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

of any case. Finally, this tactic tended to shift somewhat the responsibility for future
actions or punishments away from the authorities and onto the accused; if God’s
judgement was perfect (which would be followed by Theodosius) all responsibility
would logically have to be that of the accused; they would indeed receive their just
deserts. 22
As noticed above, the lack of theological and technical terms in this law is
striking. Most vociferously since the council of Nicaea over fifty years earlier,
discussion in the Church had focused on the nature of the relationship of the Son with
the Father, and indeed on the nature of the Son’s being as well. The lack of terms such
as hom oousion or ousia, or of their Latin equivalents, substan tia or person a, might lead
to the conclusion that there was little direct influence from clerics in the composition
of this law. However, the law does assign equal status to the Holy Spirit which had
hitherto not been the most important concern in theological debates and was only at
this point becoming an issue. As such Theodosius must have gained some advice from
clerics, or, alternatively, he may have been keeping abreast of theological
developments himself.
Also worthy of note is Theodosius' introduction of the phrase “the concept of
equal majesty” (sub parili m aiestate) to describe the nature of the Holy Trinity. This
phrase was not common to descriptions of the Trinity and Theodosius may have
coined it in order to present the Nicene, Catholic version of Christianity as being
more palatable to non-Catholic Christians.
CTh. 16.2.25 was issued on the same day as Cun ctos populos, i.e. 28 February
380. There is no addressee and it reads more like a statement of fact, than a law: any
persons who “through ignorance confuse or through negligence violate and offend the
22 The concept of the “ideal judge” is from Harries (1999c) 214-218
169