Christ’s Attitude toward the State--The Roman Conception of Religion
as a Department of the State--Roman Civil Law Created and Regulated
All Religious Duties--Effect of the Pagan Doctrine of Religious
Syncretism on Christianity--The Emperor a Demi-God, Entitled to
Worship, and, _ex officio_, the Supreme Authority in Religion--The
Deep Corruption of Roman Morals and Social Life under Pagan State
Religion.
Three fundamental points at which Christianity was corrupted by
heathenism have been examined. It remains to consider another which
was not less fundamental, and has not been less persistent--viz., the
_Union of Christianity with the State_.
Christ’s Attitude Toward the State.
Christ taught the infinite worth of man as an individual. The divine
priesthood of every believer in Christ, and his absolute spiritual
kingship over himself, under God, is a fundamental doctrine of the
Gospel. On such a platform, Christ proclaimed the absolute separation
of Church and State. “My kingdom is not of this world” was the keynote
in His proclamation. His kingdom knew neither Jew nor Greek, Roman
nor Egyptian, bondman nor freeman. Ethnic distinctions and lines of
caste were unknown to the world’s Redeemer. Wherever a heart bowed
in simple faith and loyal obedience, there Christ’s kingdom was set
up. Placed alongside the state-church theory of Rome, the doctrine of
Christ’s kingdom was noonday by the side of midnight. It was a diamond
among pebbles. It was the proclamation of a brotherhood all-embracing
and eternal. This kingdom rendered unto Cæsar the little that was due
him, and demanded the fullest and highest allegiance to the invisible
but not unknown God. It sought only simple protection from the civil
power, and patiently suffered wrong, even unto death, when this was
denied. Such a kingdom found its first adherents among those who were
least entangled in the meshes of the state religions, and whose hearts
opened most loyal to the one God, and His Son, the Christ. These were
naturally the common people, who heard gladly, and entered joyfully
into the heavenly citizenship. Thus the Church of Christ, like Himself,
was born among the lowly, and wholly independent of the state. Such
a spiritual kingdom could not be brought under the control of the
civil power, and that a pagan power, without being corrupted, if not
destroyed.
Roman Conception of Religion.
The reader will be better prepared to understand how Christianity
became corrupted along this line, by considering the genius of the
Roman nation, and its conception of religion. The idea of law as
the embodiment of absolute power pervaded the Roman mind. Men were
important only as citizens. Separate from the state, man was nothing.
“To be a Roman, was greater than a king.” Every personal right, every
interest was subservient to the state. This conception of power was the
source of Roman greatness, prowess, and success. It conscripted the
legions, conquered the world, and made all roads lead to Rome. Previous
to Christianity, all religion was ethnic. To the Roman, religion was
a part of the civil code. It was a system of contracts between men
and the gods, through the civil law. The head of the State was, _ex
officio_, the head of the Department of Religion. There was no place in
heathen theories for the Gospel idea of the Church.
Speaking on this point, Dr. SCHAFF says:
“Of a separation of religion and politics, of the spiritual power
from the temporal, heathen antiquity knew nothing, because it
regarded religion itself only from a natural point of view, and
subjected it to the purposes of the all-ruling state, the highest
known form of human society. The Egyptian kings, as Plutarch
tells us, were at the same time priests, or were received into the
priesthood at their election. In Greece the civil magistrate had
supervision of the priests and sanctuaries. In Rome, after the
time of Numa, this supervision was intrusted to a senator, and
afterward united with the imperial office. All the pagan emperors,
from Augustus to Julian the Apostate, were at the same time supreme
pontiffs (Pontifices Maximi), the heads of the state religion,
emperor-popes. As such they could not only perform all priestly
functions, even to offering sacrifices, when superstition or policy
prompted them to do so, but they also stood at the head of the
highest sacerdotal college (of fifteen or more Pontifices), which in
turn regulated and superintended the three lower classes of priests
(the Epulones, Quindecemviri, and Augures), the temples and altars,
the sacrifices, divinations, feasts and ceremonies, the exposition of
the Sibylline books, the calendar, in short, all public worship, and
in part even the affairs of marriage and inheritance.”[175]
That Christianity must needs become paganized if it became a religion
of the state, is shown further by the following, from an editor of
_Justinian’s Institutes_:
“What was most peculiar in the religion of Rome was its intimate
connection with the civil polity. The heads of religion were not a
priestly caste, but were citizens, in all other respects like their
fellows, except that they were invested with peculiar sacred offices.
The king was at the head of the religious body, and beneath him
were augurs and other functionaries of the ceremonies of religion.
The whole body of the _populus_ had a place in the religious system
of the state. The mere fact of birth in one of the _familiæ_ forming
part of a _gens_ gave admittance to a sacred circle which was closed
to all besides. Those in this circle were surrounded by religious
ceremonies from their cradle to their grave. Every important act
of their life was sanctioned by solemn rites. Every division and
subdivision of the state to which they belonged had its own peculiar
ceremonies. The individual, the family, the _gens_, were all under
the guardianship of their respective tutelar deities. Every locality
with which they were familiar was sacred to some patron god. The
calendar was marked out by the services of religion. The pleasure of
the gods arranged the times of business and leisure; and a constantly
superintending Providence watched over the councils of the state,
and showed, by signs which the wise could understand, approval or
displeasure of all that was undertaken.”[176]
The fundamental difference between New Testament Christianity and the
Roman idea of religion is further shown by the following from Reville
and Tiele:
REVILLE says:
“In Rome religious tradition was an affair of the state, like the
priesthood itself. The senate was by right its guardian. That body
legislated for religion as for everything else; and when the
Greco-Roman paganism persecuted, it did so from essentially political
motives.”[177]
TIELE says:
“Much greater weight was attached by the practical Roman to the
cultus than to the doctrines of religion. This was the one point
of supreme importance; in his view the truly devout man was he
who punctually performed his religious obligations, who was pious
according to law. There was a debt to be paid to the gods, which
must be discharged, but it was settled if the letter of the contract
was fulfilled, and the symbol was given in place of the reality. The
animistic conception that the gods might be employed as instruments
for securing practical advantages, lies at the basis of the whole
Roman cultus. In the earliest times, therefore, it was quite simple,
so far as regards the absence of images or temples, but it was at
the same time exceedingly complicated and burdened with all kinds
of ceremonies and symbolic actions, and the least neglect destroyed
the efficacy of the sacrifice. This necessitated the assistance of
priests acquainted with the whole ritual, not to serve as mediators,
for the approach to the deity was open to all, but to see that pious
action failed in no essential element.... Everything was regulated
with precision by the government, and the fact that the highest of
the priests was always under the control of the state, prevented
the rise of a priestly supremacy, the absence of which in Greece
was due to other causes; but the consequence was that the Roman
religion remained dry and formal and was external rather than
inward. Even the purity (_castitas_) on which great stress was laid,
was only sacerdotal, and was attained by lustration, sprinkling,
and fumigation, and the great value attached to prayer, so that a
single error had to be atoned for as a neglect, had its basis in the
superstitious belief that it possessed a high magic power.”[178]
Religious Syncretism.
The prevailing tendency to religious syncretism in the Roman empire
paved the way for corrupting Christianity by union with the State.
The doctrine of courtesy in religious matters had risen in the Roman
mind, to a theory of religious syncretism, which offered recognition
to other religions outside the Roman. The religions of the Orient
and of Egypt already had a place and protection at Rome. These, like
the citizens of the lands whence they came, were taken in charge by
the laws of the Mistress of the World. By the opening of the fourth
century, Christianity had gained such influence and standing that,
although it had no claims as an ethnic religion, it was too promising a
waif to be longer unnoticed. The great empire was conscious of present
decline and coming decay. New blood was an imperative necessity;
perhaps this new religion, that had given such power of endurance to
its votaries, would furnish the needful help.
This recognition, at first, was not in any true sense toleration, nor
a full recognition of the freedom of conscience. It was rather such
recognition as the foreman gives to the apprentice: “Come in and show
what you can do.” In this recognition Rome adopted no new policy,
neither gave evidence of any genuine faith in Apostolic Christianity.
As late as 321 A.D., not more than one-twentieth part of the people
were Christians; and Constantine, erroneously called “The first
Christian emperor,” did not make an open confession of Christianity,
until he lay on his death-bed in 337 A.D. Christianity was taken under
the protection of the empire, to be cared for and controlled according
to the genius of Roman history and Roman law. The “Christian emperors,”
from Constantine to Gratian (312-383), retained the title of “Pontifex
Maximus.” The visiting of heathen temples for religious purposes, and
the performance of heathen rites in private, were not prohibited by
imperial law until 391-393 A.D. by Theodosius. Nor were these laws then
enforced where the heathen element was in the ascendency. Theodosius
himself was not deemed an enemy of the old religion; he stood in such
favor that the senate enrolled him among the gods, after his death, in
395 A.D.
Instead of developing normally, after the simple New Testament model,
the Roman church was modelled largely after the Roman empire. The union
once begun, political intrigue and religious degeneracy followed in
rapid succession. All civil legislation in matters of religion pushes
the divine authority aside, and substitutes the human. This creates
conscience, if at all, toward the state alone, and so remains on
heathen ground.
Thus, by descending from the high ground of the Apostolic period,
from the immediate control and direction of the Holy Spirit, to the
control of a heathen state-system, and being already weakened by the
false philosophies which had driven out the authority of the Word,
Christianity was turned far away from its true status and character.
The legislation which followed, concerning festivals, ceremonies, and
doctrines, was a medley of paganism and Christianity, truth and error,
widely removed from the Sermon on the Mount, and the epistles of Paul.
The kernel of Papal error, and the fountain which was the source of
the Dark Ages, are both involved in the fundamental perversions of
Apostolic Christianity.
Since the emperor was, _ex officio_, the head of the Department of
Religion, it was comparatively easy to accomplish the amalgamation
of the different systems. Gibbon gives an outline picture of this
tendency as it prevailed during the third century. It was the more
destructive to Christianity because of the degraded character of the
emperors and those who controlled the public life of the empire. The
emperor of whom Gibbon writes below, is described by Schaff as follows:
“The abandoned youth El-Gabal, or Heliogabalus (218-222), who
polluted the throne by the blackest vices and follies, tolerated all
the religions in the hope of at last merging them in his favorite
Syrian worship of the sun, with its abominable excesses. He himself
was a priest of the god of the sun, and thence took his name.
“His far more worthy cousin and successor, Alexander Severus
(222-235), was addicted to a higher kind of religious eclecticism
and syncretism, a pantheistic hero-worship. He placed the busts of
Abraham and Christ in his domestic chapel, with those of Orpheus,
Apollonius of Tyana, and the better Roman emperors, and had the
Gospel rule, ‘As ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to
them,’ engraven on the walls of his palace and on public monuments.
His mother, Julia Mammæa, was a patroness of Origen.”[179]
GIBBON says of this period:
“The sun was worshipped at Emesa, under the name of Elagabalus, and
under the form of a black conical stone, which, as it was universally
believed, had fallen from heaven on that sacred place. To this
protecting deity Antoninus, not without some reason, ascribed his
elevation to the throne. The display of superstitious gratitude
was the only serious business of his reign. The triumph of the god
of Emesa over all the religions of the earth, was the great object
of his zeal and vanity; and the appellation of Elagabalus (for he
presumed, as pontiff and favorite to adopt that sacred name) was
dearer to him than all the titles of Imperial greatness. In a solemn
procession through the streets of Rome, the way was strewed with
gold-dust; the black stone, set in precious gems, was placed on a
chariot, drawn by six milk-white horses, richly caparisoned. The
pious emperor held the reins, and supported by his ministers, moved
slowly backwards, that he might perpetually enjoy the felicity of
the divine presence. In a magnificent temple raised on the Palatine
Mount, the sacrifices of the god Elagabalus were celebrated with
every circumstance of cost and solemnity. The richest wines, the
most extraordinary victims, and the rarest aromatics, were profusely
consumed on his altar. Around the altar, a chorus of Syrian damsels
performed their lascivious dances to the sound of barbarian music,
whilst the gravest personages of the state and army, clothed in long
Phœnician tunics, officiated in the meanest functions, with affected
zeal and secret indignation.
“To this temple, as to the common center of religious worship, the
Imperial fanatic attempted to remove the Ancilia, the Palladium, and
all the sacred pledges of the faith of Numa. A crowd of inferior
deities attended in various stations the majesty of the god of Emesa;
but his court was still imperfect, till a female of distinguished
rank was admitted to his bed. Pallas had been first chosen for his
consort; but, as it was dreaded lest her warlike terrors might
affright the soft delicacy of a Syrian deity, the Moon, adored by
the Africans under the name of Astarte, was deemed a more suitable
companion for the Sun. Her image, with the rich offerings of her
temple as a marriage portion, was transported with solemn pomp from
Carthage to Rome, and the day of these mystic nuptials was a general
festival in the capital and throughout the empire.”[180]
Elagabalus reigned from 218 to 222 A.D. The foregoing facts show
that the empire was practically prostituted, and given over to the
lowest forms of sun-worship during his reign. It was the triumph of
Orientalism in the West. The same devotion to sun-worship appears in
other emperors, toward the close of the third century.
Aurelian reigned from 270 to 276 A.D. Speaking of the magnificent
“Triumph” of this emperor in 274 A.D., Gibbon says:
“So long and so various was the pomp of Aurelian’s triumph, that,
although it opened with the dawn of day, the slow majesty of the
procession ascended not the Capitol before the ninth hour; and it was
already dark when the emperor returned to the palace. The festival
was protracted by theatrical representations, the games of the
circus, the hunting of wild beasts, combats of gladiators, and naval
engagements. Liberal donatives were distributed to the army, and
people, and several institutions agreeable or beneficial to the city,
contributed to perpetuate the glory of Aurelian.
“A considerable portion of his oriental spoils was consecrated to
the gods of Rome; the Capitol, and every other temple, glittered
with the offerings of his ostentatious piety; and the temple of the
Sun alone received above fifteen thousand pounds of gold. This last
was a magnificent structure, erected by the emperor on the side of
the Quirinal hill, and dedicated, soon after the triumph, to that
deity whom Aurelian adored as the parent of his life and fortunes.
His mother had been an inferior priestess in a chapel of the Sun;
a peculiar devotion to the god of Light was a sentiment which the
fortunate peasant imbibed in his infancy; and every step of his
elevation, every victory of his reign, fortified superstition by
gratitude.”[181]
Speaking of Diocletian, who reigned from 284 to 305, MILMAN says:
“Diocletian himself, though he paid so much deference to the older
faith as to assume the title of Jovius, as belonging to the Lord of
the world, yet, on his accession, when he would exculpate himself
from all concern in the murder of his predecessor Numerian, appealed
in the face of the army to the all-seeing deity of the sun. It is the
oracle of Apollo of Miletus, consulted by the hesitating emperor,
which is to decide the fate of Christianity. The metaphorical
language of Christianity had unconsciously lent strength to this new
adversary; and, in adoring the visible orb, some, no doubt, supposed
that they were not departing far from the worship of the ‘Sun of
Righteousness.’”
In a foot-note, Milman quotes:
“Hermogenes, one of the older heresiarchs, applied the text, ‘He
has placed his tabernacle in the sun,’ to Christ, and asserted that
Christ had put off his body in the sun.”[182]
Dr. GEIKIE touches the point, and shows in a few words how Christianity
yielded to paganism and its corrupting results; he says:
“Helios, the sun, was the great object of worship, and so deep-rooted
was this idolatry that the early Christian missionaries knew no other
way of overthrowing it than by changing it into the name of Elias,
and turning the temples into churches dedicated to him.”[183]
Two important factors touching the union of Christianity and the state
are now before the reader.
1. Under the Roman empire all recognized religions were controlled by
the civil law. The persecution of Christians was based upon the idea
that their worship was illegal; or rather that their refusal to worship
the national gods, according to the legal _cultus_, was an offence
against the commonwealth.
2. Sun-worship in its higher and lower forms was the prevailing and
popular cult at Rome in the third and fourth centuries of Christian
history. The emperors were devotees of this cult. It was therefore
a foregone necessity that when Christianity grew strong enough to be
entitled to recognition rather than persecution, it should be adopted
by the state, and further commingled with the prevailing sun-worship.
The next chapter will show how this was accomplished.
FOOTNOTES:
[175] _Church History_, vol. iii., pp. 131, 132, New York, 1884.
[176] _The Institutes of Justinian_, by Thomas Collett Sandars, Oxford,
Eng., Introduction, p. 4, Chicago, 1876.
[177] _Prolegomena of the History of Religions_, by Albert Reville,
D.D., p. 169, London, 1884.
[178] _Outlines of the History of Religions_, C. P. Tiele, Boston,
1877, pp. 237, 238.
[179] Schaff, _History of the Christian Church_, vol. ii., pp. 58, 59.
[180] _Decline_, etc., vol. i., pp. 170, 171, New York, 1883.
[181] _Ibid._, vol. i., p. 361.
[182] _Hist. Christianity_, book ii., chap. ix.
[183] _Life and Words of Christ_, vol. i., pp. 53, 54. Appleton & Co.,
1883.