31.12.2012 Views

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

Religious Intolerance in the Later Roman Empire - Bad request ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

implication to <strong>the</strong> detriment of <strong>the</strong> Donatists. This apparent belief of Constant<strong>in</strong>e<br />

<strong>in</strong>dicates <strong>the</strong> extent to which he had come to understand, and appreciate <strong>the</strong> value of,<br />

<strong>the</strong> Donatists’ attitude and hence <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>appropriateness of persecution as a viable<br />

strategy.<br />

Constant<strong>in</strong>e went on to reserve <strong>the</strong> heights of moral impeccability to <strong>the</strong><br />

Catholics; regardless of what <strong>the</strong> Donatists might do Catholics would be triumphant<br />

and would receive eternal life: “For what is it <strong>in</strong> this age to conquer <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> name of<br />

God, if not to bear with unmoved breast <strong>the</strong> lawless attacks of those who harry <strong>the</strong><br />

people of <strong>the</strong> law of peace?” 141 It appears that just as persecutions aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong> Donatists<br />

proved to <strong>the</strong>m that <strong>the</strong>y were <strong>the</strong> true Church, so forbearance <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> face of Donatist<br />

attacks would prove <strong>the</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ality of <strong>the</strong> Catholic victory. It seems unlikely, however<br />

that Constant<strong>in</strong>e was referr<strong>in</strong>g to physical violence and mob attacks; such <strong>in</strong>stability<br />

would surely have been unacceptable <strong>in</strong> any part of <strong>the</strong> empire, especially a corn<br />

produc<strong>in</strong>g area. The emperor is more likely to be referr<strong>in</strong>g to a metaphorical attack;<br />

i.e. <strong>the</strong> Donatists were cont<strong>in</strong>ually attack<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> Catholic Church by <strong>the</strong>ir very<br />

existence, because <strong>the</strong>y denied to <strong>the</strong> Catholics any legitimacy, and assumed all<br />

legitimacy to <strong>the</strong>mselves and <strong>the</strong>ir Church. 142<br />

Although this new policy was possibly just a convenient sentiment <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> face of<br />

<strong>the</strong> apparent <strong>in</strong>solubility of <strong>the</strong> Donatist dispute, it also articulated a powerful<br />

ideological impetus which was issued <strong>in</strong> order to grant <strong>the</strong>ological superiority to <strong>the</strong><br />

Catholics. In practice <strong>the</strong> new ‘Policy of Toleration’ said that <strong>the</strong> Catholics were<br />

better than <strong>the</strong> Donatists because <strong>the</strong>y tolerated <strong>the</strong> Donatists’ attacks and would not<br />

respond to <strong>the</strong>m; <strong>the</strong> Donatists were worse because not only did <strong>the</strong>y (albeit<br />

metaphorically) attack <strong>the</strong> Catholics, but <strong>the</strong>y also denied <strong>the</strong>ir Church any legitimacy<br />

whatsoever; such a denial was studiously avoided on <strong>the</strong> Catholic side: <strong>the</strong> Donatist<br />

141 Opt. App. 9; Ziwsa 213; Edwards 197: quid est enim aliud <strong>in</strong> hoc saeculo <strong>in</strong> nom <strong>in</strong>e dei v <strong>in</strong> cere quam<br />

<strong>in</strong>conditos hom <strong>in</strong>um im petus quietae legis populum lacessentes constanti pectore sust<strong>in</strong>ere<br />

142 Opt. 2.1 Optatus mentions that <strong>the</strong> Donatists believed <strong>the</strong>mselves to be <strong>the</strong> true Church and that no<br />

o<strong>the</strong>r church could be true: apud v os solos esse dixisti – ie <strong>the</strong> one Church of Christ.<br />

91

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!