edit persecution
This commit is contained in:
@@ -9,14 +9,16 @@ pubDate: 2025-12-11
|
||||
|
||||
In the year 325, Constantine stood before an assembly of Christian bishops. He
|
||||
had just the year before killed his last remaining rival in battle, leaving him
|
||||
as the sole Augustus of the Roman Empire, from Brittania to Arabia. Many of the
|
||||
bishops assembled before him in reverent awe sported scars from torture they had
|
||||
endured in the reign of Diocletian, Constantine's predecessor. Diocletian had
|
||||
sponsored an enormous and brutal persecution of Christians. But that generation
|
||||
of bishops were witnessing an epochal shift of power. Over his reign,
|
||||
Constantine would divert large chunks of the wealth and influence of the Roman
|
||||
state into the safe-keeping of the bishops. Under Constantine's leadership, the
|
||||
bishops would be transformed from enemies of the state to the state's agents.
|
||||
as the sole Augustus of the Roman Empire, from Brittania to Arabia. The bishops
|
||||
must have assembled before him in reverent awe.
|
||||
|
||||
Many of them sported scars from torture they had endured in the reign of
|
||||
Diocletian, Constantine's predecessor. Diocletian had sponsored an enormous and
|
||||
brutal persecution of Christians. But that generation of bishops was witnessing
|
||||
an epochal shift of power. Over his reign, Constantine would divert large chunks
|
||||
of the wealth and influence of the Roman state into the safe-keeping of the
|
||||
bishops. Under Constantine's leadership, the bishops would be transformed from
|
||||
enemies of the state to the state's agents.
|
||||
|
||||
Official Roman persecution of Christians was decisively coming to an end. But
|
||||
the tragedy of the fourth century is that rather than ushering in a new age of
|
||||
@@ -38,11 +40,10 @@ emperors.
|
||||
The bishops were already in control of an impressive poor-relief system within
|
||||
Christian communities, and, unlike the Roman system, which rewarded rich
|
||||
philanthropists with honours, the Christian system encouraged patrons to give
|
||||
anonymously via their bishop, meaning the bishops were in control of how
|
||||
alms-money was spent. Some historians think of early bishops playing a social
|
||||
role rather like bankers in their communities. When Constantine ascended, they
|
||||
were ready to go with their own bureaucratic systems independent of the imperial
|
||||
civil service.
|
||||
anonymously via their bishop, meaning the bishops were in control of how large
|
||||
amounts of Christian money was spent. When Constantine ascended, they were ready
|
||||
to go with their own bureaucratic systems independent of the imperial civil
|
||||
service.
|
||||
|
||||
Constantine may have regarded the bishops, fresh out of persecution, as less
|
||||
corrupt than imperial pen-pushers. However, in the long run, the effect of his
|
||||
@@ -53,20 +54,29 @@ into persecution?
|
||||
As the bishops became ever more powerful, Constantine and his successors became
|
||||
increasingly dependent on their power. Bishops had huge moral influence over
|
||||
their congregations, and their word had the power to stop -- or start -- riots.
|
||||
They also needed them to keep distributing poor relief on the emperor's behalf,
|
||||
an important foundation for the emperor's moral authority. When the hugely
|
||||
unpopular George of Cappadocia was installed in Alexandria in 357, the local
|
||||
widows refused to receive alms from him: as a result, they were physically
|
||||
beaten by George's imperial goons. Since the emperors needed the bishops'
|
||||
support, they became increasingly willing to acquiesce to their demands. And one
|
||||
of the bishops' demands was that the emperor use his authority to help them
|
||||
crush heresy.
|
||||
Emperors also needed them to keep distributing poor relief, an important
|
||||
foundation for the emperor's moral authority. When the hugely unpopular George
|
||||
of Cappadocia was installed in Alexandria in 357, the local widows refused to
|
||||
receive alms from him: as a result, they were physically beaten by George's
|
||||
imperial goons.
|
||||
|
||||
Since the emperors needed the bishops' support, they became increasingly willing
|
||||
to acquiesce to their demands. And one of the bishops' demands was that the
|
||||
emperor use his authority to help them crush heresy.
|
||||
|
||||
The bishops of the fourth century inherited a dichotomy between orthodoxy and
|
||||
heresy which had developed in the early church. Orthodoxy meant true belief,
|
||||
defined and enforced by the bishop. Whoever promoted false beliefs, and together
|
||||
with it insurrection against the bishop's authority, was defined as a heretic.
|
||||
|
||||
Orthodoxy was conceived of as the unchanging teaching of the apostles, who were
|
||||
in turn taught directly by the Holy Spirit. Orthodoxy might have to be re-stated
|
||||
as sneaky heretics sought to twist its language, but orthodoxy was never
|
||||
supposed to be innovative: only heresy was innovative. Further, heresy was
|
||||
always thought of as a combination teaching falsehoods, behaving immorally, and
|
||||
refusing to take part in mainstream Christian community. It all came as a
|
||||
package. Truth means right behaviour means loyalty.
|
||||
|
||||
It's difficult to explain exactly why this system emerged. It's true that faith
|
||||
lies at the root of Christian religion, and that Christ taught that he is truth.
|
||||
The Epistles are clear that false teachings can be dangerous, and Christians
|
||||
@@ -76,14 +86,18 @@ unchanging apostolic orthodox teaching should have prevailed over the idea that
|
||||
Christian teaching can grow over time as it encounters new problems and
|
||||
contexts.
|
||||
|
||||
This system may have been partly motivated by the need for a distinguishing
|
||||
feature for the Christian community in the absence of an identity based on
|
||||
nationality, social class, sex, or religion. It may have been some kind of
|
||||
reaction or defence mechanism in the face of persecution. Whatever the case may
|
||||
be, the result by the Constantinian turning point was that bishops had
|
||||
significant influence over their local Christian communities, and an ideological
|
||||
commitment to maintaining their communities' loyalty to the bishop and his
|
||||
teachings.
|
||||
This system may have been motivated by the need for a distinguishing feature to
|
||||
ground Christian family identity in the absence of an identity based on
|
||||
nationality, social class, sex, or religion. It may also have been some kind of
|
||||
reaction or defence mechanism against persecution. In a world that was often
|
||||
hunting for an excuse to persecute Christians, it was a matter of life and death
|
||||
that Christian communities were tight-knit, loyal to one another, and visibly
|
||||
living according to the highest moral standards.
|
||||
|
||||
Whatever the case may be, the result by the Constantinian turning point was that
|
||||
bishops had significant influence over their local Christian communities, and an
|
||||
ideological commitment to maintaining their communities' loyalty to the bishop
|
||||
and his teachings.
|
||||
|
||||
And the bishops' desire to crush heretics only increased as the fourth century
|
||||
wore on. With the wealth and power of the civil service increasingly transferred
|
||||
@@ -180,8 +194,7 @@ accept what they teach or to support their political programme.
|
||||
|
||||
Finally, established churches are vulnerable to the perverse incentive
|
||||
structures of the state, and must be disestablished. The Church of England
|
||||
should not have seats in the Lords, should not crown British monarchs and should
|
||||
not be exempt from taxation.
|
||||
should not have seats in the Lords and should not crown British monarchs.
|
||||
|
||||
I believe in one holy, catholic and apostolic church -- but I do not believe in
|
||||
one opinion or one authority. My realistic ideal of church unity now involves a
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user