the southern part of Russia were then occupied by the same hordes, the history of one is the history of the other. I shall still, therefore, confine myself to the history of Thrace and Greece. .

Heraclius, having determined upon carrying on the war vigorously against Chosroes, King of Persia, was not much occupied with theology at first. However, the various sectaries which now arose produced perpetual contention and theological disputes, and the speculative Greeks were ever and ever making new distinctions and inventing new subtleties. The original errors having been with respect to the nature of our blessed Redeemer, every particle, if I may use an expression of that nature, was subjected to their examination. A new contest nov arose.

Sergius, Archbishop of Constantinople, was a disguised Eutychian, and anxious covertly to introduce his doctrines, he began with Heraclius. His imperial pupil, charmed with the care of his new preceptor and gratified at the compliments paid to his progress in the theological erudition, adopted the dictates of the archbishop as the results of his own convictions. Nor was Heraclius the only pupil of the plotting prelate. Many others were infected with the new opinions, which as yet had not been brought to full light.

Eutychianism consisted in the doctrine of the singleness of the Redeemer's nature. This doctrine had been condemned. Of course, to teach it openly would insure condemnation. But if there was only a single will, there was of course in the Redeemer only a single rational nature. Could the doctrine of this single will be covertly established, the singleness of nature would be thus taught. This first doctrine had not yet been examined nor formerly proscribed, and Sergius inculcated that in Christ there but one will, and thus he prepared the way for the introduction of Eutychianism.

was

Athanasius, Patriarch of the Jacobites, who were a great body of Eutychians, having been informed by Sergius of

the dispositions of Heraclius, went to meet his majesty at Hierapolis, and informed him that he and his people were anxious for a reunion with the Church, and that he would make such a profession of faith as would satisfy the Patriarch of Constantinople, and offered to content himself with expression that in Christ there was only one will. Heraclius, anxious for this union, embraced the proposition joyfully, and declared that he would take every step in his power to have Athanasius raised to the See of Antioch.

Cyrus, Bishop of Phasis, was another of the conspirators who, under the pretext of union, peace and charity, came to offer his services for the harmony of the faithful; and it was contrived that he obtained the See of Alexandria. Thus, without any noise, the principal sees of the East were, through the cunning of Sergius, in the power of Monothelites. Sophronius, a Syrian monk, was the first who exposed the heresy. He besought the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Constantinople in vain. They drew up a form to be subscribed by all who desired union with the Church. It consisted of nine articles; and the seventh only, which contained the doctrine of Monotheletism, was erroneous. The Eutychians ran in crowds to sign it, and the emperor was gratified.

The next step was to guard against the condemnation of Rome. For this purpose Sergius wrote to Pope Honorius that a most brilliant prospect was now before them of reuniting to the Church all the contending sects of the East; that the Patriarch of Alexandria had been eminently successful; that crowds were every day flocking in to reunite themselves; and that no obstacle was raised but by the unauthorized interference of the monk Sophronius, who was creating difficulties by discussing a new question upon which the Scriptures contained nothing, and which the councils had never even entertained, and which, though many of the Fathers had touched upon, still was more a question for grammarians than for bishops; and that, as all the success of their exertions depended upon peace, it

was

requested that Honorius would command silence upon this new topic. The artifice succeeded; and the Pope, thus deceived, wrote letter desiring that there should be no disputes about words, and that Sophronius should not trouble the Patriarch of Alexandria.1 Sophronius was meantime raised to the See of Jerusalem, and held a council in which Monotheletism was condemned. He wrote to Honorius, and in return the Pope sent a second letter, in which he repeated his desire of silence upon the subject. Sophronius, aware that there must have been some imposition practiced upon the Holy See, selected Stephen, Bishop of Doria, upon whom he placed the greatest reliance, and taking him to Mount Calvary, bound him solemnly, as he would account to that Saviour who there shed His blood, to go to Rome and to lay the facts distinctly before the Pope, and gave him upwards of six hundred passages of the Fathers, which clearly contained the doctrines of two wills, the human and the divine, together with Scriptural texts. The Monothelites did all they could to intercept the holy bishop; but though they waylaid him in a variety of places, he arrived safely in Rome, but found Honorius had died.

Meantime Sergius composed a document, which Heraclius published under the title of Ecthesis, or an explanation, in 639. The doctrines of the Trinity and of the Incarnation are clearly stated in Catholic terms in this document; but there is a passage regarding the unity of will in the Redeemer, which is susceptible of an explanation in either sense. This document caused great commotion. Severinus was the immediate successor of Honorius; but dying after a pontificate of four months, he was succeeded by John IV, who, learning the true state of the question from the Bishop of Doria, condemned the Ecthesis in 640. Heraclius thereupon revoked the document, and informed the Pope that it had been drawn up by Sergius.

This does not touch the infallibility of the Pope, since he was here acting not in the formal character of Pastor Eternus,

Jerusalem was taken by the Mussulmen, under the Caliph Omar, in 638; and in the following year, on the 11th of March, 639, St. Sophronius died. The Emperor Heraclius was succeeded in 641 by Constantine, who, after a reign of more than three months, made way for Heracleonas, and he in six months was succeeded by the Emperor Constans, in the same year 641.

Sergius, Bishop of Constantinople, died in 638, and was succeeded by Pyrrhus, a Monothelite. This prelate, having joined with Martina and Heracleonas Heracleonas in their wicked poisoning of Constantine and the usurpation of Heracleonas, fled from the city after the punishment of the empress and the usurper. Paul, another Monothelite, occupied the See of Constantinople; and he prevailed upon Constans, the emperor, in 648, to publish his edict called the Type, imposing silence on the Catholics and the Monothelites. The Type was condemned by Pope Theodore in the same year. Pyrrhus, having passed from. Africa to Rome, retracted his errors, and was received into communion by the Pope. Thence he passed to Ravenna, where, at the instigation of the exarch Olympius, he relapsed into his errors, in the expectation of being restored to the favor of the emperor; and Paul dying in 655, he again got into the see of the imperial city. Many of the best, bravest, and wisest men of the empire fell victims to the relentless persecution of the Monothelites: amongst them was the holy Pope Martin, who, after severe torture in Constantinople, died of want and ill-treatment, in exile in the Chersonesus.

Constans dying in 668, was succeeded by his son, Constantine Pogonatus, who was a Catholic. a Catholic. He requested the Pope Donus to assemble a council; but that pontiff, in 688, was succeeded by Agatho, who complied with the emperor's request, and sent his legate to preside at the synod, which assembled in Constantinople in the month of November, 680. Theodore, a Monothelite, had succeeded Pyrrhus in the see of that city; and he having been

deposed, his place was filled by George, a Catholic. In this council the Monothelite heresy was condemned, as were its abettors; and amongst them Honorius the Pope had his memory censured for his criminal silence and neglect of opposing the progress of heresy. Pope Agatho dying in Rome before the acts of the council reached him, its canons were confirmed by his successor, Leo II. This is the third Council of Constantinople and the sixth general council.

THE GREEK SCHISM.

I

I FEAR exceedingly that a pure republican form of government cannot be established by this valorous people; the miscalled Holy Alliance cannot bear a free government to exist within the sphere of its action.1 I fear that the only hope of patriotic and brave Greece must rest on the position advanced by some of her agents- even to receive a king from some reigning house in Europe. This seems to be the alternative between two evils; to choose Egyptian bondage or European monarchy, and we can hardly blame this suffering people for preferring the latter as the less of the two evils. The friend of Greece and humanity must shed a tear of sympathy over the uncertain and dangerous condition in which Greece now stands, according to the latest and best anthenticated accounts from Europe.

Having gone thus far into the civil concerns of Greece, let us see a little of the religious history of this people. For the first eight centuries of Christianity, the Greek or Eastern Church was in full communion with the Western or Latin Church, and under the jurisdiction and supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, successor to St. Peter, and visible head of the Church of Christ on earth. During this period several errors were broached in the East. Much of the

1 These fears were confirmed.