Rio de Janeiro. See SÃO SEBASTIÃO, ARCHDIO

CESE OF.

Rio Negro, PREFECTURE APOSTOLIC OF, in Brazil, bounded on the south by a line running westwards from the confluence of the Rio Negro and Rio Branco along the watershed of the Rio Negro to Colombia, separating the new prefecture from those of Teffé and Upper Solimões, and the See of Amazones (from which it was separated by a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Consistory, 19 Oct., 1910), on the west by Colombia, on the north by Colombia and Venezuela, on the east by the territory of Rio Branco. The white population is small, and confined to the few villages along the banks of the Rio Negro. As early as 1658 a Jesuit Father, Francisco Gonsales, established a mission among the natives of the Upper Rio Negro, and traces of the work of the Jesuit missionaries still exist in the scattered villages. Two years later a Carmelite, Father Theodosius, evangelized the Tucumaos. The Franciscans laboured among the Indians from 1870 and had seven stations on the Rio Uaupés (Tariana Indians), four on the Rio Tikié (Toccana Indians), and one on the Rio Papuri (Macu Indians), but on the fall of the empire most of the missions were abandoned, though some of them were re-established later.

A. A. MACERLEAN. Riordan, PATRICK WILLIAM. See SAN FRANCISCO, ARCHDIOCESE OF.

Ripalda, JUAN MARTÍNEZ DE, theologian, b. at Pamplona, Navarre, 1594; d. at Madrid, 26 April, 1648. He entered the Society of Jesus at Pamplona in 1609. In the triennial reports of 1642 he says of himself that he was not physically strong, that he had studied religion, arts, and theology, that he had taught grammar one year, arts four, theology nineteen, and had been professed. According to Southwell, he taught philosophy at Monforte, theology at Salamanca, and was called from there to the Imperial College of Madrid, where, by royal decree, he taught moral theology. Later he was named censor to the Inquisition and confessor of de Olivares, the favourite of Philip IV, whom he followed when he was exiled from Madrid. Southwell describes his character by saying that he was a good religious, noted for his innocence. Mentally he qualifies him as subtle in argument, sound in opinion, keen-edged and clear in expression, and well-versed in St. Augustine and St. Thomas. According to Drews, no Jesuit ever occupied this chair in the University of Salamanca with more honour than he, and Hurter places him, with Lugo, first among the contemporary theologians of Spain, and perhaps of all Europe. Among the numerous theological opinions which characterize him the following are worth citing: (1) He thinks that the creation of an intrinsically supernatural substance is possible, in other words, that a creature is possible to which supernatural grace, with the accompanying gifts and intuitive vision, is due. (2) He holds that, by a positive decree of God, supernatural grace is conferred, in the existing providence for every good act whatsoever; so that every good act is supernatural, or at least that every natural good act is accompanied by another which is supernatural. (3) He maintains that, prescinding from the extrinsic Divine law, and taking into account only the nature of things, the supernatural faith which is called lata would be sufficient for justification, that faith, namely, which comes by the contemplation of created things, though assent is not produced without grace. (4) He affirms that in the promissory revelations the formal object of faith is God's faithfulness to His promises, the constancy of His will, and the efficacy of omnipotence. (5) He asserts that all the propositions of Baius were demned for doctrine according to the sense in which

con

he (Baius) held them. (6) He maintains that the Divine maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary is of itself a sanctifying form. The following are his works: "De ente supernaturali disputationes in universam theologiam", three vols., I (Bordeaux, 1634),, II (Lyons, 1645), III, written "Adversus Bajanos" (Cologne, 1648); rare editions like that of Lyons, 1663, have been published of the two first volumes. It is a classic work in which he included questions which are not included in ordinary theologicai treatises. His third volume was attacked in an anonymous work, "P. Joannis Martinez . . . Vulpes capta per theologos.. Academiæ Lovaniensis", which Reusch says was the work of Sinnich. "Expositio brevis litteræ Magistri Sententiarum" (Salamanca, 1635), praised by the Calvinist Voet. "Tractatus theologici et scholastici de virtutibus, fide, spe et charitate" (Lyons, 1652), a posthumous work and very rare. Two new editions of all his works have been issued: Vives (8 vols., Paris, 1871-3), Palmé (4 vols., Paris, Rome, Propaganda Fide, 1870-1). "Discurso sobre la elección de sucessor del pontificado en vida del pontifice" (Seville). this work was published in Aragon, perhaps in Huesca, with the anagram of Martín Jirón de Palazeda, written by order of the Count de Olivares. The following are in manuscript: "De visione Dei" (2 vols.); "De prædestinatione"; "De angelis et auxiliis "De voluntate Dei"-preserved in the University of Salamanca; "Discurso acerca de la ley de desafío y parecer sobre el desafío de Medina Sidonia á Juan de Braganza", preserved in the Biblioteca Nacional.

Uriarte says

SOUTHWELL, Biblioteca scriptorum S. J. (Rome, 1670), 478; ANTONIO, Bibliotheca hispana nova, I (Madrid, 1783), 736; HURTER, Nomenclator, I, (Innsbruck, 1892), 381; SOMMERVOGEL, Bibliothèque, V., col. 640; Biografia eclesiástica completa, XXII (Madrid, 1864), 179.

tima.

ANTONIO PÉREZ GOYENA.

Ascoli Piceno, Central Italy. The city is situated on Ripatransone, DIOCESE OF (RIPANENSIS), in five hills, not far from the site of ancient Cupra MaritAsonem, "the other bank of the Asone". A castle The modern name comes from Ripa trans larged later by the bishops of Fermo, who had several was erected there in the early Middle Ages, and enconflicts with the people. In 1571 St. Pius V made it Lucio Sasso and including in its jurisdiction small poran episcopal see, naming as its first bishop Cardinal tions of the surrounding Dioceses of Fermo, Ascoli, and Teramo. Noteworthy bishops were: Cardinal Filippo Bishop of Modena, employed by Alfonso II of Ferrara Sega (1575); Gaspare Sillingardi (1582), afterwards on various missions to Rome and to Spain, effected a revival of religious life in Ripatransone; Gian Carlo Gentili (1845), historian of Sanseverino and Ripanized by the Government. The cathedral is the work transone; Alessandro Spoglia (1860-67), not recogof Gaspare Guerra and has a beautiful marble altar del Carmine possesses pictures of the Raphael School. with a triptych by Crivelli; the church of the Madonna has been suffragan of Fermo since 1680. The diocese, at first directly subject to the Holy See,

CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia, III (Venice, 1857); Annuaire pontifical catholique (Paris, 1911), s. v. U. BENIGNI.

Ripon, MARQUESS OF, GEORGE FREDERICK SAMUEL ROBINSON, K.G., P.C., G.C.S.I., F.R.S., Earl de Grey, Earl of Ripon, Viscount Goderich, Baron Grantham, and baronet; b. at the prime minister's residence, 10 Downing Street, London, 24 Oct., 1827; d. 9 July, 1909. He was the second son of Frederick John Robinson, Viscount Goderich, afterwards first Earl of Ripon, and Lady Sarah Albinia Louisa, daughter of Robert, fourth Earl of Buckinghamshire; and he was born during his father's brief tenure of the office of prime minister. Before entering public life

he married (8 April, 1851) his cousin Henrietta Ann Theodosia, elder daughter of Captain Henry Vyner, and by her had two children, Frederick Oliver, who succeeded to his honours, and Mary Sarah, who died in infancy. Inheriting the principles which were common to the great Whig families, Lord Ripon remained through his long public life one of the most generally respected supporters of Liberalism, and even those who most severely criticised his administrative ability-and in his time he held very many of the great offices of state-recognized the integrity and disinterestedness of his aims. He entered the House of Commons as member for Hull in 1852, and after representing Huddersfield (1853-57), and the

He was condemned to death by the Act of Attainder, 25 Henry VIII, c. 12, together with Elizabeth Barton, Edward Bocking, Hugh Rich, warden of the Observant friary at Richmond, John Dering, B.D. (Oxon.), Benedictine of Christ Church, Canterbury, Henry Gold, M.A. (Oxon.), parson of St. Mary, Aldermanbury, London, and vicar of Hayes, Middlesex, and Richard Master, rector of Aldington, Kent, who was pardoned; but by some strange oversight Master's name is included and Risby's omitted in the catalogue of prætermissi. Father Thomas Bourchier, who took the Franciscan habit at Greenwich about 1557, says that Fathers Risby and Rich were twice offered their lives, if they would accept the king's

GEORGE FREDERICK SAMUEL, MARQUESS

OF RIPON

year he first took office, and was a member of every Liberal administration for the next half-century. The offices he held were: under secretary of State for war (185961); under secretary of State for India (18611863); secretary of State for war (1863-66), all under Lord Palmerston; secretary of State for India (1866) under Earl Russell. In Mr. Gladstone's first administration he was lord president of the council (1868-73) and during this period acted as chairman of the joint commission for drawing up the Treaty of Washington, which settled the Alabama claims (1876). For this great public service he was created Marquess of Ripon. He also was grand master of the freemasons from 1871 to 1874, when he resigned this office to enter the Catholic Church. He was received at the London Oratory, 4 Sept., 1874. When Gladstone returned to power in 1880 he appointed Lord Ripon GovernorGeneral and Viceroy of India, the office with which his name will ever be connected, he having made himself beloved by the Indian subjects of the Crown as no one of his predecessors had been. He held this office until 1884. In the short administration of 1886 he was first lord of the admiralty, and in that of 18921895 he was secretary of State for the Colonies. When the Liberals again returned to power he took office as lord privy seal. This office he resigned in 1908. Ever a fervent Catholic, Lord Ripon took a great share in educational and charitable works. He was president of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul from 1899 until his death; vice-president of the Catholic Union, and a great supporter of St. Joseph's Catholic Missionary Society.

The Tablet (17 July, 1909); Annual Register (London, 1909). EDWIN BURTON.

Risby, RICHARD, b. in the parish of St. Lawrence, Reading, 1490; executed at Tyburn, London, 20 April, 1534. He entered Winchester College in 1500, and was subsequently a fellow of New College, Oxford, taking his degree in 1510. He resigned in 1513 to enter the Franciscan Order, and eventually became warden of the Observant friary at Canterbury.

Letters and Papers of the reign of Henry VIII, VI, VII (London, Oxford, Cambridge, Edinburgh, and Dublin, 1882-3), passim; GASQUET, Henry VIII and the English Monasteries (London, 1906), 44; KIRBY, Winchester Scholars (London and Winchester, 1888), 98; BOASE, Register of the University of Oxford (Oxford, 1885), 71. J. B. WAINEWRIGHT.

Rishanger, WILLIAM, chronicler, b. at Rishangles, Suffolk, about 1250; d. after 1312. He became a Benedictine at St. Alban's Abbey, Hertfordshire in 1271, and there revived the custom of composing chronicles which had languished since the time of Matthew Paris. His chief work is the history of the Barons' Wars, "Narratio de bellis apud Lewes et Evesham", covering the period from 1258 to 1267 and including a reference which shows that he was still engaged on it on 3 May, 1312. Apart from its historical matter which is derived from Matthew Paris and his continuators, it is interesting for the evidence it affords of the extreme veneration in which Simon de Montfort was held at that time. He also wrote a short chronicle about Edward I, "Quædam recapitulatio brevis de gestis domini Edwardi". It is possible, though not very probable, that he wrote the earlier part of a chronicle, "Willelmi Rishanger, monachi S. Albani, Chronica". Four other works attributed to him by Bale are not authentic.

RILEY, Willelmi Rishanger chronica et annales in R. S. (London, 1863-76); RILEY in Mon. Germ. Hist., XXVIII (Berlin, 1865); HALLIWELL, Chronicle of William de Rishanger of the Barons BEMONT, Simon de Montfort (Paris, 1884); HARDY, Descriptive Wars in Camden Society Publications, XV (London, 1840); Catalogue (London, 1862-71), I, 871; III, 171-2, 191-3; Tour in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. EDWIN BURTON.

Rishton, EDWARD, b. in Lancashire, 1550; d. at Sainte-Ménehould, Lorraine, 29 June, 1585. He was probably a younger son of John Rishton of Dunkenhalgh and Dorothy Southworth. He studied at Oxford from 1568 to 1572, when he proceeded B.A. probably from Brasenose College. During the next year he was converted and went to Douai to study for the priesthood. He was the first Englishman to matriculate at Douai, and is said to have taken his M.A. degree there. While a student he drew up and published a chart of ecclesiastical history, and was one of the two sent to Reims in November, 1576, to see if the college could be removed there. After his ordination at Cambrai (6 April, 1576) he was sent to Rome. In 1580 he returned to England, visiting Reims on the way, but was soon arrested. He was tried and condemned to death with Blessed Edmund Campion and others on 20 November, 1581, but was not executed, being left in prison, first in King's Bench, then in the Tower. On 21 January he was exiled with several others, being sent under escort as far as Abbeville, whence he made his way to Reims, arriving on 3 March. Shortly afterwards, at the suggestion of Father Persons, he completed Sander's imperfect "Origin and Growth of the Anglican Schism". With the intention of taking his doctorate in divinity he proceeded to the University of Pont-à-Mousson in Lorraine, but the plague broke out, and though he

all Eastern customs "we shall provide without narrowness."

At the time of the Schism, Photius and Cerularius hurled against Latin rites and customs every conceivable absurd accusation. The Latin fast on Saturday, Lenten fare, law of celibacy, confirmation by a bishop, and especially the use of unleavened bread for the Holy Eucharist were their accusations against the West. Latin theologians replied that both were right and suitable, each for the people who used them, that there was no need for uniformity in rite if there was unity in faith, that one good custom did not prove another to be bad, thus defending their customs without attacking those of the East. But the Byzantine patriarch was breaking the unity of the Church, denying the primacy, and plunging the East into schism. In 1054, when Cerularius's schism had begun, a Latin bishop, Dominic of Gradus and Aquileia, wrote concerning it to Peter III of Antioch. He discussed the question Cerularius had raised, the use of azymes at Mass, and carefully explained that, in using this bread, Latins did not intend to disparage the Eastern custom of consecrating leavened bread, for there is a symbolic reason for either practice. "Because we know that the sacred mixture of fermented bread is used and lawfully observed by the most holy and orthodox Fathers of the Eastern Churches, we faithfully approve of both customs and confirm both by a spiritual explanation" (Will, "Acta et scripta quæ de controversiis ecclesiæ græcæ et latinæ sæc. XI composita extant", Leipzig, 1861, 207). These words represent very well the attitude of the papacy towards other rites at all times. Three points, however, may seem opposed to this and therefore require some explanation: the supplanting of the old Gallican Rite by that of Rome almost throughout the West, the modification of Uniat rites, the suppression of the later medieval rites.

The existence of the Gallican Rite was a unique anomaly. The natural principle that rite follows patriarchate has been sanctioned by universal tradition with this one exception. Since the first organization of patriarchates there has been an ideal of uniformity throughout each. The close bond that joined bishops and metropolitans to their patriarch involved the use of his liturgy, just as the priests of a diocese follow the rite of their bishop. Before the arbitrary imposition of the Byzantine Rite on all Orthodox Churches no Eastern patriarch would have tolerated a foreign liturgy in his domain. All Egypt used the Alexandrine Rite, all Syria that of AntiochJerusalem, all Asia Minor, Greece, and the Balkan lands, that of Constantinople. But in the vast Western lands that make up the Roman patriarchate, north of the Alps and in Spain, various local rites developed, all bearing a strong resemblance to each other, yet different from that of Rome itself. These form the Gallican family of liturgies. Abbot Cabrol, Dom Cagin, and other writers of their school think that the Gallican Rite was really the original Roman Rite before Rome modified it ("Paléographie musicale", V, Solesmes, 1889; Cabrol, "Les origines liturgiques", Paris, 1906). Most writers, however, maintain with Mgr Duchesne ("Origines du culte chrétien", Paris, 1898, 84-89), that the Gallican Rite is Eastern, Antiochene in origin. Certainly it has numerous Antiochene peculiarities (see GALLICAN RITE), and when it emerged as a complete rite in the sixth and seventh centuries (in Germanus of Paris, etc.), it was different from that in use at Rome at the time. NonRoman liturgies were used at Milan, Aquileia, even at Gubbio at the gates of the Roman province (Innocent I's letter to Decentius of Eugubium; Ep. xxv, in P. L., XX, 551-61). Innocent (401-17) naturally protested against the use of a foreign rite in Umbria; occasionally other popes showed some deXIII. 5

sire for uniformity in their patriarchate, but the great majority regarded the old state of things with perfect indifference. When other bishops asked them how ceremonies were performed at Rome they sent descriptions (so Pope Vigilius to Profuturus of Braga in 538; Jaffé, "Regesta Rom. Pont.", n. 907), but were otherwise content to allow different uses. St. Gregory I (590–604) showed no anxiety to make the new English Church conform to Rome, but told St. Augustine to take whatever rites he thought_most suitable from Rome or Gaul (Ep. xi, 64, in P. L., LXXVII, 1186–7).

Thus for centuries the popes alone among patriarchs did not enforce their own rite even throughout their patriarchate. The gradual romanization and subsequent disappearance of Gallican rites were (beginning in the eighth and ninth centuries), the work not of the popes but of local bishops and kings who naturally wished to conform to the use of the Apostolic See. The Gallican Rites varied everywhere (Charles the Great gives this as his reason for adopting the Roman Use; see Hauck, "Kirchengesch. Deutschlands", II, 107 sq.), and the inevitable desire for at least local uniformity arose. The bishops' frequent visits to Rome brought them in contact with the more dignified ritual observed by their chief at the tomb of the Apostles, and they were naturally influenced by it in their return home. The local bishops in synods ordered conformity to Rome. The romanizing movement in the West came from below. In the Frankish kingdom Charles the Great, as part of his scheme of unifying, sent to Adrian I for copies of the Roman books, commanding their use throughout his domain. In the history of the substitution of the Roman Rite for the Gallican the popes appear as spectators, except perhaps in Spain and much later in Milan. The final result was the application in the West of the old principle, for since the pope was undoubtedly Patriarch of the West it was inevitable, that sooner or later the West should conform to his rite. The places, however, that really cared for their old local rites (Milan, Toledo) retain them even now.

It is true that the changes made in some Uniat rites by the Roman correctors have not always corresponded to the best liturgical tradition. There are, as Mgr Duchesne says, "corrections inspired by zeal that was not always according to knowledge" (Origines du culte, 2nd ed., 69), but they are much fewer than is generally supposed and have never been made with the idea of romanizing. Despite the general prejudice that Uniat rites are mere mutilated hybrids, the strongest impression from the study of them is how little has been changed. Where there is no suspicion of false doctrine, as in the Byzantine Rite, the only change made was the restoration of the name of the pope where the schismatics had erased it. Although the question of the procession of the Holy Ghost has been so fruitful a source of dispute between Rome and Constantinople the Filioque clause was certainly not contained in the original creed, nor did the Roman authorities insist on its addition. So Rome is content that Eastern Catholics should keep their traditional form unchanged, though they believe the Catholic doctrine. The Filioque is only sung by those Byzantine Uniats who wish it themselves, as the Ruthenians. Other rites were altered in places, not to romanize but only to eradicate passages suspected of heresy. All other Uniats came from Nestorian, Monophysite, or Monothelete sects, whose rites had been used for centuries by heretics. Hence, when bodies of these people wished to return to the Catholic Church their services were keenly studied at Rome for possible heresy. In most cases corrections were absolutely necessary. The Nestorian Liturgy, for instance, did not contain the words of institution, which had to be

added to the Liturgy of the converted Chaldees. The Monophysite Jacobites, Copts, and Armenians have in the Trisagion the fateful clause: "who wast crucified for us", which has been the watchword of Monophysitism ever since Peter the Dyer of Antioch added it (470-88). If only because of its associations this could not remain in a Catholic Liturgy.

In some instances, however, the correctors were over scrupulous. In the Gregorian Armenian Liturgy the words said by the deacon at the expulsion of the catechumens, long before the Consecration: "The body of the Lord and the blood of the Saviour are set forth (or "are before us") (Brightman, "Eastern Liturgies", 430) were in the Uniat Rite changed to: "are about to be before us". The Uniats also omit the words sung by the Gregorian choir before the Anaphora: "Christ has been manifested amongst us (has appeared in the midst of us)" (ibid., 434), and further change the cherubic hymn because of its anticipation of the Consecration. These misplacements are really harmless when understood, yet any reviser would be shocked by such strong cases. In many other ways also the Armenian Rite shows evidence of Roman influence. It has unleavened bread, our confession and Judica psalm at the beginning of Mass, a Lavabo before the Canon, the last Gospel, etc. But so little is this the effect of union with Rome that the schismatical Armenians have all these points too. They date from the time of the Crusades, when the Armenians, vehemently opposed to the Orthodox, made many advances towards Catholics. So also the strong romanizing of the Maronite Liturgy was entirely the work of the Maronites themselves, when, surrounded by enemies in the East, they too turned towards the great Western Church, sought her communion, and eagerly copied her practices. One can hardly expect the pope to prevent other Churches from imitating Roman customs. Yet in the case of Uniats he does even this. A Byzantine Uniat priest who uses unleavened bread in his Liturgy incurs excommunication. The only case in which an ancient Eastern rite has been wilfully romanized is that of the Uniat Malabar Christians, where it was not Roman authority but the misguided zeal of Alexius de Menezes, Archbishop of Goa, and his Portuguese advisers at the Synod of Diamper (1599) which spoiled the old Malabar Rite.

The Western medieval rites are in no case (except the Ambrosian and Mozarabic Rites), really independent of Rome. They are merely the Roman Rite with local additions and modifications, most of which are to its disadvantage. They are late, exuberant, and inferior variants, whose ornate additions and long interpolated tropes, sequences, and farcing destroy the dignified simplicity of the old liturgy. In 1570 the revisers appointed by the Council of Trent restored with scrupulous care and, even in the light of later studies, brilliant success the pure Roman Missal, which Pius V ordered should alone be used wherever the Roman Rite is followed. It was a return to an older and purer form. The medieval rites have no doubt a certain archæological interest; but where the Roman Rite is used it is best to use it in its pure form. This too only means a return to the principle that rite should follow patriarchate. The reform was made very prudently, Pius V allowing any rite that could prove an existence of two centuries to remain (Bull, "Quo primum", 19 July, 1570, printed first in the Missal), thus saving any local use that had a certain antiquity. Some dioceses (e. g. Lyons) and religious orders (Dominicans, Carthusians, Carmelites), therefore keep their special uses, and the independent Ambrosian and Mozarabic Rites, whose loss would have been a real misfortune (see LITURGY, MASS, LITURGY OF THE) still remain,

Rome then by no means imposed uniformity of rite. Catholics are united in faith and discipline, but in their manner of performing the sacred functions there is room for variety based on essential unity, as there was in the first centuries. There are cases (e. g. the Georgian Church) where union with Rome has saved the ancient use, while the schismatics have been forced to abandon it by the centralizing policy of their authorities (in this case Russia). The ruthless destruction of ancient rites in favour of uniformity has been the work not of Rome but of the schismatical patriarchs of Constantinople. Since the thirteenth century Constantinople in its attempt to make itself the one centre of the Orthodox Church has driven out the far more venerable and ancient Liturgies of Antioch and Alexandria and has compelled all the Orthodox to use its own late derived rite. The Greek Liturgy of St. Mark has ceased to exist; that of St. James has been revived for one or two days in the year at Zakynthos and Jerusalem only (see ANTIOCHENE LITURGY). The Orthodox all the world over must follow the Rite of Constantinople. In this unjustifiable centralization we have a defiance of the old principle, since Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Cyprus, in no way belong to the Byzantine Patriarchate. Those who accuse the papacy of sacrificing everything for the sake of uniformity mistake the real offender, the oecumenical patriarch.

III. THE OLD RITES.-Catholic and Schismatical.— A complete table of the old rites with an account of their mutual relations will be found in the article LITURGY. Here it need only be added that there is a Uniat body using each of the Eastern rites. There is no ancient rite that is not represented within the Catholic Church. That rite, liturgical language, and religious body connote three totally different ideas has been explained at length in the article GREEK RITES. The rite a bishop or priest follows is no test at all of his religion. Within certain broad limits a member of any Eastern sect might use any rite, for the two categories of rite and religion cross each other continually. They represent quite different classifications: for instance, liturgically all Armenians belong to one class, theologically a Uniat Armenian belongs to the same class as Latins, Chaldees, Maronites, etc., and has nothing to do with his Gregorian (Monophysite) fellow-countrymen (see EASTERN CHURCHES). Among Catholics the rite forms a group; each rite is used by a branch of the Church that is thereby a special, though not separate, entity. So within the Catholic unity we speak of local Churches whose characteristic in each case is the rite they use. Rite is the only basis of this classification. Not all Armenian Catholics or Byzantine Uniats obey the same patriarch or local authority; yet they are "Churches," individual provinces of the same great Church, because each is bound together by their own rites. In the West there is the vast Latin Church, in the East the Byzantine, Chaldean, Coptic, Syrian, Maronite, Armenian, and Malabar Uniat Churches. It is of course possible to subdivide and to speak of the national Churches (of Italy, France, Spain, etc.) under one of these main bodies (see LATIN CHURCH). In modern times rite takes the place of the old classification in patriarchates and provinces.

IV. PROTESTANT RITES.-The Reformation in the sixteenth century produced a new and numerous series of rites, which are in no sense continuations of the old development of liturgy. They do not all represent descendants of the earliest rites, nor can they be classified in the table of genus and species that includes all the old liturgies of Christendom. The old rites are unconscious and natural developments of earlier ones and go back to the original fluid rite of the first centuries (see LITURGY).. The Protestant rites are deliberate compositions made