 |
|
|
 Constantine: Collaboration of Church
and State. A Further Departure from the
Teachings of Jesus – The State Church,
an External Religion of Power
The theologian now sketches the further development of Christianity up to Constantine: During the first three centuries there still was much persecution of Christians, but by depending on Paul, many Christians responded by fitting in and subordinating themselves to the state, in order to show that injustice was being done to them. Responsible for the leadership of the communities were at first elders, prophets, and an “angel” who, through a life in the footsteps of Jesus without compromise, maintained the connection to God (cf. Rev. 2 and 3: letter to the “angels” in the communities). But angels and prophets could only hold out a few years. Paul did mention “apparitions and revelations of the Lord,” but increasingly turned attention to his person and took a threatening stance against possible revelations that might question his teachings: But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. (Gal. 1:8)
Paul (or a student using his name) finally empowered the followers of Paul, Timothy and Titus, to name a bishop, in addition to the elders, as leader of the community. In the first letter to Timothy, it says: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task. (I Tim. 3:1)
Already at the beginning of the second century, these measures developed into a fixed hierarchical institution, headed by a bishop, below him the elders, below the elders the deacons. The bishops soon ruled the communities like kings – one speaks of “monarchical episcopacy.” The bishops were soon followed by metropolitan bishops, or “patriarchs,” responsible for larger regions, and the bishop of the capital turned into the “pope.”
More and more the holders of these offices tried to achieve recognition and social acceptance for their communities, probably to prevent possible persecutions, as well. Original Christian principles receded into the background or were given up. It was even Paul, for example, who condoned slavery, and in the communities there were slaveholders. The result of this authoritarian mindset was that increasing numbers among the members of the communities supported military service for Christians.
The following development is summed up by a reader of Karlheinz Deschner’s books:
This development was welcomed by Emperor Constantine, born in 285. He soon allied himself with the Church. This symbiosis of church and state, a classic case of chumminess – according to the principle, you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours, or birds of a feather stick together – proved to be an extraordinarily effective and long-lived association of intent for the domination and manipulation of subordinates. The might, the “authority,” of the state combined with the authority of “God” to form an unbeatable tool of pressure and discipline, for enforcing one’s will upon the people.
Karlheinz Deschner writes an extensive chapter about this development in his Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums [Criminal History of Christianity] (vol. 1, pp. 213 ff.): Constantine was born in 285 in what is today Bulgaria. His father was a military tribune and, after 305, emperor in the western part of the Roman Empire, which had been divided into four parts by Diocletian to make it easier to rule.
Constantine like his father delighted in warfare and was also very cruel. He was always waging war against several Germanic tribes. He had great numbers of defeated enemies thrown to the lions in the circus, and had two defeated princes torn apart by bears.
Then Constantine, in a ten-year civil war, subdued his three co-emperors. For some time he sided with Licinius, one of the other emperors, until Licinus had done away with co-emperor Maximin, at which point, Constantine turned on Licinius. Before this, Constantine had first eliminated his competitor Maxentius, in the famous battle of Milvic bridge (312) where, supposedly, Constantine had a vision: “In this sign you will be victorious.”
The followers and families of his defeated opponents in battle were mercilessly exterminated. Constantine swore that he would spare Licinus, the last to be defeated, but only a year later, Constantine had Licinus strangled.
Constantine’s cruelty did not stop at his own family. The British historian Shelly writes: “This cold-blooded and hypocritical brute cut his son’s throat, strangled his wife, murdered his father-in-law and his own brother-in-law …”; but this does not mean that Constantine did so by his own hand. He had his wife killed, because she was accused of adultery (but not proven) – he himself however was a notorious adulterer.
Constantine had a splendid palace built; he dressed in the highest luxury and pomp, had himself addressed as “representative of God,” or as “our deity” (nustrum numen), and had himself celebrated by the clergy as “Messiah” and “Redeemer.”
With this, we come to this mutual usefulness: Constantine granted privileges to the Church and the Church, in turn, justified his excessive power.
During his whole life, until right before his death (337), Constantine was not officially a Christian. He only accepted baptism at the very end, and then not Catholic, but “heretical,” namely, Aryan. In the early years of his reign, while he still ruled Gaul, Constantine promoted paganism. Later he did not commit himself to Christianity, and had coins minted, for instance, that bore the image of the sun god.
It therefore cannot have been inner conviction that caused Constantine to seek an alliance with the Church.
The decisive point was that in Gaul there were few Christians. But then Constantine started conquering Italy, where there were many Christians. In some regions of Asia Minor, which he conquered last, half the population was Christian. Therefore, the aid of the Church was welcome.
Deschner writes: Constantine, who had traveled from his early years on, was well informed, including in matters of religious policy – especially when it came to the strict, almost military ranks of the Catholics, spanning the entire empire, as the most disciplined and most self-contained organization of late antiquity. And in this church he perceived a model of his own empire, a prefiguration of it. (p. 242)
The collaboration between Constantine and the Church stamped by Paul was a success from the very beginning. The Church unleashed a defamatory campaign against Constantine’s first opponent, Maxentius. To this day, Maxentius is considered a bloodthirsty persecutor of Christianity and the epitome of wickedness and tyranny. In reality, Maxentius was a competent and moderate ruler; he was not prone to war and he tolerated the Christians. But he sent two Roman Christian bishops into exile, because there had been a great argument among the “Christians” after the bishops’ election. Maxentius levied taxes equally, also among the rich, and the Church even then was not on the side of the poor, or the less war-mongering, and therefore less powerful, politicians.
As soon as Constantine had established himself in Rome after defeating Maxentius, he showed his gratitude: The Church received large gifts of property and was given back church property. The Church of Rome alone received “in excess of one ton of gold and almost ten tons of silver” (p. 236). From the state coffers, which he filled by exploiting his subjects, Constantine financed huge and magnificent church buildings everywhere in the empire. But not only that: He dispensed the clergy from taxes and gave them the right to be named heirs (which before, only pagan cults had enjoyed and only in exceptional cases). He even gave the Church legal jurisdiction: Against the judgement of a bishop there was no appeal.
Deschner: Not a few bishops could already imitate the character and ceremony of the imperial court. They had claim to special titles, to incense, were greeted with genuflection, and sat on a throne that was the likeness of God’s throne. To others they preached humility! (p. 238)
In a very short time, the Church became so rich and privileged that Constantine had to take measures. For instance, he limited the possibilities of the rich to become clerics – because in this way they wanted to evade taxation! Under Constantine’s subsequent successors, the right of the Church to inherit was again limited, but not permanently.
You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours. Already in 314 the Church decided that Christians who refused military service had to be banned from the Church – a complete turnabout, as it had been those who took up arms who were banned before.
The distribution of roles was clearly defined: The emperor had the say-so, even in religious matters. For instance, he called the Council of Nicaea in 325 and dictated the creed which has been valid ever since. The emperor was the highest god-like ruler. The church dignitaries followed right behind, often living in the same splendor. And they showed their gratitude by justifying the emperor’s power and his wars, by covering up his cruel deeds, and by constantly flattering him.
Constantine – the original image of the symbiosis between church and state. Deschner writes: Constantine’s predecessors had feared Christianity and had at times fought it. He turned it to his ends by granting a plethora of favors and privileges … In fact he used the clergy and forced his will upon it … The church became powerful but it lost all freedom …He and they[Constantine and the bishops] turned the church into the state church … (p. 242 f.)
Constantine, even though he was not a believing Catholic, gave the Church free rein in the early persecution of dissidents, when, for example, pagan temples were destroyed by the “Christian” mob. Apparently under the influence of the clergy, Constantine passed anti-Jewish laws, among them the death penalty for converts from Christianity to Judaism. At times, for political expediency and tellingly not consistent, Constantine persecuted the heretical movements of the Donatists in North Africa and the Marcionites. The Donatists were opposed to a union of throne and altar and combined with rebellious farm workers against the large landowners. Of course, this was not what church and state had in mind!
Under Constantine’s rule, the term “Catholic” appears for the first time – certainly no coincidence – to separate the Church from so-called “heretics.”
This will do as a historical flash-black. May the one who has ears to hear, listen. And may the one who has a heart for Christ follow the advice in John’s Revelation: Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues ... (Rev. 18:4)
The church of pagan rituals was built through Paul, who misinterpreted the teachings of Jesus by integrating it into the pagan tradition of Rome and by providing it with all the power-hunger and truculence of Roman power structures.
Paul denigrated women as the reflection of the man, but the man is the reflection of God according to Paul. This gave rise to the Christian church management as the men’s domain, which persists to this day. On the other hand, Jesus taught that man and woman are equal. He made no difference; He did not raise the man to be the reflection of God and did not reduce the woman to be the reflection of the man. Again, this is Saul, the same as Paul, but not Jesus, the Christ.
Constantine turned the church of pagan rituals into a state church, or state religion, which to this day, with its bloody and cruel roots, is still interwoven with pagan rites. The bloody, cruel and barbarous religious cults started developing soon after Moses and continued in the former Roman Empire. Today, the state churches, offshoots of the Roman church of rituals and power, are external religions of power, which have little in common with Jesus, the Christ. They use, that is, abuse, the name of Jesus, the Christ. The undertow from the Old Testament and Constantine’s brutal and arrogant presumption remain.
to the next chapter
|
|
