xxx. 18; 1 Tim. i. 16; and towards the ungodly, Rom. ii. 4; Eccl. viii. 11. The end of his forbearance to the wicked, is, that they may be without excuse; to make his power and goodness visible; and partly for the sake of his own people, Gen. xviii. 32; Rev. vi. 11; 2 Pet. iii. 9. His patience is manifested by giving warnings of judgments before he executes them, Hos. vi. 5; Amos i. 1; 2 Pet. ii. 5. In long delaying his judgments, Eccl. viii. 11. In often mixing mercy with them. There are many instances of his patience recorded in the Scriptures; with the old world, Gen. vi. 3; the inhabitants of Sodom, Gen. xviii.; in Pharaoh, Exod. v.; in the people of Israel in the wilderness, Acts xiii. 18; in the Amorites and Canaanites, Gen. xv. 15; Lev. xviii. 28; in the Gentile world, Acts xvii. 30; in fruitless professors, Luke xiii. 6, 9; in Antichrist, Rev. ii. 21; xiii. 6; xviii. 8. See Charnock's Works, vol. i. p. 780; Gill's Body of Divinity, vol. i. p. 130; Saurin's Sermons, vol. i. ser. 10 and 11, pp. 148, 149; Tillotson's Sermons.

PATRIARCHS (from the Greek Tarpia, family, and apxwv, head, or ruler), heads of families; a name applied chiefly to those who lived before Moses, who were both priests and princes, without peculiar places fitted for worship, Acts ii. 29; vii. 8, 9; Heb.

vii. 4.

Patriarchs, in church history, are ecclesiastical dignitaries, or bishops, so called from their paternal authority in the church. It obtained first among the Jews, as the title of the presidents of the Sanhedrim, which exercised a general authority over the Jews of Syria and Persia, after the destruction of Jerusalem. The patriarchate of Tiberias, for the Western Jews, subsisted till the year 415; that of Babylon, for the Eastern Jews, till 1038. When introduced into the Christian Church, the power of patriarchs was not the same in all, but differed according to the different customs of countries, or the pleasure of kings and councils. Thus the patriarch of Constantinople grew to be a patriarch over the patriarchs of Ephesus and Cæsarea, and was called the Ecumenical and Universal Patriarch; and the patriarch of Alexandria had some prerogatives which no other patriarch but himself enjoyed; such as the right of consecrating and approving of every single bishop under his jurisdiction.

The patriarchate has ever been esteemed the supreme dignity in the church: the bishop had only under him the territory of the city of which he was bishop; the metropolitan superintended a province, and had for suffragans the bishops of his province; the primate was the chief of what was then called a diocese, and had several metropolitans under him; and the patriarch had under him several dioceses, composing one exarchate, and the primates themselves were under him. Usher, Pagi, De Marca, and Morinus, attribute the establishment of the grand patriarchates to the apostles themselves, who, in their opinion, according to the description of the world then given by geographers, pitched on three principal cities in the three parts of the known world, viz. Rome in Europe, Antioch in Asia, and Alexandria in Africa; and thus formed a trinity of patriarchs. Others maintain that the name patriarch was unknown at the time of the Council of Nice; and that for a long time afterwards patriarchs and primates were confounded together, as being all equally chiefs of dioceses, and equally superior to metropolitans, who were only chiefs of provinces. Hence Socrates gives the title patriarch to all the chiefs of dioceses, and reckons ten of them. Indeed, it does not appear that the dignity of patriarch was appropriated to the five grand sees of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, till after the Council of Chalcedon, in 451; for when the Council of Nice regulated the limits and prerogatives of the three patriarchs of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, it did not give them the title of patriarchs, though it allowed them the pre-eminence and privileges thereof: thus when the Council of Constantinople adjudged the second place to the bishop of Constantinople, who, till then, was only a suffragan of Heraclea, it said nothing of the patriarchate. Nor is the term patriarch found in the decree of the Council of Chalcedon, whereby the fifth place is assigned to the bishop of Jerusalem; nor did these five patriarchs govern all the churches.

There were besides many independent chiefs of dioceses, who, far from owning the jurisdiction of the grand patriarchs, called themselves patriarchs, such as that of Aquileia; nor was Carthage ever subject to the patriarch of Alexandria. Mosheim (Eccles. Hist., vol. i.

p. 284) imagines that the bishops who enjoyed a certain degree of pre-eminence over the rest of their order, were distinguished by the Jewish title of patriarchs in the fourth century. The authority of the patriarchs gradually increased till about the close of the fifth century: all affairs of moment within the compass of their patriarchates came before them, either at first hand, or by appeals from the metropolitans. They consecrated bishops; assembled yearly in council the clergy of their respective districts; pronounced a decisive judgment on those cases where accusations were brought against bishops; and appointed vicars or deputies, clothed with their authority, for the preservation of order and tranquillity in the remoter provinces. In short, nothing was done without consulting them, and their decrees were executed with the same regularity and respect as those of the princes.

It deserves to be remarked, however, that the authority of the patriarchs was not acknowledged through all the provinces without exception. Several districts, both in the castern and western empires, were exempted from their jurisdiction. The Latin Church had no patriarchs till the sixth contury; and the churches of Gaul, Britain, &c. were never subject to the authority of the patriarch of Rome, whose authority only extended to the suburbicary provinces. There was no primacy, no exarchate, nor patriarchate, owned here; but the bishops, with the metropolitans, governed the church in common. Indeed, after the name patriarch became frequent in the West, it was attributed to the bishop of Bourges and Lyons; but it was only in the first signification, viz. as heads of dioceses. Du Cange says, there have been some abbots who have borne the title of patriarchs. The archbishops of Lisbon and Venice have still the title. The former is primate of Portugal; but the latter has no authority over other archbishops.

At present, the Greek Church is governed by four patriarchs, viz., those of Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria. The last three are equal and independent, but they acknowledge the superiority of the other, and his authority, in so far that nothing important can be undertaken in the regulation of spiritual affairs without his consent.

The patriarch of Constantinople is elected, by plurality of votes, by the metropolitan and neighbouring bishops, and presented to the sultan for institution. This favour is seldom refused, if he bring with him the usual presents, which have varied, according to the varieties of wealth or avarice, from 20,000 to 30,000 dollars. But having conceded this formality in the election, the sultan retains the unmitigated power of deposition, banishment, or execution; and it is needless to add, that even the paltry exaction on institution is motive sufficient for the frequent exertion of that power; and it has sometimes happened, that the patriarch, on some trifling dispute, has been obliged to purchase his confirmation in office. He possesses the privilege (in name, perhaps, rather than reality) of nominating his brother patriarchs: and, after their subsequent election by the bishops of their respective patriarchates, of confirming the election; but the barat of the sultan is still necessary to give authority both to themselves, and even to every bishop whom they may eventually appoint in the execution of their office. The election of the other patriarchs, as they are further removed from the centre of oppression, is less restrained, and their deposition less frequent. But this comparative security is attended by little power or consequence; and two at least of the three are believed to number very few subjects who remain faithful to the orthodox church. The patriarch of Antioch has two rivals who assume the same title and dignity-the one as the head of the Syrian Jacobite Church, the other as the Maronite patriarch, or head of the Syrian Catholics. The patriarch of Alexandria, who resides generally at Cairo, has also his Coptic rival; and the few who are subject to him are chiefly found in the villages or capital of Lower Egypt. The patriarchs of Antioch and Jerusalem reside chiefly at Constantinople, and enjoy very slender and precarious revenues. Eclec. Rev. July, 1831.

PATRICIANS, ancient sectaries who disturbed the peace of the church in the beginning of the third century; thus called from their founder, Patricius, preceptor of a Marcionite called Symmachus. His distinguishing tenet was, that the substance of the flesh is not the work of God, but that of the devil; on which account his adherents bore an implacable

hatred to their own flesh, which some times carried them so far as to kill themselves.

PATRIPASSIANS, a sect that appeared about the latter end of the second century; so called from their ascribing the passion or sufferings of Christ to the Father; for they asserted the unity of God in such a manner as to destroy all distinctions of persons, and to make the Father and Son precisely the same; in which they were followed by the Sabellians and others. The author and head of the Patripassians was Praxeas, a philosopher of Phrygia, in Asia.

PATRISTICS, Theologia Patristica, that branch of historical theology which treats particularly of the lives and doctrines of the fathers of the church. It is at present studied with unusual zeal in Germany, where, at Tübingen, a cheap "Bibliotheca Patrum Latinorum" was published in 1827.

PATRONAGE, OR ADVOWSON, a sort of incorporeal hereditament, consisting in the right of presentation to a church, or ecclesiastical benefice. AdVowson signifies the taking into protection, and therefore is synonymous with patronage; and he who has the right of advowson is called the patron of the church.

PAULIANISTS, a sect so called from their founder, Paulus Samosatenus, a native of Samosata, elected bishop of Antioch, in 262. His doctrine seems to have amounted to this: that the Son and the Holy Ghost exist in God in the same manner as the faculties of reason and activity do in man; that Christ was born a mere man: but that the reason or wisdom of the Father descended into him, and by him wrought miracles upon earth, and instructed the nations; and, finally, that on account of this union of the divine word with the man Jesus, Christ might, though improperly, be called God. It is also said that he did not baptize in the name of the Father and the Son, &c.; for which reason the Council of Nice ordered those baptized by him to be re-baptized. Being condemned by Dionysius Alexandrinus in a council, he abjured his errors to avoid deposition; but soon after he resumed them, and was actually deposed by another council in 269. He may be considered as the father of the modern Socinians; and his errors are severely condemned by the Council of Nice,

whose creed differs a little from that now used under the same name in the Church of England. The creed agreed upon by the Nicene fathers, with a view to the errors of Paulus Samosatenus, concludes thus :-" But those who say there was a time when he was not, and that he was not before he was born, the Catholic and apostolic church anathematize."

PAULICIANS, so called from their founder, one Paulus, an Armenian, in the seventh century, who, with his brother John, formed this sect; though others are of opinion that they were thus called from another Paul, an Armenian by birth, who lived under the reign of Justinian II. In the seventh century, one Constantine revived this drooping party, which had suffered much from the violence of its adversaries, and was ready to expire under the severity of the imperial edicts, and that zeal with which they were carried into execution. The Paulicians, however, by their number, and the countenance of the emperor Nicephorus, became formidable to all the East. But the cruel rage of persecution, which had for some years been suspended, broke forth with redoubled violence under the reigns of Michael Curopalates, and Leo the Armenian, who inflicted capital punishment on such of the Paulicians as refused to return into the bosom of the church. The empress Theodora, tutoress of the emperor Michael, in 845, would oblige them either to be converted, or to quit the empire; upon which several of them were put to death, and more retired among the Saracens; but they were neither all exterminated nor banished.

Upon this, they entered into a league with the Saracens, and choosing for their chief an officer of the greatest resolution and valour, whose name was Carbeus, they declared against the Greeks a war, which was carried on for fifty years with the greatest vehemence and fury. During these commotions, some Paulicians, towards the conclusion of this century, spread abroad their doctrines among the Bulgarians: many of them, either from a principle of zeal for the propagation of their opinions, or from a natural desire of flying from the persecution which they suffered under the Grecian yoke, retired about the close of the eleventh century from Bulgaria and Thrace, and

principal standards of appeal on doctrinal matters in the Church of England. --Jones's Christ. Biog.

PELAGIANS, a sect who appeared about the end of the fourth century. They maintained the following doctrines: 1. That Adam was by nature mortal; and, whether he had sinned or not, would certainly have died.-2. That the consequences of Adam's sin were confined to his own person.-3. That newborn infants are in the same situation with Adam before the fall.-4. That the law qualified men for the kingdom of heaven, and was founded upon equal promises with the gospel.-5. That the general resurrection of the dead does not follow in virtue of our Saviour's resurrection.-6. That the grace of God is given according to our merits.-7. That this grace is not granted for the performance of every moral act; the liberty of the will and information in points of duty being sufficient.

The founder of this sect was Pelagius, a native of Great Britain. He was educated in the monastery of Bangor, in Wales, of which he became a monk, and afterwards an abbot. In the early part of his life he went over to France, and thence to Rome, where he and his friend Celestius propagated their opinions, though in a private manner. Upon the approach of the Goths, A.D. 410, they retired from Rome, and went first into Sicily, and afterwards into Africa, where they published their doctrines with more freedom. From Africa, Pelagius passed into Palestine, while Celestius remained at Carthage, with a view to preferment, desiring to be admitted among the presbyters of that city. But the discovery of his opinions having blasted all his hopes, and his errors being condemned in a council held at Carthage, A.D. 412, he departed from that city, and went into the East. It was from this time that Augustin, the famous bishop of Hippo, began to attack the tenets of Pelagius and Celestius in his learned and elegant writings; and to him, indeed, is principally due the glory of having suppressed this sect in its very birth.

Things went more smoothly with Pelagius in the East, where he enjoyed the protection and favour of John, bishop of Jerusalem, whose attachment to the sentiments of Origen led him naturally to countenance those of Pelagius, on account of the conformity that there seemed

to be between these two systems. Under the shadow of this powerful protection, Pelagius made a public profession of his opinions, and formed disciples in several places. And though, in the year 415, he was accused by Orosius, a Spanish Presbyter, whom Augustin had sent into Palestine for that purpose, before an assembly of bishops met at Jerusalem, yet he was dismissed without the least censure; and not only so, but was soon after fully acquitted of all errors by the council of Diospolis.

This controversy was brought to Rome, and referred by Celestius and Pelagius to the decision of Zosimus, who was raised to the pontificate, A.D. 417. The new pontiff, gained over by the ambiguous and seemingly orthodox confession of faith that Celestius, who was now at Rome, had artfully drawn up, and also by the letters and protestations of Pelagius, pronounced in favour of these monks, declared them sound in the faith, and unjustly persecuted by their adversaries. The African bishops, with Augustin at their head, little affected with this declaration, continued obstinately to maintain the judgment they had pronounced in this matter, and to strengthen it by their exhortations, their letters, and their writings. Zosimus yielded to the perseverance of the Africans, changed his mind, and condemned, with the utmost severity, Pelagius and Celestius, whom he had honoured with his approbation, and covered with his protection. This was followed by a train of evils, which pursued these two monks without interruption. They were condemned, says Mosheim, by that same Ephesian council which had launched its thunder at the head of Nestorius. In short, the Gauls, Britons, and Africans, by their councils and emperors, by their edicts and penal laws, demolished this sect in its infancy, and suppressed it entirely before it had acquired any tolerable degree of vigour or consistence.

PENANCE, a punishment either voluntary, or imposed by authority, for the faults a person has committed. Penance is one of the seven sacraments of the Romish Church. Besides fasting, alms, abstinence, and the like, which are the general conditions of penance, there are others of a more particular kind; as the repeating a certain number of ave-marys, paternosters, and credos; wearing a hair shirt, and giving one's self a certain