CONSTANTINE THE GREAT

CONSTANTINE THE GREAT GEINUINE FAITH OR NECESSITY OF STATE CHHI 520 (SPRING 2013) Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary By Stephen P. Higgs (ID 25106280) May 5, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………..2 FAMILY HISTORY AND CHRISTIAN BACKDROP……………………………2-3 CONVERSION EXPERIENCE…………………………………………………….3-4 CHRISTIAN AFTERMATH AND RESULT OF CONVERSION………………...5 NEW CHURCH-STATE RELATIONS…………………………………………….5-6 THE CHRISTIANITY OF CONSTANTINE………………………………………7 AUTHENTICITY OF CONSTANTINE’S CONVERSION……………………….7-9 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………...9-10 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………...11 INTRODUCTION While there may be various interpretations of the authentication of Constantine’s conversion and in particular his religious experience in 312 by the Tiber River near Rome, it is at this point arguable that Constantine was conscious of some type of religious experience. Whether he made the interpretations of his visions and dreams to be of a Christian nature on his own accord or with the help of Christian advisors is not certain; it is the victory at the battle of Milvian Bridge that solidified his conversion and consequently made his conversion authentic to him. At any rate, his conversion initiated a shift in ideology and politics at the state level; an intervention of faith and politics was forged. The question is, was Constantine’s conversion sincere or did he use Christianity in order to strengthen the state as well as secure his own political aspirations. Despite the debate of his conversion, the impact that Constantine had on the Roman Empire, Europe and the Church in the fourth century and beyond is undeniable. FAMILY HISTORY AND CHRISTIAN BACKDROP Constantine was born to a Roman official and an innkeeper in the year A.D. 274. His father, Constantius, in 293, was appointed as one of the four junior emperors established by Diocletian. Reported by most historians, Constantius was a pagan due his destruction of some of the churches. However he did not enforce the harsher edicts of persecution that some of his contemporaries had inflicted upon the Christian population. There are some accounts that Constantius may have actually been a Christian and this was also a belief that Constantine himself had come to believe. Charles Freeman, “The Emperor's State Of Grace,” History Today 51, no. 1 (January, 2001): 9- 15,http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/docview/202814928/fulltext?accountid=12085(accessed May 1, 2013). There are reports that Constantantius believed in only one god and spoke of a single god, which was uncommon for a roman official, particularly an emperor in the polytheistic society of Rome. It is however apparent that Constantine’s father was a Neo-Platonist who was at the least, tolerant of Christianity. Ferguson, E. Church History: Volume One from Christ to Pre-Reformation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005),182 Constantine’s mother, Helena was an inn-keeper; there are conflicting accounts of his mother, Helena’s Christianity. Helena was known as a sympathizer with the early church. She traveled extensively throughout the empire and administered aid to the churches. Up until her death, Helena had given the churches support and personal service, yet there is no profound evidence that she was a Christian at this time, but assumedly a sympathizer. Charles Freeman. The Emperor's State Of Grace, History Today 51, no. 1 (January, 2001): 9- 15,http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/docview/202814928/fulltext?accountid=12085(accessed May 1, 2013). The picture that is presented of Helena is one of compassion and generosity and is eventually referred to as St. Helena. Evidently, her attitude and acts of kindness toward the Christians made an impact on her son, Constantine. So much so, that in 308, he summoned his mother to the imperial court, and conferred on her the title of Augusta, and ordered that all honor should be paid her, and had coins struck bearing her effigy. Ibid Her son's influence caused her to officially embrace Christianity after his victory over Maxentius. The point can be made that the combination of Constantine’s father’s tolerance of Christianity and his mother’s Christianity do lend some credence to the conversion of Constantine to be authentic, which we will examine. CONVERSION EXPERIENCE The conversion of Constantine marks a major turning point in the history of Europe and the Near East. Many scholars when studying early Christianity mark a distinction between pre and post-Constantine rule. Ferguson, E. Church History: Volume One From Christ to Pre-Reformation.(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 183 After the death of his father, he gathered his troops and solidified his hold on the western part of the empire and marched against his rival Maxentius. On his route to Rome, the two armies met at the Milvian Bridge located on the Tiber River just outside the city. Constantine’s much smaller army won the battle at the Milvian Bridge and as a result, he secured the city of Rome, which marked the end of opposition in the west. This victory was the result of a “religious experience,” according to Constantine’s Christian advisor. In 312, while his troops were camped outside the city, according to Bishop Eusebius, Constantine had prayed for divine intervention. According to Eusebius and a report from Constantine himself, there was seen at noon a shining cross of light with a banner attached to the cross with the words, “in hoc signo vinces “by this, conquer;” the following night a vision of Jesus Christ in a dream instructed Constantine and his troops to adorn their shields with a Christian symbol (the Chi-Rho), and thus, they were victorious. Gerberding, R and J. H. Moran Cruz, Medieval Worlds (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004),55 Was the experience real or a figment of Constantine’s imagination? It appears that he did have some type of experience for the fact that this experience would change the course of European history. Whether the interpretation of the dreams or visions were an accurate account of what he witnessed or was interpreted with the help of accompanying bishops, is of no real matter with regards to the affect it had on history and particularly that of the lives of Christians of the time; it is clear that he believed he had a divine mission and help from God in his victory and this mission continued through the policies and culture he would perpetuate and would gradually favor Christianity and change the religious and ideological structure of the empire. Ferguson, E. Church History: Volume One From Christ to Pre-Reformation. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005),183 CHRISTIAN AFTERMATH AND RESULT OF CONVERSION In 313, Constantine entered into an agreement, known as the Edict of Milan, with his eastern emperor, Licinius, giving Christians in the eastern empire the same rights and privileges that the Christians were enjoying under Constantine in the western empire. Licinius did not have the Christian fervor that Constantine had and nevertheless, continued persecutions in the east. In 324, Constantine defeated Licinius and was now Emperor of the entire Roman Empire. Ferguson, E. Church History: Volume One From Christ to Pre-Reformation. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 183. Unsettled by the pagan associations of Rome, Constantine moved to capital to Constantinople (modern day Istanbul) on the site of the old Greek city Byzantium, where much of the wealth, commerce and education was centered. Ibid,184. It is here that the Byzantine Orthodox Christian Empire would be forged. Constantine showed favor to Christians by implementing legislation making Sunday a legal holiday, and privileges from civil duties for Christians and monetary support that was previously given to pagan priests were now awarded to Christian priests. Ibid,184 Constantine also initiated an extensive building program with the massive construction of churches throughout the empire. While most previous emperors initiated massive building projects during their reign, the building of Christian churches, as opposed to monuments was a first in history. While past emperors initiated building projects to enhance the prestige of themselves, the building of churches enhance not just the prestige of Constantine, but that of the Church itself. NEW CHURCH-STATE RELATIONS According to traditional roman thought, the success and welfare of the state depended much on the relationship it had with its gods. Constantine was no different in his conviction. He desperately wanted to have the support of the Christian God. Constantine would propagate policies in order to promote a “harmony” between the church and state. The massive shift between church and state relations would become evident by the church’s difficulty in understanding its new role from a church that had been historically persecuted and now favored. The church had difficulty in understanding its new relation and responsibilities. Concerns that arose were a concern regarding how competent the state was when dealing with church affairs, what is the nature of the church and what is the doctrine of the Orthodox Church. Ferguson, E. (2005). Church History: Volume One From Christ to Pre-Reformation. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 186 Constantine set a precedent for state involvement in church affairs by directly involving the state in the controversy regarding the nature of the church and its doctrine. It is at this time that one cannot discuss the secular history of Europe in the fourth century without discussing the nature of the religious history of the church and vice versa because of the political and religious ramifications. As a result of the controversies that arose regarding the state’s involvement in the official development of the nature and doctrine of the church, a creed was eventually adopted at Nicaea in 325. The Council of Nicaea had marked a major turning point in church-state relations and the newly acquired authority that the church now had. Three main aspects of the Council was that this was the first time that church leaders had formed such a council; thus marking a new authority that the bishops now felt they had. It marked a beginning of “imperial” involvement, that being the involvement of Emperor Constantine and it marked a crucial development in church history marking the end of Christian persecution. THE CHRISTIANITY OF CONSTANTINE At the time of Constantine’s conversion, he was well acquainted with the pagan rituals of the day, and his conversion was probably initially interpreted by himself in a pagan mindset. However, like most Christians, an understanding of his own Christianity would have most likely increased. It is clear that he supported Christianity because he believed the experience he had was divine and the victory his troops had won would not have been possible without the help of God. It does appear to be clear that Constantine’s conversion was convenient for his own aspirations; he did support a unity and “harmony” of the church and state and he pursued and implemented policies to end Christian persecutions and provide an inclusiveness and flexibility for Christians and extended poser to the authority of the church and his subjects. Wenig, S. (2011). Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom. Journal of the Evangelical Society, 424-427. It may be prudent to hold judgment regarding the validity or authenticity of Constantine’s Christianity when one understands Constantine’s motives or actions. One such action which leads one to judgment is the fact that Constantine delayed his own baptism until near his death in 337 and that Constantine had his wife, Fausta, and his son Crispus murdered for political reasons. However, in Constantine’s mind, such actions may not have been contradictory but a necessity of the responsibly he may have felt for the religious welfare of his subjects and the state along with personal weakness from being simply human, despite his conversion. Individuals within scripture were at times no different. King David and Moses come to mind. AUTHENTICITY OF CONSTANTINE’S CONVERSION The question at hand is whether Constantine was non-religious and never accepted Christ and used Christianity and turned it on his own political ends or was Constantine sincere in his conversion and also used Christianity for his own political purposes. One’s faith and political aspirations can coincide. This may have been the case with Constantine. The other question which arises is whether Constantine would have initially interpreted the visions and dreams as being of a Christian nature without the guidance and interpretation from Christian bishops who were trying to merely influence, and then perpetuated by Bishop and Christian advisor, Eusebius. To say that this debate is conclusive and settled would be inaccurate. Historians and theologians of the fourth century held different opinions on the subject just as historians and theologians do today. It is noted by fourth century Christian theologian, Tertullian, that the notion of a Christian Emperor would be a contradiction; noting the murder of his wife and son and the history of church persecutions. However, Constantine did not offer a sacrifice to Jupiter after he had his victory Milvian Bridge, which would have been the usual practice of emperors of his day and prior; however, he did keep images of the sun god on the currency until 325. Graham Keith, “Church -State Relations: The Impact of the Constantinian Revolution,”Reformation and Revivalno. 4( 2004), 13. This could be due to the fact that he was not sincere in his conversion or the inconsistencies surrounding his conversion and afterwards may be attributed the infancy of his understanding of Christianity of that time. Initially, one might conclude that political motivation for converting to Christianity may not have posed any real advantage politically in the mind of Constantine at the time of his conversion. At the time the church was fragmented in Rome and Christians were still being persecuted throughout the empire. Converting to Christianity might have appeared to be a hindrance to the achievement of his political aspirations which included the unity of the empire. The case could be clearly made that his conversion was in fact authentic. Prior to his conversion, there was no evidence that he harbored any disdain for Christianity and the influence his mother would not make a legitimate conversion unlikely. It could be the fact that Constantine’s faith was authentic and that he truly believed God was on his side and that it was his duty to forge a new Christian empire. The belief that God was on his side gives evident to his boldness he depicted. Case in point would be Constantine’s defeat of Licinius after the agreement (edict of Milan) was not honored by Licinius, in which he did not impose liberties to Christians in the west and continued to persecute them. It was this defeat that unified the Roman world and made Constantine the sole Emperor and first Christian Emperor. CONCLUSION Constantine’s conversion initiated a shift in ideology and politics of the state; an intervention of faith and politics was forged. The question is, was Constantine’s conversion sincere or did he use Christianity in order to strengthen the state as well as secure his own political aspirations. Theologians and historians have debated this issue. No matter which view one takes, it is overwhelmingly evident that Constantine, despite his contradictions and in many cases, activities that would appear to be not of a Christian nature, Constantine’s contribution to history of Europe and that of the early church is profound. A major shift in church and state relations was forged that officially ended Christian persecution and formulated an empire where society was composed mostly of Christians, in which the church became, for the first time in history, a dominant force. His un-Christian behavior, such as the murder of his son and wife and the narcissistic tendencies he occasionally portrayed may not be a condemnation of his belief in Christianity. If one were to argue that was the case, than one could make that case for nearly every major biblical figure in the Bible, two such being the case of Moses murdering the master builder and King David’s adultery and murder of Bathsheba’s husband. It is evident that Constantine was conscious of some type of religious experience and his victory over Maxentius’s army only confirmed his conviction that God was on his side. His belief that he was aided with divine help on both the battle field and in the empire he forged and policies he enacted give testament that Constantine believed in his version of Christianity. The favor he extended to Christians and to the bishops elevated the church as well as the Christian faith and ended the Roman policy of Christian persecution. Eusebuis, Constantine’s champion, notes,” Although it is clear that we are new and that this name of Christians has really but recently been known among all nations, nevertheless our life and our conduct, with our doctrines of religion, have not been lately invented by us, but from the first creation of humanity have been established by the natural understanding of divinely favored persons of old.” Ferguson, E. Church History: Volume One From Christ to Pre-Reformation. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,2005), 187 Evidence of Constantine’s version of Christianity is the belief he held that he became the supreme ruler of the empire on earth corresponding to the Holy divine rule from above. He believed that the empire was under the protection of God and he considered himself God’s instrument for fulfilling God’s will on earth. At any rate, one cannot deny the impact Constantine had on the history of Europe and Christianity throughout the world in the fourth century and the legacy which he forged which would be continued by his successors. His reign marked a total shift in church-state relation and changed the ideology and policies that had been in place for hundreds of years. His reign changed the course of human history and elevated the status of the church which would last for centuries to follow. Whatever one may conclude about his conversion, it is unmistakable that he is to be considered as one of the great figures in human history. BIBLIOGRAPHY Ferguson, E. . Church History: Volume One From Christ to Pre-Reformation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005. Freeman, Charles The Emperor's State Of Grace. History Today 51, no. 1 (January, 2001): 9- 15. Gerberding, R and J. H. Moran Cruz, Medieval Worlds (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. Graham Keith, Church -State Relations: The Impact of the Constantinian Revolution,”Reformation and Revivalno. 4( 2004), 13. MacMullen, R. Constantine. New York: Croom Helm, 1987. Wenig, S. Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom. Journal of the Evangelical Society, 2011. 10