Whatever we think of him, there is little doubt that the Roman emperor Constantine is a polarizing figure. For Catholics and Orthodox he is a heroic figure - even gaining the title "Saint" among the latter. For many Protestants he is a villain who paganized the Church. For secularists, he is a political genius. In reality he might be a little of all the above.
Rather than thinking anachronistically, we should place Constantine in the proper historical context as a Roman general fighting for supremacy in the subculture that surrounded the Roman army. Roman soldiers (and many soldiers anywhere) were incredibly superstitious. Victories and defeats were often attributed to the favor and scorn of various gods. If you fought with some god's favor and the opponents fought with a different god's favor, the outcome might be viewed as much owing to the relative strengths of gods as of the soldiers - particularly if natural phenomena (e.g., weather) assisted in determining the outcome.
During the Roman persecution of Christians, Constantine's father and later Constantine himself never enforced the edicts. This might be because they had relatives who were Christians, they were sympathetic nonbelievers, they were facing barbarian hordes and so had better things to do than worry about than some religious sect, or all of the above. It seems Constntine's army had Christians in it.
Constantine's main opponent for the throne was Maxentius who had the backing of the Roman establishment, an impressive army, and the pagan religious establishment. Maxentius was in power at Rome and accordingly was by far the favorite in the forthcoming battle. As one would expect, the various pagan oracles "predicted" his victory. This last item is significant since it would show Constantine's army that the heavens were against him. It is not to much to imagine that Christians in Constantine's army might have approached him and said they would intercede with God (or in Constantine's mind - their god) for his victory knowing he would grant the Church freedom from persecution.
Constantine, likely latched on to any god who might come to his aid. I honestly cannot judge the veracity of his alleged "vision" of a cross in the sky. I have seen a cloud that resembled a cross myself once but I heard no voices and no one has made me emporer. Maybe it happened and maybe not. The tale comes later so who knows? Still, we do know God was in control then as now. Anyway Constantine fought under the emblem.
In the battle of Pons Milvius an amazing thing happened. Early in the battle Maxentius was thrown into the river and drowned. His army fell apart and Constantine was victorius. He granted Christianity toleration with the edict of Milan.
Now, what would a Roman general do if some god (even if he didn't "get" the cult's theology) do if he thought the god gave him a great victory. He would finance temples and promote the cult. What did Constantine do? He financed temples and promoted the cult. The theories of him realizing Christianity would win are historically unjustified. The persecition of Diocletian had left the Church in shambles. It was the most severe in history and a large segment of the Church apostacized and even ratted out fellow Christians. The remains of this would fuel the Donatist schism to follow. There were many better choices of a cult to choose than one that was extermely unpopular with the centers of Roman power.
There is little doubt that at the time, he was not a Christian in any orthodox sense of the word. But it is also clear that he gradually became one over the years and finally sought baptism in his last days on earth (a common thing at the time). Under his rule, the Council of Nicea defended the divinity of Christ althought it is unlikely he understood the theological issues or cared. God can use all sorts of people for his purposes. It is a common misconception that he made Christianity the religion of the empire. This is not true. It would be after his death that happened.
The reason for his demonization in Protestant circles can be traced to the early debates of the Reformation. Catholic apologists used a document called the Donation of Constantine to prove that Constantine - whose reputation was pretty high among all at the time - had given control of the Church to the papacy (as if an emperor could do that). Protestants understandably decided all the problems started then and Constantine was blamed for Catholicism's errors. Later the document was proven to be of medieval origin and thus a fraud, but by then Constantine had long been the bogeyman of Protestants and it stuck.
The reality is just the opposite. By his moving the capital of the empire to his "New Rome" at the city of Byzantium (later renamed Constantinople), he effectively prevented the complete centralization of power in the Church at Rome. The other great cities of the Church in the Empire (Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem) alligned with Constantinople against Roman claims of ecclesial jurisdiction. Contrary to much western thinking, the Roman empire did not collapse with the sacking of Rome - old Rome was no longer the capital and had not been for about a century. The empire continued until in 1453 it was sacked by the Muslim Turks. Historians call this period of the empire the Byzantine Empire but it was still known at the time as Roman. The tag "Byzantine" is a modern creation from the city's original name. The Ottomans who recognized nationalities (millets) within their empire called the Orthodox Christians the millet roma. The Church of the East in Persia called the Orthodox the Roman Church. The Catholics were referred to as the Frankish Church (the Catholics "Holy Roman Empire" created under Charlmagne was controlled by descendants of Franco-Germanic tribes and they gradually gained control of Rome and the Church from the native Romans).
Well, there you have it. Not saying that Constantine was some great super Christian but he was not the villain portrayed by many either. He was a complex figure who God used for His purposes and whatever happened later in medieval Catholicism should not be laid at his feet.
Rather than thinking anachronistically, we should place Constantine in the proper historical context as a Roman general fighting for supremacy in the subculture that surrounded the Roman army. Roman soldiers (and many soldiers anywhere) were incredibly superstitious. Victories and defeats were often attributed to the favor and scorn of various gods. If you fought with some god's favor and the opponents fought with a different god's favor, the outcome might be viewed as much owing to the relative strengths of gods as of the soldiers - particularly if natural phenomena (e.g., weather) assisted in determining the outcome.
During the Roman persecution of Christians, Constantine's father and later Constantine himself never enforced the edicts. This might be because they had relatives who were Christians, they were sympathetic nonbelievers, they were facing barbarian hordes and so had better things to do than worry about than some religious sect, or all of the above. It seems Constntine's army had Christians in it.
Constantine's main opponent for the throne was Maxentius who had the backing of the Roman establishment, an impressive army, and the pagan religious establishment. Maxentius was in power at Rome and accordingly was by far the favorite in the forthcoming battle. As one would expect, the various pagan oracles "predicted" his victory. This last item is significant since it would show Constantine's army that the heavens were against him. It is not to much to imagine that Christians in Constantine's army might have approached him and said they would intercede with God (or in Constantine's mind - their god) for his victory knowing he would grant the Church freedom from persecution.
Constantine, likely latched on to any god who might come to his aid. I honestly cannot judge the veracity of his alleged "vision" of a cross in the sky. I have seen a cloud that resembled a cross myself once but I heard no voices and no one has made me emporer. Maybe it happened and maybe not. The tale comes later so who knows? Still, we do know God was in control then as now. Anyway Constantine fought under the emblem.
In the battle of Pons Milvius an amazing thing happened. Early in the battle Maxentius was thrown into the river and drowned. His army fell apart and Constantine was victorius. He granted Christianity toleration with the edict of Milan.
Now, what would a Roman general do if some god (even if he didn't "get" the cult's theology) do if he thought the god gave him a great victory. He would finance temples and promote the cult. What did Constantine do? He financed temples and promoted the cult. The theories of him realizing Christianity would win are historically unjustified. The persecition of Diocletian had left the Church in shambles. It was the most severe in history and a large segment of the Church apostacized and even ratted out fellow Christians. The remains of this would fuel the Donatist schism to follow. There were many better choices of a cult to choose than one that was extermely unpopular with the centers of Roman power.
There is little doubt that at the time, he was not a Christian in any orthodox sense of the word. But it is also clear that he gradually became one over the years and finally sought baptism in his last days on earth (a common thing at the time). Under his rule, the Council of Nicea defended the divinity of Christ althought it is unlikely he understood the theological issues or cared. God can use all sorts of people for his purposes. It is a common misconception that he made Christianity the religion of the empire. This is not true. It would be after his death that happened.
The reason for his demonization in Protestant circles can be traced to the early debates of the Reformation. Catholic apologists used a document called the Donation of Constantine to prove that Constantine - whose reputation was pretty high among all at the time - had given control of the Church to the papacy (as if an emperor could do that). Protestants understandably decided all the problems started then and Constantine was blamed for Catholicism's errors. Later the document was proven to be of medieval origin and thus a fraud, but by then Constantine had long been the bogeyman of Protestants and it stuck.
The reality is just the opposite. By his moving the capital of the empire to his "New Rome" at the city of Byzantium (later renamed Constantinople), he effectively prevented the complete centralization of power in the Church at Rome. The other great cities of the Church in the Empire (Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem) alligned with Constantinople against Roman claims of ecclesial jurisdiction. Contrary to much western thinking, the Roman empire did not collapse with the sacking of Rome - old Rome was no longer the capital and had not been for about a century. The empire continued until in 1453 it was sacked by the Muslim Turks. Historians call this period of the empire the Byzantine Empire but it was still known at the time as Roman. The tag "Byzantine" is a modern creation from the city's original name. The Ottomans who recognized nationalities (millets) within their empire called the Orthodox Christians the millet roma. The Church of the East in Persia called the Orthodox the Roman Church. The Catholics were referred to as the Frankish Church (the Catholics "Holy Roman Empire" created under Charlmagne was controlled by descendants of Franco-Germanic tribes and they gradually gained control of Rome and the Church from the native Romans).
Well, there you have it. Not saying that Constantine was some great super Christian but he was not the villain portrayed by many either. He was a complex figure who God used for His purposes and whatever happened later in medieval Catholicism should not be laid at his feet.
