Constantine the Great: The reorganization of the Empire and the triumph of the ChurchFirth, John B. (John Benjamin)
History
Constantine the Great: The reorganization of the Empire and the triumph of the Church
Firth, John B. (John Benjamin)
Church history -- Primitive and early church, ca. 30-600; Constantine I, Emperor of Rome, -337
But did Constantine maintain this attitude of strict neutrality, only
tempered by ardent prayer that his pagan subjects might be brought to a
knowledge of the truth? In its entirety he certainly did not, and it was
impossible that so zealous a convert should. When the smiles of Imperial
favour were withdrawn from the old religion it was inevitable that the
Imperial arm which protected it should grow slack in its defence. Yet,
throughout his reign Constantine never forgot that the majority of his
subjects were still pagan, despite the hosts of conversions which
followed his own, and he took care not to press too hardly upon them and
not to goad the more fanatical upholders of the old régime to the
recklessness of despair. We have seen how the Emperor refused to witness
the procession of the Knights in Rome at the time of his Vicennalia. He
also forbade his statue or image to be placed in a pagan temple. But he,
nevertheless, retained through life the office of _Pontifex Maximus_,
and as such continued to be supreme head of the pagan religion. Nor was
it until the time of Gratian fifty years afterwards that this title—no
doubt in deference to the repeated representations of the bishops—was
dropped by the Christian Emperors. Some historians have expressed
surprise that so enthusiastic a convert to Christianity should have been
willing to remain Chief Pontiff; a few have even been genuinely
concerned to explain and excuse his conduct. But Constantine was
statesman as well as convert. If he had resigned the Chief Pontificate
that office might conceivably have passed into dangerous hands. By
holding it as an absolute sinecure, by never performing its ceremonial
duties or wearing its distinctive robes, Constantine did far more to
destroy its influence than if he had resigned it. Imperial titles,
moreover, sometimes signify very little. Every one knows the gibe of
Voltaire at the Holy Roman Empire which was neither holy, nor Roman, nor
an Empire. For centuries after the loss of Calais the lilies of France
were quartered on the Royal arms of Great Britain, and the coins of our
Protestant monarch still bear the F. D. bestowed by the Pope upon the
eighth Henry. The King of Portugal is still Lord of All the Indies. It
is not titles that count but actions. Whether or not Constantine’s
ecclesiastical friends were troubled by his retaining the title, we may
be sure the question never troubled the Emperor himself, as the title of
“Supreme Head of the English Church” is said to have troubled the
scrupulous conscience of James II. after he became a convert to Rome.
But in the latter case the practical advantages of retention outweighed
the shock to consistency in the eyes of those whom James consulted.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account