28. CAPPADOX, or the CAPPADOCIAN (2), patriarch of Constantinople, known by the surname NESTEUJTA (νηστεύτης
), or JEJUNATOR, the FASTER. He is Joannes IV. in the list of the patriarchs of Constantinople.
He was a deacon of the great church at Constantinople, and succeeded Eutychius [EUTYCHIUS] in the patriarchate A. D. 582, in the reign of the emperor Tiberius II.
In a council held at Constantinople A. D. 589, for the examination of certain charges against Gregory, patriarch of Antioch [GREGORIUS, ecclesiastical and literary, No. 5; EVAGRIUS, No. 3], John assumed the title of universal patriarch (οἰκουμενικὸς πατριάρχης
), or perhaps resumed it after it had fallen into disuse. [See above, No. 27.] Upon the intelligence of this reaching the pope, Pelagius II., he protested against it most loudly, and annulled the acts of the council as informal.
A letter written in the most vehement manner by Pelagius to the Eastern bishops who had been present in the council, appears among his Epistolae
in the Concilia
(Ep. viii. vol. v. col. 948, ed. Labbe, vol. ix. col. 900, ed. Mansi); but some doubt has been cast on its genuineness. Gregory I., or the Great, who (in A. D. 590) succeeded Pelagius, was equally earnest in his opposition, and wrote to the emperor Maurice and to the patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch, and to John himself, to protest against it. (Gregorius Papa, Epistolae,
lib. iv. ep. 32, 36, 38, 39, apud Concilia,
vol. v. col. 1181, &c., ed. Labbe, vol. x. col. 1206, &c., ed. Mansi.) John, however, retained the title probably till his death (about A. D. 596); and far from being odious to the Greek Christians, was and is reverenced by them as a saint.
John of Cappadocia wrote:
called by Cave Libellus Poenitentialis,
and by Allatius, Praxis Graecis praescripta in confessione peragenda.
This work, there is every reason to conclude, has been much interpolated: and Oudin (De Scriptor. Eccles.
vol. i. col. 1473, seq.) affirms is altogether the production of a later age.
It is given by Morinus in the Appendix
(pp. 77-90) to his work, Commentarius Historicus de Disciplina in Administratione Sacramenti Poenitentiae,
fol. Paris, 1651.
also given by Morinus (pp. 91-97)
. But Morinus himself doubts the genuineness of this work, and Oudin (l.c.
) denies it altogether.
This discourse is in some MSS. ascribed to Chrysostom.
It is printed in the editions of his works by Morell, vol. i. p. 809, and Savil, vol. vii. p. 641.
This discourse is ascribed in some MSS. to Chrysostom but is by Vossius, Petavius, Cave, and Assemani ascribed to John of Cappadocia.
It has been printed in some editions of his works (vol. vii. p. 221, ed. Savil, who, however, regards it as spurious
, vol. viii. ed. Montfaucon, in Spuriis, p. 72
, or p. 701 in the reprint of Montfaucon's edition, Paris, 1836)
This work, mentioned by Isidore of Seville (De Scriptoril. Eccles.
100.26), is lost: it contained only a collection of passages from older writers on the subject of trine immersion.
This work, which is mentioned by Trithemius (De Ecclesiasticis Scriptoribus,
100.224), is also lost.
Extant in MS. in the Vatican Library at Rome, and in the King's Library at Paris.
Other possible works
Beside the above writings, there is reason to think that John of Cappadocia is the author of a Κανονάριον
describing the various depraved affections of the mind and the penance suitable to each, given by Morinus (ibid. pp. 101-117).
The work is in some MSS. entitled Ἰωάννου μοναχοῦ καὶ διακόνου
, μαθήτου τοῦ μεγάλου Βασιλείου, οὗτινος ἡ ἐπωνυμία Τέκνον Ὑπακοῆς Κανονάριον
, Joannis Monachi et diaconi, discipuli magni Basilii, cui cognomentum est Obedieientiae Filius, Canonarium :
and some writers, as Morinus, Allatius, and Fabricius, distinguish this " Joannes, Discipulus Magni Basilii et Obedientiae Filius," from our John, but Assemani has shown that there is every reason to identify them.
Natalis Alexander (Saec. x. and xi. pars iii. p. 571, apud Fabric. Bibl. Gr.
vol. i. p. 699, not. xx.) ascribes to John of Cappadocia the Epistola ad Caesarium Monachum,
ascribed by others to Chrysostom, and celebrated for the testimony against transubstantiation contained in it : but his opinion appears to have been approved by few.
Cave, Hist. Litt.
vol. i. p. 541; Fabric. Bibl. Gr.
vol. xi. p. 108,&c.; Morinus, ll. cc. ;
Assemani, Biblioth. Juris Orientalis,
vol. iii. pp. 479-542.