Constantine The Great
Overview of Life
Constantine The Great (Flavius Valerius Constantinus) (b272–d337), was a Roman emperor from AD 306 to 337 and the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity. He played a pivotal role in elevating the status of Christianity in Rome, decriminalizing Christian practice and ceasing Christian persecution in a period referred to as the Constantinian shift. This initiated the Christianization of the Roman Empire.
Born in Naissus, in Dardania within Moesia Superior (now Niš, Serbia), Constantine was the son of Flavius Constantius, a Roman army officer of Illyrian origin who had been one of the four rulers of the Tetrarchy. His mother, Helena, was a Greek woman of low birth, probably from Asia Minor in modern Turkey. Later canonized as a saint, she is traditionally credited for the conversion of her son. Constantine began his career under emperors Diocletian and Galerius in the eastern provinces. He fought the Persians before being recalled west in 305 to campaign alongside his father in the province of Britannia. After his father’s death in 306, Constantine was proclaimed as Augustus (emperor) by his army at Eboracum (York, England). He eventually emerged victorious in the civil wars against emperors Maxentius and Licinius to become the sole ruler of the Roman Empire by 324.
Although Constantine lived much of his life as a pagan and later as a catechumen, he began to favor Christianity beginning in 312 after his vision of the cross and subsequent victory over Maxentius at the battle of the Milvian Bridge, finally becoming a Christian and being allegedly baptized by Eusebius of Nicomedia, an Arian bishop. the Catholic Church and the Coptic Orthodox Church reject this and maintain that he was baptized by Pope Sylvester I. He played an influential role in the proclamation of the Edict of Milan in 313, which declared tolerance for Christianity in the Roman Empire. He convoked the First Council of Nicaea in 325 which produced the statement of Christian belief known as the Nicene Creed. The Church of the Holy Sepulchre was built on his orders at the claimed site of Jesus’ tomb in Jerusalem and was deemed the holiest place in all of Christendom. He has historically been referred to as the “First Christian Emperor”. He is venerated as a saint in Eastern Christianity, and he did much to push Christianity towards the mainstream of Roman culture.
The Donation of Constantine
The “Donation Of Constantine” was a 8th century document that alleges that Constantine donated all temporal power of the western roman empire to the pope. although many parts of this document are false there may be some truth to Constantine giving Donations to the Church. the donation was partially based off an earlier 5th century document named Acts of Sylvester (linked below).
Acts of Sylvester tells a very different story then the one reported by Eusebius of Caesarea in his book “Life Of Constantine” (339AD). in Acts, a pagan Constantine contracts leprosy and after refusing to sacrifice children is converted by pope Sylvester and then is baptized. Constantine then gives a large list donations to the church. This is in contrast to the story told by Eusebius which states doesn’t mention some of the donations and alleges that Constantine was baptized in Nicomedia to an unnamed bishop. about 45 years later, saint Jerome alleged that the bishop who baptized Constantine was Eusebius of Nicomedia. so what we have is 2 competing stories that directly contradict one another. most historians have taken Eusebius’s and Jerome’s positions at face value and have rejected the acts of Sylvester as a result of its the incredible exaggerated nature (ex. Sylvester slaying a dragon, St Helena converting to Judaism and then later Christianity).
however I feel it unfair to fully discredit acts as a whole over its fantastical elements. the document was written about 100 years after the death of Constantine and all of the alleged donations present in the acts where in effect by that time (450). as well almost all of the donations can be independently verified.
The Donations provided in Acts Of Sylvester and their probability are provided below:
- Makes persecution of Christians illegal. definitely true; as explained by edict of Milan in 313.
- bans the blaspheming of Christ’s name. somewhat true; Constantine suppressed pagan cults especially within Constantinople.
- Tithing of government funds to support church: Definitely true
- Donation of lands to the church: Definitely true; edict of Milan returned land seized from church. Constantine personally donated other lands including the the Lateran Palace and Vatican Hill.
- Law of Sanctuary: probable; was already a well known custom in Greece and Rome, probable that Constantine granted right to church in some circumstances
- Recognition of Papal supremacy specifically in appointment of bishops. complicated see below
- Pope not seen as subject to the emperor. complicated see below
Donations 1-5 are not that controversial. 6 and 7 on the other hand are very controversial. this brings us too how much should we trust Eusebius as a source. papal primacy had already been firmly established by 339 when Eusebius died.
well start with #7 and then go to #6. the recognition of the pope as an equal or at minimum highly favored is recognized in the primary sources. Eusebius, a primary source, describes Constantine meeting with the bishops at Rome (most likely Pope Miltiades)and sitting at a table with them in a way that implies a level of distinction that does not fit into the master slave dynamic typical of roman society. “The emperor also personally inviting the society of God’s ministers, distinguished them with the highest possible respect and honor, showing them favor in deed and word as persons consecrated to the service of his God. Accordingly, they were admitted to his table, though mean in their attire and outward appearance; yet not so in his estimation, since he thought he saw not the man as seen by the vulgar eye, but the God in him” (Eusebius 339). The exact nature of this relationship is unknown as Eusebius did not elaborate upon this further but the general principal is at least sound. in addition by the second half of the 400s, the two swords theory (pope has complete authority over spiritual matters and emperor retains control of temporal power) was firmly established. in that time pope Gelasius I wrote a letter to the current emperor. He stated that the religious power which he retains is greater than the temporal power the emperor retains. Gelasius was not rebuked by the emperor for this, showing that it was accepted at this time by the emperor. it is not unreasonable to assume that the emperors acceptance of this could have originated 100 years prior with Constantine and was then passed down by oral tradition.
going on to #6, papal primacy was firmly established by the 4th century.
Here is a list of pre-Constantine sources affirming papal primacy.
Pope Clement I
“Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy” (Letter to the Corinthians 1, 58–59, 63 [A.D. 80]).
Hermas
“Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty” (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [A.D. 80]).
Ignatius of Antioch
“Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father” (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]).
“You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force” (ibid., 3:1).
Dionysius of Corinth
“For from the beginning it has been your custom to do good to all the brethren in various ways and to send contributions to all the churches in every city. . . . This custom your blessed Bishop Soter has not only preserved, but is augmenting, by furnishing an abundance of supplies to the saints and by urging with consoling words, as a loving father his children, the brethren who are journeying” (Letter to Pope Soter in Eusebius, Church History 4:23:9 [A.D. 170]).
“Today we have observed the Lord’s holy day, in which we have read your letter [Pope Soter]. Whenever we do read it [in church], we shall be able to profit thereby, as also we do when we read the earlier letter written to us by Clement” (ibid., 4:23:11).
The Martyrs of Lyons
“And when a dissension arose about these said people [the Montanists], the brethren in Gaul once more . . . [sent letters] to the brethren in Asia and Phrygia and, moreover to Eleutherius, who was then [A.D. 175] bishop of the Romans, negotiating for the peace of the churches” (Eusebius, Church History 5:3:4 [A.D. 312])
“And the same martyrs too commended Irenaeus, already at that time [A.D. 175] a presbyter of the community of Lyons, to the said bishop of Rome, rendering abundant testimony to the man, as the following expressions show: ‘Once more and always we pray that you may rejoice in God, Pope Eleutherius. This letter we have charged our brother and companion Irenaeus to convey to you, and we beg you to receive him as zealous for the covenant of Christ’” (ibid., 5:4:1–2).
Irenaeus
“But since it would be too long to enumerate in such a volume as this the succession of all the churches, we shall confound all those who, in whatever manner, whether through self-satisfaction or vainglory, or through blindness and wicked opinion, assemble other than where it is proper, by pointing out here the successions of the bishops of the greatest and most ancient church known to all, founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul, that church which has the tradition and the faith which comes down to us after having been announced to men by the apostles. With that church, because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree, that is, all the faithful in the whole world, and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition” (Against Heresies 3:3:2 [A.D. 189]).
Eusebius the unreliable narrator
However, Eusebius never directly affirms any of these statements in any of his letters. the closest he came was describing a conversation that pope victor had about his power to excommunicate heretics outside of his geographical jurisdiction. In addition it is important to remember that Eusebius’s himself was Arian leaning, being excommunicated in 325 before being exonerated, hesitantly signing the Nicaean creed. in addition he finished his writings about Constantine during the reign of his Arian son, Constantinius II. Constantinius II was know for trying to form the church in his own image, convening several councils in an attempt to affirm semi-arianism. it is not out of the realm of possibility that he had influence over the writings of Eusebius.
all of these give reason to be doubtful of the accuracy of some of Eusebius’s accounts. the Arians other schismatic-adjacent eastern bishops were opposed to the papacy after the delegates sent by pope Sylvester to Nicaea where the driving force behind the creed and the excommunication of Arius. it also doesn’t help that all of the eyewitness accounts of Constantine’s baptism were from Arians.
Proof of recognition of primacy
going back to Constantine’s conversion in 312 we should ask the question: did Constantine meet with Pope Miltiades or his successor Sylvester. the answer is yes, Eusebius infers that he met with Pope Miltiades after the battle of Milvian Bridge although he leaves details to a minimum. it would not have been out of place for Constantine to recognize the popes authority within the church as most of the church, with the exception of the schismatics like the Arians, excepted this.
Constantine’s Baptism
Who baptized Constantine is a much less clear answer. the support of Eusebius of Nicomedia preforming the baptism has large support among historians on account of it being the only source that is readably available. however the source that we draw this from is incredibly biased and pro Arian. the only non Arian source of the time period was Jerome. this gives credence to the story being true as Jerome was born and raised in Italy. however, Jerome also lived in Palestine for large span of time before writing on this topic which restricts its definiteness.
There are several sources with different accounts however. As stated above, acts of Sylvester tells the story of him converting sometime after 324, after he defeated Licinius (Acts of Sylvester states he was sole roman emperor). The problem with this source is that it alleges that Constantine was actively persecuting Christians in 326 (when he returned to Rome from the east) despite the fact he had commissioned St. Peters Basilica in 318 and issued the edict of Milan in 312. this results in it being very unreliable account.
There is also another account that conflicts with Eusebius, which was written in the 360s, much closer to the actual event. in the mid fourth century there are accounts of polytheists stating that Constantine’s baptism was linked with the murder of his son.
In the year 326, Constantine ordered his first son Crispus to be put to death. in the years proceeding this, Crispus was considered by Constantine to be his favorite son. So what happened? The generally excepted theory is that Constantine’s wife at the time (Fausta) accused Crispus of raping her in a plot to ensure her bloodline would inherit the throne. Constantine in a rage ordered Crispus to be killed. Later after realizing his wife’s betrayal, she was also executed. later that year he passed some extreme for the times adultery laws. He also decreed that any historians who recorded the murders would be punished severely.
The pagan accounts state that since the romans found this sin to be unforgivable, Constantine turned to the church and was baptized in 326 to forgive this sin.
I am not unaware [Sozomen writes] that the Hellenes tell how Constantine, after slaying certain members of his closest family circle and conniving at the death of his own son Crispus, repented and enquired of Sopater the philosopher, who was at that time the foremost representative of the succession (btacoXj) of Plotinus, concerning the means by which he might be purified. He [Sopater] replied that such sins admit no purification. The king, dismayed at this ban, happened to encounter some bishops, who promised that he would be cleansed from sin through repentance and baptism. These words found their mark, and he [Constantine] was delighted with them. He admired the doctrine [of the Church], and became a Christian, and led his subjects to the same faith ( http://www.jstor.org/stable/300874 .)
Although some of the events heir in are fabrications on account of this account being an anti Constantine account (romans didn’t believe murdering family was unforgivable, and Constantine had relations with the church), the basic idea may be true. The fact that Constantine had murdered his family was completely omitted by Eusebius of Caesarea as it was would portray the emperor in a negative light. If it was true that Constantine was baptized as a result of this event it would follow that Eusebius would lie and move the baptism date to his death bed to protect the emperors good name as well as give imperial support to his own semi-Arian ideals.
Combining these accounts together, consider this possible progression of events.
In the year of our lord 326, Constantine, having believed in Christ last 14 years (but adverse to baptism for social, political and religious reasons) and presided over the council of Nicaea the previous year; orders the murders his wife and son. St the time, he is in Rome to celebrate the 20th jubilee of his reign and is currently in a deep state of grief. Filled with grief he consults the pope and the other bishops on how he can be escape damnation to the fires of Hell on account of this vile act. The Pope replies saying that the only way ensure his salvation is to have this sin washed away by baptism. then as the accounts above states he was baptized in Rome in the Lateran palace (which he had donated 10 years prior to the Holy See) and became a member of the body of Christ. this baptism is kept quite as to avoid scandal.
Then 10 years later in 337 Constantine dies in Nicomedia, wanting to protect Constantine’s good name and further his own Arian goals (with perhaps pressure from the Arian Constantanius II to portray his father as sympathetic to Arians), Eusebius of Caesarea writes in his “Vivi Constantini” that Constantine was baptized in Nicomedia and imply it was done by Eusebius of Nicomedia.
The year 326 as his date of baptism also has several other pieces of evidence. It is a undisputed fact that this is almost the exact time (325-326) when Constantine removed all pagan imagery from his coins. In addition he seemed to be moving deeper into his faith during this period. He ordered the pilgrimage to Jerusalem to destroy the pagan temples and find the true cross in the year 326, as well as overseeing the construction of his pagan free city: Constantinople.
Conclusion
In conclusion it is likely that the majority of donations presented in Acts Of Sylvester are supported by church history. these include the tithing of government funds, donation of large amounts of land and special recognition of the status of the church. their is good evidence that Constantine recognized the primacy of the pope as well.
The true story of what exactly happened with Constantine’s baptism might be lost to time. However as seen from above there is evidence that their may have been a baptism in Rome in 326 that was stricken from the history books both to support the Arian cause as well as to coverup the murder of his son from the historical record.
Regardless of how and when Constantine’s baptism occurred, it is never the less remarkable. let me present a parallel with both the apostle Paul and Peter. After the establishment of the church at Pentecost, a man named Saul persecuted the Christians. He watched in approval as the Jews stoned Stephen and dragged Christians out of there homes and imprisoned them. Then while traveling to Damascus, he received a vision, converted, became a Christian, and was renamed Paul. Similarly, Constantine oversaw the persecution of the Christians and the burning of scripture under his father Constantius during the Diocletian persecutions. Then after being chosen by God to do his will, he received 2 visions. The first telling him it was his destiny to be the ruler of the whole world and the second telling him to do this under the sign of the cross. He then converted; but just as Peter denied Jesus 3 times, Constantine denied God by violating the Fifth Commandment and murdering his son. But the Lord our God is a merciful God. for as it is written “The Lord our God is merciful and forgiving, even though we have rebelled against him”. for God will not forgive a mans sins just once or twice, but 77 times. In this way, even a man that was responsible for the persecution of Christ’s body and the murder of his own posterity can be saved. for the words of Paul are fitting, “Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy.” “The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.”
To conclude, I shall share this poem.
And so, in this way, Constantine’s baptism shines
For if he, who held the scepter high
Above Rome’s empire, far and wide,
Who burned the churches, tore the scrolls,
And cast the faithful to the lions’ hold
If he can be redeemed, then so can we.
For as the famous hymn confers:
Amazing grace, how sweet the sound,
That saved a wretch like me.