Posted on 01/18/2002 6:11:04 AM PST by 1stFreedom
Two years later, however, only a few months after the Council of Nicaea, where he helped lay down the guidelines for a united imperial Christianity, Constantine went on a killing spree. He put Licinius to death on a charge of treasonable intrigue, then went on to kill his own son Crispus, who had ably and loyally served him as a general, and the younger Licinius, his sister's son, who was, at the most, twelve years old. Next he put to death his wife Fausta, reputedly by boiling her alive in her own bath, and went on to kill a number of his friends.[14] By determination, ruthlessness, and military genius, Constantine had made himself the most powerful man in the world, but he was obviously anxious about his grip on power, and prepared to do anything to ensure it.Source
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus:God spoke His word to the saints, to believers, to Christians — not to a special caste.
Ephesians 1:1
Apart from that, one need only test the fruits, as Christ so charges His people to do (Matthew 7:16). To be a RC is to pledge to believe that white is black, if The Sect's Machinery says so. It is to believe the opposite of what Scripture plainly teaches. It is to do what God forbids, to forbid what God commands, to be robbed of all that God has given.
You mean well, I've no doubt, and thank you for that. However, by walking with Christ I am "missing" nothing but deception, lies, enslavement, disenfranchisement of what is mine as a child of God, and the perversion of my God-given mind.
It has been asserted that Constantine favoured Christianity merely from political motives, and he has been regarded as an enlightened despot who made use of religion only to advance his policy. He certainly cannot be acquitted of grasping ambition. Where the policy of the State required, he could be cruel. Even after his conversion he caused the execution of his brother-in-law Licinius, and of the latter's son, as well as of Crispus his own son by his first marriage, and of his wife Fausta. He quarrelled with his colleague Licinius about their religious policy, and in 323 defeated him in a bloody battle; Licinius surrendered on the promise of personal safety; notwithstanding this, half a year later he was strangled by order of Constantine. During the joint reign Licinianus, the son of Licinius, and Crispus, the son of Constantine, had been the two Caesars. Both were gradually set aside; Crispus was executed on the charge of immorality made against him by Constantine's second wife, Fausta. The charge was false, as Constantine learned from his mother, Helena, after the deed was done. In punishment Fausta was suffocated in a superheated bath. The young Licinianus was flogged to death. Because Licinianus was not the son of his sister, but of a slave-woman, Constantine treated him as a slave. In this way Constantine evaded his own law regarding the mutilation of slaves After reading these cruelties it is hard to believe that the same emperor could at times have mild and tender impulses; but human nature is full of contradictions.
That said, Constantine also stopped the Christian persecutions, did quite a bit to further the rights of children, women and slaves. He also tightened the divorce rules and made it difficult to put aside your spouse for trivial reasons (quite common at the time).
You know he was instrumental in organizing the Council of Nicaea and from the came the Nicean Creed - I don't think any of us posters have a problem with that.
Not sure how I personally feel about Constantine but I do come away with the feeling that AT THAT TIME he was probably the best out of a bad lot. I believe that I read once that he pre-empted quite a few of the pagan holidays by taking those dates and instituting Christian holidays instead - furthering the cause of Christianity.
Like I said earlier, you have to take all figures in history in the context of their world and not ours - else you run the risk of some that would revise history - like that elected official in NY who wanted to take down the portraits of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and other American Forefathers who he (the official) decided were slaveholders and therefore did not contribute to the growth of our country.
Just my opinion!
My only other thought at the moment is to remind us all to make sure we think of Constantine in the context of his place and time. He was Emperor of Rome, and thus it seems a bit extreme to accuse him of excessive egotism (as the author of your source does) for erecting a statue of himself. Par for the course, and in a way comparable to Washington and Jefferson owning slaves - distasteful by our modern standards, but needs to be taken as part of a whole. Ditto for any violent acts he may have perpetrated in order to secure his rule.
"The Holy Emperor Constantine (306-337), has received from the Church the title "Equal-to-the-Apostles", and in world history he received the name "the Great". He was the son of Caesar Constantius Chlorus (305-306), governing the lands of Gaul and Britania. The immense Roman empire was at this time divided into a Western and an Eastern empire, at the head of which were two independent emperors and also co-rulers titled "Caesars", -- such in the Western half of the Roman empire was the aforementioned father of Saint Constantine. Saint Contantine's mother was the empress Helen, who was a Christian. The future ruler of all the whole Roman empire -- Constantine -- was raised to have respect for the Christian religion. His father did not persecute Christians in the lands governed by him, this at a time, when through all the rest of the Roman empire Christians were subjected to fierce persecutions by the emperors Diocletian (284-305) together with his co-ruler Maximian Galerius (305-311) in the East, and the emperor Maximian Hercules (284-305) in the West. After the death of Constantius Chlorus, his son Constantine in 306 was proclaimed by the army as emperor of Gaul and Britania. The first act of the new emperor was to promulgate in the lands subject to him the freedom of confession of the Christian faith. The pagan-fanatic Maximian Galerius in the East and the fierce tyrant Maxentius in the West hated the emperor Constantine and they plotted to overthrow and kill him, but Constantine bested them in a series of battles, and he defeated his opponents with the help of God. He prayed to God to give him a sign, which should inspire his army to fight valiantly, and the Lord manifest to him in the heavens a radiant Sign of the Cross with the inscription "With this Sign thou wilt conquer". Having become sole ruler of the Western half of the Roman empire, Constantine in the year 313 issued the Edict of Milan concerning religious toleration, and in the year 323, when he came to rule as the sole ruler over the whole Roman empire, he extended the conditions of the Milan Edict also over the Eastern half of the Roman empire. After three hundred years of persecution, Christians finally received the possibility to openly confess their faith in Christ.
"Renouncing paganism, the emperor did not let his capital remain in ancient Rome, the former centre of the pagan realm. He transferred his capital to the East, to the city of Byzantium, which also was renamed Constantinople ["Constantinopolis" means "the city of Constantine"]. Constantine was deeply convinced, that only the Christian religion could unify the immense Roman empire with its diverse peoples. He supported the Church in every way, he brought back from banishment the Christian confessors, he built churches, and he showed concern for the clergy. The emperor deeply revered the victory-bearing Sign of the Cross of the Lord, and he wanted also to find the actual Life-Creating Cross, upon which was crucified our Lord Jesus Christ. For this purpose he dispatched to Jerusalem his own mother -- the holy Empress Helen, granting manifold plenitude of power and material means. Together with the Jerusalem Patriarch Makarios, Saint Helen set about the search, and through the Will of God the Life-Creating Cross was discovered in a miraculous manner in the year 326. (The account about the finding of the Cross of the Lord is located under the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, 14 September). Situated in Palestine, the holy empress did much of benefit for the Church. She gave orders, that all places connected with the earthly life of the Lord and His All-Pure Mother, should be freed of all traces of paganism, and she commanded that churches should be built at these places of memory. Over the Cave of the Sepulchre of the Lord the emperor Constantine himself gave orders to construct a magnificent church to the glory of the Resurrection of Christ. Saint Helen gave the Life-Creating Cross to the Patriarch for safe-keeping, and part of the Cross she took with her for the emperor. Having distributed generous alms at Jerusalem and seeing to the feeding of the needy, during which times she herself attended them, the holy Empress Helen returned to Constantinople, where she soon after died in the year 327.
"For her great services to the Church and her efforts in finding the Life-Creating Cross, the empress Helen is titled "Equal-to-the-Apostles".
"The peaceful state of the Christian Church was rent by the rise from within the Church by dissensions and quarrels from heresies which had appeared. Already at the beginning of the emperor Constantine's reign there had arisen in the West the heresies of the Donatists and the Novatians, demanding a second baptism over those who lapsed during the times of the persecutions against Christians. These heresies, repudiated by two local Church councils, were finally condemned at the Milan Council of 316. But particularly ruinous for the Church was the rise in the East of the heresy of Arius, daring to repudiate the Divine Essence of the Son of God, and teaching that Jesus Christ was a mere creature. By order of the emperor, in the year 325 there was convened the First Ecumenical Council in the city of Nicea. At this Council were gathered 318 bishops. Among its participants were confessor-bishops from the period of the persecutions and many other luminaries of the Church, among whom -- was Sainted-hierarch Nicholas of Myra in Lycia. (The account about the Council is located under 29 May). The emperor was present at the sessions of the Council. The heresy of Arius was condemned and a Symbol-Creed of Faith compiled, in which was included the term "of One-Essence with the Father", always confirming in the consciousness of Orthodox Christians the truth of the Divinity of Jesus Christ, Who took on and assumed upon Himself human nature for the redemption of all the human race.
"The deep churchly awareness and feeling of Saint Constantine might possibly surprise one, where the working-out of the definition "of One-Essence"heard by him in the disputes of the Council, was at his insistence included within the Symbol-Creed of Faith.
"After the Council of Nicea, Saint Constantine continued with his active role in the welfare of the Church. He accepted holy Baptism at the end of his life, having prepared for it all his whole life. Saint Constantine died on the day of Pentecost in the year 337 and was buried in the church of the Holy Apostles, in a crypt earlier prepared by him.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So you are saying that it was OK to murder others and then claim to be a Christian in those days?
So the commandment from God that he knew: "Thou shall not murder" did not apply to him? IOW he wasn't such a bad guy, he's just misunderstood. Riiiight. LOL
So you are saying that it was OK to murder others and then claim to be a Christian in those days?
No, I'm saying that I'm not aware of all of the historical evidence and thus am in no position to claim whether or not he was a murderer. If he was, did he repent and was he then forgiven? Or were his acts no more murder than the killing done for just reason by American soldiers today in Afghanistan? I'm not prepared to put Constantine on trial for murder. As I say, I don't know the evidence. And even if I did, it would be important to take in to account the manner in which justice was understood in the society of which Constantine was a part.
Having said that, I'm still waiting to hear what this all has to do with the original accusation that Constantine started his own religion.
So it's OK to kill if you tell God you're sorry after you do it? Very interesting view.
Amen. Good post, I agree.
So it's OK to kill if you tell God you're sorry after you do it? Very interesting view.
Are you saying that you do not believe in the possibility of repentance? You do not think that God may choose to show mercy? I'm not saying its OK to kill. I'm saying that it is possible to gain the kingdom of heaven if one has sinned. Did not Christ say, "I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance"?
Was not Paul himself at least an accomplice to murder? What of the thief on the cross? Are you against the death penalty? Are you claiming that President Bush is a murderer?
And yet again I ask, what does this have to do with the initial claim that Constantine started his own religion?
What if Constantine was saved? How do we know whether he was or he wasn't?
Then he could murder and still be OK according to what you believe. Once saved, always saved, right? Are you going to judge him?
Simple, when he married the Roman empire to his church he created something else, his new religion, which blended those 2 things together. You didn't deny before what Constantine did, you just said we can't be sure of his motives. I say look at what he did, it's clear enough if you don't wear blinders.
Nope sorry this is wrong. Jesus said by their fruit you shall know them. Constantine's actions (murder) tell me he wasn't "saved". What do his actions tell you?
Do the personal insults help bolster your position some how? You didn't answer the question, did you? I think that makes clear the merit of your position.
patent
The Church belongs to Christ, as He states: "...I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it."
How do you propose the Church became Constantine's? How was he able to overcome the will of God? If, as you propose, Constantine managed this, how do you propose that he was able to deceive all of the Christians of the day in to believing that the Church was still Christ's?
I will gladly respond to reasoned arguments. Its hard for me to respond to accusations of wearing blinders.
OK, we are using common terms, but with seemingly different meanings. Please define "the Church". Also God allows sin and disobedience (which is anything against His will) to happen all the time, but He does not approve of it, Constantine is no exception.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.