Constantine by J. H. Waggoner

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Aug 5, 1875

Constantine.

By J. H. Waggoner

Two things will be noticed in respect to this law, namely, it was issued before he made any profession of Christian faith, and, it was the day of the sun which was to be observed by resting from secular labor. And history furnishes abundant evidence that the sun was the especial object of adoration by the emperor, and Apollo, the sun-god, was his "tutelary deity." If this be so, then the heathen origin of the edict must be beyond question. Milman thus testifies :—

"Up to this period, all that we know of Constantine's religion would imply that he was outwardly and even zealously pagan. In a public oration his panegyrist extols the magnificence of his offerings to the gods. His victorious presence was not merely expected to restore more than their former splendor to the Gaulish cities, ruined by barbaric incursions, but sumptuous temples were to arise at his bidding, to propitiate the deities, particularly Apollo, his tutelary god. The medals struck for these victories are covered with the symbols of paganism. Eusebius himself admits that Constantine was at this time in doubt which religion he should embrace; and after his vision, required to be instructed in the doctrines of Christianity."—Hist. of Christianity, p. 287.

And again, of the Sunday law, he says :—

"It is the day of the sun which is to be observed by the general veneration; the courts were to be closed, and the noise and tumult of public business and legal litigation were no longer to violate the repose of the sacred day. But the believer in the new paganism, of which the solar worship was the characteristic, might acquiesce without scruple, in the sanctity of the first day of the week."—Milman, book 3, chap. 1.

Gibbon furnishes the following decisive evidence on the subject :—

"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 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 tutelary deity. The sun was universally celebrated as the invincible guide and protector of Constantine."—Gibbon, chap. 20, vol. 2, p. 251.*

And again :—

"The panegyric of Eumenius, which was pronounced a few months before the Italian war, abounds with the most unexceptionable

evidence of the pagan superstition of Constantine, and of his particular veneration for Apollo, or the sun."—Note, p. 251.

Reference has been made to the fact that after Constantine professed his preference for Christianity he continued to hold the office and title of Pontifex Maximus, or high priest of the heathen rites; and he held it to the year of his death in 337, and, indeed, there is no evidence existing, that we have been able to find, that he ever renounced it. His religion was not Christianity, but Polytheism, and when he professed to embrace Christianity it was in union with his former paganism, and not by any means to the exclusion of it. Thus Keightley says :—

"Constantine, however, was still a polytheist, and his principal object of worship was the sun-god, Apollo. At the same time, with the compliant spirit of polytheism, he held the God of the Christians and the author of their faith in respect and reverence."—Hist. of Rome, p. 313.

And Dr. Schaff testifies to the same thing :—

"At first, Constantine, like his father, in the spirit of the Neo-Platonic syncretism of dying heathendom, reverenced all the gods as mysterious powers; especially Apollo, the god of the sun, to whom, in the year 308, he presented munificent gifts. Nay, so late as the year 321 he enjoined regular consultation of the soothsayers in public misfortunes, according to ancient heathen usage; even later, he placed his new residence, Byzantium, under the protection of the God of the martyrs and the heathen goddess of Fortune; and down to the end of his life he retained the title and dignity of a Pontifex Maximus, or high priest of the heathen hierarchy. His coins bore on the one side the letters of the name of Christ, on the other the figure of the sun-god, and the inscription, Sol invictus."—Church Hist., vol. 2, pp. 14, 15.

The edict above referred to in which "he enjoined regular consultation of the soothsayers in public misfortunes, according to ancient heathen usage," was given on the 8th day of March, 321, the next day after the Sunday decree was given! Without any other evidence this fact would prove that the Sunday edict was a heathen ordinance only; and it had no more reference to Christian duties than had the consultation of soothsayers, which the Lord had expressly forbidden to his people. And Dr. Schaff clearly shows the nature of his Christianity, so-called, in the fact that he not only retained his office of Pontifex Maximus, and dedicated his residence to the goddess of Fortune as well as to the God of the Christians, but inscribed on one side of his coins the name of Christ, and on the other the figure of the sun-god, with words of adoration to the sun! Dr. Schaff further says:

"He enjoined the observance, or, rather, forbade the public desecration of Sunday, not under the name of Sabbatum, or dies Domini, but under its own astrological or heathen title, dies solis, familiar to all his subjects, so that the law was as applicable to the worshipers of Hercules, Apollo, and Mithras, as to the Christian."

But Dr. Schaff has gone further, as he well knew that Constantine had no regard for Christianity at the time when he issued this Sunday decree, and this he declares in the following words :—

"He enjoined the civil observance of Sunday, though not as dies Domini, but as dies solis, in conformity to his worship of Apollo, and in company with an ordinance for the regular consulting of the haruspex (321)."—Hist. of the Chris. Church, vol. 2, p. 31.

And Milman again says :—

"The rescript commanding the celebration of the Christian Sabbath bears no allusion to its peculiar sanctity as a Christian institution; it is the day of the sun which is to be observed by the general veneration."—Page 289.

Although retaining the office of high priest of paganism he exercised the power of a bishop in the Christian church, and affected to preach. Dr. Schaff says one of his sermons "is still extant, in which he recommends Christianity in a characteristic strain, and in proof of its divine origin cites especially the fulfillment of prophecy, including the Sibylline books, and the Fourth Eclogue of Virgil."—Hist., vol. 2, p. 34.

Mosheim, while avowing his belief that the conversion of Constantine (such as it was) took place in 323, says that Zosimus placed it after the death of Crispus, 326; and he adds that it is difficult to determine the truth in the matter. The words of Mosheim on this point are as follows :—

"How long Constantine retained these vague and undecided views of religion and religious worship, regarding the Christian religion as excellent, and salutary to the Roman State, yet not esteeming the other religions or those of inferior gods, as vain, pernicious, and odious to God—it is difficult to determine. Zosimus, as is well known, reports that Constantine did not publicly profess Christianity, and show himself hostile to the Romish sacred rites, until after the slaughter of his son Crispus, and his wife Fausta; which truly detestable crimes were perpetrated in the year 326."—Hist. Com., p. 469.

They who would gladly avail themselves of Constantine's influence in behalf of some customs introduced in his day, are anxious to save his reputation as far as possible. If his conversion could be placed after the most horrid of his crimes were committed, it would be some relief to his character as a Christian. But that is attended with difficulties, for it would place his Sunday edict farther from his professed reception of Christianity, and also present him as presiding over the first great Christian council and leading the minds of the bishops in their consultations on matters of faith before he professed regard for the Christian religion! Look at it in whatever light we will, his patronage of the church was a curse to it, and his Christianity, mixed as it was with paganism, was unworthy of the name. The title of "the great" has been accorded to him with many misgivings, by some, as the following shows :—

"That Constantine had a large share of talent, and some virtues, is undeniable; but when we consider his many faults, among which was a cruelty that did not spare even his own children, his claim to the title of great becomes somewhat more than dubious."—Dictionary of Biography.

Dr. Schaff makes another declaration which has an important bearing on Constantine's religion, and sheds light on the statements made but a few pages before that he acted "in the spirit of the Neo-Platonic syncretism of dying heathendom." Syncretism is the attempted union of incongruous principles; and this was remarkably displayed in the actions of Constantine. Dr. Schaff there stated to what length this incongruity was attempted to be carried, even to wearing the insignia of a pagan high priest and exercising the functions of a Christian bishop; to dedicating his residence to the goddess of Fortune and to the God of the Christians; and to inscribing together on his coins the name of Christ with the figure of the sun-god and words of adoration to the sun! The further statement of Dr. Schaff is in regard to the length of time in which these inconsistencies were retained by the emperor :—

"When at last on his death bed he submitted to baptism, with the remark, 'Now let us cast away all duplicity,' he honestly admitted the conflict of two antagonistic principles which swayed his private character and public life."—Hist., vol. 2, p. 18.

It appears beyond all denial that, had not the bishops become ambitious, selfish, and worldly; had they not valued the personal favors bestowed by the emperor above the purity of the church, they would never have recognized him as the leader and head of the church, as he actually was at the council of Nice. But this was a dark day for the church, as the extracts we have given conclusively show. Most of the testimony respecting it comes to us through the "orthodox" or Roman side. But the picture is dark enough. Athanasius, a man of indomitable will and determination, took the lead of the Trinitarians, or orthodox, as they were finally called, while Arius headed the opposition. Strong charges were preferred against Athanasius, concerning whose trial Sozomon thus speaks :—

"After several sessions, when the synod was filled with tumult and confusion, and the accusers and a multitude of persons around the tribunal were crying aloud that Athanasius ought to be deposed as a sorcerer and a ruffian, and a being utterly unworthy of the priesthood, the officers who had been appointed by the emperor to maintain order in the synod compelled the accused to quit the judgment hall secretly; for they feared that he might be torn to pieces by the mob."—Eccl. Hist., p. 86.

So far as Arius himself was concerned the controversy was closed by his sudden death in a fit of purging and retching; the orthodox declaring that God had smitten him for perverting the faith, and his friends as persistently declaring that he died by poison from the hands of his orthodox enemies.

J. H. WAGGONER. (To be Continued.)