Letter 5: 1N.N0CENTM PAP.E I to ANYSIUM TIIF.

POPE INNOCENT I TO ANYSIUS, BISHOP OF THESSALONICA. Innocent confirms Anysius in that authority over the churches of Illyricum which Anastasius and his [own] predecessors had granted to him. To his most beloved brother Anysius, Innocent. When our God [Christ] saw fit to call to Himself, though swiftly, that man of holy memory, the bishop Anysius [...], reckoning his merits to be so great and of such a kind that they already surpassed the common bounds of human conduct and that age, by reason of the purity of his life and the abundance of his teaching, with which he governed the people of God with all the rigor of ecclesiastical authority: lest his Church should remain for any little while without the guidance of a ruler, He at once, of His mercy, with the holy priests and all the clergy and people consenting, with that peace which God, returning to heaven, [bestowed upon] His Church [...] saw fit to grant; [and so,] my dear brother, when I had been ordained in his place, it was fitting [for you] to recognize [...] and to announce my first acts [primitiae] speedily to that most excellent man, always faithfully laboring in God [...]. To which [office] also [those] earlier [than I were established], that is, men of holy memory, my predecessor bishops, namely Damasus, Siricius, and the aforesaid man, so deferred matters, that all things which were carried out in those parts they handed over to be examined by your holiness, which is full of justice; and it befits you to recognize that my own littleness too holds this same judgment and has the same will. For it would not be right that either I should attempt to come against the judgment of such great and good men, into whose place I am known to have succeeded, or that, by your merit, to whom those illustrious men are seen to have conferred so great a grace of this authority, anything should appear to be detracted. I therefore declare openly that this very thing has been reserved also to my littleness, that I should recognize it, so that by an equal judgment and like form I may attribute equally to your charity also that which was [granted to my predecessors] [...]. [The following are the editor's notes prefixed to the next letter, on its authenticity, date, and transmission.] ADMONITION ON THE FOLLOWING LETTER. 1. The things which are set down in it from Siricius do not render its truth doubtful. -- From the fourth letter of Siricius much is transcribed in this one. But, as Tillemont observed, this ought to seem in no way surprising, since Innocent, being asked by Victricius to hand over to him the rules customarily observed in the Roman Church, was unable to perform this better than by copying out the decrees of his predecessors. Hence, then, no suitable reason is held why either the aforesaid letter should be denied to Siricius, or this one to Innocent. Nor are the arguments of less weight which adjudge this one to Innocent, just as they adjudged that one to Siricius. By the second Council of Tours (c. 21), by Cresconius in his Breviarium canonum here and there, by Pope Zacharias [...] (Concil. Gall., epist. 9, c. 14 and 20), it is praised under his name. Moreover, of the ancient collections, of which we have examined very many indeed, in none is it lacking, in none is it not set forth as ascribed to Innocent. To him it is ascribed by the Corbie exemplar copied in the times of Pope Vigilius, by the Colbertine [exemplar] written out in large Lombardic letters, the old Codex of canons published by Quesnel, the exemplars of the Dionysian and Hadrian collections, and likewise the Spanish collection, the Isidorian, and many others. 2. That it is not to be assigned to the year 405. -- In all these collections (if you except the Dionysian, in which the consular note is not sought) the end of the letter is one and the same, and is by fullest agreement signed off [in the consulship of] Honorius Augustus for the sixth time and Aristaenetus. Hence no place is left for the conjecture of the learned man, by which he supposed that consular note to have been added to this letter of Innocent by another hand, or at least that one ought certainly to read "after the consulship of Honorius," etc. For even if we grant him that the words "after the consulship," which from their first letters are wont to be set out as P.C., could easily have fallen away, surely in that case in some at least old codex "of Honorius and Aristaenetus," not "Honorius and Aristaenetus," would have been retained, nor ought any word "in the consulship" [conss.] to have been added. Nor shall we be the more compelled to yield to that conjecture, if there be any reason why one should think this letter to have been written in the year 405 rather than 404. Let us examine it. Namely, one is moved by the words of number 5, in which Innocent recalls that [he] reported the matter [...], with the emperor present, and that Victricius brought it [...] with him placed [...]. Whence he also thinks it follows that [...] only after the emperor had come into the city [...]. [Footnote a: The same Anysius is honored by Palladius in the Dialogue on the Life of Chrysostom, c. 5, with the excellent epithet "old man worthy of esteem" [optimi senis tou axiologou]. There too is mentioned Eulysius of Apamea in Bithynia.] [The note continues, on the date and on the deacon who carried Chrysostom's letters:] [...] and after Victricius had returned from Rome to Rouen [...] this letter was written. And indeed, he says, Honorius [...] in the year [40]5 at most, in the month of December [...] as is gathered [...] from Claudian's poem [...] came: but Victricius, in so short an interval, which runs from [...] to the 15th of February of the year 404, was not able to return from Rome to Rouen and thence to send [letters] to Innocent, so that they might be delivered to him before [...]. From these things [it is concluded] [...] given under Honorius Augustus as consul, but after [...], that is in the year 405, [or rather] in the year 404 [...] he denied them to have been given. But if to one thing alone, of which no certain notice is held, it is permitted to deny faith [against] so many and so diverse and so ancient [witnesses], what [...] [...] in the year 405 he came to Rome, and was at that time present in the city [...] Victricius: so that we should suppose that the same bishop, before he received these letters of Innocent, had pretended to have returned to Rouen [...] what does it compel? Innocent nowhere [says] a deacon was sent to him, [nor that] any letters of his [Victricius's] were delivered to him [...]. But, says the learned man, by the word which Innocent uses in the opening, he hints at one absent. But if absent, surely [the one] returned to Rouen, not [the one who had] departed from Rome [...]. Which also [does not hinder but that] Victricius, about to depart from Rome, while [...] he might say to Innocent, asked from him a book of the ecclesiastical rules, and he [Innocent] [...] [gave] [...] the book, that one which [...] first [...] [had it] arranged, and took care that it be handed to Victricius before his departure from the city. Nor indeed is there need that [it] be brought forth by us, to whom we are said to send something. Daily friends send to one another, even [those] dwelling within the walls of the same city, little gifts, books, letters, etc. Of which thing Damasus and Jerome are an example, above pp. 579 ff. 3. It is called a "Book of Rules." The division of the chapters. -- Furthermore, the said book of rules is to be thought no other than this very letter, inasmuch as in it Innocent, having prefaced a few things, sets forth several chapters of discipline, by which the churches are to be governed. These chapters, however, in most manuscripts -- though not in all -- are exhibited, with their titles, in summary fashion prefixed. But neither in those [manuscripts] is this division of the chapters or summary one and the same, but it is diverse according to the genius and judgment of those who collected the pontifical letters. Among the rest, however, that is fuller which the exemplars published by Quesnel from the Corbie [collection] exhibit. As to which one [division], we should hold it sufficient to represent it here, were it not worth the trouble to add another from the collection of Dionysius Exiguus, with which the Hispana -- whence the Isidorian was copied -- agrees in almost all points. For since Cresconius and other collectors of canons are wont to cite the decrees of the Roman pontiffs according to the division of titles arranged by Dionysius, in order that their citations may be ascertained, it is necessary to know beforehand what that division is. Now Dionysius Exiguus comprehends in twenty-nine titles all that he collected from Innocent's decrees, among which the first place is held by this pope's letter to Decentius, distinguished into eight titles. Then that one to Victricius follows it, which is divided into twelve titles. Wherefore the first decree of this letter is called by Dionysius title 9, and the last title 20, as may be seen below. 4. The laws which forbade decurions [curiales] to migrate from the curia. -- In these decrees, that especially which is said in chapter 11 concerning decurions [curiales], because in the letters of other pontiffs too mention of the same matter falls again and again, must be explained a little here, since [explaining it] in the annotations is hardly possible. The decurions, or town councillors [decuriones], were so called who discharged the municipal magistracies and offices. Concerning them the emperor Majorian, in his first Novel, speaks thus: "That decurions are the sinews of the commonwealth and the very vitals of the cities, no one is ignorant; whose body antiquity rightly called the Lesser Senate." But, as the same emperor observes, judges and rulers of the provinces by their unjust exactions reduced many to such [straits] that they deserted their native city. To the decurions belonged the care of the tributes, of public buildings, of the public offices or works [munera seu ludi publici], etc. Wherefore severe were the laws of the emperors, by which no one was permitted to leave the curia unless he had discharged all the offices of his curia. The emperor Constantine ordained (Theodosian Code, book XII, title 1, law 11): "Let no civil judge endeavor to grant immunity to any decurion, nor by his own arbitration set anyone free from the curia." Of those too who, leaving the curias, flee to the protections of military service, he commands (Law 1) that "all who are found not yet [bound] to the chief office, [being] discharged from military service, shall return to the curia." And he establishes (Law 12), as the interpreter Anianus speaks, that "whosoever shall have wished to pass from the curial decury of the city in which he was born to another, shall in no wise be able to evade the condition owed to the curia... nor by any plea of necessity, or of slavery to his own city, on the ground that he wished to leave the city, be able to escape." By another law also (Law 20) he orders that "no decurion, unless all the offices of the curia have been performed in order (Anianus adds: which are owed to the native city), ought to undertake the office of curator or defender." Nor was the indulgence of the emperors greater toward those who passed from the curia to the clergy. Ambrose, in epistle 41, to the emperor Theodosius, n. 29, judged that he must expostulate with him on this matter in this manner: "How shall I make excuse before the bishops, who groan grievously that, whereas through thirty and countless years presbyters of some grade or ministers of the Church abstained from the sacred office, [now] they are being assigned to the curia?" And indeed that expostulation was the more just, because before (Law 15) Constantine had wished the curias to be admonished that thenceforth [...] only [...]. [On] which condition decurions were permitted to give their name to the clergy. -- The decurions were not so removed from the clergy that all access to it was utterly forbidden them. Valentinian and Valens permit [them] to give their name to the clergy under a certain condition, which by a law given in the year 364, on the 10th day of September, they thus explain (Law 59): "Whoever produces children for the Church, or by conferring his own property on a kinsman, let him make him a decurion in his stead, or yield to the resources of the curia as much as he leaves behind, [the one] who has done neither being recalled of necessity": that is, in such wise that he is to be wholly recalled to the curia who has not ceded his own goods, [whether] his own [or] to his curia. The same thing is also set forth by this constitution of Theodosius, drawn up in the year 38[?], on the 7th day of November (Law 104): "Decurions who prefer to serve the churches rather than the curias, if they wish to be what they pretend, let them despise those things which they withdrew [from the curia]." For we do not free them otherwise, unless their patrimonies have been despised." To which Ambrose looked back, when in epistle 18, to Valentinian, n. 15, he wrote: "If a priest seek the privilege of declining the curial burden, he must cede the possession of his ancestral and inherited estate and of all his goods." A little more indulgent had Constantius been: since in the year 361, on the 29th day of August, he first decreed, in favor of bishops (Law 49): "Let no one compel the bishop alone to alienate his faculties, as had been established before." Then he wishes those to enjoy the same privileges "who shall have attained to the rank of presbyters, of deacons too, or of subdeacons and the rest, [having obtained] release of the curia, and having offered to himself [...] by the declaration of a judge with the people's consent... especially if they are sought by the voices of the whole people." Otherwise, two portions of his substance [being made over] either to his kinsmen substituted for the curial duties, or [being] handed over to the curia by them [...] who shall have dismissed [it] on the conditions premised, that seems to be said which is added at the end of the same constitution: "If the over-assessors of the granaries, and those who are to undertake the magistracy, the appointed [overseers] also of the peace, or the receivers of the various commodities, shall have believed they ought to aspire to the Church (this also to the ministry of the Church), after the offices of the imposed solicitude [...] all the rest, lectors, subdeacons, or clerics to whom the privileges of clerics are not owed, shall forthwith be presented for the due burdens of their native city." By so many and so diverse laws, then, occasion was not lacking to the judges by which to reclaim importunately the decurions enrolled into the clergy, and thence to create trouble for the prelates of the churches.

1N.N0CENTM PAP.E I AD ANYSIUM TIIF.SSALONICENSEM EPISCOPHM. Anysio lnnocentius cam in llhjrici Ecclesias palesla- tem confirmal, quam Anaslusius ejusqite decessores ipsi cuncesseiant. Dileclissimo fratri Anysio Innocentius. Cum Dcus nosler Chrisius sancix niemorisc virum An isiasiuui episcopmn, licet celeriter, ad se vocare Ruinanse vulgavit. Cum lnnoceniius lituras isias D dignaius sit; compuians ejus merita lanta esse ac talia, ut jam excedereni conversalionis humana-con- soitinm, saeculiimque illud, pra3 vila: puriiaie et ablindantia doclrime, qua jiopulnm Dei toto ecrle- siastic.TR auctoritaiis rigore regebat: ne ejus Eccle- sia aliquantulum sine rccioris gubernariilo rcma- ncret, siaiim pro sua misericordia, consentientibus sanctis sacerdotibus omnique clero ac popnlo cnm pace , qu;ini Deus Ecclesi;c suae rediens ad ccelum episcopalus sui, qocni statim ab Anaslasii obitll iniit' primitias vncei ; eas c rcn ineoseio Mnium anni 402 scnpias fuisse non immerito colligamus. 465 EPISiOL.fc ET DECRETA. 466 donare dignatus e-l, orriinalum me in ejus locum, A seri ei postquam Victricius Roma Rotomagum rediis- frater charissime, par fuitrecognoscere(f. lecognos- ?el- ll:1'c episiola seripla sit. Aiqni, inquil, llooorius ... ... imperali r auno iluiniaxai 40">, mense Decembri Ito- cere) ; prtmit.asque meas nonms. viro* opim.o al- „,.„„ ve||it |1C(, ,.„ m|eij ,„ px c|alldiaili poemate que in Deo semper fiileli.er laboranli celeriler nun- culligiiur, vencrni : Viciricius autem tatn exiguo in- tiare (V. epist. 2 Mcoltri i). Cui eiiam ameriores twvallo, qimd ab impen -is rhcm advcntu ad . , _. „ .. 15 Februarii diem anni 404 excnrni, Rnma Roloma- tant, actalesviripraHiecessoresme.ep.scnp.,.desl, g)lm red,re f aiqne i|l(|e |i||0MS ad ,nnocemilin sanctx memoria. Damasus, Siriciusatque supra mc- miltere, iia m ci ante reddi rcmur, nou valuit. Ex moratus vir iia dciulerunt, m omnia, qua? i.i illis ml° ' tl('ra- illas .mn llonorio augi.sto consule, scd par.ibus gereren.ur, sanctitati tu», qu.-c plcna P0*1 ___^__ «T? a»g»?,li' ^oc est anno 405, F ° 'ii iidii 404, dalas es-e c nelmlil. Sed si nli lailuni, ju-titbe esi, traderent cog.ioscenda ; mea.u qunque c.i.jus nulla liabelur .mtiiia certa, lot el tan. dive.sis parvitaieni l.oc tenere judicium, ean.demque l.abere lanique an.iqi.is li- fidem i.egare liceat, quid in vol.inta.em, le dccet recognoscerc. Neque enim fas ^lLT' '' .r,i ? *?!?, _____"-- ""T"? ^T" ' ° M auno 40o Uoniain venerii, iilqiu; in it.be tnuc lcm- erat, ut aut ego conlra lanlorum bonorum virorum p,,iis ex-tiiorii Victricius : ut eumdem episcoptim judicium veuire lentarem, quorum in locura succes- prius, qiiam bas lunoi eniii litleras acciperet, lt> loma- sisse dienoscor, aut tno merito, cui praidari viri P«ra rediisse simulassei.iiamus, quid cogii? Nullum . , . .. . „ lni.occnl.us NkIikii immiuu :.d se nii-siun, i.u.las lania.u gratiam auciontat.s hujusce contulisse vi- R _|jus |illeras sioi rcddilas „ en.o.ai. Verum, ii.quit denlur, aliqnid derogari viderelur. Prae me itaque v.r eruditus, verbum misi, quo in exorriio utitur fero, tit boc ipsum etiam me;e parvitati reseivatnm Innoccntius, absenlem inni.il. At si absei.tem, non . . . eerie Ro.oinayiim rcvers-im, non Rmna cgrcssum recognoscam , ut pari indico s.mil.que forma cl bo- _01).lt_ nuid eil.M1 |1T.(,|„|,et q„0u,ii,us Yiciricius Roma nis adaeque el lua; charilati id tribuam quod me- asbcefsnrus, dnm vnlelnnoceiiiio dicerel, rcgularum rerjS- ecclesiasiicarum libiuin ab eo pnslularit, atnue is iiniMiTiiu iv irDiuTni am cirniTK-MTirm ad "i:,mim """ n"" babins libiuin, illiim qii.nn pri- MOMTUM IN EPISTOLAM SEQUENTEM. , co.icii.iiari, ei Viclricio anle illius e.x urbe 1. Venlatem ejus dubiam non faciunt, qiue in ea ex di-c-suin tradi curarit. Neque vero opns est ut pro- Siricio descripla sunt. — Ex cpistola 4 Siricii inulta cul a nobis siui, ad quos aliquid initieie dicimur. in bac describuuliir. Veium. ut ob.-ervavil Tille- Qim.idie sibi mutuo n itu.nl amici, eliani ejiisdem moiitius, id niinime mirum videii debet, ciun li.no- urbis mcenibus cniiienli, niunuscula, libns, li.leras, centius a Victricio rogatus ut regulas in Ecclesia eie. Cnjus r>i exeniplosini Damasus et Hieronynius, Roinana servari soliins sibi traderel, id leliiius pru- supra p. 579 et seqq. stare, quam decessorum decreia exscribeudn, nequi- . Regulnrum tiber appellalur. Capilutorum divi- verit. Ilinc itaque nulla habetur idunea raiio, cur sio. — Porro memnratus regulariini liber uon alms aul pradicta epistola Sincio, aui hac lnni.cenlio exisiiniandus videlur ab l.ac ip-a epistula, uipoie in abroge.ur. Neque leviora simt imunenia, qiur. batic qua I. nucen.ics iiauca pra'fatus, plura ilisciplinae ln.mcentio, qu n. lucru.it quaa illaui SiriciO adjndi- G capiiula, q.nbiis Ecclesia2 regend™ siiil, explicat. cant. A conclio I uronensi ii, c. 21), a Cresconio in Hac anleiii capitula plerisque in n ss. tnmel-i non breuar. can. passim, a Zacliaria papa ai ud Sirm. in oiimibus, praunissis lilulissuniniaiiin exliibentur. lo. I Concil. Gall. ep.st. 9, c. 14 el 20, sui> il ius Scd ncque in illi- lnec C.ipilulnruiii divisio seu noinine laudalur. Praicica e veieribus collcclioi.i- summa u„a ei eadem esi, vcrum pro eorum, qui b..s, qnas bcne mullas recognovinius, i.i iu.lla dcsi- pontificias cpisloins collcgerunt, ingenio cl arbilrio deralur, in n.illa non exb.bclur Innoccntio in- diversa. Ca-leris auicm amplinr esi ea. quain Coiii- sciipta. Ilanc ipsi adscribuui exemplar Curbeiensu cis a nucsncllo vulgaii exbibent excni|>iaria. Quo- Vi.ilii papae temporibus descriplum, Colbertinum circa uiiam illam hiu repraBseutare saiis liabi-remus, niajn-ciilis biieiis Langobardicis cx.iratuin, \cuis nisi ci alleram ex Diouysii Exi^ni collectione, eui canoiiu.n Codex a Gjuesncllo vulgalus, Dionysiana: e. Ilispana, unde descr.p.a est l-idor.ana , pene in colleciionis Hadriaiiseque exemplaria, necnon col- oinii bus concinil, adjieere operie prei.i.m essct. lec.io llispana, I-nloriaii.i, et aliai |lines. Cuni eniin Creseonius aliique caiioiinin colleclores 2. In annum 405 rejiciendam non exse. — lu bis Roniauoruni poniiGciim dccretu secundiini li.ulorum omnibus colleciiouibus (si Dionysianam excipi-.s. in divisionem a Dionysin coiiciuiiaiaiii cilare soleanl, quaoniit.iiur uoia cmisularis) ide.n o.nnino est epi- ul cnrum comperiautur ciiaiim . s, prxuosse necesse Siolac linis »c snmmo cousensu cousignaiur Uonorio est qua; illa sn divisio. A.qai Dumysius Exiguus aug . vi el Arisleneio conss. Ilinc nullus relinquiiur lo- nnvem ac \ igmii litulis Conipiebendii onu.ia qua; ex cus erudili vii i conjectura?, qua huic Inuocenlii epi- Ini.ocentiu cnllegit dccreln, inler qiiffi priiiium lo- stolx notnin illam consulnrein ab aliu adjei lain cs-e, p cum ubtinet hnjus pap e ad Deccniium eiusiola li- au. cerli- potl consulutum llonorii,e\c, legendum esse tnbs oclo disliucia. I nm lianc exeipil i>la ad ViCtri- su-piialiii'. Ut eniui ei la rgiam ur voces posl consu- cium, quam m duodecim tiiubs par.uur. Quociica lutiiiii, qua; primis liiteris P. C. ab anii .uains ex- priiuum episi.be lnjus decrelum apud Dionysium primi snleni, excidere facilc potuisse; en sane casu lilulus 9 et ullimum litulus 20 nppeiiaiur, ut inlra in aliquo saltem ve.cre codice Hvnorii et Aristeneti, videre est. nnn U onorio et Aristeneto , fuissel retentum, nec iu 4. Leges . qua; curiales « curia migrare prohibe- ullo vocabulu.n conss. addi debuisset. Neqne magis bant. — l.i .lli- auleiii riecretis id inaxime, quud ronjecliirie ilbus concedere cogemur, si i|iiid causae cap. II de curiahbiis dicimr, qnia ci in aiiis alio- sit cur cpislol im banc anno 405, potius quaiu 401 runi ponlificiim epis.olis ejusdem rei identidem inci- scripiam putei, expendamus. Ncmpe unis movelur det me.uio, paulu b.c Ui.it.-, quani in aniioiaiioni- num. 5 vcrbis, qnibus commcmurai Innocenlius qua3 bus licet.opus >si explic re Curiales seu decunones cm laliuiii causa, iniperatore prxsenle, et Victricin , dicehantur, qui magislraiibns atquc officiis fuuge- sccum jiosiio perlulerit. Unde ci sequi exisiimat, ut bantur niunicipalibus. De illis Majorianus imp., no- i.uu uiodu postqua... in urbcm venisset imperaior, velbc 1 ini.io, iia bqmiur ; i Curiales nervos esse a Idem Any-ii.s a Palladio in diab go ile Viia Cbry- episcopo , qni qni. dci im episcopornm litlcras in sosloim, cap. 5, optnni senis tc.0 xuliyripa\i cncnniio gia.iam (.brysosloiui Ruuiam delercbat, suas eiiam donai.ir Ibi cl memoraiur Eulysio Apameue Uilhynix iradidisse. -5G7 m voipiiblicifi ac visrera civiiatum ntillus ignoral : \ prascipit ; sed lcrliam ipsis reserval. I'e iis aiitcm, B quoriiiu caHnni recie appellavit antiquitas ininoreiii Seoalum. > Sed, ulidemimperaior uljservai, judices mmi rectores provineiarunn iniquis cxaciionibus suis multos ro redige.banl, ut pilriam dosererent. Ad curiales pciiincbat iriliiitorniii, ajdilioioriiin, inune- nini sen liid.iriiin |>iib!ieoriiin, olc, Cura. (Ju.ipro- pter seveiaj erani lutperatorum leges, i|iiil>us nemo :i ouria, oisi oiiiniliiis curiae su e oilieiis ossrt fuu- Ctus, liliTui iieniiitiebatiii'. Coasianlinns impera- lor sauxii (Cod. Th. lib. xn, 1(4. 1, leg. 11) : < Nemo jiiilex eivili iin uiiiiierniii vacationein cui |iiam pr;e- slare euriali eonetnr, vel aliquein suo arbiirio ile curia lilieret : » Ex iis eliain, qni reliciis eiiriis :nl inililie piiC-ailia confiigiuiit, i omnes qui nomJinn priiuipilo inveiiitiutur obuoxii, sulmos niililia ail euriain reverti • pr.ocipit (Leg. I). !l tn consuinit (Leg 12), ui iiilerpres Aiiniamis koquiiur, « qui- cumqiie curialia deea, iu i|ua natus est , civitate ;>d aliam ir.insire voluent, condilionem cnrie dchiiaui ntillateipis... ner ullo nrguuienio nece.-silalis, aul seivni.i civiiati- snse, pre eo qund civiia.em mittire vnluil, possit 1'V.nlere. » Alia i|iioque loge (Lcg. 20) jubet, « nulltioi curialem, nisi oiiinibiis curiie olli- ciis per urilinem aclis (addit Aitnianus, quai palrioe tiebeulu ), cnaioris aut deleosoris ofliriinii ilebere Miseipere. » Neqne major eral loiporaiorum erga eos, qtti ad clerum a euiii ntijir ibanl , indiilgeiilia. Anibn.siiis, ojiisl. 41, ad Tlieodo iuni ini|i., n. 29, liae de re ciiin illo sibi exposiulnuduin duxil in bniic iiinliiiii : « Qiiniuoilo excus.ibo apud episeo- pus, qui ouiie, qtiia per briginla et iniiiiineros annos presbyieri quid im giadil lninji vol ministri Bcctesiae i'1'tiabiint ir a inuiiero saor.t, et curiaj depul aiimi", graviter geniiint? i Et eo quidem ;e,|uior erat illa exposlnlatio, qnod airtoa (Leg. 15) Coiisiauiiniis cu- rias adinoneri vwtuissel, ul cos tanluin deineeps ... Q :u conditione euriules clero nomcii divre pcnnit- lebaniur. — Gmiales non ita removeb iiiiur a clero, nt oniiiis ad euin adiiu- ipsis inlerilu lei eiur lilis Valenlinianiis ao Valens elero iioiueii daie qu adaui condttione periniuunt, qnain lege anim 5(34, Septein- biis iO die. data. sie oxplicanl (Leg. 59) : « Qui paries eiigil Eorlesise, anl in piopinqiiiini lnnia prn- pna coolereiido, eutti pro so faeiat curialeni, aot l.iciiiiaiibus curi;e cedai quam reln|ii.i, ox necessj- tate revoe.indo eo, qui neulrinn leeit : i li.c est, ila ut omiiiiio ad curiam rcvoc.uulus sil, qui Iinna tua vel p riipiii pio vel curiie sme iion eessil. Eadoin da re exsial et Iwec Thoodosii aono 58', Novomlirii 7 die, cousignata conslitulio (Leg. Iu4) : « (.nriiles, ffui eeclesiis m.ilunl servire qo.mi curiis, si volunt esse qund siiniilaui, c mieinnant illa quae subti ainint. v Nee eniin eos aliler, nisi coniemplis pairimoniis, libeiamiis. > Qio respexii Ambrosius, cum epist. 18, ad Vabailiiiiaiiiioi, n. 15, scripsil : i Si privilegitiin qu;firai sacerdos, ut onus curiale dcclinei; patrix atque aviti el oiiiniiiiii liculianiin posse-sioue ce- deiiilinn esl. • Pauto indiilgenlior lueral Conslan- tius : sii|uidein anno 501, Augiisii 2'J ilie, pnniuin iu e|iiseoporuin graiiain decrevit (Leg. 49) : < Epi- scopuiii soliim laeultaies suas ciliiie, sieiit anle fne- rat eonstiluiuHi, nullus adigat inaneipare. » Deinde illns endein priviiegin gaudere vult, « qui ad presby- teroruin gradus, diaeoinim etiam seu siibiliaeniiiiiu c.eieroi'iim;|iie pervoneriii! asstsionic euria, aiqtre snli obliilit judicis proineiile consensuin... inaxiine si luiiiis poptili vooibns expeianiur. » Alioqnin dtias subsi iiiia- su;e poriiones vel propinqnis suis ad eii- rialia obsequia stibrogatis, vel curnr ab ii< iradi qm pr;einissis couditionibtis doiiiissenl , videlur diciinn quod in cjusdem conslitutionis (iue adjici- lur : « Si inxqiosli liorienriim, iique (|ui siiscei.ltiri sunt iiiagislraliini , praqiositi oliam pacis seu sus- ceptores diversaruiu specieruni ad Eeclcsiam (lioc el ad Ecclesioe ministeriiim) crodiderint aspiran- diiui, postquaiii officia ini|iosi(;e sollicitudinis aut Hesidui omnes, leetores, siibdiaconi, vcl clerici (|inbus clericoiuin privilegia nou debeiitnr, debitis iiiox patrisc miiiiertbus pi:eseiitenttir. > Tnl igitur tauii|iie dtvetsis legibus imii deerai judieibus ncca- sio, qua curialos in clernin ailscitos iiuporiiine re- peiercnl, imleqiie pr.esiilibn ■ ecclwiarum miilesiiain creareui.