ISBN: 1230448969

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: TheClassics.us], ERNEST GEORGE HARDY,SUBJECTS, This item is printed on demand. Paperback. 72 pages. Dimensions: 9.7in. x 7.4in. x 0.1in.This historic b… Plus…

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: TheClassics.us], ERNEST GEORGE HARDY,SUBJECTS, This item is printed on demand. Paperback. 72 pages. Dimensions: 9.7in. x 7.4in. x 0.1in.This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1894 edition. Excerpt: . . . if we assume its early date, being evidence for it. 1 But, on the other hand, it was quite within their discretion to inquire into and punish specific charges, and in the early days, when Christianity was still a strange and unfamiliar appearance, they would be likely to do this, and any cases which Professor Eamsay may adduce out of the Pastoral Epistles would belong to this category. Indeed, this uncertainty of procedure, though more likely to occur in the early relations between government and Christianity, was apparently a characteristic of it all through. Tertullian complains that the whole matter was confessio nominis non examinatio criminis, 2 and yet he also says sacrilegii et maiestatis rei convenimur, 3 and maiestas was surely as specific a charge as could be made. But the language of Tertullian suggests a more important question than that of the precise date at which the nomen ipsum became punishable--a question which, as far as I can judge, Mommsens utterances both in the Historische Zeitschrift and in the Expositor still leave a little uncertain--viz. whether those who were punished as rei maiestatis were or were not punished for the name. To all appearance Mommsen answers this question in the affirmative. In the earlier article, after speaking of the conception of the Christian belief as in itself a capital crime, and quoting such well-known passages as 1 Peter iv. 15, and Just. Apol. i. 11 in support of it, he goes on to say that this conception could not have depended on the edict of this or that particular emperor, but must have been grounded in the essence of the Eoman criminal law, and we can see from Tertullian--i. e. in the passage about maiestas--how it was juristically to be explained. i Still more. . . This item ships from La Vergne,TN.<

2013, ISBN: 1230448969

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: Theclassics.Us, United States], Language: English . Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****. This historic book may have numerous typos and missing … Plus…

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: Theclassics.Us, United States], Language: English . Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****. This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1894 edition. Excerpt: .if we assume its early date, being evidence for it.1 But, on the other hand, it was quite within their discretion to inquire into and punish specific charges, and in the early days, when Christianity was still a strange and unfamiliar appearance, they would be likely to do this, and any cases which Professor Eamsay may adduce out of the Pastoral Epistles would belong to this category. Indeed, this uncertainty of procedure, though more likely to occur in the early relations between government and Christianity, was apparently a characteristic of it all through. Tertullian complains that the whole matter was confessio nominis non examinatio criminis, 2 and yet he also says sacrilegii et maiestatis rei convenimur, 3 and maiestas was surely as specific a charge as could be made. But the language of Tertullian suggests a more important question than that of the precise date at which the nomen ipsum became punishable--a question which, as far as I can judge, Mommsen s utterances both in the Historische Zeitschrift and in the Expositor still leave a little uncertain--viz. whether those who were punished as rei maiestatis were or were not punished for the name. To all appearance Mommsen answers this question in the affirmative. In the earlier article, after speaking of the conception of the Christian belief as in itself a capital crime, and quoting such well-known passages as 1 Peter iv. 15, and Just. Apol. i. 11 in support of it, he goes on to say that this conception could not have depended on the edict of this or that particular emperor, but must have been grounded in the essence of the Eoman criminal law, and we can see from Tertullian--i.e. in the passage about maiestas--how it was juristically to be explained.i Still more.<

2013, ISBN: 1230448969

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: Theclassics.Us, United States], Language: English . Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****.This historic book may have numerous typos and missing t… Plus…

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: Theclassics.Us, United States], Language: English . Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****.This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1894 edition. Excerpt: .if we assume its early date, being evidence for it.1 But, on the other hand, it was quite within their discretion to inquire into and punish specific charges, and in the early days, when Christianity was still a strange and unfamiliar appearance, they would be likely to do this, and any cases which Professor Eamsay may adduce out of the Pastoral Epistles would belong to this category. Indeed, this uncertainty of procedure, though more likely to occur in the early relations between government and Christianity, was apparently a characteristic of it all through. Tertullian complains that the whole matter was confessio nominis non examinatio criminis, 2 and yet he also says sacrilegii et maiestatis rei convenimur, 3 and maiestas was surely as specific a charge as could be made. But the language of Tertullian suggests a more important question than that of the precise date at which the nomen ipsum became punishable--a question which, as far as I can judge, Mommsen s utterances both in the Historische Zeitschrift and in the Expositor still leave a little uncertain--viz. whether those who were punished as rei maiestatis were or were not punished for the name. To all appearance Mommsen answers this question in the affirmative. In the earlier article, after speaking of the conception of the Christian belief as in itself a capital crime, and quoting such well-known passages as 1 Peter iv. 15, and Just. Apol. i. 11 in support of it, he goes on to say that this conception could not have depended on the edict of this or that particular emperor, but must have been grounded in the essence of the Eoman criminal law, and we can see from Tertullian--i.e. in the passage about maiestas--how it was juristically to be explained.i Still more.<

2013, ISBN: 1230448969

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: Theclassics.Us, United States], Language: English Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****. This historic book may have numerous typos and missing te… Plus…

[EAN: 9781230448961], Neubuch, [PU: Theclassics.Us, United States], Language: English Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****. This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1894 edition. Excerpt: .if we assume its early date, being evidence for it.1 But, on the other hand, it was quite within their discretion to inquire into and punish specific charges, and in the early days, when Christianity was still a strange and unfamiliar appearance, they would be likely to do this, and any cases which Professor Eamsay may adduce out of the Pastoral Epistles would belong to this category. Indeed, this uncertainty of procedure, though more likely to occur in the early relations between government and Christianity, was apparently a characteristic of it all through. Tertullian complains that the whole matter was confessio nominis non examinatio criminis, 2 and yet he also says sacrilegii et maiestatis rei convenimur, 3 and maiestas was surely as specific a charge as could be made. But the language of Tertullian suggests a more important question than that of the precise date at which the nomen ipsum became punishable--a question which, as far as I can judge, Mommsen s utterances both in the Historische Zeitschrift and in the Expositor still leave a little uncertain--viz. whether those who were punished as rei maiestatis were or were not punished for the name. To all appearance Mommsen answers this question in the affirmative. In the earlier article, after speaking of the conception of the Christian belief as in itself a capital crime, and quoting such well-known passages as 1 Peter iv. 15, and Just. Apol. i. 11 in support of it, he goes on to say that this conception could not have depended on the edict of this or that particular emperor, but must have been grounded in the essence of the Eoman criminal law, and we can see from Tertullian--i.e. in the passage about maiestas--how it was juristically to be explained.i Still more.<

ISBN: 9781230448961

Paperback, [PU: Theclassics.Us]