Back to Chapter Listing
Previous Chapter
Continue Reading
Part I.
The Motives, Progress, And Effects Of The Conversion Of
Constantine. - Legal Establishment And Constitution Of The
Christian Or Catholic Church - 306-313 A.D.
The public establishment of Christianity may be considered
as one of those important and domestic revolutions which excite
the most lively curiosity, and afford the most valuable
instruction. The victories and the civil policy of Constantine
no longer influence the state of Europe; but a considerable
portion of the globe still retains the impression which it
received from the conversion of that monarch; and the
ecclesiastical institutions of his reign are still connected, by
an indissoluble chain, with the opinions, the passions, and the
interests of the present generation.
In the consideration of a subject which may be examined with
impartiality, but cannot be viewed with indifference, a
difficulty immediately arises of a very unexpected nature; that
of ascertaining the real and precise date of the conversion of
Constantine. The eloquent Lactantius, in the midst of his court,
seems impatient 1 to proclaim to the world the glorious example
of the sovereign of Gaul; who, in the first moments of his reign,
acknowledged and adored the majesty of the true and only God. 2
The learned Eusebius has ascribed the faith of Constantine to the
miraculous sign which was displayed in the heavens whilst he
meditated and prepared the Italian expedition. 3 The historian
Zosimus maliciously asserts, that the emperor had imbrued his
hands in the blood of his eldest son, before he publicly
renounced the gods of Rome and of his ancestors. 4 The
perplexity produced by these discordant authorities is derived
from the behavior of Constantine himself. According to the
strictness of ecclesiastical language, the first of the Christian
emperors was unworthy of that name, till the moment of his death;
since it was only during his last illness that he received, as a
catechumen, the imposition of hands, 5 and was afterwards
admitted, by the initiatory rites of baptism, into the number of
the faithful. 6 The Christianity of Constantine must be allowed
in a much more vague and qualified sense; and the nicest accuracy
is required in tracing the slow and almost imperceptible
gradations by which the monarch declared himself the protector,
and at length the proselyte, of the church. It was an arduous
task to eradicate the habits and prejudices of his education, to
acknowledge the divine power of Christ, and to understand that
the truth of his revelation was incompatible with the worship of
the gods. The obstacles which he had probably experienced in his
own mind, instructed him to proceed with caution in the momentous
change of a national religion; and he insensibly discovered his
new opinions, as far as he could enforce them with safety and
with effect. During the whole course of his reign, the stream of
Christianity flowed with a gentle, though accelerated, motion:
but its general direction was sometimes checked, and sometimes
diverted, by the accidental circumstances of the times, and by
the prudence, or possibly by the caprice, of the monarch. His
ministers were permitted to signify the intentions of their
master in the various language which was best adapted to their
respective principles; 7 and he artfully balanced the hopes and
fears of his subjects, by publishing in the same year two edicts;
the first of which enjoined the solemn observance of Sunday, 8
and the second directed the regular consultation of the
Aruspices. 9 While this important revolution yet remained in
suspense, the Christians and the Pagans watched the conduct of
their sovereign with the same anxiety, but with very opposite
sentiments. The former were prompted by every motive of zeal, as
well as vanity, to exaggerate the marks of his favor, and the
evidences of his faith. The latter, till their just
apprehensions were changed into despair and resentment, attempted
to conceal from the world, and from themselves, that the gods of
Rome could no longer reckon the emperor in the number of their
votaries. The same passions and prejudices have engaged the
partial writers of the times to connect the public profession of
Christianity with the most glorious or the most ignominious era
of the reign of Constantine.
Footnote 1: The date of the divine Institutions of Lactantius
has been accurately discussed, difficulties have been started,
solutions proposed, and an expedient imagined of two original
editions; the former published during the persecution of
Diocletian, the latter under that of Licinius. See Dufresnoy,
Prefat. p. v. Tillemont, Mem. Ecclesiast. tom. vi. p. 465- 470.
Lardner's Credibility, part ii. vol. vii. p. 78-86. For my own
part, I am almost convinced that Lactantius dedicated his
Institutions to the sovereign of Gaul, at a time when Galerius,
Maximin, and even Licinius, persecuted the Christians; that is,
between the years 306 and 311.
Footnote 2: Lactant. Divin. Instit. i. l. vii. 27. The first
and most important of these passages is indeed wanting in
twenty-eight manuscripts; but it is found in nineteen. If we
weigh the comparative value of these manuscripts, one of 900
years old, in the king of France's library may be alleged in its
favor; but the passage is omitted in the correct manuscript of
Bologna, which the P. de Montfaucon ascribes to the sixth or
seventh century (Diarium Italic. p. 489.) The taste of most of
the editors (except Isaeus; see Lactant. edit. Dufresnoy, tom. i.
p. 596) has felt the genuine style of Lactantius.
Footnote 3: Euseb. in Vit. Constant. l. i. c. 27-32.
Footnote 4: Zosimus, l. ii. p. 104.
Footnote 5: That rite was always used in making a catechumen,
(see Bingham's Antiquities. l. x. c. i. p. 419. Dom Chardon,
Hist. des Sacramens, tom. i. p. 62,) and Constantine received it
for the first time (Euseb. in Vit Constant. l. iv. c. 61)
immediately before his baptism and death. From the connection of
these two facts, Valesius (ad loc. Euseb.) has drawn the
conclusion which is reluctantly admitted by Tillemont, (Hist. des
Empereurs, tom. iv. p. 628,) and opposed with feeble arguments by
Mosheim, (p. 968.)
Footnote 6: Euseb. in Vit. Constant. l. iv. c. 61, 62, 63. The
legend of Constantine's baptism at Rome, thirteen years before
his death, was invented in the eighth century, as a proper motive
for his donation. Such has been the gradual progress of
knowledge, that a story, of which Cardinal Baronius (Annual
Ecclesiast. A. D. 324, No. 43-49) declared himself the unblushing
advocate, is now feebly supported, even within the verge of the
Vatican. See the Antiquitates Christianae, tom. ii. p. 232; a
work published with six approbations at Rome, in the year 1751 by
Father Mamachi, a learned Dominican.
Footnote 7: The quaestor, or secretary, who composed the law of
the Theodosian Code, makes his master say with indifference,
"hominibus supradictae religionis," (l. xvi. tit. ii. leg. 1.)
The minister of ecclesiastical affairs was allowed a more devout
and respectful style, the legal, most holy, and Catholic
worship.
Footnote 8: Cod. Theodos. l. ii. viii. tit. leg. 1. Cod.
Justinian. l. iii. tit. xii. leg. 3. Constantine styles the
Lord's day dies solis, a name which could not offend the ears of
his pagan subjects.
Footnote 9: Cod. Theodos. l. xvi. tit. x. leg. l. Godefroy, in
the character of a commentator, endeavors (tom. vi. p. 257) to
excuse Constantine; but the more zealous Baronius (Annal. Eccles.
A. D. 321, No. 17) censures his profane conduct with truth and
asperity.
Whatever symptoms of Christian piety might transpire in the
discourses or actions of Constantine, he persevered till he was
near forty years of age in the practice of the established
religion; 10 and the same conduct which in the court of
Nicomedia might be imputed to his fear, could be ascribed only to
the inclination or policy of the sovereign of Gaul. His
liberality restored and enriched the temples of the gods; the
medals which issued from his Imperial mint are impressed with the
figures and attributes of Jupiter and Apollo, of Mars and
Hercules; and his filial piety increased the council of Olympus
by the solemn apotheosis of his father Constantius. 11 But the
devotion of Constantine was more peculiarly directed to the
genius of the Sun, the Apollo of Greek and Roman mythology; and
he was pleased to be represented with the symbols of the God of
Light and Poetry. The unerring shafts of that deity, the
brightness of his eyes, his laurel wreath, immortal beauty, and
elegant accomplishments, seem to point him out as the patron of a
young hero. The altars of Apollo were crowned with the votive
offerings of Constantine; and the credulous multitude were taught
to believe, that the emperor was permitted to behold with mortal
eyes the visible majesty of their tutelar deity; and that, either
walking or in a vision, he was blessed with the auspicious omens
of a long and victorious reign. The Sun was universally
celebrated as the invincible guide and protector of Constantine;
and the Pagans might reasonably expect that the insulted god
would pursue with unrelenting vengeance the impiety of his
ungrateful favorite. 12
Footnote 10: Theodoret. (l. i. c. 18) seems to insinuate that
Helena gave her son a Christian education; but we may be assured,
from the superior authority of Eusebius, (in Vit. Constant. l.
iii. c. 47,) that she herself was indebted to Constantine for the
knowledge of Christianity.
Footnote 11: See the medals of Constantine in Ducange and
Banduri. As few cities had retained the privilege of coining,
almost all the medals of that age issued from the mint under the
sanction of the Imperial authority.
Footnote 12: The panegyric of Eumenius, (vii. inter Panegyr.
Vet.,) which was pronounced a few months before the Italian war,
abounds with the most unexceptionable evidence of the Pagans superstition of Constantine, and of his particular veneration for
Apollo, or the Sun; to which Julian alludes.
As long as Constantine exercised a limited sovereignty over
the provinces of Gaul, his Christian subjects were protected by
the authority, and perhaps by the laws, of a prince, who wisely
left to the gods the care of vindicating their own honor. If we
may credit the assertion of Constantine himself, he had been an
indignant spectator of the savage cruelties which were inflicted,
by the hands of Roman soldiers, on those citizens whose religion
was their only crime. 13 In the East and in the West, he had
seen the different effects of severity and indulgence; and as the
former was rendered still more odious by the example of Galerius,
his implacable enemy, the latter was recommended to his imitation
by the authority and advice of a dying father. The son of
Constantius immediately suspended or repealed the edicts of
persecution, and granted the free exercise of their religious
ceremonies to all those who had already professed themselves
members of the church. They were soon encouraged to depend on
the favor as well as on the justice of their sovereign, who had
imbibed a secret and sincere reverence for the name of Christ,
and for the God of the Christians. 14
Footnote 13: Constantin. Orat. ad Sanctos, c. 25. But it might
easily be shown, that the Greek translator has improved the sense
of the Latin original; and the aged emperor might recollect the
persecution of Diocletian with a more lively abhorrence than he
had actually felt to the days of his youth and Paganism.
Footnote 14: See Euseb. Hist. Eccles. l. viii. 13, l. ix. 9, and
in Vit. Const. l. i. c. 16, 17 Lactant. Divin. Institut. i. l.
Caecilius de Mort. Persecut. c. 25.
About five months after the conquest of Italy, the emperor
made a solemn and authentic declaration of his sentiments by the
celebrated edict of Milan, which restored peace to the Catholic
church. In the personal interview of the two western princes,
Constantine, by the ascendant of genius and power, obtained the
ready concurrence of his colleague, Licinius; the union of their
names and authority disarmed the fury of Maximin; and after the
death of the tyrant of the East, the edict of Milan was received
as a general and fundamental law of the Roman world. 15
Footnote 15: Caecilius (de Mort. Persecut. c. 48) has preserved
the Latin original; and Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. l. x. c. 5) has
given a Greek translation of this perpetual edict, which refers
to some provisional regulations.
The wisdom of the emperors provided for the restitution of
all the civil and religious rights of which the Christians had
been so unjustly deprived. It was enacted that the places of
worship, and public lands, which had been confiscated, should be
restored to the church, without dispute, without delay, and
without expense; and this severe injunction was accompanied with
a gracious promise, that if any of the purchasers had paid a fair
and adequate price, they should be indemnified from the Imperial
treasury. The salutary regulations which guard the future
tranquillity of the faithful are framed on the principles of
enlarged and equal toleration; and such an equality must have
been interpreted by a recent sect as an advantageous and
honorable distinction. The two emperors proclaim to the world,
that they have granted a free and absolute power to the
Christians, and to all others, of following the religion which
each individual thinks proper to prefer, to which he has addicted
his mind, and which he may deem the best adapted to his own use.
They carefully explain every ambiguous word, remove every
exception, and exact from the governors of the provinces a strict
obedience to the true and simple meaning of an edict, which was
designed to establish and secure, without any limitation, the
claims of religious liberty. They condescend to assign two
weighty reasons which have induced them to allow this universal
toleration: the humane intention of consulting the peace and
happiness of their people; and the pious hope, that, by such a
conduct, they shall appease and propitiate the Deity, whose seat
is in heaven. They gratefully acknowledge the many signal proofs
which they have received of the divine favor; and they trust that
the same Providence will forever continue to protect the
prosperity of the prince and people. From these vague and
indefinite expressions of piety, three suppositions may be
deduced, of a different, but not of an incompatible nature. The
mind of Constantine might fluctuate between the Pagan and the
Christian religions. According to the loose and complying
notions of Polytheism, he might acknowledge the God of the
Christians as one of the many deities who compose the hierarchy
of heaven. Or perhaps he might embrace the philosophic and
pleasing idea, that, notwithstanding the variety of names, of
rites, and of opinions, all the sects, and all the nations of
mankind, are united in the worship of the common Father and
Creator of the universe. 16
Footnote 16: A panegyric of Constantine, pronounced seven or
eight months after the edict of Milan, (see Gothofred. Chronolog.
Legum, p. 7, and Tillemont, Hist. des Empereurs, tom. iv. p.
246,) uses the following remarkable expression: "Summe rerum
sator, cujus tot nomina sant, quot linguas gentium esse voluisti,
quem enim te ipse dici velin, scire non possumus." (Panegyr. Vet.
ix. 26.) In explaining Constantine's progress in the faith,
Mosheim (p. 971, &c.) is ingenious, subtle, prolix.
But the counsels of princes are more frequently influenced
by views of temporal advantage, than by considerations of
abstract and speculative truth. The partial and increasing favor
of Constantine may naturally be referred to the esteem which he
entertained for the moral character of the Christians; and to a
persuasion, that the propagation of the gospel would inculcate
the practice of private and public virtue. Whatever latitude an
absolute monarch may assume in his own conduct, whatever
indulgence he may claim for his own passions, it is undoubtedly
his interest that all his subjects should respect the natural and
civil obligations of society. But the operation of the wisest
laws is imperfect and precarious. They seldom inspire virtue,
they cannot always restrain vice. Their power is insufficient to
prohibit all that they condemn, nor can they always punish the
actions which they prohibit. The legislators of antiquity had
summoned to their aid the powers of education and of opinion.
But every principle which had once maintained the vigor and
purity of Rome and Sparta, was long since extinguished in a
declining and despotic empire. Philosophy still exercised her
temperate sway over the human mind, but the cause of virtue
derived very feeble support from the influence of the Pagan superstition. Under these discouraging circumstances, a prudent
magistrate might observe with pleasure the progress of a religion
which diffused among the people a pure, benevolent, and universal
system of ethics, adapted to every duty and every condition of
life; recommended as the will and reason of the supreme Deity,
and enforced by the sanction of eternal rewards or punishments.
The experience of Greek and Roman history could not inform the
world how far the system of national manners might be reformed
and improved by the precepts of a divine revelation; and
Constantine might listen with some confidence to the flattering,
and indeed reasonable, assurances of Lactantius. The eloquent
apologist seemed firmly to expect, and almost ventured to
promise, that the establishment of Christianity would restore the
innocence and felicity of the primitive age; that the worship of
the true God would extinguish war and dissension among those who
mutually considered themselves as the children of a common
parent; that every impure desire, every angry or selfish passion,
would be restrained by the knowledge of the gospel; and that the
magistrates might sheath the sword of justice among a people who
would be universally actuated by the sentiments of truth and
piety, of equity and moderation, of harmony and universal love.
17
Footnote 17: See the elegant description of Lactantius, (Divin
Institut. v. 8,) who is much more perspicuous and positive than
becomes a discreet prophet.
The passive and unresisting obedience, which bows under the
yoke of authority, or even of oppression, must have appeared, in
the eyes of an absolute monarch, the most conspicuous and useful
of the evangelic virtues. 18 The primitive Christians derived
the institution of civil government, not from the consent of the
people, but from the decrees of Heaven. The reigning emperor,
though he had usurped the sceptre by treason and murder,
immediately assumed the sacred character of vicegerent of the
Deity. To the Deity alone he was accountable for the abuse of
his power; and his subjects were indissolubly bound, by their
oath of fidelity, to a tyrant, who had violated every law of
nature and society. The humble Christians were sent into the
world as sheep among wolves; and since they were not permitted to
employ force even in the defence of their religion, they should
be still more criminal if they were tempted to shed the blood of
their fellow-creatures in disputing the vain privileges, or the
sordid possessions, of this transitory life. Faithful to the
doctrine of the apostle, who in the reign of Nero had preached
the duty of unconditional submission, the Christians of the three
first centuries preserved their conscience pure and innocent of
the guilt of secret conspiracy, or open rebellion. While they
experienced the rigor of persecution, they were never provoked
either to meet their tyrants in the field, or indignantly to
withdraw themselves into some remote and sequestered corner of
the globe. 19 The Protestants of France, of Germany, and of
Britain, who asserted with such intrepid courage their civil and
religious freedom, have been insulted by the invidious comparison
between the conduct of the primitive and of the reformed
Christians. 20 Perhaps, instead of censure, some applause may be
due to the superior sense and spirit of our ancestors, who had
convinced themselves that religion cannot abolish the unalienable
rights of human nature. 21 Perhaps the patience of the primitive
church may be ascribed to its weakness, as well as to its virtue.
A sect of unwarlike plebeians, without leaders, without arms,
without fortifications, must have encountered inevitable
destruction in a rash and fruitless resistance to the master of
the Roman legions. But the Christians, when they deprecated the
wrath of Diocletian, or solicited the favor of Constantine, could
allege, with truth and confidence, that they held the principle
of passive obedience, and that, in the space of three centuries,
their conduct had always been conformable to their principles.
They might add, that the throne of the emperors would be
established on a fixed and permanent basis, if all their
subjects, embracing the Christian doctrine, should learn to
suffer and to obey.
Footnote 18: The political system of the Christians is explained
by Grotius, de Jure Belli et Pacis, l. i. c. 3, 4. Grotius was a
republican and an exile, but the mildness of his temper inclined
him to support the established powers.
Footnote 19: Tertullian. Apolog. c. 32, 34, 35, 36. Tamen
nunquam Albiniani, nec Nigriani vel Cassiani inveniri potuerunt
Christiani. Ad Scapulam, c. 2. If this assertion be strictly
true, it excludes the Christians of that age from all civil and
military employments, which would have compelled them to take an
active part in the service of their respective governors. See
Moyle's Works, vol. ii. p. 349.
Footnote 20: See the artful Bossuet, (Hist. des Variations des
Eglises Protestantes, tom. iii. p. 210-258.) and the malicious
Bayle, (tom ii. p. 820.) I name Bayle, for he was certainly the
author of the Avis aux Refugies; consult the Dictionnaire
Critique de Chauffepie, tom. i. part ii. p. 145.
Footnote 21: Buchanan is the earliest, or at least the most
celebrated, of the reformers, who has justified the theory of
resistance. See his Dialogue de Jure Regni apud Scotos, tom. ii.
p. 28, 30, edit. fol. Rudiman.
Back to Chapter Listing
Previous Chapter
Continue Reading
To cite original text:
Gibbon, Edward, 1737-1794. The history of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire. (NY : Knopf, 1993), v. 2, pp. 248 - 256 .