One of the Most Enigmatic Figures in History

“Constantine has been a whipping boy for a long time, and still is today. In popular culture (Dan Brown, Da Vinci Code), among bestselling historians (James Carroll, Constantine’s Sword), and among theologians (Stanley Hauerwas, John Howard Yoder, and their followers), his name is identified with tyranny, antisemitism, hypocrisy, apostasy, and heresy. He was a hardened power-politician who never really became Christian, a hypocrite who harnessed the energy of the Church for his own political ends, a murderer, a usurper, an egotist.”

Constantine is one of the most enigmatic figures in history. There is no doubt that his influence on secular and ecclesial events was immense, but opinions vary on who he actually was and why he made certain decisions.

Constantine is viewed as the initiator of the Great Apostasy that created the Catholic Church and kept the authentic Christian faith hidden for more than a millennium. He is also seen as an evil tyrant and a lukewarm Christian sympathizer who used the Church for selfish political goals. Perhaps he was an authentic Christian, “gripped with a profound confidence that God had anointed and appointed him to ensure the expansion of the gospel to the Roman world and beyond.”

Although there are bountiful interpretations of Constantine and his historical impact, perhaps the one that best illustrates the use of Constantine as a scapegoat in the Protestant historical attack is the belief in Constantinianism.

Advocated by the Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder (1927-1997), Constantinianism “refers to a theology and ecclesial practice that took form when the Church assumed a dominant position in Roman society,” which is summarized as the “wedding of piety to power.”

Protestant adherents of Constantinianism believe that Constantine united politics and the Church, which ended ecclesial independence and produced a subservient Church that composed its teachings at the behest of its secular master. The Church embraced anti-Christian ideas such as justified violence and military service, which it had previously rejected (supposedly).

Constantine’s reign marks a shift in ecclesiology, as the Church’s new social status within the empire turned it from a church of martyrs ready to suffer violence for the sake of Christ to a church of warriors ready to engage in violence for the glory of Christ.

Allegedly, this fundamental change in the Church remains today and infects ordinary Christians who compromise with the secular world.

These various interpretations of Constantine place significant influence on one, albeit very powerful, fourth-century man.

So who was Constantine, and how did he view his relationship with the Church?          

The odds were not in favor of Constantine winning the struggle for control of the western Roman Empire at the beginning of the fourth century. His chief rival for the throne, Maxentius, was safely entrenched behind the walls of Rome with a large army nearly twice the number of troops Constantine could muster. Against the advice of his generals, Constantine marched the legions from Britain through Gaul (modern-day France) and into Italy to battle Maxentius.          

While Constantine marched through Gaul, a miraculous event occurred that changed his life.

Constantine and his army witnessed a cross appearing suddenly in the sky with the words hoc signo victor eris (by this sign you will be victor) around it. Constantine interpreted this sign as favor from the Christian God and a harbinger of good news in his upcoming battle.       

The heavenly sign prompted Constantine to order the painting of the chi rho, the Greek monogram formed from the first two letters for the word Christ in Greek, on their shields. Constantine wore the chi rho on his helmet. Additionally, Constantine ordered the creation of the labarum, a golden and jeweled cross with a square piece of purple cloth with the chi rho in the center. The chi rho became extremely popular after Constantine’s usage, and reproductions of it are found everywhere in the Roman world from the fourth century onward. (Indeed, it is still used in Catholic churches and on liturgical vestments today.)

The adoption of a Christian symbol by a Roman army marked a significant turning point in the history of the Church. Previously, the Roman army was the instrument of state persecution of the Church, of the killing of thousands of Christians. Now Roman troops marched to battle against a rival with the sign of Christ on their shields because of a miraculous sign!           

The Roman populace welcomed Constantine as a deliverer and recognized him as the sole ruler of the western empire. In a move that signaled a new era, Constantine did not go to the Capitol to offer sacrifice to the pagan gods in thanksgiving for his victory. Instead, he attributed his victory over Maxentius to the intercession of the Christian God and showed his gratitude by favoring the Church and receiving instruction in the Faith under the spiritual guidance of Bishop Hosius of Cordoba (257-358).                                              

Constantine was a complex man, and his actions toward the Church involved more than a simple adherence to Christian doctrine. Despite the false narratives from the Protestant historical attack, Constantine did not “Romanize” the Faith, and he should not be scapegoated as the initiator of the Great Apostasy. Constantine did not embrace “Constantinianism,” nor did the Church change its teachings to appease the emperor. Instead, Constantine highly favored the Church and gave it the “freedom to be itself, to erect its own legal structures, to organize its own system of conflict resolutions, to carry out its own sanctions.” Constantine meddled in ecclesial affairs, but he did so because of who he was—a politician—and not because he desired to remake the Church in his own image.

Did you enjoy this excerpt from Steve Weidenkopf's Canceled? Order your copy today!