Иоанн иерусалимский

John of Jerusalem. In Orthodox anti-iconoclast literature of the 8th century. There are several works, the author of which is called St. John of Damascus, then John the monk, a Jerusalemite, then, finally, John, Patriarch of Jerusalem. Of these are printed among the works of St. John of Damascus, as spuria, are as follows: dr. ХLV, 309–344), Διάλογος στηλιτευτικός (ХLVІ, 1347 – 1362; СIХ, 501–516) and a short Διήγησις iconoclasm (CIX, 517–520). For scientists who believe the death of St. John of Damascus to 754, his authorship is excluded by the fact that both of these larger works speak about a number of events of 750 - 780, such as: the iconoclastic council of 754, the execution of Patriarch Constantine in 767, the death of Emperor Constantine V in 775. However, the formula of the 754 anathema on Damascus, cited as evidence that at that time he was no longer alive does not mean this at all, and it is highly probable that Damascus died much later. Nevertheless, it is difficult to believe that he is the author of these works [see. above the post. 8 at A.A. Bronzov's "John of Damascus"]: despite certain merits, they are still far lower in language and content than the undoubted works of Damascus, and the first is not yet original, representing (even in the original, handwritten edition) a reworking of the dispute of a certain Bishop Cosmas with George from the Mount of Olives with the help of the early works of Damascus himself. For these works, several authors are available to accept a noticeable difference in their style; but in this case this is a deceptive sign, since Λόγος is almost entirely not original, and Διήγησις; an example of the author's own literary style. So, according to the rule: sine саusa efficiente auctores non multiplicandi, it is most natural to consider the author of all three works to be one John, a Jerusalem monk, and, moreover, different from Damascus. History does not know any Patriarch John in Jerusalem for the period being calculated, and there is strong evidence that this did not happen at all. But the author of Διήγησι is known with complete certainty: this is the presbyter and patriarchal syncellus John, the locum tenens of the Antioch and Jerusalem patriarchs at the seventh ecumenical council in 787. This position of his very simply explains why some manuscripts call him the archbishop of Jerusalem: turn the patriarchal locum tenens ( τοποτηρητής) in the patriarch was as natural as we in casual speech call a minister - the manager of a ministry or a professor - correcting the position of a professor. With all that, the identity of the author of all the named pseudo-Damascene creations with John the Locum Tenens is only probable, but no more. If we accept this identity, then the biography of John and his activities will be presented in this light. He was probably born in Syria or Palestine, perhaps. in Jerusalem itself, at the beginning of the second quarter of the 8th century, he took monastic vows in Jerusalem and in the 60s he was syncellus of the Jerusalem Patriarch Theodore; Towards this title, he participated in the conciliar action of the three eastern primatial sees against the iconoclast-bishop Cosmas of Epiphanius and, on behalf of the three patriarchs, compiled a conciliar accusatory letter against the Emperor Constantine and the heretical council of 754 (not published to this day). He took information about the Byzantine heresy and material for polemics partly from the works of John of Damascus, partly from the sermons and dispute with one heretic bishop (also Cosmas) of a certain elder George, who asceticised on the Mount of Olives in eastern Taurus (now Zeitun) and died for Orthodoxy in a Byzantine prison around 753. (This George is probably the same person as George the Cyprian, who was anathematized by the iconoclasts in 754. A recording of his sermons was made by his disciple Theosev, who fled across the Syrian border). In 769 - 770: Mr. John composed Διάλογος στηλιτευτικός (the title hardly belongs to him), i.e., a polemical statement of faith against the iconoclasts. In the eighties, John, it seems, after the widowhood of the Jerusalem see, became syncellus of Antioch and in this rank was authorized by the eastern bishops to be the representative of the Antioch and Jerusalem patriarchal sees at the 7th Ecumenical Council. He arrived in Constantinople in 785 and brought with him his accusatory works, from which the message here, by himself or by others, was supplemented and converted into speech and acquired considerable fame and influence (this is the printed Λόγος ἀποδεικτικός). At the council they presented a short report on the origin of iconoclasm on Saracen and Jewish soil (Διήγησις). At the end of the council, John remained for the rest of his life in Constantinople, probably in the clergy of the Great Church under Patriarch Tarasius, and tried to reconcile the patriarch with the Studites in the famous case of the illegal divorce and marriage of Emperor Constantine VI. For his identity with Bishop. There is no direct data about John the Hebrew. The year of his death is unknown.