On October 28th, 312 AD, the tetrarch Constantine defeated his fellow tetrarch Maxentius, at the battle of the Milvian Bridge. The night before the battle Constantine had a heavenly vision—the famous Chi-Rho (the first two letters in the name “Christ”)—and heard a voice say, “In this, conquer!” That experience marked Constantine’s conversion to Christianity. He was convinced that he was to go into battle in the name of the Christian God. After a decisive victory over Maxentius, Constantine consolidated his power and became the emperor of the western part of the Roman Empire, with Licinius being the eastern emperor.
In 313 AD, Constantine and Licinius issued the famous Edict of Milan, which granted full tolerance for all the religions of the empire, including Christianity. With that one edict, the persecution of Christians came to an end. Eventually, though, Constantine went to war with Licinius when Licinius began to persecute Christians in the east again, and by 325 AD, Constantine was the sole emperor of a unified Roman Empire.
The conversion of Constantine was a watershed moment in both Christianity and Western civilization. For the previous 300 years, Christians had been a persecuted minority within a crumbling and chaotic pagan culture. Although during that time Christianity was slowly but surely growing in numbers, the conversion of Constantine vaulted it to prestige and imperial favor. Christianity thus became the major re-shaping influence in a pagan world that was crumbling, decimated, desolate, and dying.
The Two Cultural Realities of the East and West
Of course, exactly how it re-shaped the old pagan world was entirely determined by which part of the empire you happened to be in. This brings us to another basic historical reality if we are to understand the evolution of Western civilization. When Constantine moved the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome in the west to Constantinople in the east, all the power, majesty, influence and interest of the empire shifted to the east as well. Consequently, with all the imperial might having shifted east, the western part of the empire was soon neglected, and became vulnerable to various barbarian groups like the Goths, Vandals, and even Attila the Hun.
Given the two different cultural realities of East and West, Christianity developed much differently in the East than it did in the West. Christianity in the East developed within an empire that was still at the height of its glory: the structure of society was still stable, and Church leaders, with imperial backing, were able to influence already-existing institutions within Byzantine society. Christianity in the West, on the other hand, developed in what we might called the “wild west” of Europe, where there was no central authority and all the structures of society had been decimated. Therefore, within the Byzantine Age, there are really two societies that need to be understood separately.
Contrary to what many modern historians claim, Constantine’s conversion did not change Christianity from a persecuted religion to an imperial-backed persecuting religion that sought to stamp out all competition. And it certainly did not signal the death knell for reason, learning, philosophy and culture. In that respect, when Charles Freeman says, in his book The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason (as if the title itself isn’t a dead giveaway!), “The imposition of orthodoxy went hand in hand with a stifling of any form of independent reasoning. By the fifth century, not only was rational thought been suppressed, but there has been a substitution for it of ‘mystery, magic, and authority,’” we must call foul. Orthodox Christianity was never imposed on the populace by emperors like Constantine, and it certainly did not stifle rational thought. Such a narrative by Freeman and others might serve the purposes of overzealous and dishonest modern propagandists, and it might help the sales of fanciful and misleading novels like The Da Vinci Code, but it simply is not dealing with reality.
Politically Speaking: Constantine
Politically-speaking, Constantine’s conversion decidedly didn’t change the political structure of the Empire. It did, though, supply the Church with more clout, power, and influence in society. We must remember that it was Constantine who called for the first official Church Council that took place in Nicaea, at his royal palace nonetheless, in 325 AD. Constantine thus lavished favors and money upon the Church because he saw that it had a history of caring for the poor and needy. It was clear that Constantine wanted to support the Church in its efforts to be Christ to Roman society and to care for those living in the margins. In fact, we have documents that are believed are from the Council of Nicaea in which Constantine ordered that hospitals were to be erected in every city of the Empire. This is of vital importance, for the Christian hospitals did not serve just the rich and influential. What set them apart was that they cared for the sick, regardless of the person’s status in society.
The results, therefore, of having a Christian emperor and a more influential church, were overwhelmingly positive. Contrary to popular opinion, Constantine did not go about trying to suppress paganism. The fact is that there was no need to…paganism was already a crumbling institutional relic of the past. Constantine never even ordered the closing of any pagan temples. In fact, he did little to change the long imperial tradition of allowing some of the imperial money going to subsidize pagan temples. Incidentally, this is why some claim that Constantine really was a pagan. But let’s be clear, despite what many modern historians argue, Constantine could not have been a fanatical Christian who persecuted pagans and, at the same time, a committed pagan.
No—the fact was that he was a Christian, but as the emperor, he did not use his political power to attack or even undercut the pagan traditions within the empire. He refused to use imperial might and the power of the state to attack or suppress non-Christians. In fact, he went out of his way to protect his citizens from any kind of religious persecution. His Edict of Milan in 313 AD forbid persecution of Christians. He also prevented Jews from attacking any of their fellow Jews who converted to Christianity. In Triumph of Christianity, Rodney Stark points out, “Moreover, this is consistent with Constantine’s order early in the fourth century ‘that Jews be restrained from attacking members of their community who converted to Christianity…’” (78).
In his Edict to the Eastern Provincials in 324 AD, Constantine once again affirmed his commitment to religious tolerance and accommodation and his rejection of any kind of coercive form of conversion.
Finally, in his Edict to the Palestinians in 322 AD, Constantine made reference to “God” but never mentioned “Christ.” This is significant, because it shows that Constantine was not a religious zealot. He was well aware that a large portion of the empire was still pagan, and he did not want to give offense—and so, he used terms (i.e. “God”) that would be familiar to both Christians and pagans. As Rodney Stark has said, “…in both word and deed Constantine supported religious pluralism, even while making his own commitment to Christianity explicit. In fact, during Constantine’s reign, ‘friendships between Christian bishops and pagan grandees’ were well known, and the many examples of the ‘peaceful intermingling of pagan and Christian thought may…be thought of as proof of the success of [his] policy’ of consensus and pluralism” (179-180).
But not only did Constantine not persecute pagans, he continued to actively appoint prominent pagans to high positions in government. Even Theodosius, the emperor who officially outlawed paganism when he made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire in 391 AD, still actually appointed just as many pagans to government positions of consuls and prefects as he did Christians (See Triumph 192). The fact is that there were very astute and capable pagan philosophers, generals, and statesmen throughout the empire. Emperors like Constantine and Theodosius knew this full well, and so they continued to appoint pagans to various, high-ranking positions in his government.
Why would Constantine, a Christian emperor, do such a thing? The answer is that he was not a fool. He had been given a top-notch education in military and classical philosophy, and he was simply continuing the logical implications of the teachings of Christian philosophers like Justin Martyr and Clement of Alexandria: namely, that there was much good in pagan philosophy, and that as a Christian, he could endorse and encourage the pursuit of truth, because all truth is God’s truth, no matter where it may be found.
Theodosius vs. Ambrose—The Shocking Relationship Between Church and State
Incidentally, there were some very interesting circumstances surrounding Theodosius’ making Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. It was in 391 AD that he banned “public and private sacrifices to the gods, not only blood sacrifices, but also ‘such pagan devotions as sprinkling incense on altars, hanging sacred fillets on trees and raising turf altars” (Triumph, 190). It had been only one year earlier that Theodosius sent troops to Thessalonica to slaughter 7,000 protestors to his rule. Ambrose, the Bishop of Milan, had urged Theodosius not to do it, but the emperor ignored Ambrose and went ahead with his order.
In response, Ambrose did something that was unheard of: he stood up to the Emperor. He refused to let Theodosius take part in the Holy Eucharist until Theodosius repented of his actions. Ambrose’ actions made it clear: moral authority came, not from the Emperor, but from the God, through the Church. The Emperor was not above God’s Law, and it was the job of the Church to hold the Emperor accountable.
Amazingly, Theodosius did something equally unheard of: he submitted to Ambrose’s call to repent. He acknowledged that he too, although the Emperor, was not above God’s Law and the moral authority of the Church. Therefore, we must see that his making Christianity the official religion of Rome was more an acknowledgement of his submission to the moral authority of the Church, than it was some sort of heavy-handed persecution of paganism. Still, we must remember that although Theodosius outlawed pagan practices, he still was somewhat hypocritical about it. Not only did he not persecute pagans, but he continued to appoint them to positions within his government. Therefore, we must see his proclamation to be more ceremonial than anything.
In any case, as with Constantine, Theodosius’ main political concern was the stability and unity of the empire. For that reason, neither man actively suppressed or persecuted paganism. In that respect, it was a Christian emperor who introduced true religious tolerance to the western world. Before Constantine, religious tolerance was dependent on the honoring and worshipping of the emperor, and in that respect, it wasn’t true tolerance. And even when Theodosius made paganism officially illegal, in reality he did nothing to persecute pagans.
The Politics and Achievements of Emperors Arcadius and Justinian
Hence, even a few years later in 400 AD, the emperor Arcadius followed in Theodosius’ footsteps by essentially paying only lip-service toward the illegality of paganism. When he was urged to destroy the pagan temple in Gaza, he remarked, “I know that the city is full of idols, but is shows [devotion] in paying its taxes…. If we suddenly terrorize these people, they will run away and we will lose considerable revenues” (Triumph 191).
Still another later emperor, Justinian, made further strides in the political sphere by completely restructuring Roman law. Justinian’s Law Code (529-534 AD) was a tremendous feat that brought about a much needed reform of ancient Roman law. In it, he specifically addressed the issue of tolerance: “We especially command those persons who are truly Christians, or who are said to be so, that they should not abuse the authority of religion and dare to lay violent hands on Jews and pagans, who are living quietly and attempting nothing disorderly or contrary to law.”
Not only did Justinian completely restructure the Roman law code, he’s also most famous for building what is arguably the greatest, most beautiful church in Christian history: Hagia Sophia. From the time of its construction in 537 AD to the time the Turks took Constantinople in 1453 AD, Hagia Sophia was the center of the Christian world. It took a mere five years to build, and 1500 year later, if one visits Istanbul and walks through those doors, one cannot help but be struck by its beauty. When I was 24 years old, I had a one day layover in Istanbul, and decided to see some of the sites. I vaguely knew about “some old church” named Hagia Sophia, but when I went inside, I was overwhelmed by the history and holiness that just seemed to saturate the very stone. No words can describe it.
That being said, the fact that the emperor had become a Christian was going to have inevitable consequences. Political and religious spheres would eventually intermingle and open the door to a new set of challenges, namely, what should the relationship between the Church and State be? That is a question that has challenged Western society ever since.
Summing Up
Clearly, a mere 2,000 word post cannot even begin to scratch the surface of the religious and political history of 1,000 years of Byzantine Christianity. But I wanted to address the false accusation put forth in this day and age that once Constantine became a Christian, that Christianity instantaneously turned into a fanatical, persecuting religion that sought to crush all other religions and force people, through terror and intimidation, to become Christians.
