4. THE FORMATION OF CHRISTENDOM

CONSTANTINE ... AND THE "ROMANIZATION" OF CHRISTIANITY

 

From an 800s Byzantine manuscript showing Constantine at Milvian Bridge conquering under the sign of the cross ... engraved with the Greek inscription ἐν τούτῳ νίκα (En touto Nika – "In this conquer" ... its Latin equivalent: In hoc signo vinces)

The Donatist controversy Within six months of his victory at Milvian Bridge Constantine was asked by the Donatists in North Africa to intervene in their dispute with "apostate" bishops (ones who under the pressure of the Diocletian persecutions had denied their faith). The Donatists refused to recognize the authority of these bishops to administer the sacraments (ordination, baptism, the eucharist or Lord's Supper, etc.).  In a way the question was one of works versus grace, or successful self-discipline versus the forgiveness for failure.  The vast majority of the catholic ("universal") or orthodox ("correct-thinking") bishops3 were opposed to the stance of the Donatists. The Catholic/Orthodox view favored the forgiveness of the fallen bishops.  This was, after all, one of the key principles of the faith.   Constantine finally did intervene in 314 – but took the Catholic/Orthodox position and found in favor of the compromised but restored bishops against the Donatists, and ordered the Donatists to submit to the authority of these bishops. But the Donatists would have none of it.  The Donatists had, after all, stood the test of persecution and could see no reason to bow to the authority of those they saw as having conveniently (albeit briefly) denied their faith in order to save themselves from the wrath of Diocletian.   Moreover, the Donatists had faced the hostility of emperors before without yielding – and they felt no need to start doing so at this point. The results of defying the emperor – even a Christian emperor – had predictable results.  In 317 Constantine sent troops to North Africa to force the Donatists into submission to his decision, thus setting off the first instance of Christians persecuting other Christians because of differences in the way they interpreted their faith.  A large number of Donatists were banished – though ultimately even this did not bring the Donatists into compliance, so tough was their stance.  Indeed, it was not until the Muslim conquest of North Africa in the 600s that the Donatist movement finally died out! The Arian controversy – and the "Nicene" decision Then there was the matter – one that would never really go away over Christianity's long history – of Trinitarianism versus Unitarianism. A works-versus-faith dispute had developed between Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, and a presbyter (priest) of his, Arius.  Arius was a strong advocate of the Monarchian or "Unitarian" position … which saw Jesus as attaining divine or godly status only upon his arrival in heaven – as something of a reward for his Messianic work while on earth.  In other words, while on earth Jesus was not part of the godhead, not really the Logos of John – but simply a Messiah or Christ called by God to exemplify the perfect Christian life.  Jesus was therefore not a God fully able to pay for the sins of all humankind on a Roman cross – but simply an outstanding moral example.  True, he now could be considered something of a god … although of derivative or lesser standing than the sole eternal God of heaven.  And as for the Holy Spirit … Arius as a Unitarian had little thought on the matter – since it was by man's own decision, rather than by some kind of intervention of a Holy Spirit, that the test of faith was to be lived out.  Righteous works of a holy man or woman – following the high moral example set by Jesus as the Christ – was, to the Unitarian such as Arian, what Christianity was ultimately all about. In response to Arius, Alexander requested a hearing on the matter before Constantine, resulting in the Council of Nicaea of 325 … Constantine presiding.   Alexander and the "Trinitarians" saw "God" in three different manifestations or "persons":  God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit – "Three in One" … all of a single God-nature, but relating to humankind in three different ways or roles. Thus the Jesus that died on the cross was not merely a morally perfect individual but indeed God himself.  The sins of a good man – even a perfect man – could possibly atone or pay for the sins of others … at least a few others.  But only a God dying on that cross could pay for the sins of all humankind. And as all humans are guilty of "original sin" – inherited from their ancient ancestors – sin would be a problem they would struggle with all their lives on earth.  No one was perfect … as Christ made clear when he rescued the woman purposely caught in the act of adultery (John 8:1-11) by challenging those without sin to throw the first stone in her death sentence.  But recognizing their own sinfulness, the accusers, starting with the oldest and wisest of the gathered "enforcers" quietly exited from the scene.  Thus to the Trinitarians – we are all sinners … despite our efforts to atone for our sins or redeem ourselves through our good works.  Only God can offer such atonement. Furthermore, faith itself is not earned or achieved through human effort … but solely as a gift of God given to us … a wonderful mystery of God's pure grace (Romans 8).  Claiming that such faith is a human achievement is a sad attempt to substitute human works for God's grace. In any case, there was no way that Arius was going to win that contest … for the vast majority of the Christian bishops and presbyters or priests were strongly supportive of the Trinitarian view.  And for good reason.  Holy Scripture (the Bible) clearly supported the Trinitarian understanding of the Divine Dynamic! Thus resulted the Nicene decision … and its Nicene Doctrine – and what is often described as "Nicene Christianity" … another term for Trinitarianism. But the problem was that while the better-instructed of the Christian community (the priests or clergy) would be able to come to such a complex Trinitarian understanding of things, many of the commoner Christians could not – or even would not.  To them, religion was a social duty … necessary for the good order in their lives.  Anything beyond that was too "intellectual," too lofty, for serious usefulness in a person's daily life. And being either of Greek, Roman, or even Semitic cultural background would also play a role in this Trinitarian-versus-Unitarian contest.  The Greeks, already of something of a mystic mindset, had less difficulty following Trinitarian logic.  The Romans perhaps had some difficulties in understanding such matters … but since their ruling authorities supported the Trinitarian doctrine, being good Romans, they did so as well.  But the Semitics of Syria, Palestine and Arabia would find themselves highly resistant to the complexities of Trinitarianism (also too "Greek" for their tastes).  And later, when the German tribes would be absorbed into the Roman order, at first they readily accepted Christianity – but in the simpler Unitarian form.  It would take some time before their tribal leaders converted to Trinitarianism – with their tribes then being brought into Trinitarianism along with them. 3Both terms, "catholic" and "orthodox," were originally more or less interchangeable – until gradually the term "catholic" tended to refer to the Roman church in the West and the term "orthodox" tended to refer to the Roman church in the East. THE CONSTANTINIAN LEGACY Constantine's impact on Christianity Certainly it was Constantine that forged the "synthesis" between Rome and Christianity that became Christendom.  Whether or not he was doing Christianity any great favor is a matter of great debate.   His own spiritual commitment to Christianity is itself debatable.  He continued to honor the Sun god, the Sol Invictus (understood at that times as Helios or Mithras – or even Jesus), establishing Sunday as a religious day of rest in honor of the Unconquerable Sun.  He and his mother Helena were builders of many churches – though they did so in the fashion of those who built pagan temples: honoring them with the name of some great saint – just as the pagans had done with their gods.  Constantine also found ways of honoring the old pagan gods – for instance setting up a statue of himself in honor of Helios in the Forum of Constantinople. Church worship itself took on a more regal character under Constantine, with worship services started up with elaborate processions into the basilica-styled churches, complete with chanting and the burning of incense by lavishly dressed officials.  All worship was focused forward – toward the elevated altar and chairs on which sat the presiding priests or bishops, who performed most of the religious duties in front of a passively arrayed congregation (much as the pagan priests had operated). His Christianity personally did not seem to have any softening effect on some of the more chilling features of imperial rule: in the summer of 326, for reasons not clear to us today, he had his oldest son Crispus and his wife Fausta murdered. His real impact however was in how his designation as a Christian made the Christian faith now "politically correct."  It made sense for those seeking court favors and appointments from Constantine to also be "Christian."  Thus the church, once thinned down in membership by intense persecution to only the most stalwart of the faith, was now filled with multitudes whose motivation for being "Christian" was more social or political than spiritual. The episcopacy For the first 300 years of its existence Christian communities had remained small (usually even secretive) and organized only at the local level under local elders or pastors and teachers ... much like the Jewish communities from which Christianity was originally drawn.  But with Constantine's official Romanization of Christianity, a bureaucratic structure was built over the Christian world ... officiated by priests, led themselves by bishops, and the bishops directed by archbishops or patriarchs.  Eventually of the last group, five would emerge to dominate the array of bishops and archbishops: the patriarchs4 of: 1) Rome (also known as the inheritor of the Keys of St. Peter and thus the Father of the faith), 2) Constantinople, 3) Alexandria, 4) Antioch and 5) Jerusalem.  Every effort of the five was made to keep their responsibilities cooperative ... although different political priorities in different parts of the Empire would eventually cause these five religious bureaucracies to move along more independent lines. A shift in the sense of the nature and consequence of Jesus's ministry A slow and almost imperceptible shift was also taking place in the understanding of the significance of Jesus's death and resurrection.  In the early days of the church, the understanding was that Jesus's death and resurrection – but particularly the latter, his resurrection – was a very strong indicator of the end of the old life … and the beginning of a new era: one produced by the Parousia or coming of a new heaven and a new earth … supposedly in the very near future.  This is what emboldened early Christians in the face of a world that proved not very accommodating to the Christian mission and ministry.  But … supposedly what the world took as its justification in persecuting Christianity was ultimately of little consequence to the Christian believer – because all of that was soon to be swept away with Christ's second coming. But with the "delay" of the Parousia – generations now passing on without that all-critical second coming taking place – a more tired or resigned spirit characterized the Christian view of life's dynamics.  The "evil" of the surrounding world weighed ever-heavier on the Christian heart … more noticeable as to being "the" problem that Christianity faced.   The cruelty of the world was very evidently well-symbolized by Jesus nailed on the cruel Roman cross.  And thus the crucified Christ, rather than the resurrected Christ, became the image that Christians increasingly held before them.  Christ's larger purpose now seemed to be to continuously suffer on that cross for the sins of humankind, rather than lead or free people from those sins … like the Christ rising from the grave. Salvation through the priestly powers of the Roman Church The burden of sin thus grew ever heavier as something that the believers found themselves struggling with – something that their mere personal faith no longer seemed to lift them above.  They would need help from some other source.  And that source increasingly became the Church itself.   Salvation once offered by Jesus Christ through the faith of the believer, was now replaced by the idea that the priestly church, through ritualized confession, formalized prayers, and ultimately the dispensation of its seven sacraments by the hands of the officers of the church (priests and bishops), was the source of a person's salvation … and ultimately heavenly reward at death.  So it was that the Church and its religious offerings – and not the personal faith of the believer – came to be understood as to what "saved" souls.5 The Blessed Virgin and the Saints Also … an interesting Christian impulse that has no support in the Christian Scriptures is the veneration of the saints – and the veneration of Jesus's mother, Mary.  As with the Greco-Roman impact of Platonism on the Christian faith, so also some of the pagan practices of the times of the Church's early formation seemed to have helped early to shape features of Christian life and practice.  This became especially so after the outlawing by Roman authorities of prayers to the pagan deities and the outlawing of the very widespread Eastern worship of "Earth Mother" (Isis, Demeter, Astarte, Aphrodite, etc.) in the 300s .  The early Christian martyrs naturally stood as heroes – saints of a special caliber – that naturally would be venerated for their exceptional lives (and deaths).  But the practice of praying to them to intercede in performing special favors (safety in travel, protection of the home, support in romance, etc.) also tended to mirror the pagan practice of praying to certain deities known to have special powers in these particular matters.  So too now the saints were prayed to – saints who were recognized to have particular powers in this or that matter. Indeed, very early on, praying to the saints became a quite common Christian practice. Then Mary began to loom large in the Christian heart … approached much more often than Jesus in prayer for this matter or that. This practice actually had an early start … as early as the time of Irenaeus (late 100s), who mentioned her important role in the act of salvation.  Little by little Mary gained importance as an intercessor between the ordinary Christian and the awesome Jesus Christ … Jesus now seen as Christus Rex – Christ the King – that is, as Jesus becomes loftier and more distant.  This becomes especially the case as Jesus takes on the role of protector of the Roman imperium ... and of the emperors themselves.  Thus the common people's prayers are directed not to Jesus but to Mary … especially when those prayers arise from concerns and burdens brought on by Roman imperial authority itself.  Mary is soon even accorded the role as "co-redeemer" with Christ … able of her own to bring salvation to the Christian.  Then finally, as a decision of the Council of Ephesus in 431, she was recognized as not merely Christotokos – Mother of Christ – but even Theotokos – Mother of God. Soon churches were dedicated to Mary.  And pictures of her – with a sweet but rather helpless baby Jesus in her arms – hung at church altars and in the homes of the faithful everywhere.  It was thus that she, not Jesus, became the primary redipient of the Christian's prayers and praises. This occurred throughout all Christendom, the Western or Catholic ("Universal") part of Rome … as well as in the Eastern or Byzantine or Orthodox ("Socially or Legally Correct") part of Rome. The division of Rome permanently into an "East" and "West" Soon after Constantine's defeat of Licinius he began the work of redeveloping the town of Byzantium, located at a very strategic point along the narrows where the Black Sea begins to connect with the Mediterranean, into a new imperial capital. This capital was not intended to rival the old city of Rome (which was suffering terribly from "inner-city" decay) – but to greatly exceed it.  In a way this brought the Roman command center closer to its border problems with the Germans to the north (across the Danube) and the Persians or Sassanids to the East.  Strategically this made a lot of sense.   But this move to the East also worsened the status of the old city of Rome all the more.  About the only thing of note that still gave some importance to old Rome was that its bishop located there typically commanded the voice of all of Western Christianity ... something that would come to have increasing importance to "Western Civilization" in the centuries to follow. 4Also known as Fathers of the faith ... although the Father or Papa or "Pope" of Rome was considered the "first among equals" – because he was supposedly the inheritor of the legacy or "keys" of the first bishop of Rome, Saint Peter – Jesus's preeminent disciple. 5This matter of salvation offered by the priestly Church rather than through the simple faith of the individual believer would ultimately surface a thousand years later as a very divisive issue, splitting the Church into two brutally hostile communities, the "Catholics" and the "Protestants." Go on to the next section:  "Post-Nicene" Christendom   Miles H. Hodges