countjulian

Wasn't that the same text that says after Paul was beheaded his head bounced 3 times, creating 3 different holy springs?

Ben C Smith

I was using the translation by M. R. James from Early Christian Writings. I am completely at the mercy of James et alii for the grouping of the many fragments of this work (in several languages) into an entire text.

The Greek fragments are available on Skeptik. The most relevant lines are from the part about the martyrdom (M. R. James 10), section 3:

Ταυτα δε ακουσας ο ΚαισαÏ? εκελευσεν παντας τους δεδεμενους πυÏ?ι κατακαηναι, τον δε ∏αυλον Ï„Ï?αχηλοκοπηθηναι τω νομω των Ρωμαιων.

[....]

Ην ουν εν τη Ρωμη ο Î?εÏ?ων ενεÏ?γεια του πονηÏ?ου πολλων ΧÏ?ιστιανων αναιÏ?ουμενων ακÏ?ιτως.

And after hearing these things Caesar commanded all the prisoners to be burned with fire, but Paul to be beheaded according to the law of the Romans.

[....]

Nero therefore was in Rome, by the working of the evil one, destroying many Christians without [giving them a chance for fair] judgment.

Ben.

Ben C Smith

Not as far as I can tell.

Ben.

Ben C Smith

Well said.

Ben.

Roger Pearse

Many thanks!

All the best,

Roger Pearse

countjulian

No, he asks Trajan if they should be punished just for the name, or for the "offences" that go with it. As for the offences, he has this to say

a rather odd list of "error", since none of these things were illegal in the Roman world, in fact most (including, seemingly, Pliny) would have agreed with the majority of what he said.

You also claimed Nero made laws against Christians which were still being followed in Pliny's day, which is rather odd, since Pliny seems rather lost on what to do. It is also odd since Tacitus mentions no such thing, indeed he mentions the persecution along with alot of other seemingly illegal and immoral things Nero was doing, and in the previous paragraphs showed how Nero benefitted from the fire, and all but said he was responsible for it. In fact, he explicitly denies that there were laws passed against them, only that Nero was using them as a scapegoat in this particular situation.

Ben C Smith

He does ask Trajan for the proper procedure, but look at his default procedure in the meantime (emphasis mine):

In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have been denounced to me as Christians is as follows. I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed. For, whatever the nature of their creed might be, I could at least feel no doubt that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy deserved chastisement.

Nothing about offenses or crimes there, is there? Merely confessing to be a Christian is enough for Pliny. Is the confession also enough for Trajan? Apparently so; he writes back:

The method that you have pursued, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those denounced to you as Cbristians is extremely proper.

Trajan continues with the following (and note that, with the entire basis for punishment being a confession, the reverse is also true, that denying being a Christian earns a pardon):

No search should be made for these people; when they are denounced and found guilty they must be punished, with the restriction, however, that when the party denies himself to be a Christian, and shall give proof that he is not, that is, by adoring our gods, he shall be pardoned on the ground of repentance, even though he may have formerly incurred suspicion.

It is an odd list of errors only if the errors on the list are the basis for the prosecution and punishment; the rest of the letter, along with the response from Trajan, demonstrates beyond doubt that these errors, as it were, are not the basis for prosecution.

Laws might be a little too strong a word (though I am open to being shown differently); procedures or precedents might be better.

Ben.

copernicus

Ben, are you aware that it was a crime in the Empire at that time to belong to any unauthorized association, no matter what its purpose? The emperors were nervous about the effect that such groups had on local stability, so they banned them all. Pliny admitted to not knowing much about the nature of Christian beliefs, but he knew that their association was illegal. Pliny once even wrote Trajan asking whether a municipality could form a fire brigade. Trajan wrote back in the negative. Had the locals formed one anyway, they might also have been treated harshly for their recalcitrance. See The Christians as the Romans Saw Them.

Ben C Smith

Yes. In fact Pliny alludes to this in his letter to Trajan:

Even this practice, however, they had abandoned after the publication of my edict, by which, according to your orders, I had forbidden political associations.

Thanks.

Ben.

rlogan

Hmmm.

The translation I am using calls them "secret societies"


http://www.tyrannus.com/pliny_let.html