Selected quad for the lemma: city_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
city_n	bishop_n	church_n	ordain_v	4,727	4	9.0001	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52277	The unreasonableness of a separation from the new bishops, or, A treatise out of ecclesiastical history shewing that although a bishop was unjustly deprived, neither he nor the church ever made a separation, if the successor was not a heretick / translated out of an ancient Greek manuscript in the publick library at Oxford, by Humfrey Hody ...; Anglicani novi schismatis redargutio. English.	Nicephorus Callistus Xanthopulus, ca. 1256-ca. 1335.; Hody, Humphrey, 1659-1707.	1691 (1691)	Wing N1076; ESTC R18833	16,596	38

that unjust Deprivation however were not so far transported as to make a Schism in the Church But then the Populace of Constantinople they were so enraged at it that they not only forsook but like Recusants or a Rabble set fire to the Church which took hold also of the Parliament House and laid it in ashes But as that case is quite foreign to this of our New Bishops so was the Separation no less contrary to the Spirit of S. Chrysostom That Good Man as a Bishop that was then present has related it when he saw he must be deposed advised and charged the Bishops his Friends more than once That as they loved Christ none of them should leave his Church upon his account That they must keep Communion with his Deposers and not rend and divide the Church And he injoyn'd some Devout Women that attended there That as they hoped to obtain mercy from God they should pay the same Service and Good-will to his Successor by a fair Election that they had done to himself FOR THE CHURCH COULD NOT BE WITHOUT A BISHOP How could he if he had now been alive have more clearly and expresly given his opinion in our Case If a man otherwise never so worthy will acknowledge no duty to the Civil Magistrate which protects him if he shall refuse to act in his Function if he will not be the Bishop somebody else must be For the Church cannot be without a Bishop This is not being deprived but relinquishing and a Successor does not invade but is placed in the Chair by the united Efficacy of Canons Law and Necessity 'T is supposed the Reader knows that for several Ages the Greek Churches have erroneously maintain'd That Adoration is to be paid to the Images of our Saviour and therefore needs not be offended at one or two passages in this Treatise to which it is now time to dismiss him Imprimatur Georgius Royse R. R. in Christo P. ac D no D no Johanni Archiepisc Cantuar. à Sacr. Domest July 6th 1691. ERRATA PAg. 13. l. 10. read He 's constrain'd by P. 19. l. 13. read Syncellus or P. ibid. l. 16. read Nicolaus P. 21. Marg. l. 7. read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A TREATISE Out of Ecclesiastical Histories concerning such as at several times have been promoted to the Patriar●hal See contrary to the Canons the rightfull Patriarchs being depos'd and yet living Amongst whom we may observe that not one of those that were unjustly depos'd did ever separate himself from the Communion of the Church upon the account of his being depos'd provided that he that was uncanonically promoted after him was Orthodox Excepting onely the Case of Chrysostome which requires a particular Consideration THE great John Chrysostome a most holy and excellent person living within the Jurisdiction of the Antiochian See was ordain'd Deacon by Meletius Patriarch of Antioch This Meletius having formerly been made Bishop of Sebastia by the Arians and afterwards translated to the Throne of Antioch by the Suffrages both of the Arians and Orthodox Eustathius late Bishop of Sebastia being yet in banishment was nevertheless because of his Orthodoxy both accepted by and beneficial to the Church Even the great Basil was ordain'd Deacon by the said Meletius Now Chrysostome being call'd from Antioch and seated upon the Throne of Constantinople was afterwards unjustly depos'd and thrust out of the City and after him there was consecrated Arsacius the Brother of Nectarius who was Patriarch there before Chrysostome He held the Patriarchate 14 months and as cannot but be supposed ordain'd Presbyters Bishops and Deacons none of whom were rejected by the Church After his death the Blessed Atticus was consecrated Chrysostome being yet alive and in exile He raised a Persecution against those that adher'd to Chrysostome and possessing the Patriarchate 20 years was approved by the Church both he himself and those that he had ordain'd no one being troubled or called in question upon the account of his Ordination These things are deliver'd in the History of Socrates From Atticus Sisinnius who succeeded him deriv'd his Ordination and by Sisinnius Proclus was consecrated Bishop of Cyzicus Now if you would be certain that Atticus was own'd and receiv'd by the Church the divine Celestine Bishop of Rome is a witness of that matter who in an Epistle to Nestorius praises and owns both Atticus himself and Sisinnius who was Patriarch after him and ranks them as Patriarchs after Chrysostome After Sisinnius Nestorius was plac'd in the Throne And the Third General Council did not narrowly examine into the promotions of those Patriarchs or about their Ordinations but only deposing the Heretick Nestorius it receiv'd and own'd all those that had been made Priests or Bishops by Arsacius Atticus and Sisinnius and even by Nestorius too provided that they profess'd the Orthodox Faith and confess'd the Blessed Virgin to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Mother of God After the Council Maximian was consecrated Patriarch by such as had receiv'd their Ordinations from the aforesaid four Patriarchs After him the Bl. Proclus who deriv'd his Ordination from the same Hands was advanc'd to that Dignity These things are related in the History of Zonaras Now the Bl. Proclus and not only he but likewise Maximian before him and Atticus and Sisinnius were receiv'd into Communion by S. Cyril After Proclus by the same succession of Ordination Flavianus obtain'd the Patriarchate See now the Succession They that depos'd Chrysostome consecrated Arsacius the same together with Arsacius consecrated Atticus Arsacius and Atticus Sisinnius and Sisinnius Proclus who as I said held Church-communion with S. Cyril Observe moreover that Severianus Bishop of Gabala and Acacius Bishop of Berrhea who were the chief Authours of all the Calamities that befell Chrysostome being afterwards call'd in question by Pope Innonocent were neither depos'd nor reprehended by him the Pope leaving their punishment to God The Bl. Flavianus having condemn'd and depriv'd the Heretick Eutyches the Emperour Theodosius commanded Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria to inspect and examine again into the matters between them Dioscorus thereupon having call'd a Council at Ephesus the second of that place judg'd condemn'd depos'd and murder'd the B. Flavianus contrary to all Ecclesiastical order absolving Eutyches and consecrating Anatolius in Flavianus's room You see that Anatolius was consecrated contrary to the Canons seeing it was by Dioscorus a Murderer and a Heretick that espous'd the Cause and the Heresie of Eutyches But observe further Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem Basil Bishop of Seleucia Photius Bishop of Isauria in Epirus Eustathius Bishop of Berytus Thalassius Bishop of Cesarea in Cappadocia and in a word all that whole Council concurr'd and acted with Dioscorus in the unjust ejectment of Flavianus and the unlawfull Ordination of Anatolius in his place Yet none of them were rejected in the Fourth General Council of Chalcedon only Eutyches and Dioscorus that persisted in