g 72. FRUITLESS ATTEMPTS AT REUNION. 323
death of the Latin party, and the formal revocation of the act of submission to the pope.
The Council at Fcrrara — Florence. A. D. 1438-1439.1
Another attempt at reunion was made by John VII. Palaeologus in the Council of Ferrara, which was convened by Pope Eugcnius IV. in opposition to the reformatory Council of Basle. It was afterwards transferred to Florence on account of the plague. It was attended by the emperor, the patriarch of Constantinople, and twenty-one Eastern prelates, among them the learned Bessarion of Nica3a, Mark of Ephesus, Dionysius of Sard is, Isidor of Kieff. The chief points of controversy were discussed : the procession of the Spirit, purgatory, the use of unleavened bread, and the supremacy of the pope.2 Bes sarion became a convert to the Western doctrine, and was rewarded by a cardinal's hat. He was twice near being elected pope (d. 1472). The decree of the council, published July 6, 1439, embodies his views, and was a complete surrender to the pope with scarcely a saving clause for the canonical rights and privileges of the Eastern patriarchs. The Greek formula on the procession, ex Patre per Filiwn, was declared to be identical with the Latin Filioque ; the pope was acknowledged not only as the successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ, but also as " the head of the whole church and father and teacher of all Chris tians/' but with variations in the Greek texts.3 The document of reunion was signed by the pope, the emperor, many arch bishops and bishops, the representatives of all the Eastern
1 See Cecconi (R. C.), Studi storici sul Concilia di Firenze (Florence 1869) ;^ Hefele (R. C.), Conciliengcsch. vol. VII. Pt. II. (1874), p. 659-761 ; B Popoft (Gr.), History of the Council of Florence, translated from the Russian, ed. by J. M. Neale (Lond. 1861); Frommann (Prot.), Krit. JBeitrage zur Gesch. der florentin. Kirchenvercinigung (Halle, 1872).
2 On the subject of purgatory the Greeks disagreed among themselves. The doctrine of transubstantiation was conceded, and therefore not brought under discussion.
3 Hefele (L c. p. 741-761) gives the Latin and Greek texts svith a critical discussion. Frommann and Dollinger charge the decree with falsification.
324 FOUBTH PEKIOD. A. D. 590-1049.
patriarchs exc2pt that of Constantinople, who had previously died at Florence, but had left as his last sentence a disputed submission to the catholic and apostolic church of old Rome. ,For the triumph of his cause the pope could easily promise material aid to his Eastern ally, to pay the expenses of the deputation, to support three hundred soldiers for the protection of Constantinople, and to send, if necessary, an army and navy for the defense of the emperor against his enemies.
But when the humiliating terms of the reunion were divulged, the East and Russia rose in rebellion against the Latinizers as traitors to the orthodox faith ; the compliant patriarchs openly recanted, and the new patriarch of Constantinople, Metrophanes, now called in derision Metrophonus or Matricide, was forced to resign.
After the Fall of Constantinople.
The capture of Constantinople by the Mohammedan Turks (1453) and the overthrow of the Byzantine empire put an end to all political schemes of reunion, but opened the way for papal propagandism in the East. The division of the church facili tated that catastrophe which delivered the fairest lands to the blasting influence of Islam, and keeps it in power to this day, although it is slowly waning. The Turk has no objection to fights among the despised Christians, provided they only injure themselves and do not touch the Koran. He is tolerant from intolerance. The Greeks hate the pope and the Filioque as much as they hate the false prophet of Mecca ; while the pope loves his own power more than the common cause of Christianity, and would rather see the Sultan rule in the city of Constantine than a rival patriarch or the Czar of schismatic Russia.
During the nineteenth century the schism has been intensified by the creation of two new dogmas, — the immaculate conception of Mary (1854) and the infallibility of the pope (1870). When Pius IX. invited the Eastern patriarchs to attend the Vatican Council, they indignantly refused, and renewed their old pro-