occasionally been disposed to copy practices of the far richer and mightier Latin Church with which they are united. But all the Roman documents point the other way. If any Eastern customs have been discouraged or forbidden, it is because they were obviously abuses and immoral like the quasi-hereditary patriarchate of the Nestorians, or sheer paganism like the superstitions forbidden by the Maronite Synod of 1736. True, their liturgical books have been altered in places; true also that in the past these corrections were made sometimes by well-meaning officials of Propaganda whose liturgical knowledge was not equal to their pious zeal. But in this case, too, the criterion was not conformity with the Roman Rite, but purification from supposed (sometimes mistakenly supposed) false doctrine. That the Maronite Rite is so latinized is due to its own clergy. It was the Maronites themselves who insisted on using our vestments, our azyme bread, our Communion under one kind, till these things had to be recognized, because they were already ancient customs to them prescribed by the use of generations.

A short survey of papal documents relating to the Eastern Churches will make these points clear.-Before Pius IX, the most important of these documents was Benedict XIV's Encyclical "Allatæ sunt" of 2 July, 1755. In it the pope is able to quote a long list of his predecessors who had already cared for the Eastern Churches and their rites. He mentions acts of Innocent III (1198–1216), Honorius III (1216-27), Innocent IV (1243-54), Alexander IV (1254-61), Gregory X (1271-76), Nicholas III (1277-80), Eugene IV (1431-47), Leo X (1513-21), Clement VII (152334), Pius IV (1559-65), all to this effect. Gregory XIII (1572-85) founded at Rome colleges for Greeks, Maronites, Armenians. In 1602 Clement VIII published a decree allowing Ruthenian priests to celebrate their rite in Latin churches. In 1624 Urban VIII forbade Ruthenians to become Latins, and Clement IX, in 1669, published the same order for Uniat Armenians (Allatæ sunt, I). Benedict XIV not only quotes these examples of former popes, he confirms the same principle by new laws. In 1742 he had reestablished the Ruthenian Church with the Byzantine Rite after the national Council of Zamosc, confirming again the laws of Clement VIII in 1595. When the Melkite Patriarch of Antioch wanted to change the use of the Presanctified Liturgy in his Rite, Benedict XIV answered: "The ancient rubrics of the Greek Church must be kept unaltered, and your priests must be made to follow them" (Bullarium Ben. XIV., Tom. I). He ordains that Melkites who, for lack of a priest of their own Rite, had been baptized by a Latin, should not be considered as having changed to our Use: "We forbid absolutely that any Catholic Melkites who follow the Greek Rite should pass over to the Latin Rite" (ib., cap. xviii). The Encyclical "Allatæ sunt" forbids missionaries to convert schismatics to the Latin Rite; when they become Catholics they must join the corresponding Uniat Church (XI). In the Bull "Etsi pastoralis" (1742) the same pope orders that there shall be no precedence because of Rite. Each prelate shall have rank according to his own position or the date of his ordination; in mixed dioceses, if the bishop is Latin (as in Southern Italy), he is to have at least one vicar-general of the other Rite (IX).

Most of all did the last two popes show their concern for Eastern Christendom. Each by a number of Acts carried on the tradition of conciliation towards the schismatical Churches and of protection of Uniat Rites. Pius IX, in his Encyclical "In Suprema Petri" (Epiphany, 1848), again assures non-Uniats that "we will keep unchanged your liturgies, which indeed we greatly honour"; schismatic clergy who join the Catholic Church are to keep the same rank and position as they had before. In 1853 the Uniat Rumanians were given a bishop of their own Rite, and in the Allocution made on that occasion, as well as in the one

to the Armenians on 2 February, 1854, he again insists on the same principle. In 1860 the Bulgars, disgusted with the Phanar (the Greeks of Constantinople), approached the Catholic Armenian patriarch, Hassun; he, and the pope confirming him, promised that there should be no latinizing of their Rite. Pius IX founded, 6 January, 1862, a separate department for the Oriental Rites as a special section of the great Propaganda Congregation. Leo XIII in 1888 wrote a letter to the Armenians (Paterna charitas) in which he exhorts the Gregorians to reunion, always on the same terms. But his most important act, perhaps the most important of all documents of this kind, is the Encyclical" Orientalium dignitas ecclesiarum" of 30 November, 1894. In this letter the pope reviewed and confirmed all similar acts of his predecessors and then strengthened them by yet severer laws against any form of latinizing the East. The first part of the Encyclical quotes examples of the care of former popes for Eastern Rites, especially of Pius IX; Pope Leo remembers also what he himself has already done for the same cause-the foundation of colleges at Rome, Philippopoli, Adrianople, Athens, and St. Ann at Jerusalem. He again commands that in these colleges students should be exactly trained to observe their own rites. He praises these venerable Eastern liturgies as representing most ancient and sacred traditions, and quotes again the text that has been used so often for this purpose, circumdata varietate applied to the queen, who is the Church (Ps. xliv, 10). The Constitutions of Benedict XIV against latinizers are confirmed; new and most severe laws are promulgated: any missionary who tries to persuade a Uniat to join the Latin Rite is ipso facto suspended, and is to be expelled from his place. In colleges where boys of different Rites are educated there are to be priests of each Rite to administer the sacraments. In case of need one may receive a sacrament from a priest of another Rite; but for Communion it should be, if possible, at least one who uses the same kind of bread. No length of use can prescribe a change of Rite. A woman in marrying may conform to her husband's Rite, but if she becomes a widow she must go back to her own.

In the Encyclical "Præclara gratulationis", of 20 June, 1894, that has been often described as "Leo XIII's testament", he again turned to the Eastern Churches and invited them in the most courteous and the gentlest way to come back to communion with us. He assures schismatics that no great difference exists between their faith and ours, and repeats once more that he would provide for all their customs without narrowness (Orth. Eastern Church, 434, 435). It was this letter that called forth the unpardonably offensive answer of Anthimos VII of Constantinople (op. cit., 435-438). Nor, as long as he lived, did Leo XIII cease caring for Eastern Churches. On 11 June, 1895, he wrote the letter "Unitas christiana" to the Copts, and on 24 December of the same year he restored the Uniat Coptic patriarchate. Lastly, on 19 March, 1895, in a motu proprio, he again insisted on the reverence due to the Eastern Churches and explained the duties of Latin delegates in the East. As a last example of all, Pius X in his Allocution, after the now famous celebration of the Byzantine Liturgy in his presence on 12 February, 1908, again repeated the same declaration of respect for Eastern rites and customs and the same assurance of his intention to preserve them (Echos d'Orient, May, 1908, 129–31). Indeed this spirit of conservatism with regard to liturgies is in our own time growing steadily at Rome with the increase of liturgical knowledge, so that there is reason to believe that whatever unintentional mistakes have been made in the past (chiefly with regard to the Maronite and Uniat Armenian rites) will now gradually be corrected, and that the tradition of the most entire acceptance and recognition of other rites

in the East will be maintained even more firmly than in the past.

On the other hand, in spite of occasional outbursts of anti-papal feeling on the part of the various chiefs of these Churches, it is certain that the vision of unity is beginning to make itself seen very widely in the East. In the first place, education and contact with Western Europeans inevitably breaks down a great part of the old prejudice, jealousy, and fear of us. It was a Latin missionary who said lately: "They are finding out that we are neither so vicious nor so clever as they had thought." And with this intercourse grows the hope of regeneration for their own nations by contact with the West. Once they realize that we do not want to eat them up, and that their milāl are safe, whatever happens, they cannot but see the advantages we have to offer them. And with this feeling goes the gradual realization of something larger in the way of a Church than their own milal. Hitherto, it was difficult to say what the various Eastern schismatics understood by the "Catholic Church" in the creed. The Orthodox certainly always mean their own communion only ("Orth. Eastern Church", 366-370); the other smaller bodies certainly hold that they alone have the true faith; every one else especially Latins -is a heretic. So, presumably, for them, too, the Catholic Church is only their own body. But this is passing with the growth of more knowledge of other countries and a juster sense of perspective. The Nestorian who looks at a map of the world can hardly go on believing that his sect is the only and whole Church of Christ. And with the apprehension of larger issues there comes the first wish for reunion. For a Church consisting of mutually excommunicate bodies is a monstrosity that is rejected by everyone (except perhaps some Armenians) in the East.

The feeling out towards the West for sympathy, help, and perhaps eventually communion, is in the direction of Catholics, not of Protestants. Protestantism is too remote from all their theology, and its principles are too destructive of all their system for it to attract them. Harnack notes this of Russians: that their more friendly feeling towards the West tends Romeward, not in an Evangelical direction (Reden und Aufsätze, II, 279); it is at least equally true of other Eastern Churches. When the conviction has spread that they have everything to gain by becoming again members of a really universal Church, that union with Rome means all the advantages of Western ideas and a sound theological position, and that, on the other hand, it leaves the national millet untouched, un-latinized, and only the stronger for so powerful an alliance, then indeed the now shadowy and remote issues about nature and person in Christ, the entirely artificial grievances of the Filioque and our azyme bread will easily be buried in the dust that has gathered over them for centuries, and Eastern Christians may some day wake up and find that there is nothing to do but to register again a union that ought never to have been broken.

Eastern Churches in General.-KATTENBUSCH, Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Confessionskunde (Freiburg im Br., 1892), I; SILBERNAGL, Verfassung und gegenwärtiger Bestand sämtlicher Kirchen des Orients (2nd ed., Ratisbon, 1904); DÖLLINGER, Ueber die Wiedervereinigung der christlichen Kirchen (Munich, 1888); DUCHESNE Eglises Séparées (Paris, 1896), tr. MATHEWS, The Churches Separated from Rome (London, 1908); LEQUIEN, Oriens Christianus (3 vols., Paris, 1740); D'AVRIL, Les églises autonomes et autocéphales (Paris, 1895).

Separate Churches.-FORTESCUE, The Orthodox Eastern Church (London, 1907), and works mentioned in the bibliography, pp. xv-xxvii; DENZINGER, Ritus Orientalium (2 vols., Würzburg, 1863); ASSEMANI, Bibliotheca Orientalis (Rome, 1719-28); BADGER, The Nestorians and their Ritual (2 vols., London, 1852); PERKINS, A Residence of Eight Years in Persia among the Nestorian Christians (New York, 1843); WIGRAM, The Doctrinal Position of the Assyrian or East Syrian Church (London, 1908); VANSLEB, Histoire de l'église d'Alexandrie (Paris, 1677); ABUDACHNA, Historia Jacobitarum seu Coptorum in Egypto, Lybia, Nubia, Ethiopia habitantium, ed. SEELEN (Lübeck, 1733); WERNER, Lehre und Geschichte der Abessinischen Kirche in Zeitschrift für kath. Theol. (1892). For

the Syrian Jacobites, see ASSEMANI, op. cit. supra, II; KLEYN, Jacobus Baradeus de Stichter der Syrische monophysietische Kerk (Leyden, 1882); LYNCH, Armenia (2 vols., London, 1901); GERMANN, Die Kirche der Thomaschristen (Gütersloh, 1877); RAE, The Syrian Church in India (London, 1892). 1907); KÖHLER, Die kathol. Kirchen des Morgenlandes (DarmThe Uniats.-Missiones Catholica (Rome, Propaganda Press, stadt, 1898); WERNER, Orbis Terrarum Catholicus (Freiburg im Br., 1890), x, xi, xv, xvi-xxiv; SILBERNAGL, op. cit., Pt. II, bruck, 1896-7), contains valuable notes and statistics of Uniat 325-85; NILLES, Kalendarium manuale (2nd ed., 2 vols., InnsChurches; D'AVRIL, Documents relatifs aux églises d'Orient (3rd ed., Paris, 1885), a selection of documents to illustrate their relations with Rome; GEORGE EBEDJESU KHAYYATH, Syri orientales seu Chaldai Nestoriani et Rom. Pontificum primatus (Rome, 1870); GIAMIL, Genuinæ relationes inter sedem Apostolicam et Assyriorum orientalium seu Chaldæorum ecclesiam (Rome, 1902); VERNIER, Histoire du patriarcat arménien catholique (Paris, 1891); MURAD, Notice historique sur l'origine de la nation Maronite (Paris, 1844); DEBS, Les Maronites du Liban (Paris, 1875). ADRIAN FORTESCUE.

Easterwine (or EOSTERWINI), Abbot of Wearmouth, was the nephew of St. Benedict Biscop; b. 650, d. 7 March, 686. Descended from the noblest stock of Northumbria, as a young man he led the life of a soldier in the army of King Egfrid, the son of Oswy. When twenty-four years old he gave up the soldier's profession to become a monk in the monastery of Wearmouth, then ruled over by St. Benedict Biscop. He is described as a noble youth, conspicuous for his humility and bodily activity, but withal infinitely gentle; a most exact observer of rule and one who loved to perform the lowliest work. He was ordained priest in the year 679, and in 682 St. Benedict appointed him abbot of Wearmouth as coadjutor to himself. As superior "when he was compelled to reprove a fault, it was done with such tender sadness that the culprit felt himself incapable of any new offence which should bring a cloud over the benign brightness of that beloved face". In the year 686 a deadly pestilence overspread the country; it attacked the community at Wearmouth and the youthful abbot was one of its victims. He bade farewell to all, the day before he died, and passed away on 7 March, when only thirty-six years old. St. Benedict was absent in Rome at the time of his death and Sigfried was chosen by the monks as his successor. Easterwine is not known to have been the author of any works.

MONTALEMBERT, The Monks of the West (London, 1847), IV, Omnia, VII; Acta SS. (Venice, 1735), March, VIII, 650. 450 sqq.; BEDE, Vita abbatum in Wiramutha et Girvum in Opera G. E. HIND.

Easton, ADAM, Cardinal, b. at Easton in Norfolk; d. at Rome, 15 Sept. (according to others, 20 Oct.), 1397. He joined the Benedictines at Norwich. He probably accompanied Archbishop Langham to Rome and, being a man of learning and ability, obtained a post in the Curia. He was made Cardinal-priest of the title of St. Cecilia by Urban VI, probably in Dec., 1381. On 7 March, 1381 or 1382, he was nominated Dean of York. In 1385 he was imprisoned by Urban on a charge of conspiring with five other cardinals against the pope and was deprived of his cardinalate and deanery. The next pope, Boniface IX, restored his cardinalate 18 Dec., 1389, and for a time Easton returned to England, where he held a prebend in Salisbury cathedral, which he subsequently exchanged for the living of Heygham in Norwich. He wrote many works, none of which are extant, and is stated to have composed the Office for the Visitation of Our Lady.

CIACCONIUS, Vita Pontif. (Rome, 1677); GODWIN, de Præsulibus Anglia (London, 1742), 793; WILLIAMS, Lives of the English Cardinals (London, 1868), I, vii; CREIGHTON, History of the Papacy (London, 1882), I, 80 sqq.; POOLE in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.

EDWIN BURTON.

East Syrian Rite. See SYRIAN RITE.

Eata, SAINT, second Bishop of Hexham; date of birth unknown; d. 26 October, 686. Whether this disciple of St. Aidan was of the English, or of the abo

iginal Pictish, race, there is no means of judging. As early as 651 he was elected Abbot of Melrose, which was then within the metropolitan jurisdiction of York. With the increase of the Christian population in northeastern Britain, the spiritual government of a territory so wide as that which was then called Northumbria became too heavy a charge for one see; accordingly, in 678 Archbishop Theodore constituted Bernicia (that part of the Northumbrian realm which lay to the north of the River Tees) a suffragan diocese and conse→ crated Eata its bishop. The new diocese was to have two episcopal sees, one at Hexham and the other at Lindisfarne, at the two extremities of what is now the County of Northumberland. Eata was to be styled "Bishop of the Bernicians". This arrangement lasted only three years, and the See of Hexham was then assigned to Trumbert, while Eata kept Lindisfarne. In 684, after the death of Trumbert, St. Cuthbert was elected Bishop of Hexham, but when the latter expressed a desire to remain in his old home rather than remove to the more southern see, Eata readily consented to exchange with him, and for the last two years of his life occupied the See of Hexham, while Cuthbert ruled as bishop at Lindisfarne. Like most of the early saints of the English Church, St. Eata was canonized by general repute of sanctity among the faithful in the regions which he helped to Christianize. His feast is kept on 26 October, the day of his death.

Acta SS. (1864), XI, 922 sqq.: RAINE, Miscellanea biogr. (Surtees Soc., 1838), XV, 119; TWISDEN ed., RICHARD OF HEXHAM, Chronicles; BEDE, Hist. Eccl., III, IV; HUNT in Dict. Nat. Biogr., s. v.; BRIGHT in Dict. Christ. Biogr., s. v. E. MACPHERSON.

Ebbo (EBO), Archbishop of Reims, b. towards the end of the eighth century; d. 20 March, 851. Though born of German serfs, he was educated at the court of Charlemagne who gave him his liberty. After his elevation to the priesthood he became librarian of Louis le Débonnaire and was his councillor in the government of Aquitaine. When Louis became emperor he appointed Ebbo archbishop of the vacant See of Reims in 816. Acting on the suggestion of the emperor, he went to Rome in 822, in order to obtain permission from Pope Paschal I to preach the Gospel to the Danes. The pope not only gave his sanction but also appointed Ebbo papal legate for the North. In company with a certain Halitgar, probably the one who was Bishop of Cambrai (817–831), and Willerich, Bishop of Bremen, he set out for Denmark in the spring of 823, and after preaching with some success during the following summer he returned to France in the autumn of the same year. Twice again he returned to Denmark, but each time his stay was of short duration and without any lasting effect on the pagan Danes whose Christianization was brought about a few years later by St. Ansgar. When, in 830, the sons of the emperor rose in rebellion against their father, Ebbo supported the emperor; but three years later he turned against him and on 13 November, 833, presided at the shameful scene enacted in the Church of St. Mary at Soissons, where the aged emperor was deposed and compelled to perform public penance for crimes which he had not committed. As a reward for this disgraceful act Ebbo received the rich Abbey of St. Vaast from Lothaire. He continued to support the rebellious Lothaire even after Louis had been solemnly reinstated in March, 834. Being prevented by a severe attack of the gout from following Lothaire to Italy he took refuge in the cell of a hermit near Paris, but was found out and sent as prisoner to the Abbey of Fulda. On 2 February, 835, he appeared at the Synod of Thionville, where in the presence of the emperor and forty-three bishops he solemn ly declared the monarch innocent of the crimes of which he had accused him at Soissons, and on 28 February, 835, made a public recantation from the pulpit of the cathedral of Metz.

Returning to the synod at Thionville, Ebbo was deposed by the emperor and the assembled bishops and brought back as prisoner to the Abbey of Fulda. Somewhat later he was given in custody to Bishop Fréculf of Lisieux and afterwards to Abbot Boso of Fleury. When Lothair became emperor, Ebbo was restored to the See of Reims, in December, 840, but a year later, when Charles the Bald invaded the northeastern part of France, he was again driven from his see. Many had considered Ebbo's reinstatement by Lothair unlawful, and Hincmar, who became Archbishop of Reims in 845, refused to recognize the ordinations administered by him after his reinstatement. The Council of Soissons (853) declared the ordinations invalid. There seems to be little doubt that the pseudo-Isidorian Decretals have as their author one of the ecclesiastics ordained by Ebbo after his reinstatement. Ebbo found shelter at the court of Lothair, who gave him the incomes of several abbeys and used him for various legations. In 844 Ebbo requested Pope Sergius II to restore him to the See of Reims but was admitted only to lay communion. A few other attempts to regain his former see were likewise unsuccessful. When Lothair could make no further use of Ebbo he discarded him, but Ebbo found a supporter in Louis the German, who appointed him Bishop of Hildesheim some time between April, 845, and October, 847. Ebbo is the author of the "Apologeticum Ebbonis", a short apologetic narrative of his deposition and reinstatement. It is published in Mansi, Amplissima Collectio Conciliorum", XIV, 775-9, and in Migne, P. L., CXVI, 11-16.

FLODOARDUS, Historia Remensis Ecclesia in Mon. Germ. Hist.,

Script., XIII, 467 sqq.; GUIZOT, Histoire de l'Eglise de Rheims (Paris, 1824), 193–220; MANN, The Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages (London and St. Louis, 1906), II, 246 sqq. et passim; HEFELE, Conciliengeschichte (Freiburg im Br., 1879), IV, passim; HAUCK, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands (Leipzig, 1900), II, 670 sqq. et passim; SIMSON, Jahrbücher des fränkischen Reiches unter Ludwig dem Frommen (Leipzig, 1874), I, 207 sqq.; SCHRÖRS, Hinkmar, Erzbischof von Reims (Freiburg im Br., 1884), 27 sqq. WATTENBACH, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter, 7th ed. (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1904), I, 326, et passim. MICHAEL OTT.

Ebendorfer, THOMAS, German chronicler, professor, and statesman, b. 12 August, 1385, at Haselbach, in Upper Austria; d. at Vienna, 8 Jan., 1464. He made his higher studies at the University of Vienna, where in 1412 he received the degree of Master of Arts. Until 1427 he was attached to the Faculty of Arts and lectured on Aristotle and Latin grammar. After 1419 he was also admitted to the theological faculty as cursor biblicus. In 1427 he was made licentiate and in 1428 master of theology; soon after he became dean of the theological faculty, in which body he was a professor until his death. Three several times, 1423, 1429, and 1445 he was rector of the University of Vienna; he was also canon of St. Stephen's, and engaged in the apostolic ministry as preacher and as pastor of Perchtoldsdorf and of Falkenstein near Vienna. He ranks high among the professors of the University of Vienna in the fifteenth century. In the struggles which it had to sustain he championed the rights and interests of the university with zeal and energy. He represented the university at the Council of Basle (1432-34), took an active part in all its discussions, and was one of the delegates sent by the council to Prague to confer with the Hussites. From 1440 to 1444 he was sent to various cities as ambassador of Emperor Frederick III. He disapproved of the attitude of the Council of Basle towards both pope and emperor, and eventually withdrew from it. His advocacy of the rights of the Vienna University, coupled with the attacks of his opponents lost him the favour of the emperor, who saw in him a secret enemy. In 1451 and 1452 he was in Italy and went to Rome where he obtained from the pope a confirmation of the privileges of the University of Vienna. In the wat