum et Conciliorum, et in epistt. canon. ss. Patr. (in Guil. Beveregii Synodicon): Commentarius in Photii Nomocanonem (in Guil. Voelli et Henr. Justelli biblioth. juris canon. veteris. ii. 789. Compare Biener's Gesch. d. Novellen Justinian's. Berlin, 1824, s. 210): Collectio ecclesiasticarum constitutionum (ibid. p. 1223): Responsa on several questions in Canon Law in Jo. Leunclavii jus Graeco-Romanorum (Francof. 1596. ii. tomi fol.), i. 130, 138, 160, 362, 442.

11 Nicolai Methon. refutatio Procli ed. Voemel. p. 1: Oavμаoтòv ovdèv, ¿ùv "Eλλŋveç μωρίαν ἡγῶνται τὴν ἀληθινὴν καὶ ἡμετέραν σοφίαν.— Αλλὰ θαυμάσειεν ἄν τις μᾶλλον εἰκότως, ὅπως καί τινες τῆς ἔνδον ταύτης καὶ ἡμετέρας γεγονότες αὐλῆς—καὶ μυστηρίων θείων γευσάμενοι, ἐπειδὴ καὶ τῆς ἔξω παιδείας μετέσχον ἤ που καὶ ἀκροθιγώς ἥψαντο, ἐπίπροσθεν τῶν οἰκείων τίθενται τὰ ἀλλότρια, τούτων μὲν τὸ σαφὲς καὶ ἁπλοῦν καὶ ἀκατάσκευον, ὡς εὐτελὲς, διαπτύοντες, ἐκείνων δὲ τὸ ποικίλον καὶ γρίφον καὶ κομψὸν, ὡς ὄντως σεμνόν τε καὶ σοφὸν ἐκθειάζοντες. — "Οθεν αὐτοῖς καὶ τὰ πολλὰ προσκόπτειν συμβαίνει, καὶ τῆς ὀρθῆς ἐκτρέπεσθαι πίστεως, καὶ ταῖς σεσοφισμέναις πειθανάγκαις ἀπαγομένοις, εἰς βλασφημιῶν αἱρέσεις ὑπολισθαίνειν. In the time of Alexius Comnenus an Italian taught philosophy in Constantinople, and excited attention by spreading error, Nicetas Chon. in Tafel Annae Comn. supplementa, p. 2: 'Hv dè rùs μeteμpvxwσeis δοξάζων, καὶ τὰς ἁγίας εἰκόνας οὐχ ὡς ἔδει τιμῶν· ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰς Πλατωνικὰς ἰδέας παρεδέχετο, καὶ ἄλλα ἅττα κακοφρόνως ἐφθέγγετο, cf. Tafel praef. p. xi. Anna Comn. v. 8 ss. gives his history at length. One of his disciples, Serblias, he had quite led back to heathenism: this man threw himself into the sea with the words δέξαι με, Πόσειδον, see Nicetas in Tafel, p. 2. On the other hand, many heathen superstitions had maintained their hold on the people, see Nicetae Thesaur. iv. 42 (Bibl. PP. Lugd. xxv. 143): Ethnophrones, h. e. gentilium rituum et superstitionum imitatores, ut caeteris in rebus cum Christianis orthodoxis conveniant, in hoc certe dissentiunt, quod gentilis superstitionis studiosiores aequo, genesin, h. e. natalitium sidus, Fortunam, Fatum, astronomiam et astrologiam introducunt et recipiunt: item vaticinia et divinationes, quae auguriis, auspiciis, cledonismis, h. e. incerti auctoris rumoribus, expiationibus, prodigiis, incantationibus, et caeteris id genus constant, non sine dierum, mensium, temporum, annorumque observatione amplexantur.

12 Under Alexius Comuenus (from 1081-1118), Eustratius, archbishop of Nicaea, gave

fraught with danger;13 but not unfrequently in this way they fell into superstitious rudeness and fanaticism.1 Among the monks there were constantly those who sought, by extravagant self-torture, to win for themselves the admiration of the crowd.15 In general, the characteristics of the monastic orders were igno

offense by the statement (Nicetas in Tafel, p. 3): καὶ πρότερον καὶ νῦν τῷ Πατρὶ λατρεύειν τοῦ Κυρίου τὸ πρόσλημμα (i. e. the body he had assumed), he had to recant, and confess: ὑψώθη τὸ πρόσλημμα ἀπ' αὐτῆς τῆς προσλήψεως,—καὶ τοσοῦτον, ὥστε πως ταὐτὸν τῷ κτίσαντι. On the other hand, the monk Ninus fell into the monophysite heresy, when he so understood the words ἐθεώθη τὸ πρόσλημμα, that he φύσει τὸ τεθεωῆναι ἐδόξαζεν (Anna Comn. lib. x.). — Under Manuel Comnenus (from 1143-1180) there was a dispute on the meaning of the words in the Liturgy : σὺ εἶ ὁ προσφέρων καὶ προσφερόμε νος (cf. Nicetae Chon. hist. in Manuele, vii. 5. Jo. Cinnamus hist. iv. 16). Many men distinguished for learning, in particular Soterichus Panteugenes, the patriarch designate of Antioch, asserted (Spicilegium Rom. x. i.) μόνῳ τῷ πατρὶ καὶ τῷ πνεύματι τὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ σταυροῦ θυσίαν προσηνέχθαι, οὐ μὴν καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ προσενέγκαντι λόγῳ, φάσκοντες ὡς, εἰ τοῦτο δοίη τις, εἰς δύο πρόσωπα πάντως ὁ εἰς τοῦ θεοῦ υἱός διαστήσεται. But the Synod assembled for this cause in 1156 (the acts are given in part in Tafel Annae Comnenae suppl. p. 8, cf. praef. p. xiv. entire in the Spicilegium Rom. x. i.) decided in this manner (Spic. Rom. x. 70): καὶ κατ' ἀρχὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ δεσποτικοῦ πάθους τὸν θεάνθρωπον λόγον τὸ σωτήριον θύμα προσενεγκεῖν τῷ πατρί τε, καὶ ἑαυτῷ ὡς θεῷ, καὶ τῷ πνεύματι· —ἀλλὰ καὶ νῦν ὡσαύτως τὰς ἀναιμάκτους θυσίας τῇ παντελείῳ καὶ τελειοποιῷ τριάδι προσάγεσθαι.-After this rose a dispute on the meaning of the words of Christ, ὁ πατήρ μου μείζων μου ἐστι (Nicetas in Manuele, vii. 5. Jo. Cinnamus, vi. 2). Some explained these words κατὰ μόνην αἰτίαν τῆς ἀχρόνου-αὐτοῦ θεότητος, πρώτης γεννήσεως : others, on the contrary, asserted κατὰ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον λεχθῆναι (Maji Nova Coll. iv. 3). A Synod in the year 1166, in which the emperor himself presided, decided for the latter opinion (the acts are in A. Maji Scriptt. Vett. Nova Coll. iv. i.).—Toward the end of his life, Manuel took offense at the assertion in the book used in the Church for the instruction of Catechumens (Nicetas in Manuele, vi .6): ἀνάθεμα τῷ θεῷ τοῦ Μωάμετ, περὶ οὐ λέγει “ οὔτε ἐγέννησεν οὔτε ἐγεννήθη,” και “ὅτι ὁλόσφυρός ἐστι” (cf. Euthymii Zygad. Panoplia, tit. xxiv. : Ολόσφυρον λέγει τὸν θεὸν ἤτοι σφαιρικόν, i. e. as filling the whole globe), and after much resistance from the bishops prevailed so far as to have the following passage substituted instead: ἀνάθεμα τῷ Μωάμετ καὶ πάσῃ τῇ αὐτοῦ διδαχῇ καὶ διαδοχῇ.

13 Nicetas Thes. iv. 39, de haeresi Gnosimachorum: Gnosimachi cuivis Christianismi cognitioni et scientiae resistunt, illosque frustra laborare asserunt, qui sacris in Scripturis scientiam ullam aut cognitionem investigant, cum praesertim a Christianis Deus praeter bona opera nihil requirat, ut sit satius, si quis simplicius ambulet, nec curiosius quicquam perscrutetur.

14 When Alexius Comnenus, in want of money, had the precious metal stripped from certain sacred images, Leo, bishop of Chalcedon, characterized the deed as εικονομαχίαν πρόδηλον, and asserted with emphasis, τὴν ὕλην καὶ μετὰ τὴν τοῦ σχήματος ἀφάνισιν εἰκόνας Χριστοῦ καὶ τῶν ἁγίων είναι (Nicetas Thes in Tafel Annae Comn. suppl. p. 6). 15 Eustathius enumerates the different methods, ad stylitam quendam Thessalonicensem, c. 48 (opp. ed. Tafel, p. 189). These are distinguished οἱ γυμνῖται, οἱ τῶν τριχῶν ἀνεπίστροφοι, οἱ χαμαιεῦναι καὶ ανιπτόποδες, οἱ ῥυπῶντες, οἱ σιγῶντες, οἱ σπηλαιῶται οἱ σιδηρούμενοι τοῦ θεοῦ οἱ ὁπλῖται, οἱ δενδρῖται (c. 54. οἱ δενδροκομούμενοι), οἱ κιονῖται, (c. 54, οἱ κιονοφορούμενοι). Then, οἱ ἐν ἀσκήσει τεθαμμένοι, of whom there are three sorts, c. 59 : οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἐγκαταχωννύουσιν εἰς γῆν ὅλους ἑαυτούς· οἱ δὲ γὴν μὲν πατοῦντες, βραχυτάτῳ δὲ καταλύματι ἐνείρξαντες ἑαυτοὺς, ὑπεμφαίνουσι τῷ ἀπροΐτῳ τεθάφθαι καὶ αὐτοί. The third sort consisted of the στυλίται, who lived in columns (c. 54, ἐντὸς τοῦ στύλου).

rance, and pretended sanctity.16 However, from among them rose up the few men who, in their zeal for the Church, ventured to resist the imperial despotism.17

$ 95.

RELATIONS TO THE LATIN CHURCH.

Leonis Allatii de Ecclesiae occidentalis atque orientalis perpetua consensione (libb. iii. Colon. Agripp. 1648. 4.), lib. ii. c. 10-16. J. G. Walch hist. controversiae Graecorum Latinorumque de processione Spiritus sancti. Jenae, 1751, p. 62. Schröckh, Kirchengesch. xxix. 372.

[Jacques G. Pitzipios, L'Eglise Orientale; Exposé historique de sa séparation et de sa réunion avec celle de Rome. Rome, Propaganda press, 1855.]

During the crusades, continual but unavailing efforts were made on the side of the Latins to unite the Greek Church with the Roman, or rather to bring it under its dominion. Remarkable, in this point of view, are the Synod at Bari,' summoned by Urban II.; the mission of Peter Grosulanus, archbishop of Milan, from Paschal II. to the Emperor Alexius Comnenus in 1113;2 the negotiations of Anselm, bishop of Havelberg, at the court of John Comnenus; and the efforts of the Popes during the reign of the

16 Compare especially Eustathii ἐπίσκεψις βίου μοναχικοῦ ἐπὶ διορθώσει τῶν περὶ avτóv (opp. ed. Tafel. p. 214).

17 Thus the Abbot Nicephorus Blemmydes, about 1240, dismissed from his Church the Marchesina, the concubine of the Emperor John Ducas (Nicephori Gregorae hist. Byzant. ii. 7. Leo. Allat. de Eccl. occid. et orient. perp. consensione, p. 718). Arsenius, patriarch of Constantinople, excommunicated Michael Palaelogus, because in 1259 he put out the eyes of the former emperor's son, and seized on the crown for himself. He was deposed a monk Joseph entered upon his see; the consequence of which was a tedious schism between the Arsenians and Josephites (Nicephorus Gregor. lib. iv. Georg. Pachymeres de Mich. Palaeol. iii. 10, 14; iv. 5, 10, de Andronico, i. 13, 21).

1 First summoned with reference to the Greeks in Lower Italy. Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury, had to take up the cause of the Roman Church; see Eadmeri hist. Novorum lib. ii. p. 53, Idem de vita Anselmi, p. 21; Willelmi Malmesburiensis de gestis Pontificum Anglorum lib. i. (in Rerum Anglicarum scriptores post Bedam praecipui. Francof. 1601, p. 223). Anselm was thus induced to compose his treatise de processione Spiritus s. contra Graecos (Opp. p. 49 ss.).

2 The archbishop's speech before the emperor is given in Latin by Baronius ad ann. 1166, no. 8, in Greek in Leonis Allatii Graecia orthodoxa, i. 379. Eustratius, archbishop of Nicaea, took up the argument against him; his report of the controversy is preserved in a manuscript at Paris (Lequien Oriens christ. i. 649). On the correspondence which ensued, see Allatius de Eccl. occid. et orient. perp. cons. p. 626.

About the year 1135, Anselm had been embassador of the Emperor Lothair at Constantinople, and in 1150, at the request of Eugene III., he prepared for him a full report of a religious conference held with Nicetas, archbishop of Nicomedia, in the Dialogorum libb. iii. (in d'Achery Spicileg. i. 161). On Anselm, see Riedel in v. Ledebur's Archiv f. d. Ge