Page:The Greek and Eastern churches.djvu/347

Rh In the year 1642 another synod took a significant course. It condemned Cyril's confession and Calvinism together, thus plainly showing that the hishops perceived the connection between them; this synod did not name Cyril as the author of the obnoxious document. But in the synod of Jassy in Moldavia, which was held a little later, this confession was again attributed to Cyril. Among the bishops assembled at Jassy was Peter Mogila, the Russian ecclesiastic, who issued a counterblast in the form of another confession of faith which came to be accepted as a standard test of orthodoxy. It was not till thirty-four years after Cyril's death that a public official denial of his authorship of the confession that bears his name, was put forth. This was at the famous synod of Bethlehem, which Dositheus, the patriarch of Jerusalem—himself a Cretan—took the opportunity of the dedication of the new church in the year 1672 to gather together there. The synod condemned the Calvinistic confession and denied that Cyril Lucar was its author, A patriarch of Constantinople emitting such poison! The idea was too horrible! It could not be so! We can appreciate the psychological attitude. But in view of sober historical criticism, can we attach any real value to this repudiation? The further back we go, the closer and surer is Cyril's connection with the confession. A late denial of it to which the policy of convenience strongly urged has no weight whatever.