Page:Orthodox Eastern Church (Fortescue).djvu/27

Rh

I name here several books that treat of the Orthodox Church in general.

J. Mason Neale: History of the Holy Eastern Church (London, 1850) is incomplete. It contains a general introduction and history of the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem only. There is no account of the schism. Dr. Neale's work was useful inasmuch as it, almost for the first time, made the Eastern Churches known to English people. But it is in no way scientific. His object is always edification and the promotion of union with these Churches rather than critical accuracy. He is absurdly flattering to every one who was "Orthodox," absurdly unjust to Copts, Jacobites, &c. He seems to conceive the supremacy of Constantinople all over the East as the primitive ideal. In any case this book must now be considered as having been superseded.

A. P. Stanley: Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church (London, 1861) is still sometimes quoted. It was never of any value.

F. Kattenbusch: Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Konfessionskunde (Freiburg, Mohr, i, Die orthodoxe anatolische Kirche, 1892). This is by far the most important work of all now on the subject. The history, development, politics, divisions, dogma, hierarchy, rites and devotions of the Orthodox Church are discussed at length with every detail that could be desired, and with