John ScoTUS Erigexa. See Scotus. John OF ScYTHOPOLis, a Greek ecclesiastical writer, Avho in all probability flourished in the latter part of the 5tli centurj' or the beginning of the 6th, wrote a work against the followers of Eutyches and Dioscorus, entitled Kara tCjv airooxKJTMV rrJQ ^K(cX^/(T/ac, Contra desertores ecclesice. It was divided into t^velve parts, and was undertaken at the suggestion of a certain prel- ate, one Jiilianus, in reply to an anonymous Eutychian writer, who had published a book deceitfully entitled Kara Nfffropiwr, Adveysus Nestoritnn, and whom Pho- tius (^Bihl. Cod. 95, 107) supposed to be Basilius, a pres- byter of Cilicia. This Basilius wrote a reply to John in very abusive style, charging him, among many other things, with being a Manichajan, and witli restricting Lent to a period of three weeks, and not abstaining from flesh even in that shortened period. Certaui UapnUre- aiig. Scholia, to the works oflfiepseudo Dionysiiis Are- opagita, which Usher has observed to be mingled in the jirinted editions of Dionysius with the Scholia of St. Maxinms, have been ascribed to John of Scythopo- lis. Anastasius Bibliothecarius, in the 8th century, made a Latin translation of these mingled scholia, not IV.-(i Q Q
JOHN
now extant, in which he professed to distinguish those of Maximus from those of John by the mark of a cross. Fabricius {Bill. Gr. vii, 9; x, 707, 710) identifies the Scholia of John with the Commentarii in Dionysiuvi A reopagitam cited by John Cyparissiota as by Diony- sius of Alexandria. Sec Usher, Dissert, de Scriptis l)i- onys. Areop. stippositis, p. 299, subjoined to his Historia Dogniatica de Scriptoris Vemaculis, etc. (London, 1689, 4to) ; Cave, Hist. Litt. i, 466.— Smith, Diet, of Gr. and Rom. Biog. ii, 602.
John of Talaia or Talaida (otherwise Tabennisi- ofa, Taliivviaiwrijc, from the monasterj' of Tabenna, near j\lexandria ; or of A kxaiulria, from his patriarchal see; or i'rom the offices which he had previously held, ceconomus [oi'/covo/ioc] and ])i-esbyier\ a celebrated ec- clesiastic in the Eastern Church, was one of the dep- utation sent by Salofaciolus, the twenty-seventh patri- arch of Alexandria (A.D. 4G0-482), shortly before his decease, to the emperor Zeno, to secure his leave for a free election of the next patriarch from among the de- fenders of the Council of Chalcedon by the clergy and laity of Alexandria. "The emperor," saysNeale (East. Church \_Alexand.'], ii, 18), "received the deputies gra- ciously, compUed with their request, and in the letter which he gave them by way of reply spolce strongly in favor of John.'" Soon after the return of John, Timo- theus Salofaciolus died, and John was unanimously elect- ed to succeed him, but was almost immediately expelled from his see by order of the emperor. The cause of his expulsion is diff'erently stated. Liberatus says that he was expelled mainly tbrmigh the jealousy of Acacius, patriarch of Constantinople, to whom, on different occa- sions, he had failed in paying due attention. According to Evagrius, who quotes Zacharias as his authority, he was detected in having procured his own election by bribery, and had broken an oath which he had taken before Zeno not to seek for himself the patriarchate. But Neale thinks it doubtful whether John ever took such an oath, and holds that, even if he had, he can see no reason for the harshness with which he was treated, and for his ejection from the see, so long as it was freely proifered to him (which seems clear from the tinanimous election). The true reason seems to be John's careless delay of the announcement of his election to the patri- arch of Constantinople, sending the message by lUus, who was then in Antioch, instead of dispatching a mes- senger direct, as he had done in the case of Rome and Antioch, thereby provoking the patriarch of Constanti- nople, also his selection of lUus for the messenger, when the latter was then the object of jealousy and suspicion to Zeno, if not actually in rebellion against him. John, expelled from Alexandria, first resorted to lUus, then to Antioch ; and having, through Illus's intervention, ob- tained from the patriarch of Antioch and his suflragans a synodical letter commending him to pope Simplicius, departed to Rome to plead his cause there in person. Simplicius, with the usual papal jealousy of the patri- archs of Constantino])lc, took the side of John ; but nei- ther the exertions of Simplicius nor those of his suc- cessor Felix could obtain the restoration of the banished patriarch, and John finally accepted from Fehx the bishopric of Nola, in Campania, which he held several years, and at last died peaccaljly (the precise date of his decease is not known). John (whom Theophanes ex- tols for his piety and orthodoxy) wrote Hpoc YtXc'taiov Tuv 'Po'i/JJK' a-o\nyla. Ad Gdasium Papam Apologia, in which be anathematized Pelagianism, as well as its defenders Pelagius and Celestius, and their successor Ju- Uanus. The work, which is noticed by Photius, is not extant. See Tillemont, Mem. vol. xvi ; Cave, Hist. Litt. i^ 445.— Smith, Diet. Gr. and Rom. Biog. ii, 602 ; Neale, Hist. East. Ch. {A lex.) ii, 18 sq. (J. H.W.)
John, surnamed the Teuton, from his nationality, abbot of St. Victor, was a native of the diocese of Treves. He studied at Paris, joined the canon regulars of St. Victor, and became their abbot in 1203 He was one