Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	archbishop_n	bishop_n	john_n	13,096	5	6.2353	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A44087	The case of sees vacant by an unjust or uncanonical deprivation, stated in reply to a treatise entituled A vindication of the deprived bishops, &c. : together with the several other pamphlets lately publish'd as answers to the Baroccian treatise / by Humphry Hody ...	Hody, Humphrey, 1659-1707.	1693 (1693)	Wing H2339; ESTC R13783	282,258	245

joy to see him and receiv'd his Blessing So great an Honour was paid our Sabas though as to his outward appearance he was nothing else but a poor ragged old Man I pass by all these things But this the Reader is desired to take notice of and remember That by both the Churches as well the Western as the Eastern Theodosius and Sabas are both honoured with the Title of Saints They are not only Worshipt as Saints but in the Liturgies the Menology and the Anthology of the Greek Church they have as two of the Sancti majorum gentium their proper and peculiar Offices Let us hear a little those Elogiums and Praises which they give them not private Authors but the whole Greek Church in her sacred Offices most blessed Sabas says the Church in her addresses to that Saint The unextinguish'd Lamp of Continence the most refulgent Luminary of those that live a monastick life enlighten'd with love the unshaken Tower of Perseverance Holy Sabas the fiery Pillar of Vertues the light that guides those that sail on the Sea of the World to the Shoar of Heaven thou that opposest the Spirits of Error the pure Vessel of the Holy Ghost the conductor of Monastick Persons the exact measure of Temperance the most illustrious Example of Humility the perfect Rule of Virtue Much more of the like Nature the pours out in the Praises of that Saint and much of the same Nature she offers up to S. Theodosius Holy Father Divine Theodosius says she in a Prayer to him composed by Theophanes See likewise that Hymn which she Sings in Praise of him composed by Iohanne Dam●s●enas Thus much I thought sit to say concerning those two great Men that the World may see what Examples those are which we follow 〈◊〉 it was not only the Church of Palaestine S. Sabas and S. Theodosius c. that acknowledged Iohn as true Patriarch of Ierusalem It appears from an Epistle of Iohannes Cappadoae Patriarch of Constantinople and the Synod of Constantinople that was call'd under him in the beginning of the Emperor Iustin viz. on the year 5'8 that the whole Greek Church acknowleged him The Latin Church at that time was broken off from the Communion of the Greek Church on the Account of Acacius formerly Patriarch of Constantinople That Epistle is extant in the Acts of the Council sub Mennâ and is directed to our Iohn Archbishop of Jerusalem and to the Metropolitans under him It begins thus Christ our God who has given from Heaven the Bond of Charity in Peace to Men that are of one Soul and of one Faith has Commanded that what is done by some should be Communicated to all c. I have therefore thought it necessary to signifie these things to your Holiness that by the assistance of the Holy Ghost you by knowing what has been done may be confirm'd in the Word of Truth The business of the Epistle is to let him and his Bishops know that Severns the Heretical Patriarch of Antioch had been Anathematiz'd at Constantinople c. and about the same matter there is another Epistle sent from the same Synod of Constantinople to Epiphanius Archbishop of Tyre There is extant in the same Acts of the Council sub Mennâ an Epistle of our John Archbishop of Jerusalem and the Synod of the three Palaestines to which besides the Archbishop himself there are the Subscriptions of 34 Bishops to the Patriarch of Constantinople in answer to that above-mention'd To my Lord and Fellow-Communicant the most Pious and Holy John and to the Holy Synod of Constantinople John by the Mercy of God Bishop of Jerusalem and the Holy Synod of the Three Palaestines now sitting in the Holy Places of Christ the God of all Things Health in the Lord. Neither can it be alleged That therefore the Patriarch and the Church of Constantinople acknowleged our Iohn of Ierusalem because at that time the old Bishop Elias was Dead For Elias Died in Banishment at a great distance from Constantinople the 20th of Iuly A. D. 518 ten days after the Emperor Anastasius and the Synod of Constantinople compleated that about which they write to Iohn of Ierusalem four days before viz. on the 16th of the same Month. And besides it is plain from the Words of the Epistle of the Patriarch of Constantinople to our Iohn of Ierusalem that before that time they own'd the latter as true Bishop of Ierusalem As our Archbishop Iohn was in his life time acknowleged by all the Church so he has been all along in the following Ages First Cyrillus Scythopolitanus who wrote his History of the Life of S. Sabas about Thirty three years after his Death speaks every where of him as of one of the true Bishops of Ierusalem and in one place he says that he was adorn'd with a Divine Prudence or Vnderstanding Secondly In the Constantinopolitan Council sub Mennâ which was celebrated in the year 536. where the Pope of Rome was concern'd as well as the Greek Church his Epistle to the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Patriarch's Epistle to him are recited in the same manner as the Epistles of other Orthodox Bishops are wont to be in the Councils and in the Acts of that Council he is Styled more than once Iohn Archbishop of Ierusalem of Holy Memory Thirdly the Author of the Synodicon speaking of that Synod of Monks which wrote that Epistle to the Emperor Anastasius in which the Eutychian Heresie is Anathematiz'd and the Emperor desired not to Depose their most Holy Archbishop Iohn gives it the Title of a Divine and Holy Synod Which shews that he very well approv'd of the Proceeding of those Monks as to their Acquiescence under Iohn their Archbishop Fourthly It is certain that the Names both of Iohn and Elias were continued all along in the Sacred Diptychs of the Church of Ierusalem This is expresly asserted not only by the Author of the Baroccian Treatise in the Words above Cited but likewise by Photius the Patriarch of Constantinople in a Treatise of his not yet publish'd His Words are express to our Purpose They are these Elias Bishop of Jerusalem being Banish'd from his Church by the Eutychians they made John Bishop in his stead who had promised to Communicate with Severus and to Anathematize the Fourth Council But he doing the contrary by the persuasion of S. Sabas and S. Theodosius was so far from being either punish'd or reprehended that to this very day he is Commemorated as a Saint together with Elias Neither did they who Communicated with him suffer any thing in their Reputation for doing so I shall conclude this Chapter with an Observation concerning the good old Archbishop Elias He though so Tyrannically deposed though deposed for adhering to the Orthodox Faith yet continu'd still to communicate with those who acknowleged his Successor Iohn This is plain from the Testimony of

great Defender of the contrary Doctrine and had been himself condemned by Iustinian to be deposed on that account was so much prejudiced against Iohn as not to like that the Patriarch of Alexandria should be ordain'd by his hands This I say might have been Anastasius's Opinion and Prejudice Yet it is not certain that Iohn did actually subscribe Eustratius was his very great Enemy and the Author of the Synodicon might speak onely by Conjecture At least this is certain that if he ever subscribed he quickly retracted and prov'd a very Orthodox Patriarch This appears not onely from his continuing so long under an Orthodox Emperor and from his being so generally receiv'd but likewise by the Edict which was publish'd in the beginning of Iustin's Reign That Edict is not onely Orthodox in general but does likewise strike particularly at the Doctrine of the Aphthartodocetae by declaring That the Body of Christ was subject to all the Passions to which our Bodies are subject It cannot be doubted but that the Patriarch himself was the chief Promoter of this Edict and it 's very probable that he himself was the Composer of it That all subscribed to it is attested by Evagrius To this I must add That the Patriarch Photius mentions a Catechetical Oration which our Patriarch spoke and published on the First Indiction i. e. three Years after the beginning of Iustin's Reign in which he laid down matters of Faith Divinely as Photius says concerning the Holy Trinity and against which Ioannes Philoponus the Heretick wrote a Treatise Secondly If we suppose according to Valesius's Conjecture that the reason why Anastasius reprehended the two Patriarchs was because the Ordainer succeeded the unjustly deposed Eutychius yet from the words of Theophanes it cannot be inferr'd that he refus'd to communicate either with him or with the Patriarch of Alexandria whom he had ordain'd On the contrary it may be gather'd from Theophanes's words that he did not refuse their Communion For if he had refus'd their Communion Theophanes would have said so he would not have said onely that he reprehended ' em Besides if Anastasius was deposed for reprehending Iohn of Constantinople because put into Eutychius's place from thence it may be concluded that before that time which was near Five Years after the Expulsion of Eutychius he all along communicated with him For if the Emperor did so highly resent his reproving Iohn of Constantinople on that account he would doubtless have been deposed before that time if he had refused on that account to communicate with him But Thirdly It does not appear that was the Reason for which Anastasius reprov'd the two Patriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria It does not I say appear that it was as Valesius conjectures because Iohn of Constantinople by whom He of Alexandria was ordain'd was put into Eutychius's place There may be another Reason assign'd more probable than that 'T is expressly enacted by the General Council of Nice That all Metropolitans should be Consecrated by the Bishops of their own Province The Ordination of a Patriarch of Alexandria by the Patriarch of Constantinople was directly against that Canon and 't was lookt upon by the other Patriarchs as a great Presumption in the Patriarch of Constantinople to pretend to ordain another Patriarch This seems to be the thing which Anastasius who was a nice observer of all Rules so much disliked He reproved the one for taking so much upon him and the other for being ordain'd in a manner not agreeable to the Canons In the same manner before those times Simplicius Pope of Rome had reprov'd Acacius Patriarch of Constantinople for taking upon him to Consecrate Steven and Calendion Patriarchs of Antioch That this was the true Reason Theophanes himself seems to imitate if we duely consider his Words It is to be supposed that what was done as to that Ordination was done by the Emperor's Order And thence it came to pass that the Emperor so highly resented the words of Anastasius's Letter as reflecting no less upon himself than upon the two Patriarchs the Ordainer and the Ordained To this may be added That it is not probable that the Emperor Iustin should be so much displeas'd with Anastasius for reflecting on the Patriarch of Constantinople for his being put into Eutychius's place since it was not himself but Iustinian that deposed Eutychius and since as Eustratius affirms he had still a great Honour for Eutychius tho' he did not think fit to restore him as long as Iohn lived That Anastasius Patriarch of Antioch did not refuse to communicate with Iohn of Constantinople may be further confirm'd from this Consideration That Eustratius in the Life of Eutychius tho he mentions that he as well as Eutychius boldly opposed the Doctrine advanced by Iustinian and his Synod and suffer'd very much for doing so yet speaks not a word of his refusing to communicate with Eutychius's Successor And the same we may likewise gather from Evagrius He speaking of the Reasons why the Emperor Iustin deposed Anastasius makes no mention at all of his being deposed for either refusing to communicate with Iohn of Constantinople or for any severe words spoken against him on the account of his being constituted in Eutychius's place but he assigns other reasons for it And if Anastasius had refused to communicate with Iohn it cannot be supposed but that Evagrius who liv'd at that time and was Assessor to Anastasius's Successor would somewhere have mention'd it Fifthly As neither Evagrius nor Eustratius himself nor any other Author makes any mention of Anastasius his refusing to communicate with Iohn so neither is there mention any where made of any the least disturbance in the Church on his account No mention any where of any one person that declined his Communion Sixthly Tho' Eustratius for his Lord Eutychius his sake was a very bitter Enemy of Iohn's and speaks in his Life of Eutychius very virulently of him yet he no where speaks reflectingly of any for receiving him as Bishop of Constantinople His Life of Eutychius is an Oration made to the People in the great Church of Constantinople in praise of him And certainly if in those days it had been accounted unlawful to acknowledge a Bishop who was put into the place of another unjustly and uncanonically deposed he would in some manner or other have expressed his dislike of the Churches owning and receiving Iohn The same we may observe of the several other Authors who speak of Iohn and Eutychius There is not so much as one that either says expressly or intimates that the former ought not to have been receiv'd as Patriarch Seventhly It is certain that he was acknowleged as a true Bishop of Constantinople by the Church in all following Ages This appears not onely by his being spoken of as such by Evagrius Theophanes Nicephorus the Patriarch Nicephorus Callisti Zonaras Cedrenus c. but likewise from the Testimony of the Baroccian Treatise