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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

security” 193 from liturgies to those who “by a vow of <strong>the</strong> Christian faith show to all<br />

persons <strong>the</strong> merit of exceptional and extraord<strong>in</strong>ary virtue. ” 194 The law f<strong>in</strong>ished with<br />

<strong>the</strong> pious affirmation that <strong>the</strong> state “is susta<strong>in</strong>ed more by religion than by official<br />

duties and physical toil and sweat.” 195 The law did not mention clerics specifically, but<br />

<strong>the</strong>y are surely meant by implication; conceivably it could also have <strong>in</strong>cluded monks.<br />

Two of <strong>the</strong> most <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g of Constantius’ laws are CTh 16.2.15 of 30 June<br />

360 and CTh. 12.1.49 of 29 August 361 which are <strong>the</strong> only laws of Constantius which<br />

are somewhat anti clerical, though only to a limited degree and potentially<br />

contradictory. Both were addressed to <strong>the</strong> same Taurus who received CTh 16.10.4 and<br />

9.16.6. As is consistent with his style as noted <strong>in</strong> his previous laws aga<strong>in</strong>st temples and<br />

traditional practices, <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>the</strong> longest of <strong>the</strong> n<strong>in</strong>e and unusually thorough,<br />

particularly <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> case of <strong>the</strong> second law. The first law, CTh. 16.2.15, provided a<br />

dist<strong>in</strong>ction between wealthy clerics and o<strong>the</strong>r clerics and <strong>the</strong> obligations that rested on<br />

both groups. The law is essentially <strong>in</strong> three parts: <strong>the</strong> first referred to <strong>the</strong> recent<br />

council of Arim<strong>in</strong>um and a decree which had apparently allowed liturgical exemptions<br />

on lands owned by <strong>the</strong> Church. This law referred to a “sanction” (san ctio) issued<br />

between <strong>the</strong> time of that decree and this law which overturned this decree and<br />

<strong>the</strong>refore presumably made Church lands liable to liturgies. The second part of <strong>the</strong><br />

law reiterated <strong>the</strong> exemption of clerics from “compulsory public services of a menial<br />

nature and from <strong>the</strong> payment of taxes, if, by means of conduct<strong>in</strong>g bus<strong>in</strong>ess on a very<br />

small scale, <strong>the</strong>y should acquire meagre food and cloth<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong>mselves.” 196<br />

In <strong>the</strong> third part of <strong>the</strong> law, clerics with “landed estates” 197 however were<br />

“compelled to make fiscal payments for <strong>the</strong> land which <strong>the</strong>y <strong>the</strong>mselves possess” 198 and<br />

were not allowed to exempt o<strong>the</strong>r men’s lands, presumably by claim<strong>in</strong>g it as <strong>the</strong>ir own<br />

193 securitate perpetua<br />

194 quicum que v oto christianae legis m eritum exim iae s<strong>in</strong>gularisque v irtutis om nibus <strong>in</strong>tim av erit<br />

195 scientes m agis religionibus quam officiis et labore corporis v el sudore nostram rem publicam<br />

196 Ita a sordidis m uneribus debent im m unes adque a conlatione praestari, si exiguis adm odum m ercim oniis<br />

tenuem sibe v ectum v estitum que conquirent<br />

197 clericis qui praedia possident<br />

51

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!