THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
the see of Jerusalem as on a par with that of Rome and gave it the title " apostolic," which he denied to Antioch. These indications show plainly that Juvenal aspired not only after an independent see within the archbishopric of Csesarea, but after superiority over, or at least, equality with, that of Antioch. He aimed to have the three bishoprics of Palestine attached to Jerusalem, and also, if possible, those of Phenicia and Arabia. The result would be to make the holy city the principal see in the Orient.
Several bishops who had been ordained by Juvenal and were present at Ephesus, supported his claims; this fact, and the absence of the abovementioned bishops from the principal sees were extremely favorable to his ambitions. Cyril of Alexandria appeared, however, at the fourth session of the council, and at once took charge of the proceedings. He saw the danger not only for the see of Antioch but for that of Alexandria in the existence of a masterful bishop of Jerusalem. He therefore opposed every plan of Juvenal. Neither did the idea of a new competitor for supremacy in Christendom please the fancy of the legates of the Roman see. It could not be foreseen what complications might arise in favor of Jerusalem, particularly since pilgrimages to the holy city were becoming more frequent every year. But Juvenal had gained an advantage of which he made the most. He ordained several new bishops in Palestine without having any stipulated right by canon law. His influence was growing constantly, and Maximus of Antioch at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 acknowledged Juvenal's claims to the three sees of Palestine on condition that the latter abandon his claims to the sees of Phenicia and Arabia. The council confirmed the agreement.
Juvenal had numerous difficulties with the mon-
ophysitic monks of Palestine; and even his life was
threatened. He introduced the celebration of
Christmas on Dec. 25, possibly to win the favor of
Rome. See Jerusalem, Patriarchate of; and
Monophtsites, § 2. (F. Kattenbusch.)
Bibliography: Sources are: The acts of the councils of
Ephesus and Chalcedon, given in Hefele, Concilienge-
schichte, vol. ii. passim, Eng. transl., vol. iii. passim; the
letters of Leo the Great, Eng. transl. in NPNF, 2 ser.,
vol. xii., cf. pp. 66, 82, 86, 97; Evagrius, Hist, eccl., ii.,
in MPG, lxxxvi. 2. Consult: M. Le Quien, Oriens Chris-
tianus, iii. 110 sqq., 164 sqq., Paris, 1740; Vailhe, in Revue
de Vorient, iv (1899), 44 sqq.; DCB, iii. 595 sqq.; Neander,
Christian Church, vol. ii. passim.
JUVENCUS, ju-ven'cus, CAIUS VETTIUS AQUI- LINUS (or AQUILIUS): Spanish presbyter and religious poet, in the reign of Constantine the Great, to whom he refers at the close of his principal poem. This is a rendering of the Gospels into Latin dactylic hexameters, with a close adherence to the original text, and contains 3,210 lines. The prologue speaks of earlier poets such as Homer and Vergil, whose names are well-nigh immortal though their subjects were only the deeds of men, and their narratives fictitious; places on a much higher plane the acts of Christ; and hopes, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, to create a work that shall worthily set them forth, last beyond the conflagration of the world, and save the author himself from the fire. The events of the life of Christ are narrated
now from one Evangelist and now from another in what seemed to the author chronological order. Matthew is throughout his main source, and Mark does not seem to be used at all. The division into four books seems to have been an afterthought, intended to correspond with the number of the Evangelists. Juvencus adheres closely to the scriptural account, and is apparently withheld by reverence from any attempt to enlarge upon it. He was evidently at home in classical literature and his diction is full of Vergilian echoes; the verse is flowing and for its period strikingly correct. This first Christian epic, although it made no pretense to be a complete narrative or a scientific harmony of the Gospels, and although it does not offer much help in the way of exegesis, of the history of dogma, or of textual criticism (it is based on the Itala as a text), was yet highly regarded in the early Church and continued to be prized throughout the Middle Ages, being frequently used as a text-book in schools. Its popularity is attested by the large number of manuscripts in which it is preserved. A work by Juvencus on the sacraments mentioned by Jerome has been lost. Some of the later manuscripts give under the name of Juvencus two other poems, De laudibus Domini and Triumphus Christi, of 148 and 108 verses. The former is probably older than Juvencus and the work of a rhetorician from Augustodunum, (Autun). The 6,000 verses on the Old- Testament history which Cardinal Pitra discovered and attributed to Juvencus are now thought to have been written by a fifth-century Gallic Cyprian (not the famous Carthaginian bishop) . The style is dry and jejune, and the poetical execution far inferior to that of Juvencus. Nor is it possible now to attribute to him the Liber in Genesim (1441 verses) which Martene published in 1723 from a Codex Corbeiensis, and which Galland, Arevolo, Gebser, Bahr, Teuffel and others believed to be his.
(K. LEIMBACHf.) Bibliography: The poem has often been edited and printed since the editio princeps of Paris, 1449, is in MPL, xix.; ed. C. Marold, Leipsic, 1886; and, ed. J. Huemer, in CSEL. xxiv., Vienna, 1891. Consult: J. Huemer. in Wiener Studien, ii. 81-112, Vienna, 1880; A. R. Gebser. Dissertatio de . Juvenci vita et scriptis, Jena, 1827; A Ebert, Allgemeine Ceschichte der Literatur des Mittelalters, i. 109 sqq., Leipsic, 1889; J. T. Hatfield, A Study of Juvencus, Bonn, 1890; Ceillier, Auteurt sacres, iii. 116- 118; DCB, iii. 598-599.
JUXON, WILLIAM: Archbishop of Canterbury; b. at Chichester (57 m. s.w. of London), baptized in Oct., 1582; d. in London June 4, 1663. He received his education at St. John's College, Oxford; became vicar of St. Giles, Oxford, 1609; rector of Somerton, Oxfordshire, 1615; head of St. John's, 1622, and vice-chancellor 1626-27, and in 1626, dean of Worcester; became bishop of London in 1633; on Mar. 6, 1635-36, he became lord high treasurer, a difficult post; he attended Charles I. to the scaffold as his most faithful servant; was deprived of his see in 1649 ; and in 1660 was recognized as the only eligible candidate for the primacy, and was elected. He left a well-deserved reputation for strict honesty, loyalty to Church and king, and great charity to the poor. Bibliography: W. H. Marah, Memoirs of Archbishop J won.
London, 1869; DNB,xxx. 233-237.