Roger Pearse

I have also found Cabau's edition of the text online here.

Roger Pearse

I have commissioned an English translation of the Passio S. Saturnini. It seems to be an interesting text, and the main part of it is genuine.

Roger Pearse

Translation is done; just a couple of tweaks to do.

mountainman

What data contradicts Minimalist's statement?

Decius's edict of 250 CE regarding sacrifice to the emperor with certificate (libellus) may have nothing to do with Christians, especially since AFAIK not one Christian related libellus has been discovered.

Huon

Born in 185, Origen wrote before 254, and knew Decius (249-251), but not Diocletian (284-305), or Galerius (305-311) and Maximinus Daia (305-313). He died in 253 or 254, at the age of sixty-nine (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", VII, i).

Origen. Contra Celsum. BOOK III. CHAP. VIII.

Stuart

Here is a footnote from the same source that claims persecutions:

This gets back to the same problem we have on much of Christian development. Later themes from Christian sources whose focus is building up the myth and story of Christian heroism.

Christians debated, but appeared to pay Fiscus Iudaicus because you could get out of State religious practices by merely having a prayer for the Emperor. Romans 13:1-7 is an example of Christianity by the mid-3rd century (the latest I am comfortable dating this passage ... I think its actually a bit earlier) adjusting to formal jurisdiction to Roman laws and customs. This seems to be an adjustment to avoid the charge of Atheism - which was seen as tax evasion (funny the Romans were such sticklers on getting their cut).

We forget today that Rome was more culturally diverse a population than the United States is today. The State wanted to get its cut and keep problems internally to a minimum. Christians biggest problem was their tax status. Matthew partly answers this by stating 17:27 to pay it "so as not to offend them." Elsewhere the render unto Caesar what is Caesar's seems to be a reference to paying the tax. So long as Christians were lumped in with Jews it would not have been an issue. Matthew 5:35 indicates that book is mid-2nd century, so Christians were not separate from Jews for taxation. This is meaning of "by race Israel or Hebrew" in Marcion/Philippians 3:6, which Tertullian translates census = tax category ... again mid-2nd century and Tertullian still sees this rule in force in 213 CE when he is writing AM 5.

So was there a change in tax status between 213 CE and 254 CE for Christians? If so where is the evidence? On what grounds, if Christians are saying a prayer for the Emperor as suggested in the pro-Imperial passages we have in the Pauline text, would an Emperor call for a crackdown? Why does Zosimus know nothing of such a change in status? What would be gained by such a persecution in the first place? How does it add money for the legions (these are barracks Emperors by the mid-3rd century)

I have to fall under the category of skeptical any organized state-wide persecution. Christians are neither a tax problem nor a threat cause a civil war. The motivation seems to be lacking.

Roger Pearse

Andrew Eastbourne has kindly translated the Acts of St Saturninus for us.

The result is public domain; use it for any purpose, personal, educational or commercial.

HTML version:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/pa...us_02_text.htm

PDF and Word format:

http://archive.org/details/PassionOfSt.Saturninus

I need to write an intro, giving details of why the text is mainly authentic and historical, as too few of the hagiographical texts are. But that will probably be later!

The collection as a whole is here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers

A CDROM of all the translations I have collected or had made is here:

http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/al...hers_on_cd.htm

All the best,

Roger Pearse

mountainman

So the evidence for a persecution of Christians under Decius is this little bit from Origen (via Eusebius)?

Is there no more?

Toto

Decian_persecution seems balanced. Decius did not target Christians, but they were caught up in the requirement to pledge loyalty to the emperor and sacrifice. The effect of the edict was to divide Christians into those who went along, and those who refused and risked death.

Roger Pearse

By 250 A.D., a century and a half after Pliny knew who they were and their attitude on this question, no ruler the Roman empire could possibly be unaware that a requirement to sacrifice would involve the Christians being persecuted. And so the sources say:

Eusebius, Church History, book 6, chapter 39.

It looks to me as if the Wikipedia article has been worked over by someone wishing to minimise the persecution of the Christians. Sadly this is the problem with Wikipedia: it reflects, not the consensus of scholars (who are not permitted to edit on the site), nor the statements of the data (which is usually unknown to the editors), but the opinions of persons who are not even required to identify themselves. A look at the Wikipediocracy website will give many examples of the problems that have arisen in Wikipedia.

I must admit that I find this kind of activity, with respect to ancient persecutions, rather disgusting. People suffered miserably; and some bastard is finding excuses to play it down and protect those who did this evil?

But I don't much care for revisionism in any field.

All the best,

Roger Pearse