English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

				   Ep . 24 was not simply the record of the dispute and it was entangled with unclear sentences which sometimes confused previous researches. The present study will specify the cause of its confusion and will argue the possibility of the change of the point at issue. As a result, it becomes clear that the case of Ep. 24 was the exceptional one of the bishop’s hearing in which bishop’s judgement was tended to be unfair to one interested party and the result of its dispute was not necessarily dependent upon Ambrose’s authority as a bishop.

Re-examining Ambrose’s Ep. 24. The Exceptional Case of the Bishop’s Hearing