14th. They celebrated the Communion with cakes, mixing the meal with a little oil and salt.M. Renaudot, in his History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria, says, that this was the usual practice of the Syrian Jacobites. He speaks of it as a great abuse; but as they were very sparing in the use of oil, it would not materially alter the bread from the state in which it was made for ordinary use. At all events, it was

much more like bread than the wafer of the Roman Church, which was simple flour and water rubbed over with a white wax.6 Mar Joseph began to introduce the wafer and wine of Portugal at this sacrament.

15th. They consecrated the elements with prayer, believing that without the Holy Ghost, the mere words of the priest would be of no avail. It will be seen in the sequel,' what pains Menezes took to impress upon them, that it was actually the priest that consecrated, by repeating the words of Christ, and not the Holy Ghost.

16th. They administered in both kinds to all communicants.-The present practice is, to dip the cake in the wine, and put it into the communicant's mouth; but it is uncertain whether this custom prevailed before the Synod of Diamper.

17th. They admitted to communion the members of other churches. It has already appeared how dearly they paid for granting this indulgence to the Portuguese, until they were provoked to exclude them. They knew nothing of the papal doctrine that regards as heretics all that

6 La Croze, pp. 177, 178. The manufacture of these wafers will be found particularly described in the Decrees of the following Synod, Session 5, Decree 7th, on the Mass.

7 Decree 1st, On Doctrine of the Mass. Geddes, p. 242. VOL II.

C

A. D. 1599.

CHAP.
I.

are not members of their own church; for they believed that every faithful disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ would be saved, to whatever communion he belonged.

18th. In all questions of doctrine, they appealed to the authority of Sacred Scripture as decisive, and not, like Romanists, to any traditions of the fathers, or decisions of the church, or interpretations of their priests.

19th. They are said to have held three Sacraments, Baptism, the Eucharist, and Holy Orders. -It is doubtful, however, whether they admitted more than the first two. If they really added Orders to the number, they differed so far from the reformed churches: but the fact of their holding only three Sacraments, strikingly distinguishes them from the Roman Church. M. Asseman has laboured hard to show that they held originally seven sacraments, but without success.8

1

8 This brief account of the Sacraments, &c. of the Malabar Christians is confirmed by the following valuable note drawn up by Professor Lee, and given in his "History of the Syrian Church in India.". 'It may not be amiss, to enter here, a little minutely, into the consideration of this question; as the Romanists have, since the times of Menezes, assumed that every Eastern Church has, in common with itself, the Seven Sacraments: namely, Baptism, Confirmation, the Eucharist, Penitence, Extreme Unction, Holy Orders, and Matrimony.

"It appears, however, from the Acts of the Council of Diamper, held under Menezes in 1599, that the Christians of St. Thomas held only Three Sacraments: namely, Baptism, the Eucharist, and Holy Orders. This was remarked by La Croze (p. 342) and opposed to the erroneous statements of Renaudotius, in which he had assumed, as above remarked, an universal consent with the Church of Rome in the use of the Sacraments.

La Croze moreover asserted (p. 205) that the Eastern Churches had not recognized even the number of Seven Sacraments prior to the times of the Crusades, when they had

By this account it will appear, that previous to the Reformation in Europe, we have no knowledge of any Church in the world, except that of the Cathari, or Vaudois, in the valleys of Piedmont, whose doctrines and practice probably adopted it in imitation of the Latins. Asseman, however, (Tom. III. pt. II. p. 391, &c.) in his refutation of La Croze, objects that the Christians of St. Thomas had, in this particular, deflected from the faith of their forefathers; and then professes to shew, from what he deems ancient Authors in the Syrian Church, that not only the number of Seven Sacraments was acknowledged, but that the very Sacraments of the Romish Church were originally held by the Nestorian Church.

"The first Author, however, that he produces, is Ebed Jesu, Metropolitan of Soba, who flourished in the beginning of the xivth century. With respect to the other authors, whose names he mentions (p. 240) some of whom lived as early as the viith century, it is sufficient to remark, that not one of them has acknowledged the existence of Seven Sacraments, much less identified them with those of Rome. La Croze has moreover shewn (p. 342) that, prior to the xiith century, no mention is made of the Seven Sacraments, even among the writers of the Latin Church; and that Allatius could not, in like manner, produce one testimony to the same effect from the Ancient Greek Fathers.

"Ebed Jesu (Bib. Orient. Tom. III. pt. II. p. 240) does indeed acknowledge Seven Sacraments, yet these do not coincide with those of Rome: "There are,' "Seven says he, Sacraments, which are, according to the intention of the Divine Books, 1. Orders, which is the completion of all the Sacraments. 2. Holy Baptism. 3. The Oil of Unction. 4. The Offering of the Body and Blood of Christ. 5. The Remission of Sins. 6. The Holy Leaven. 7. The Signing of the life-giving Cross : " where no mention is made of the Sacraments of Confirmation or Matrimony.

"With regard to Confirmation, Menezes was well aware that it was wholly unknown in India; for in the Acts of the Synod of Diamper (Geddes, p. 213) he says: Forasmuch as hitherto there has been no use, nor so much as knowledge, of the Holy Sacrament of Confirmation among the Christians of this Bishoprick, &c." Father Simon, Renaudotius, and Asseman, have, however, evaded this, by the sweeping observation that Menezes knew nothing at all about the matter; and adding, that the Sacrament of Confirmation in the East

A. D. 1599.

CHAP.

I.

were as free from error as those of the Church of Malabar. There is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the accounts which represent them at that period as Nestorians, though, as already remarked, it is very uncertain how far they is included in that of Baptism. It is remarkable (Geddes, p. 210) that the Jesuits in England had formerly recourse to the same expedient; and asserted, moreover, that Confirmation was not very necessary, and might be dispensed with. It should follow, if this mode of arguing be granted, that the Syrians acknowledge Eight Sacraments, which effectually destroys the fancied agreement in number.

"But it does not appear from the Syrian Writers themselves that any such construction ought to be put upon the use of the Holy Oils in Baptism. "The Oil," (Bib. Orient. Tom. III. pt. II. p. 247) says Elias, Bishop of Anbara, who flourished early in the tenth Century, "with which the Priest anoints the heads of baptised Persons, is a mystical sign of the confidence which the saints do hence receive." And Timothy II. Metropolitan of Mosul and Arbela, A.D. 1318, says, (Bib. Orient. Tom. III. pt. II. p. 261) "So Water, Oil, the Priest, and the prayers of the Priest, are the substantial parts of Holy Baptism, if one of which be wanting, Baptism is by no means complete." Words to the same effect are used by George, Metropolitan of Arbela, who flourished about the middle of the tenth century. What is cited by Asseman from Joseph II. in which he reproaches the Nestorians for not acknowledging the Sacrament of Confirmation, vanishes, when we know that this Joseph is one of the sham Patriarchs that was set up by Pope Innocent the XIIth, A.D. 1696, and whose authority was never acknowledged at Mosul. It appears therefore that the Christians of St. Thomas had not deflected from the usage of their forefathers in not acknowledging the Sacrament of Confirmation; and that the citations made by Asseman himself tend to prove the statements of La Croze, which they had been intended to refute.

"Asseman and Renaudotius, however, go still further, and would prove, from the use of this Holy Oil, the Sacrament of Extreme Unction as acknowledged in the Eastern Churches : but not to mention that this would swell the number of Sacraments to nine, and that Ebed Jesu does not admit it in his enumeration of the Sacraments, and that (Bib. Orient. Tom. III. pt. II. p. 276) George of Arbela only mentions the laying of hands upon the sick as one of the duties of the Priest, it cannot follow by any just mode of arguing, that

adopted the heretical dogmas of that sect in Persia. We know, however, that they have long since denied the favourite Nestorian tenet of a duality of persons in Jesus Christ, and held it in utter abhorrence; and the catalogue

Extreme Unction was ever yet considered as a Sacrament in the East.

"It would hardly have been expected that Asseman would have attempted to shew that Matrimony was considered as a Sacrament by the Syrians, when Ebed Jesu had excluded it from his enumeration of them. Yet that nothing may be left untried to support the faith of the Church, he has attempted this also. "Simon Sulaka," says he, "when a Monk at Rome in 1553, expressly enumerated Matrimony in the number of the Sacraments." The account given by Geddes (Hist. Church Mal. p. 12) of this Simon Sulaka, is I think a sufficient refutation of his statements. "In the year 1552, one Tum Siud, or Simon Sulacan, a monk of the Order of St. Pachomius, who pretended to have been chosen Patriarch of Mosul, or Seleucia Parthorum, or Babylon, for they are all the same, by the whole clergy of Persia and Assyria, came to Rome and submitted himself to the Pope......He presented Letters and a Confession of faith to the Pope, which he pretended were sent by all the Eastern Bishops. In these Letters the Pope's Supremacy was exalted as high as if they had been writ by a Parasite Canonist, &c. .....Tum Siud, after he was dismissed at Rome, instead of returning to Babylon, went and lived in an obscure place called Charamet, or Amed," &c.

"As to the citation from Ebed Jesu, (Bib. Orient. Tom. III. pt. II. p. 318) in which St. Paul's words are translated, This is a great Sacrament, but I speak of Christ and the Church," it is unnecessary to dwell upon the refutation of such sophistry.

"It may, perhaps, not be amiss here to remark, that the matter of the Holy Leaven, as also that of the Oil, is considered among the Christians in the East as a Sacrament, supposing they have preserved them from the Apostolic times. This is a great proof of their superstition and ignorance, which we may reasonably hope that a revival of true Religion among them may induce them to disregard.

"The attempt of Asseman to shew that Auricular Confession was in use among the Syrians, is no less ridiculous than that of endeavouring to establish the Sacrament of Matrimony: for it is well known that Joseph II., whose words he cites to

A. D.

1599.