Page images
PDF
EPUB

ligion. They had mass said among them; but some years since, some of the valley going over to Germany to earn somewhat by their labour, happened to go into the Palatinate, where they were better instructed in matters of religion, and these brought back with them into the valley, the Heidelberg cathechism, together with some other German books, which run other the valley, they being before that in a good disposition, those books had such an effect upon them, that they gave over going to mass any more, and began to worship God in a way more suitable to the rules set down in scripture. Some of their priests concurred with them in this happy change, but others that adhered still to the mass, went and gave the archbishop of Saltsburgh an account of it, upon which he sent some into the country to examine the truth of the matter, to exhort them to return to mass, and to threaten them with all severity if they continued obstinate; so they seeing a terrible storm ready to break upon them, resolved to abandon their houses and all they had, rather than sin againt their consciences; and the

whole inhabitants of the valley, old and young, men and women, to the number of two thousand, divided themselves into several bodies, some intended to go to Brandenburgh, others to Palatinate, and about five hundred took the way of Coire, intending to disperse themselves in Switzerland. The ministers told me they were much edified with their simplicity and modesty, for a collection being made for them, they desired only a little bread to carry them on their way.

These seem to have been the last remains of the Waldenses,, or Albigenses, and from the whole we may draw the following conclusion, that till Christ comes again to judge the world, there will be found some who are not ashamed of his gospel. Of this we shall have occasion to treat more fully hereafter, when we come to write of the different denominations of Protestants; but the nature of our plan leads us to give a particular account of the Greek Church, its origin, doctrines, worship, dicipline, and government.

[ocr errors]

An Account of the GREEK CHURCH.

they were in the middle ages, we have a full account in the history of the lower empire.

to take notice of several passages in civil history, in order to elucidate its ancient and modern state, and in this we have the best authority; for this When Constantine the Great removed the seat church, however much it may be despised at pre- of empire from Rome to Byzantium, and built the sent, was once the most flourishing in the world. famous city of Constantinople, he did not consider The Greeks had churches and convents all along, that he was laying the foundation of many different from Dalmttia to Constantinople, and from thence kingdoms, particularly in Europe. The Huns, to Syria, including all the Lesser Asia. In Africa Goths, and Vandals, who inhabited the countries they had churches throughout Fgypt and Ethiopia, now called Hungary, Poland, and along the coasts and even to this day there are some remains of them. of the Baltic Sea, from their manner of living in At present, the Greeks are extremely numerous in sobriety, became so numerous, that they could not the Levant; for although the Turkish religion is find room in their own countries, although they that established by law, yet there are above ten were very extensive. Another circumstance conGreek christains for every Mahometan. It like-tributed towards their invading the Roman empire, wise is the established religion in great part of Russia, so that we cannot be mistaken in giving a proper account of every thing worthy of notice in their churches.

All our travellers, who visited those places where the religion of the Greeks is professed, have given

and that was the account that had been brought them by some soldiers, who had deserted from their legions, and taken shelter among these barbarians. These gave them such a character of the southern parts of Europe, that they resolved to invade them. This was entirely consistent with their characters,

for

for as they had little or no employment at home, it was natural for theem to seek out more agreeable habitations. Indeed, the effeminancy of the Romans, and the distracted state of the empire were such as gave them, as it were, an invitation. These barbarians continued to pour themselves in numerous bodies into Italy, France and Spain, and although they were frequently driven home to their own deserts, yet that only served to stimulate them the more to make new attempts, and by fighting with the Romans they learned the art of war. Thus the Roman empire sunk under the weight of its own greatness, like all the other empires that had been before it, and probably all that come afterwards will share the same fate.

But that which was more important, was the change that took place between the eastern and western churches, and this was occasioned by dividing the empire. It is true, that for a considerable time the bishops of Rome did not aspire to any pretentions about their brethren; but as pride is the mother of tyranny, so the bishops of Rome found a proper opportunity for establishing their power. This did not happen till many years after the death of Constantine, for that emperor had too much sense to suffer one bishop to exercise authority over another. Happy for the church had it continued so afterwards, but a variety of circumstances made the western church as easy a conquest for the popes, as the western empire was to the barbarians.

As Rome was left defenceless, it was necessary that some person should exercise the civil power, and as the clergy were at that time much esteemed, nothing was more natural than for the people to put themselves under the protection of the popes. Another circumstance was, that great disputes having frequently arisen among the clergy, they referred the decision of them to the bishops of Rome. Some of the Greek bishops were weak enough to do so, and at last the bishop of Rome claimed the privilege of exercising his authority over all the Christian

world.

This greatly alarmed those bishops of the Eastern church, who sought to maintain the liberties of their Christain people, for they flatly refused to submit to the decrees of the pope, and this laid the foundation of a schism between both churches, which has continued to this day. Nay, we are assured, that their aversion to the church of Rome is such, that, being extremely ignorant, they will submit to believe every thing, let it be ever so absurb, so as they are not required to submit to the popes, whom they never mention without some terms of reproach.

In corrupting the purity of the gospel, the Greeks

have kept equal pace with the Roman Catholics, for although in some things we find them not so gross as the latter, yet in other of their ceremonies they are more ridiculous. The Latins have freqnently insulted the Greeks, by telling them they were in a deplorable state, because they would not submit to the pope's supremacy, and the Greeks have retorted the charge, by telling the Roman catholics, that the patriarch of Constantinople is equal in dignity, and in authority, to the bishops of Rome. However, this is nothing more than what commonly happens in all religious controversies, where ungovernable passion gets the better of reason, and men become enemies to each other merely for a difference in sentiment, arising from a wrong conception of words.

In our account of the ancient Heresies and Heretics, we have mentioned what notions many of them had of the trinity, and some of these were most unworthy indeed. We have taken notice that the Roman Catholics, even in the midst of all their con ruption, never denied the divinity of Christ or the Holy Ghost, but always allowed that there was a trinity in unity, and that all the three persons were the same in substance, and equal in power and in glory. That this is a mystery cannot be denied; but what is not a mystery to circumscribed creatures! Our saviour, when he asserted that he was equal to the Father, never taught his disciples to enquire into that mystery, but left them to attend to duty, in believing what he had commanded, and in working out their salvation with fear and trembling. It is very probable, that the Greek church continued long to embrace the same sentiments, with respect to the doctrine of the trinity, as the Roman catholics had done, and indeed, the difference between them depends more upon inetaphysical terms, than on any thing that has the least connection with truth. In all disputes of a religious nature, men ought to be extremely cautious, and perhaps it will be found that he is the most sincere Christian, who, in meekness and humility, declares that he will sit down. and acknowledge his own ignorance of many things that will be revealed to him hereafter, rather than disturb the peace of society. disturb the peace of society. Indeed this will give him more comfort, because by giving up his pretensions to knowledge, he does honour to God, to whom all mortals ought to look up for wisdom.

In the middle of the ninth century, the controversy relating to the procession of the Holy Ghost, which had been started in the sixth century, became a point of great importance, on account of the jea lousy and ambition, which at that time were blended with it. Photius, the patriarch of Jerusalem,

having been advanced to that see, in the room of Ignatius, whom he procured to be deposed, was solemnly excommunicated by pope Nicholas, in a council held at Rome, and his ordination declared null and void. The Greek emperor resented this conduct of the pope, who defended himself with great spirit and resolution, and Photius, in his turn, convened what he called an ŒEcumenical council, in which he pronounced sentence of excommunication and deposition against the pope, and got it subscribed by twenty-one bishops, and other of the clergy, amounting in number to a thousand. This occasioned a wide breach between the sees of Rome and Constantinople. However, the death of the emperor Michael, and the deposition of Photius, subsequent thereupon, seemed to have restored peace; for the emperor Basil held a council at Constantinople, in the year 869, in which entire satisfaction was given to pope Adrian; but the schism was only smothered and suppressed for a while. The Greek church had several complaints against the Latin; particularly it was thought a great hardship for the greeks to subscribe to the definition of a council, according to the Roman form prescribed by the pope, since it made the church of Constantinople dependant on that of Rome, and set the pope above an ecumenical council. But, above all, the pride and haughtiness of the Roman court gave the Greeks a distate; and, as their deportments seemed to insult his imperial majesty, it entirely alienated the affections of the emperor Basil.

Towards the middle of the eleventh century, Michael Cerularius, patriarch of Constantinople. opposed the Latins with respect to their making use of unleavened bread in the eucharist, their observation of the Sabbath, and fasting on Saturdays, charging them with living in communion with the Jews. To this pope Leo IX. replied, and, in his apology for the Latins, declaimed very warmly against the false doctrines of the Greeks, and interposed, at the same time, the authority of his see. He likewise, by his legates, excommunicated the patriarch of the of the church of Santa Sophia; which gave the last shock to the reconciliation, attempted a long time after, but to no purpose, for from that time the aversion of the Greeks for the Latins, and of the Latins for the Greeks, became insuperable; insomuch that they have continued, ever since, separa ted from each other's communion.

The Greek church was not formerly so contracted, as it has been since the emperors of the east have lessened and reduced the other patriarchates, in order to aggrandize that of Constantinople. The Greek clergy retain to this hour, some particular

marks of distinction, some titles of honour, whereby they are respectively dignified and distinguished; insomuch that the patriarch of Constantinople, when he writes to the bishops, never fails to insert their proper additions, notwithstanding the necessitous condition to which the Turkish government has reduced them. The Greek churches are scarce the shadows of what they were in their former flourishing state. Caucus, a Venetian nobleman, and archbishop of Corfou, in his dissertation on the erroneous doctrine of the modern Greeks, dedicated to Gregory XIII. has digested their tenets under the following heads :

1. They re-baptize all such Latins as are admitted into their communion. 2. They do not baptize their children, till they are three, four, five, six, ten, nay sometimes eighteen years of age. 3. They exclude confirmation and extreme unction, out of the seven sacraments. 4. They deny that there is any such place as purgatory, notwithstanding that they pray for the dead. 5. They do not acknowledge the pope's supremacy, nor that of the see of Rome. 6. They deny, by consequence,

that the church of Rome is the true catholic, mother church: they prefer their own to that of Rome, and on Holy-Thursday, excommunicate the pope, and all the Latin prelates, as heretics and schismatics. 7. They deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son. 8. They refuse to worship the host, consecrated by Latin priests with unleavened bread, according to the ancient custom of the church of Rome, confirmed by the council of Florence. They wash likewise the altars, where the Latins have said mass, and will not suffer a Latin priest to officiate at their altars, pretending that the sacrifice ought to be performed with bread. 9. They assert, that the usual form of words, wherein the consecration, according to the Latins, wholly consists, is not sufficient to change the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, without the use of some additional prayers and benedictions of the fathers. 10. They insist that the sacrament of the Lord's supper ought to be administered in both kinds, and even to infants, before they are capable of distinguishing this spiritual food from any other; because it is a divine institution. For which reason they give the sacrament to infants immediately after baptism. 11. They hold that the laity are under an indispensible obligation, by the law of God, to receive the communion in both kinds. 12. They assert, that no members of the church, when they have attained to years of discretion, ought to be compelled to receive the communion every Easter, but should have free liberty to act according to the

dictates

dictates of their own consciences. 13. They pay no religious homage or veneration to the sacrament of the eucharist, even when celebrated by their own priests; and they use no lighted tapers, when they administer it to the sick. Moreover, they Moreover, they keep it in a little bag or box, without any other ceremony than fixing it to the wall, where they light up lamps before their images. 14. They are of opinion, that such hosts as are consecrated on Holy-Thursday, are much more efficacious than those consecrated at other times. 15. They maintain, that the sacrament of matrimony is an union which may he dissolved. 16. They condemn all fourth marriages. 17. They refuse to celebrate festivals of the holy virgin, the apostles, and the other saints, on the same day with the Latins. They reject likewise the use of graven images and statues, though they admit of pictures in their churches. 18. They insist, that the canon of the mass, of the Latin church, is full of errors, and ought therefore to be abolished. 19. They deny that usury is a mortal sin. 20. They reject the order of sub-deacons. 21. They pay no regard to any of the general councils, held by the popes, after the sixth. 22. They entirely deny auricular confession to be a divine precept, and say it is only a positive injunction of the church. 23. They insist that the confession of the laity ought to be free and voluntary; for which reason they are not compelled to confess themselves annually, nor are they excommunicated for neglect of it. 24. They insist, that in confession there is no divine law which enjoins the acknowledgment of every individual sin, or a discovery of all the circumstances that attend them. 25. They administer the sacrament to the laity, both in sickness and health, tho' they never applied themselves to their confessors; and the reason is, because they are persuaded; that a lively faith is all the preparation that is necessary for the worthy receiving of the Lord's supper. 26. They do not observe the vigils before the nativity of our Saviour, and the festivals of the virgin Mary and the apostles; nor do they fast in ember week: They even affect to eat meat more plentifully at those seasons, to testify their contempt of the Latin customs. They prohibit likewise all fasting on Saturdays, that preceding Easter only excepted. 27. They abstain from things strangled, and such other meats as are forbidden in the old testament. They deny that simple fornication is a mortal sin. 29. They insist that it is lawful to, deceive an enemy, and that it is no sin to injure and oppress him. 30. They hold, that it is necessary, in order to salvation, to make restitution of goods stolen, or frauNo. 14.

28.

dulently obtained, 31 Lastly, they hold, that such as have been admitted into holy orders, may quit them, and become lay-men at pleasure; and they approve of the marriage of priests, provided that they enter into that state before their admission into holy orders.

These are the articles of faith embraced by the Greek christians, and altho' it may appear plain to every intelligent reader, that many of them are contrary to the simplicity of the gospel, yet they have still some remains of genuine Christianity among them. All this, however, has not been sufficient to reconcile them to the Roman catholics, nor the Roman catholics to them.

Father Richer, a Jesuit, speaking of the Greeks, tells us, that they make the cross from the right hand to the left, whereas the Roman catholics do it from the left to the right. This Jesuit being one day in company with a Greek priest, the latter asked him why the Roman catholics made the sign of the cross from the left hand to the right? To this question the Jesuit answered, "The intention thereof is to intimate, that by the power of the cross, from darkness to light, and from the power of satan unto God, that thro' the merits and death of Christ, when he comes to judge the world at the last day, and separate the righteous from the ungodly, we shall be called from the left hand to the right, and be admitted among the number of the saints in glory."

Another Greck who happened to be in company, and a man of a pleasing disposition, took up the argument, and said very smartly, "You, Sir, have free liberty to make your cross from the left to the right, but we think it always best to begin at the right, for those who begin at the wrong end, generally lay a bad foundation and seldom prosper." The Jesuit was nettled to the quick for some minutes, he knew not what reply to make; but recollecting himself, he turned to the Greek and said, "Sir you may make the sign of the cross from the right to the left, to denote, that ever since you have deserted from the church of Rome, you have deviated from the paths of truth, to walk in darkness and error; you have gone astray from virtue to vice, and from grace to sin; and it is very much to be feared, that when we shall appear at the right hand of our blessed Saviour, you will stand at his left, when he comes in all his glory to judge both the quick and the dead." Such in general are the arguments made use of both by the Greek and Roman priests, when they meet together; from which we may infer, that in all violent disputes, truth is not the sole object in view. Trifles, and even ridiculous rites and ceremonies, are more regarded than the 4 M essential

[ocr errors]

́essential articles of faith, just in the same manner as if two persons were to fall out, because one washes his face with the right hand, and the other with the left. This arrant superstition has been well ridiculed by Dean Swift, in his travels of Guilliver, where he tells us, that two of the nations of the Lillyputians went to war, and cut each others throats about the great dispute that had long subsisted between them, concerning the breaking eggs on the right end.

It is certain, that the Jesuits, in the relations they have given us of their travels into Greece, often mention things concerning the Greeks that are not true, and this arises from the antipathy they have against them for not submitting to the popes; nor are the Greeks one bit behind with the Roman cathe lies in their malice. As the pope excommuni. cates once in the year, all those who are not of his communion, to the Greeks do the same to the Roman catholics, and probably would do so to Protestants, were they acquainted with their tenets.

In Passion-week, the patriach of Constantinople, dressed in his pontifical robes, goes up to the altar of his church, and solemny curses and excommunicates all the Roman catholics in the world. Having pronounced the words used in the ceremony, he drives a nail into the floor with a hammer, as a mark of his malediction, and then pronounces the sentence of excommunication upon all such as shall offer to remove it; nay, if any one should do so, the Turks, for the sake of a small gratuity, suffer them to fine, imprison, and bastinade the culprit.

They have another ceremony of almost a similar nature, performed by the patriarch of Jerusalem, who, in dignity, is the next to the patriarch of Constantinople. He sits on a throne before the door of the convent of the holy sepulchre, dressed in his pontifical habit, and attended by as many of the eastern bishops as can conveniently come to be present at the ceremony. There mass is celebrated, and after service is over the patriarch tramples seven times upon the figure of a city, built upon seven hills, which, in all respects, alludes to Rome. On the top of the figure is an eagle with two heads, and all those who attend at the ceremony know, that by this is meant, the Greeks trampling upon the city and church of Rome.

It is remarkable, that in the articles of their faith, we find very little concerning heaven, hell, and purgatory, but this is owing to their not making these sentiments so public as is done by the Roman catholics. That they believe in a state of rewards and punishments hereafter, cannot be denied; for the whole of their system clearly points it out, and

as they pray for the dead, so one would naturally imagine that they had some notion of what the Roman catholics call purgatory. This however, is not the case; for the Roman catholics believe, that the souls of those who have not committed moral sins will be delivered from from punishment as soon as they are purified, and immediately enter into a state of everlasting happiness. This notion was embraced by some of the fathers in the Latin church, who lived after the time of Constantine the Great, and it gained ground daily, till it became the source of much wealth to the Romish clergy.

It was altogether different in the Greek church, for, with respect to the state of departed souls, they are almost of the same opinion with the fathers, Chrysostom, Bazil, Gregory, Nanzienzen, and many others. To understand this, it will be necessary to consider what is related in the New Testament concerning the state of departed souls; and secondly, how far the Greeks at present differ from those sentiments, for the popish doctrine of purgatory has no connection with them.

The notion of a state of future rewards and punishments, is not the subject of the present enquiry, for it ever was, and still is, in one sense or other, believed by all the heathen nations in the universe; but as the heathens were, and are, in many things ignorant, so they had of old, and still have gross conceptions of capital truths.

It was reserved for the New Testament dispensation to clear up this grand point, by removing the veil of darkness that had long overspread the human mind, and under which even some of the Old Testament saints laboured.

It is remarkable, that when our Saviour delivered the parable concerning the rich man and Lazarus, he represented them both in different places; and yet neither the one or the other in a fixed state. We do not read that he was contradicted by any of his hearers, many of whom were his most implacable enemies, which would certainly have been the case, had not the same sentiments been at that time common among the Jews. Nay, the apostle Peter speaks of it as a received truth, in his first sermon, after the descent of the Holy Ghost, for he alludes to Psalm xvi. where the Psalmist says, "That God would not leave his soul in hell, nor suffer his holy one to see corruption."

By hell in this place is not meant a place of material punishment, but the general state of departed souls, some longing for the resurrection to everlasting life, and others in fear of everlasting punishment. This is clearly explained and illustrated by our Saviour, when he represents the rich man and

Lazarus

« PreviousContinue »