IS HISTORY REPEATING ITSELF?
By W. N. G.
Since a prominent National Reform lecturer has seen fit to eulogize the church and state legislation of Constantine’s time, and a prominent National Reform organ deems such eulogy worthy of publication, it seems opportune to note a few points pertaining to the formal union of the church with this noted emperor’s government. Constantine, altho professing Christianity, delayed the ceremony of baptism until he realized that he was on his death-bed. Gibbons says of this action of the emperor:— The example and reputation of Constantine seemed to countenance the delay of baptism. Future tyrants were encouraged to believe that the innocent blood which they might shed in a long reign would instantly be washed away in the waters of regeneration; and the abuse of religion dangerously undermined the foundations of moral virtue.—History of Christianity, p. 320. Some of the effects of such a union are thus graphically portrayed:— The gratitude of the church has exalted the virtues and excused the failings of a generous patron, who seated Christianity on the throne of the Roman world; and the Greeks, who celebrate the festival of the imperial saint, seldom mention the name of Constantine without adding the title of “equal to the apostles.” . . . By the edicts of toleration, he removed the temporal disadvantages which had hitherto retarded the progress of Christianity, and its active and numerous ministers received a free permission, a liberal encouragement, to recommend the salutary truths of revelation by every argument which could affect the reason or piety of mankind. The exact balance of the two religions continued but a moment; and the piercing eye of ambition and avarice soon discovered that the profession of Christianity might contribute to the interest of the present as well as of a future life. The hopes of wealth and honors, the example of an emperor, his exhortations, his irresistible smiles, diffused conviction among the venal and obsequious crowds which usually fill the apartments of a palace. The cities, which signalized a forward zeal by the voluntary destruction of their temples, were distinguished by municipal privileges, and rewarded with popular donations; and the new capital of the east gloried in the singular advantage that Constantinople was never profaned by the worship of idols. As the lower ranks of society are governed by imitation, the conversion of those who possessed any eminence of birth, of power, or of riches, was soon followed by dependent multitudes. The salvation of the common people was purchased at an easy rate, if it be true that in one year twelve thousand men were baptized at Rome, besides a proportionable number of women and children; and that a white garment, with twenty pieces of gold, had been promised by the emperor to every convert.—Ib., pp. 320–322. Eusebius, the emperor’s friend and apologist, gives this item in his praise:— A statute was also passed enjoining the due observance of the Lord’s day, and transmitted to the governors of every province, who undertook, at his command, to respect the days commemorative of martyrs, and duly to honor the festivals of the church; and all these intentions were fulfilled to the emperor’s entire satisfaction.—Life of Constantine, p. 198. The same authority also tells of the emperor’s claim as a bishop:— It was not without reason that once, on the occasion of his entertaining a company of bishops, he let fall the expression that he himself too was a bishop, addressing them in my hearing in the following words: “You are bishops whose jurisdiction is within the church: I also am a bishop, ordained by God to overlook whatever is external to the church.” And truly his measures corresponded with his words; for he watched over his subjects with an episcopal care, and exhorted them as far as in him lay to follow a godly life. A specimen of his “episcopal care” is given by Rev. Robert Taylor, as quoted in a marginal note, Gibbon’s “History of Christianity,” p. 317:— 1. Constantine the puissant, the mighty and noble emperor, unto the bishops, pastors, and people wheresoever. Moreover, we thought good that if there can be found extant any work or book compiled by Arius, the same should be burned to ashes, so that not only his damnable doctrine may thereby be wholly rooted out, but also that no relic thereof may remain unto posterity. This also we straitly command and charge, that if any man be found to hide or conceal any book made by Arius, and not immediately bring forth the said book, and deliver it up to be burned, that the said offender for so doing shall die the death. For as soon as he is taken, our pleasure is that his head be stricken off from his shoulders. God keep you in his tuition. In giving the foregoing edict of Constantine, Mr. Taylor says it is a “specimen of that conjunction of holiness and blood-thirstiness, religion and murder, which portrays his character with a precision and fidelity that needs no further illustration.” Arius had contended against the doctrine of the Trinity, and he also denied the right of the emperor, or other civil authority, to interfere in the affairs of the church. He was opposed to a union of church and state. One more extract from Gibbon’s “History of Christianity” must suffice for the present purpose:— The grateful applause of the clergy has consecrated the memory of a prince who indulged their passions and promoted their interest. Constantine gave them security, wealth, honors, revenge; and the support of the orthodox faith was considered as the most sacred and important duty of the civil magistrate. The edict of Milan, the great charter of toleration, had confirmed to each individual of the Roman world the privilege of choosing and professing his own religion. But this inestimable privilege was soon violated; with the knowledge of truth, the emperor imbibed the maxims of persecution; and the sects which dissented from the Catholic Church were afflicted and oppressed by the triumph of Christianity. Constantine easily believed that the heretics, who presumed to dispute his opinions, or to oppose his commands, were guilty of the most absurd and criminal obstinacy, and that a seasonable application of moderate severities might save those unhappy men from the danger of an everlasting condemnation.—Pp. 341, 342. When the leading forces now urging upon Congress the adoption of a religious amendment to the Constitution, and who are declaring that Christians should have “high offices in the state,” boldly hold up for public indorsement the “blessings of Christian legislation in the Roman Empire under Constantine,” it is time for the people and for Congress to revert to the history of church and state union in those early days. It is time for serious consideration of the question, Is not history repeating itself? W. N. G.