Selected quad for the lemma: saint_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
saint_n	age_n	church_n	time_n	1,746	5	3.3463	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A36251	Reflexions on a pamphlet entitled, Remarks on the occasional paper, numb. VIII relating to the controversy betwixt Dr. Hody and Mr. Dodwell and on another entitl'd A defence of the vindication of the depriv'd bishops, some time since seiz'd and suppress'd by the Government, and now reprinted : with an answer to a third call'd historical collections concerning church affairs.	Dodwell, Henry, 1641-1711.; Hody, Humphrey, 1659-1707.	1698 (1698)	Wing D1816; ESTC R9160	29,610	34

accounted a Heretick was designed his Successor That the same Simplicius writing afterwards to the Patriarch Acacius concerning the Deprivation of the Heretical Bishops desires him to intercede with the Emperor That either the rejected Orthodox Bishops might be restored or at least new Orthodox Bishops created Whether old ones or new ones was to him upon the matter indifferent provided they were Orthodox That P. Felix III in his Synodical Epistles to the Emperor and Acacius concerning Mongus's his Promotion takes no notice at all of his being put into the place of one whom the Imperial Authority had depos'd but only complains of his Heresie That the same P. Felix in another Epistle in which he Excommunicates the Patriarch Acacius gives this as the chief Reason for it because he communicated with the Heretick Mongus And tho' at the same time he charges him with other Crimes yet he does not obj●ct it to him as a Crime That he Communicated with one who was put into the place of another Unsynodically depriv'd Lastly That Talaias himself did not think it Unlawful for the People and Clergy of Aegypt to acknowledge another for their Patriarch provided he were a Professor of the Orthodox Faith He fled says Evagrius to Rome and raises there very great stirs affirming what not that another could not be own'd in his stead because he had not been Synodically depriv'd but that it was for his defending the Council of Chalcedon that he had been depos'd and that he that was put into his place was an Enemy of that Council He observes that Calendion the Patriarch of Antioch being depos'd without any Synod by the same Emperor they that refus'd to acknowledge Gnapheus his Successor pleaded nothing at all for their so doing but his Heresie He shews that Macedonius the Patriarch of C P. being violently depos'd by the Heretical Emperor Anastasius because he refused to condemn the Council of Chalcedon his Succsseor Timotheus was by all that did not reckon him a Heretick acknowledg'd as a true Patriarch as particularly by the two great B shops and Saints Elias and Flavianus Patriarchs of Ierusalem and Antioch tho' at the same time they declared Macedonius his Deprivation to be null and invalid and could not be induced by any Threats of the Emperor to subscribe to it That the Orthodox Party of C P. Communicated generally with him and that he was acknowledged by the Orthodox Monks of Palestine no less than 10000 in number tho' they too at the same time condemn'd what was done against Macedonius as invalid That the great Abbot of Studium refused to be consecrated by him whilst he thought him a Heretick but assoon as he had an assurance that he was not so without the least scruple concerning the Unjust and Unsynodical Deprivation of his Predecessor he readily yielded to be consecrated by him He further observes that Flavianus Patriarch of Antioch being violently depos'd by the same Heretical Emperor the only Reason assigned by the Orthodox Party why they would not communicate with his Successor Severus was his being an Enemy to the Orthodox Faith He likewise shews that Elias Bishop of Ierusalem being depriv'd by the same Emperor his Successor Iohn because he prov'd to be an Asserter of the true Faith was by all the Orthodox readily acknowledged by all the People of Ierusalem tho' they extreamly hated him as looking upon him to be one of the chief Instruments in Elias's Expulsion by those two great Saints Theodosius and Sabas with the rest of the Monks and Inhabitants of Palestine by Io. Cappadox Patriarch of C P. with all the Bishops that were under him That his Name was preserved in the Diptycks of the Church together with that of Elias and that he was honoured as well as he by that Church as a Saint That Cyrillus of Scythopolis speaking of him says he was adorned with a Divine Prudence and that in the Acts of the Council Sub Mennâ he is stiled more than once Archbishop of Jerusalem of holy Memory You may see it there prov'd that tho' St. Silverius Bishop of Rome was so violently and unjustly depos'd by Iustinian's General Belisarius yet his Successor Vigilius was own'd as true Bishop of Rome by the whole Catholick Church particularly by the 5th general Council and is reckon'd by all to this day as one of the true Popes That tho' Macarius Bishop of Ierusalem was depos'd by the bare Authority of the Emperor Iustinian yet his Successor Eustochius was own'd as a true Patriarch by the same 5th general Council and the whole Church Catholick That after that when Eustochius himself was depos'd by the same Authority Macarius being restor'd was acknowledged again as a true Patriarch He shews you that tho' Eutychius Patriarch of C P. was so unjustly deposed by the Lay-power and tho' he still laid claim to the See yet his Successor Iohn was received by all the Orthodox particularly by the Clergy and People of that City tho' at the same time they exceedingly lov'd Eutychius and accounted him unjustly depriv'd That Eustratius who wrote the Li●e of Eutychius though he was a great Enemy to the Patriarch Iohn and speaks very angrily of him yet he no where reflects on any for owning him as a true Patriarch That the Emperors Iustin and Tiberius tho' they had a great Veneration for the rejected Eutychius yet they did not think themselves obliged to restore him by deposing his Successor but stayed till his Successor was dead and then restored him That Eutychius himself tho' he never gave up his Right but look'd upon himself as the rightful Patriarch yet he did not break the Peace of the Church but continued to Communicate with those that acknowledged his Successor He shews you likewise that tho' St. Anastasius was depos'd from his See of Antioch by the Emperor Iustin without any Synodical Procedure and tho' he never gave up his Right but always look'd upon himself as the Rightful Patriarch yet this Successor Gregory was unanimously receiv'd by the whole Church by four of that Age who are honour'd by the Church with the Veneration of Saints St. Symeon Stylites Saint Gregory the Great St. Eulogius Patr. of Alexandria and St. Iohn Nestutes Patr. of C P. That St. Gregory the Great communicated fr●ely with him tho' he own'd at the same time that St. Anastasius was invalidly Depriv'd and that he was still the Rightful Patriarch that he gives Anastasius the Title of Patriarch of Antioch and yet at the same time own'd his Successor Gregory to be a true Patriarch of the same See and gives him the same Title looking on the one as the Rightful Patriarch and acknowledging the other as the Patriarch in Possession He sends a Synodical Epistle to 'em both together with this Title which is very remarkable Gregorius Ioanni Episcopo C P no Eulogio Alexandrino Gregorio Antiocheno Anastasio Patriarchae Antiocheno à paribus And this is likewise observable that the Patr. Anastasius is