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.

CTh 16.2.21 of May 371 was addressed to Publius Ampelius. In this law, <strong>the</strong><br />

western government decided for <strong>the</strong> first time to prescribe a time period after which<br />

clergy were liable for recall to <strong>the</strong> councils. 58 The law re<strong>in</strong>forced <strong>the</strong> exist<strong>in</strong>g rul<strong>in</strong>g<br />

that clergy were exempt from service on <strong>the</strong> councils, but only if <strong>the</strong>y had “devoted<br />

<strong>the</strong>mselves to <strong>the</strong> cult of our law before <strong>the</strong> beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of our reign”, i.e. before 364. 59<br />

The “o<strong>the</strong>rs”, who had become members of <strong>the</strong> clergy after such time were to be<br />

recalled to <strong>the</strong> councils. This somewhat flowery language appears to simply mean that<br />

those who had obeyed <strong>the</strong> exist<strong>in</strong>g law under Valent<strong>in</strong>ian’s predecessors and had only<br />

jo<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>the</strong> clergy when <strong>the</strong>y were unable to serve <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> councils may cont<strong>in</strong>ue to<br />

rema<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> clergy; but those who had done so s<strong>in</strong>ce <strong>the</strong> beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of Valent<strong>in</strong>ian’s<br />

reign were liable for recall. As such, <strong>the</strong> law was a little harsh and took no account of<br />

clergy who may have been unable to fulfil <strong>the</strong> responsibilities of office, unlike previous<br />

legislation on this subject. 60 As such <strong>the</strong> law does not appear to have been particularly<br />

well drafted. It also used <strong>the</strong> term ecclesiasticus ra<strong>the</strong>r than clericus to <strong>in</strong>clude <strong>the</strong><br />

widest possible Church membership <strong>in</strong> its scope.<br />

The comprehensiveness of CTh. 16.2.20 (through its use of ecclesiasticus) and<br />

that it was <strong>in</strong>tended to <strong>in</strong>clude all members of <strong>the</strong> Church hierarchy and not just<br />

Damasus, is evidenced by CTh 16.2.22 of 1 December 372 addressed to Paul<strong>in</strong>us,<br />

Governor of New Epirus. 61 In this law <strong>the</strong> emperor specified that <strong>the</strong> “general rule of<br />

<strong>the</strong> forego<strong>in</strong>g decree [i.e. CTh 16.2.20] shall be valid and shall extend also to <strong>the</strong><br />

persons of bishops and virg<strong>in</strong>s as well as to <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r persons who are <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

forego<strong>in</strong>g statute.” 62 Presumably Paul<strong>in</strong>us had been unsure whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> earlier law<br />

related to all churchmen; an uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty which was perhaps based on CTh 16.2.12.<br />

These two laws <strong>in</strong>dicate a close collaboration between <strong>the</strong> separate adm<strong>in</strong>istrations of<br />

58<br />

Publius Ampelius 3 PLRE 1.56-57<br />

59<br />

si tam en eos ante ortum im perii n ostri ad cultum se legis nostrae contulisse constiterit: ceteri rev ocentur, qui<br />

se post id tem pus ecclesiasticis congregarunt<br />

60<br />

Eg: CTh 16.2.3, 16.2.6<br />

61<br />

Paul<strong>in</strong>us 6 PLRE Vol 1 676<br />

62<br />

form a praecedentis consulti etiam circa episcoporum v irg<strong>in</strong>um que personas et circa alias, quarum statuto<br />

praecedenti facta conplexio est, v aleat ac porrigatur<br />

109

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!