John OF AxTiocH (1), a prelate of the early Greek Church, distinguished for the part he took in the con- troversy between CjtII and Nestorius, flourished in the first half of the 5th century, and succeeded Theodotus in the patriarchate of Antioch about A.D. 427. Favor- ably disposed towards Nestorius, who is said to have been a schoolmate of his in the monastery of St.Eupre- pius, near Antioch, he was forced to take decided ground against Cjiil by the impolitic conduct of the latter at the Council of Ephesus (q. v.). Among the Eastern bishops who came with John of Antioch to attend the council, he was the acknowledged leader, and we need not wonder, therefore, that he swayed them all in favor of Nestorius, when, on arriving at Ephesus, they learn- ed that the sessions had not only commenced, but that Nestorius had already been actually condemned without their sanction. As long as Irensus (q. v.) and Candidi- us tiucceeded in maintaining the Nestorians at the court of the emperor Theodosius, John proved faithful to his course taken at Ephesus ; but when he found the Cyril- lian party gaining the upper hand, he slowjy modified his position until a reconciliation with Cyril followed (A.D. 432). He now turned actually against his former friend Nestorius, and after much trouble and opposition, which he vanquished, partly by persuasion, partly by deposing the pertinacious, the other Eastern bishops also — in provincial councils held at Antioch (A.D. 432), Anazarbus (A.D. 433), and Tarsus (A.D. 434)— declared for Cyril and the decrees of the third CEcumenical Coun- cil. Nay, it is said that John of Antioch was even the man who instigated the emperor to make the banish- ment of Nestorius perpetual; no doubt actuated by a desire to convince the Cyrillians of the truthfulness of his conversion. In the controversy with Theodore of Mopsuestia he took more liberal ground, declining, at a council held in 438, to condemn the writings and opin- ions of Theodore ; according to Liberatus, he even ap- peared in his defence. John died in 441 or 442. He is spoken of by Gennadius {Be Viris Illustribus, c. 54) as possessed of great rhetorical power. He wrote (1) 'ETTtffroXot {Epistol(e) and 'Ava(l>oimi {Relntiones') re- specting the Nestorian controversy and the Council of Ephesus, of which several are contained in the various edirions of the Concilia:— {^) 'Oj.n\ia {Homilia), the homily or exhortation delivered at Chalcedon, just after the Council of Ephesus, to the pcoi)le of Constantinople, with the aim to animate them to continue steadfast 'm their adherence to the old Nicene Confession ; a frag- ment of it we have in the Concilia:— {i) Ylipl rujv Ms- naXiaviTiov {De Messalianis), a letter to Nestorius, enu- merated by Photius {Bill. Cod. 32) among the episcopal and synodical papers against that heretical body, con- tained in the history or acta of the Council of Side (A. D. 383) : — (4) (Umtrn eos qui una tantum substantia as- serunt ivlnniinhnii Christum (only known to us by Gen- nadius; |ii(ili,iMy the work from which the passages are taken with which Eulogius credits John of Antioch). See Smith, Diet. Gr. and Rom. Biog. ii, 586 sq. ; Tille- mont, Afemoires, vol. xiv ; Mansi, Concilia, iv, 1259 sq. ; Neale, f list. East. Ch. (A lexandria), i, bk. ii. sect, ii and iii; Hefele, Conciliengesch. ii, 178 sq. : Schaft', Ch. Hist.
JOHN
961
JOHN
iii, § 138-140 ; Milman, Latin Christianity, i, 224 sq. ; Gibbon, Decl. and Fall Rom. Einp. ch. xlvii. (J. H. W.)
John OF Antiocii (2), surnamed Codonatus, the successor of Petriis Gnapheus, or Fullo (the Fuller), after his deposition, in the patriarchate of Antioch, A.D. 447. John had previously been bisliop of Ajjamea ; but, af- ter holding the patriarchate three months, he was de- ])osed by r. synod of Eastern bishops, and succeeded by Stephen. Theophanes incorrectly jilaces the appoint- ment of John after Stephen's death. Uoth John and his predecessor Petrus had been, at the instigation of Acacias of Constantinople, excommunicated by the pope; yet, after the deposition of John, the same Acacius pro- cured his elevation to the bishopric of Tyre. Theopha- nes incorrectly ascribes this appointment to Calendion of Antioch. See Theophanes, Chronog. p. 110, etc., ed. Paris (p. 88, etc., ed. Venice ; p. 199, etc., ed. Bonn) ; Valesius, Not. ad Evagrii H. E. iii, 15, and Observaiio- nes, Eccles. ad Evagrium, ii, 8. — Smith, Diet. Greek and Roman Biog. ii, 586.
John OF Antioch (3), surnamed Scholasticns, an eminent Greek legist, flourished in the Gth century. He entered the Church, and became patriarch of Constan- tinople (564-578). He compiled a collection of ecclesi- astical laws, which greatly surpassed in extent and method those which preceded it, and which has remain- ed the basis of canon law in the Greek Church. An- other of his works, entitled Nomocanon, was an attempt to harmonize Justinian's constitutions relating to the Church with the older rules. Both works were for many centuries held in high estimation, and were in- serted in Voell and Justel's Bibl. jiiri<i canonici veteris (Paris, 1961), ii, 603-789. See Fabricius, Bibl. Grceca, xi, 100 ; Hoefer, Nouv. Biog. Gm. xxvi, 530, (J. N. P.)
John Archaph ("Apx"^)) ^" Egyptian schismatic of some note, was a contemporary of Athanasius. He was a devoted follower of Melitius, who, just before his death, which occurred shortly after his condemnation by the Council of Nice (A.D. "325), made John the Me- letian bishop of IMemphis, and intrusted to him also the leadership of the Melitians as a body. John, supported by the Arians, renewed the attacks against the ortho- dox party, and the schism soon became as violent as ever. Athanasius, now patriarch of Alexandria, and leader of the orthodox party, was the great object of attack ; and John and his followers sought to throw on him tlie odium of originating the disturbances, and of persecuting his opponents ; and, especially, they charged him with the murder of Arsenius, a Melitian bislioji, whom they had secreted in order to give color to the charge. Athanasius (q. v.), on his part, appealed to the emperor, Constantine the Great, charging John and his followers with unsoundness in the faith, with a de- sire to alter the decrees of the Nicene Council, and with raising tumults and insulting the orthodox ; he also ob- jected to them as being irregularly ordained. He re- futed their charges, especially the charge of murder, ascertaining that Arsenius was alive, and obliged them to remain quiet. John professed to repent of his disor- derly proceedings and to be reconciled to Athanasius, and returned with his party into the communion of the orthodox Church, but the reconciliation was not sincere or lasting; troubles broke out again, and a fresh sepa- ration took place, John and his followers eitlier being ejected from communion by the Athanasian party, or their return opposed. The Council of Tyre (A.D. 335), in which the opponents of Athanasius were triumphant, ordered them to be readmitted; but the emperor, deem- ing John to be a contentious man, or at least thinking that his presence was incompatible with the peace of the Egyptian Church, banished him (A.D. 336), just after he had banished Athanasius into Gaul. The place of his exile and his subsequent fate are not known.— Sozomen, Hist. Eccles. ii, 21 , 22, 25. 31 ; Athanasius, Apol. contra Arianos, c. 65, 67, 70, 71 ; Tillomont, Memoires. vol. vi passim, vol. viii passim : Neale, Hist. Eastern Ch. IV.— P I' i>