suffragans, even a studious imitation of Papal titles and style. No bishop is to settle anything without the Patriarch's leave; whereas he acts with too great independence of his superior, the Pope. There are supposed to be Jansenist infiltrations in expressions about grace and sacraments; there were decrees annoying to the Salvatorians. For all these reasons the synod was said to be tainted with the errors of Ḳarḳafah; it was never approved at Rome. In this synod the old quarrel of precedence between Tyre and Aleppo came up again.[1]
Meanwhile Ri'āshī of Beirut was still in opposition against his Patriarch, and the Shuwair monks of his diocese were in opposition against him. They wanted independence of the Metropolitan and immediate dependence on the Patriarch. After a long quarrel which embittered Maximos's last years, Rome decided for Ri'āshī. Maximos was summoned to Rome, and refused to go. It is even said that very grave remonstrances were about to be sent to him by Propaganda when he sickened and died. Certainly at his death the Patriarchate was in a great state of disorder. Maximos fell sick at Cairo in the spring of 1855. He would not use any relaxation of the severe fast of Lent according to his rite, saying that the Patriarch, above all, should give a good example of fidelity to the laws of his Church. He received the last sacraments, died a holy death on August 11, 1855,[2] and is buried at Cairo.
Maximos III had many enemies during his long career. He was accused of pride and too great pomp. Certainly he loved to surround himself with attendants; he loved grand titles and splendid ceremonies. His weakness was ordaining useless bishops and then quarrelling with them. Yet he was by far the greatest Patriarch, perhaps the greatest bishop, the Melkite Church has had. He was a man of great erudition, author of a score of valuable works on grammar, history, liturgy, and theology.[3] He inherited the Gallican ideas of Germanos Ādam, which he never quite laid aside. For all that, he was a man of unquestioned piety, zeal, and energy for the good of his Melkites. In spite of his Gallicanisms and assumptions of independence, he was never anything approaching a heretic or schismatic. Now all his faults are long forgotten by his people.
- ↑ For the Synod of Jerusalem in 1849 see Charon, op. cit., ii, chap. v, pp. 217-251.
- ↑ His will is in Charon, op. cit., ii, 261-267. In it he protests his Catholic sentiments and fidelity to the Holy See. The story of his last hours is most edifying and touching (ibid., 259-260).
- ↑ The list of his works is given in Charon, op. cit., ii, 267-276.
