Patriarchates of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, who have other rites in other languages.
But why is this distinction made at all? Why do we have one name for members of one Patriarchate and classify all the others together under another name? Why should one not just as well put the Catholics of any other Patriarchate, for instance, Antioch, on one side and call all the others who are in union with them, Uniates? There is no special reason why we should not. The distinction between Latins and Uniates comes, first from a certain precedence that the Roman Patriarchate must have, still more perhaps from an accident of history. Certainly, since the Roman Patriarch is the chief of his brethren, it would be strange to begin by considering any other branch of the Church as the standard, and then putting him with all that remain in one group, as being in union with a lesser dignitary than himself. If the Pope is in union with another bishop, it is more natural to call the other bishop the Uniate than the Pope.
But, still more, this distinction between Latins and Uniates is the result of the development of Church History. In the old days when, for instance, the first Council of Nicæa maintained as an "ancient custom" that there should be three chief bishops having jurisdiction over others, those of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch,[1] then the Roman Pontiff had by no means the best share for his Patriarchate. Alexandria had all the fat land of Egypt, richest and most populous province of the Empire. Antioch had Syria, Asia Minor, Greece — all flourishing lands, full of great cities, the heart of the Empire since Constantine had brought the Eagles back near the Trojan mountains.[2] Rome, besides the old Imperial City itself, had Italy, already threatened, soon to be overrun by barbarians. She had Africa, no mean province, but not to be compared with Egypt (and here, too, the Vandals would come). Then she had only the wild western lands, at that time the haunt of heathen savages, who then were of little use to any bishop. No one in the fourth century could foresee how great a change there would be. This change was mainly the work of the Roman Patriarchs themselves. As distinct from their place as Primates of the whole Church, they held the least enviable of Patriarchates. Without envying their brothers of Alexandria and Antioch the prosperous, civilized territories over which these ruled, the Popes set out to convert the barbarians of their own
