Short Papers on Church History

 •  10 min. read  •  grade level: 10
But even from history, we think it can be proved that it was better for Christianity when Christians were suffering at the stake for Christ, than when they were feasted in king’s palaces, and covered with royal favors. By way of illustrating our question, we will give our readers a page from the history of the great persecution under Dioclesian, and one from the brightest days of Constantine; and we will quote both from Milman, late Dean of St. Paul’s, who will not be suspected of unfairness to the clergy. We speak of the faithful only. It is well known that in the later persecutions, when the assemblies of Christians had greatly increased, many proved unfaithful in the day of trial; though these were comparatively few, and many of them afterward repented.
“The persecution had now lasted for six or seven years (309), but in no part of the world did Christianity betray any signs of decay. It was far too deeply rooted in the minds of men, far too extensively promulgated, far too vigorously organized, not to endure this violent but unavailing shock. If its public worship was suspended, the believers met in secret, or cherished in the unassailable privacy of the heart, the inalienable rights of conscience. But of course the persecution fell most heavily upon the most eminent of the body. Those who resisted to death were animated by the presence of multitudes, who, if they dared not applaud, could scarcely conceal their admiration. Women crowded to kiss the hems of the martyrs’ garments, and their scattered ashes, or unburied bones, were stolen away by the devout zeal of their flocks.”
Under the edict issued from the dying bed of Galerius, the persecution ceased, and the Christians were permitted the free and public exercise of their religion. This breathing time lasted only a few months. But how grand the sight which followed, and what a testimony to the truth and the power of Christianity! The Dean goes on to say:—“The cessation of the persecution showed at once its extent. The prison doors were thrown open; the mines rendered up their condemned laborers; everywhere long trains of Christians were seen hastening to the ruins of their churches, and visiting the places sanctified by their former devotions. The public roads, the streets, and market places of the towns were crowded with long processions singing psalms of thanksgiving for their deliverance. Those who had maintained their faith under these severe trials received the affectionate congratulations of their brethren: those who had failed in the hour of affliction hastened to confess their failure and seek for re-admission into the now joyous fold.”
We now turn to the altered state of things under Constantine, about twenty years after the death of Galerius. Mark the mighty change in the position of the clergy.
“The bishops appeared as regular attendants upon the court; the internal dissensions of Christianity became affairs of state. The prelate ruled, not now so much by his admitted superiority in christian virtue, as by the inalienable authority of his office. He opened or closed the door of the Church, which was tantamount to an admission or an exclusion from everlasting bliss: he uttered the sentence of excommunication, which cast back the trembling delinquent amongst the lost and perishing heathen. He had his throne in the most distinguished part of the christian temple; and though yet acting in the presence and in the name of his college of presbyters, yet he was the acknowledged head of a large community, over whose eternal destiny he held a vague, but not therefore less imposing and awful dominion.”1
Intellectual and philosophical questions took the place of the truth of the gospel, and mere outward religion for faith, love, and heavenly-mindedness. A crucified Savior, true conversion, justification by faith alone, separation from the world, were subjects never known by Constantine, and probably never introduced in his presence. “The connection of the physical and moral world had become general topics; they were, for the first time, the primary truths of a popular religion, and naturally could not withdraw themselves from the alliance with popular passion’s. Mankind, even within the sphere of Christianity, retrograded to the sterner Jewish character; and in its spirit, as well as its language, the Old Testament began to dominate over the gospel of Christ.”
THE TRUE CHARACTER OF THE CHURCH DISAPPEARS.
However agreeable to mere nature, the sunshine of the imperial favor might be, it was destructive of the true character of the individual Christian, and of the Church corporately. All testimony to a rejected Christ on earth, and an exalted Christ in heaven, was gone. It was the world baptized, in place of believers only, as dead and risen in Christ—as having died in His death, and risen again in His resurrection. The word of God is plain. “Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” (Col. 2:1212Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. (Colossians 2:12).) Baptism is here used as the sign both of death and resurrection. But to whom was that solemn and sacred ordinance now administered? Again, we repeat, To the Roman world. Faith in Christ, the forgiveness of sins, acceptance in the Beloved, were not looked for by the obsequious clergy.
The profession of Christianity being now the sure way to wealth and honors, all ranks and classes applied for baptism. At the Easter and Pentecostal festivals, thousands, all clothed in the white garment of the neophyte, crowded round the different churches, waiting to be baptized. The numbers were so great, and the whole scene so striking, that many thought these conspicuous neophytes must be the innumerable multitude spoken of in the Revelation, who stood before the Lamb, clothed with white robes. According to some writers, as many as twelve thousand men, besides women and children, were baptized in one year in Rome; and a white garment, with twenty pieces of gold, was promised by the emperor to every new convert of the poorer classes. Under these circumstances, and by these venal means, the downfall of heathenism was accomplished, and Christianity seated on the throne of the Roman world.
THE BAPTISM AND DEATH OF CONSTANTINE.
The baptism of Constantine has given rise to almost as much speculation as his conversion. Notwithstanding the great zeal he displayed in favor of Christianity, he delayed his baptism, and consequently his reception into the Church, till the approach of death. Many motives, both political and personal, have been suggested by different writers as reasons for this delay; but the real one, we fear, was personal. Superstition had by this time taught men to connect the forgiveness of sins with the rite of baptism. Under this dreadful delusion, Constantine seems to have delayed his baptism until he could no longer enjoy his imperial honors, and indulge his passions in the pleasures of the world. It is impossible to conceive of any papal indulgence more ruinous to the soul, more dishonoring to Christianity, or more dangerous to every moral virtue. It was a license for such as Constantine to pursue the great objects of his ambition through the darkest paths of blood and cruelty, as it placed in his hands the means of an easy forgiveness, when convenient to himself. But on the other hand, we think it was a great mercy of the Lord, that one, whose private and domestic life, as well as his public career, was so stained with blood, should not have made a public profession of Christianity by receiving baptism and the Lord’s supper. Let us hope that he really repented on his deathbed.
The bishops, whom he summoned in his last illness to the palace of Nicomedia, heard his confession, were satisfied, and gave him their blessing; Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, baptized him! He now professed for the first time, that if God spared his life, he would join the assembly of His people, and that having worn the white garment of the neophyte, he would never again wear the purple of the emperor. But these resolutions were too late in coming; he died shortly after his baptism, in the year 337.2
HELENA, the emperor’s mother, deserves a passing notice. She embraced the religion professed by her son. Her devotion, piety, and munificence were great. She traveled from place to place; visited the scenes which had been hallowed by the chief events of scripture history; ordered the temple of Venus to be demolished, which Hadrian had built on the site of the holy sepulcher, and gave directions for a church to be built on the spot, which should exceed all others in splendor. She died A.D. 328.
We have now seen, alas, too plainly, the sorrowful truth of the Lord’s words, that the Church was dwelling where Satan’s seat is. Constantine left it there. He found it imprisoned in mines, dungeons, and catacombs, and shut out from the light of heaven; he left it on the throne of the world. But the picture is not yet complete; we must notice other features in the history, answering to the likeness in the epistle.
The reign of Constantine was marked, not only by the Church being taken out of her right place, through the deceptions of Satan, but by the bitter fruits of that degrading change. The seeds of error, corruption, and dissension sprang up rapidly, and now came publicly before the tribunals of the world, and in some instances before the pagan world.
THE DONATISTIC AND ARIAN CONTROVERSIES.
Two great controversies—the Donatistic and the Arian, had their beginning in this reign. The former, arising in the west, from a disputed appointment to the episcopal dignity at Carthage; the latter, of eastern origin, and involving the very foundations of Christianity. The one was a question of doctrine, the other of practice. Both were now corrupted in their very springs and essence; and may have been represented by the false prophet and the Nicolaitanes; but more as to this afterward. We will now briefly notice the two schisms, as they throw light on the nature and results of the union of church and state. The emperor took part in the councils of the bishops as head of the Church.
On the death of Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, a council of neighboring bishops was called to appoint his successor. The council was small through the management of Botrus and Celesius, two presbyters who aspired to the office, but Caecilian, the deacon, who was much loved by the congregation, was elected bishop. The two disappointed persons protested against the election. Mensurius died on a journey; but before leaving home he had entrusted some plate and other property of the church to certain elders of the congregation, and had left an inventory in the hands of a pious female. This was now delivered to Caecilian; he of course demanded the articles from the elders; they were unwilling to deliver them up, as they had supposed no one would ever inquire for them, the old bishop being dead. They now joined the party of Botrus and Celesius in opposition to the new bishop. The schism was also supported by the influence of Lucilla a rich lady whom Caecilian had formerly offended by a faithful reproof; and the whole province assumed the right of interference.
 
1. History of Christianity, vol. ii., pp. 283— 308. Neander, vol. iii., p. 41. Life of Constantine, by Eusebius.
2. Eusebius’s Life of Constantine, p. 147