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

loyalty to his faith and emperor and therefore to forestall any imperial displeasure that
could have occurred in the aftermath, or during, the council. As a Christian, Taurus
may well have understood the impossibility of ensuring a consensus from four
hundred or so bishops gathered from all over the western half of the empire and
therefore a law which attacked paganism in some form may have been just what he
needed to reinforce the faith and to show that both he and the emperor were good
Christians, despite the failure to achieve consensus among the bishops. 183 The law had
the added bonus of indicating Taurus’ personal loyalty to the safety of the emperor;
through the law he was making an obvious declaration that he valued the security of
the emperor from divinatory practices. Nevertheless, Taurus did not have to include
the augurs in his list and therefore, if he and nobody else did in fact include the augurs,
then we may conclude that Taurus was a particular opponent of paganism and made all
the more so by his habit of making his laws particularly detailed and comprehensive.
Constantius and the Church
Constantius issued an extensive body of legislation (nine laws) on the
Church and the clergy, all but one (CTh 16.2.12) was concerned with the exemptions
which clerics enjoyed from municipal duties and in that respect the legislation shows a
marked increase in the power and privileges of the Church, most notably in allowing
clerics of decurion status to continue to hold property and also the grant of a privilege
that bishops should have the right of being tried only by fellow bishops and that the
secular courts had no jurisdiction over them. The surviving legislation again indicates
the influence that one of the emperor’s com es, in this case Taurus, could have on the
legislative record and at the same time also sheds some light on the extent, or lack, of
Taurus’ Christianity
183 Ammianus (21.16.18) gives the impression that Constantius failed to deal competently with the
Christians and he critices Constantius for complicating an absolutam et sim plicem religion. Rather than
producing any benefits, the synods that he called only resulted in chaos for the postal service and in
dissension for the Church.
48