Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Constantine and the Christian Church...

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Praying the Rosary is a grand example of premoting Mary above Jesus. According to the teaching of Fatima, we are all supposed to place our full trust in Mary by praying the Rosary. There is absolutly NO salvation found in Mary and you should know that by now.

    Pope John Paul 2nd and Benedict XVI have Both publically premoted this Prayer in recent times, this is what I call nonsensical and blasphemous.
    You're right, I never thought about it like that... :)


  • Options
    #33
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    kelly1 wrote: »
    You're right, I never thought about it like that... :)
    I was expecting you to go for my juggler! :eek:


  • Options
    #34
    SubjectSean
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭SubjectSean


    Scofflaw wrote: »

    Which is to say that soldiers remained excommunicate, surely?

    It certainly sounds that way, I had formed the impression long ago, and from where now I know not, that Christian soldiers were first allowed into the ranks of the Roman army during Constantines reign.
    Scofflaw wrote: »

    Hmm. The divinity of Jesus, unless that means something other than His eternal coexistence with God, predates the Council, who decided only on the form it took.?

    It predates it in the orthodox church but there were sects that were not part of the orthodox following to whom Jesus was just a man AFAIK
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    It is true that Nicaea broadly approved the Eusebian compromise between Christianity and Roman civil society, and that Constantine started the process of absorbing the episcopate into the ranks of Roman magistracy. However, much that seems to be ascribed to Constantine and Nicaea appears bit by bit over the following couple of centuries - and the strand of Christian thought that rejected accommodation with the world was represented by the eremitic and then monastic traditions from very early on.

    OK so in that case it would be fairer to say that Constantine and Nicea were the start of the process and that perhaps the 'purity' (for want of a better word) of earlier Christianity lived on with the monks and hermits.
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    As, in general, to the point behind this - what Protestant tradition, other than the Anabaptists, does not show such accommodations? Do we lack for Protestant soldiers, administrators, or dogmatists?

    I suppose maybe the Quaker tradition but other than themselves and the Anabaptists most of the Christian traditions are very far from the roots they claim. Risibly far IMO, from what little I can reliably glean I imagine Yeshua ben Miriam would shake his head some at the carry on


  • Options
    #35
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    I was expecting you to go for my juggler! :eek:
    Maybe you didn't realize I was joking. I'm not really all that bothered to refute what you said. As far as you are concerned most of us are going to Hell except you and a few others. You really need to stop judging people for your own sake. "Judge not lest ye be judged"!


  • Options
    #36
    condra
    Registered Users Posts: 3,849 ✭✭✭condra


    kelly1 wrote: »
    You really need to stop judging people for your own sake. "Judge not lest ye be judged"!
    Utter hypocrisy coming from you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Run_to_da_hills wrote:
    I was expecting you to go for my juggler!
    Maybe you didn't realize I was joking. I'm not really all that bothered to refute what you said. As far as you are concerned most of us are going to Hell except you and a few others. You really need to stop judging people for your own sake. "Judge not lest ye be judged"!

    Maybe even "juggle not, lest ye be judged"? You should have gone for his jugular.

    amused,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #38
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    womoma wrote: »
    Utter hypocrisy coming from you.
    How so? I never told anyone that they're going to Hell, did I?


  • Options
    #39
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    SubjectSean wrote: »
    It certainly sounds that way, I had formed the impression long ago, and from where now I know not, that Christian soldiers were first allowed into the ranks of the Roman army during Constantines reign.
    Just to confirm this, Canon 12 of the Council of Nicea states this:
    As many as were called by grace, and displayed the first zeal, having cast aside their military girdles, but afterwards returned, like dogs, to their own vomit, (so that some spent money and by means of gifts regained their military stations);

    God bless,
    Noel.


  • Options
    #40
    SubjectSean
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭SubjectSean


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Sean, Jesus IS the Way (and the Truth adn the Life). Apart from Jesus there is no true way.

    I want to avoid getting into metaphysics here if I can because at the end of the day workings unseen are just that and it's very hard for me to have the right words in a small space. If you say there is no true way apart from your graeco-Christian divine logos then I will kind of argree with you.
    kelly1 wrote: »
    In the days when I used to read the works of Krishnamurti and Yogananda etc, I used to believe that all religions eventually lead to God. I guarantee you that all religions are NOT saying the same things (not even if they are in different ways).

    Noel I said that all religions have differences but that whatever differences there are between them come from the hearts and hands of men. They all say love God and love one-another, do good acts, protect the weak, the list goes on but I am lazy
    kelly1 wrote: »
    The philosophy or reincarnation says that we can achieve our ultimate purpose by self effort. It teaches that we can break free of the cycle of samsara and reach nirvana/samadhi by progressing spiritually in successive lives by destroying karma.

    Christianity on the other hand teaches that judgment comes after death and that sin prevents our entry into Heaven and that Christ came to save us from damnation by suffering and dying on the Cross thereby paying the price of our sins in order to satisfy divine justice.)

    Here is exactly what I mean. I personally find that both of these notions are lacking in credulity and to me look very much like they have come from the hands of men; yet they both cause those who believe in them to act in a manner that is objectively the same and is, hopefully, for the greater good.

    kelly1 wrote: »
    As I've said many times before, different religions teach different things and they can't all be correct.

    As I keep saying, what is different between them is man made, hence the apparent error.
    kelly1 wrote: »
    Out of curiosity, what are the beliefs of "The Way" and who is its founder?

    Do they have a website?

    Jesus revealed the Way. In Acts the community in Jerusalem are called followers of the Way, they were poor and they helped the poor. There isn't a website I'm afraid and following the Way is the prescribed action for ushering in the Kingdom rather than any set of collected dogmas.


  • Options
    #41
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    SubjectSean wrote: »
    Here is exactly what I mean. I personally find that both of these notions [reincarnation and redemption] are lacking in credulity and to me look very much like they have come from the hands of men; yet they both cause those who believe in them to act in a manner that is objectively the same and is, hopefully, for the greater good.
    Ok, so what do you believe is the truth? Where do we go when we die and how do we get there? If you think reincarnation and redemption are human inventions, what is the alternative?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    SubjectSean
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭SubjectSean


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Ok, so what do you believe is the truth? Where do we go when we die and how do we get there? If you think reincarnation and redemption are human inventions, what is the alternative?

    The alternative Noel is what we cannot imagine, it will be that :) We are just sentient, barely down from the trees, our minds are not capable of knowing. Up until now we have had our stories but now it is time to put away childish things and see they are stories although not without value. I feel I can trust in God to do the right thing without a story.


  • Options
    #43
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    SubjectSean wrote: »
    The alternative Noel is what we cannot imagine, it will be that :) We are just sentient, barely down from the trees, our minds are not capable of knowing. Up until now we have had our stories but now it is time to put away childish things and see they are stories although not without value. I feel I can trust in God to do the right thing without a story.
    Our minds are not capable of understanding God but all we need to know about God has been revealed by Jesus.

    Anyway, we're going way off track. Has anyone got any decent proof that the Church was corrupted by Constantine? Any proper historical evidence? Or are people just happy to believe hear-say?


  • Options
    #44
    SubjectSean
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭SubjectSean


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Our minds are not capable of understanding God but all we need to know about God has been revealed by Jesus.

    But Noel your religion relies on things that have been revealed by Paul and a host of Bishops. Jesus was totally silent on many of the doctrines you espouse. You cannot say they have been revealed by Jesus because that is not true.
    kelly1 wrote: »
    Anyway, we're going way off track. Has anyone got any decent proof that the Church was corrupted by Constantine? Any proper historical evidence? Or are people just happy to believe hear-say?

    The link I gave you to is a respected 'Internet Resource for Studying the Early Church' and is supported by a host of bible colleges and theology institutes. The article itself is from Clemens Petersen, "CONSTANTINE THE GREAT AND HIS SONS," Philip Schaff, ed., A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, 3rd edn., Vol. 1. Toronto, New York & London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1984. pp.546-547. It cites upwards of 30 references both primary and secondary.

    This is not here-say IMO


  • Options
    #45
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    SubjectSean wrote: »
    The link I gave you to is a respected 'Internet Resource for Studying the Early Church' and is supported by a host of bible colleges and theology institutes. The article itself is from Clemens Petersen, "CONSTANTINE THE GREAT AND HIS SONS," Philip Schaff, ed., A Religious Encyclopaedia or Dictionary of Biblical, Historical, Doctrinal, and Practical Theology, 3rd edn., Vol. 1. Toronto, New York & London: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1984. pp.546-547. It cites upwards of 30 references both primary and secondary.

    This is not here-say IMO
    Thanks for the info Sean.

    I read the article at http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/constantine.php and I don't see anything in it about Constantine altering or paganising Christianity and the doctrines taught by the 318 bishops.

    My understand is that Constantine legalized Christianity and thereby ended the Roman persecution of Christians. I don't see any evidence that he altered Christian doctrines. He did of course assist the bishops in stamping out the Arian heresy which arose at the time. There is nothing unusual about the Church fighting against heresy.

    God bless,
    Noel.


  • Options
    #46
    SubjectSean
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭SubjectSean


    kelly1 wrote: »

    I read the article at http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/constantine.php and I don't see anything in it about Constantine altering or paganising Christianity and the doctrines taught by the 318 bishops.

    This is true. However it does show quite admirably that he was a famously unpleasant man and not at all the type to chum around with as various Church Bishops did. I am doing more reading in regard to the paganising of Christianity, Mr Scofflaw kindly pointed out that Constantine is perhaps unfairly blamed for a process he merely started. I shall get back to you on this as soon as I am able to better discern the exact origins of the pagan doctrines and iconography that have become evident in post Nicean Christianity.


    kelly1 wrote: »
    My understand is that Constantine legalized Christianity and thereby ended the Roman persecution of Christians. I don't see any evidence that he altered Christian doctrines. He did of course assist the bishops in stamping out the Arian heresy which arose at the time.


    There is nothing unusual about the Church fighting against heresy.


    This is really one of my key points Noel and I'm not sure you are grasping and it's probably because I'm not putting it across very well. Let me try this way. Before Nicea there were many Christian camps. In Acts we can see the start of a split into the "Judiasing" and "Pauline" camps. By the time things had moved along as far as Nicea there were at least 40 different interpretations of the Gospel existing, the followers of each denouncing the others as heretics. Some used the letters and Gospels of what is now called apocrypha for their scripture, others used various versions of the Gospels and letters in the NT. What I do not understand Noel is how you can be sure that the group who were most faithful to the teachings of Jesus were actually the group who Constantine gathered in Nicea basically in order to decide on who were the heretics. It seems natural to assume that Constantine will have called the largest cohesive group of followers possible. However it may very well be that the most faithful followers of Jesus were nowhere near Nicea. To the first followers of Jesus, Rome was 'Babylon', Roman Emporers false gods. I am 100% sure that the first followers of Jesus would not have sat down at the behest of the Roman Empire. Clearly the philosophy of those who did so is not the same. Personally I could never trust such men I think they are like Sadducees and Pharisees :)


  • Options
    #47
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    I am coming late to this thread, but I believe Constantine damaged the witness and vitality of the Christian Church that is only now being repaired by the implosion of Christendom (by that I mean a Church/state alliance that claims temporal power, wealth and political power for the Church).

    I don't believe he changed the doctrine of the Church - but he did push the Church leaders into codifying and writing down what was already assumed and understood by most Christians.

    He also introduced pagan practices into the Church (celebrating Saturnalia etc) and paved the way for the Church to become a repressive and persecuting institution that tried to use force and coercion instead of love and service to produce converts.


  • Options
    #48
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    PDN wrote: »
    He also introduced pagan practices into the Church (celebrating Saturnalia etc) and paved the way for the Church to become a repressive and persecuting institution that tried to use force and coercion instead of love and service to produce converts.
    Do you mean to say that the Church began some kind of pagan worship or did they just supplant pagan practices? And when you refer to force and coercion, can you elaborate on this please?


  • Options
    #49
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Do you mean to say that the Church began some kind of pagan worship or did they just supplant pagan practices? And when you refer to force and coercion, can you elaborate on this please?

    The Church basically adopted many pagan practices and tacked Christian names onto them. The most obvious examples were the retention of the pagan high priest title of Pontifex Maximus, celebrating Christ's birth on the day devoted to to the sun God (25th December), and the deepening of the gulf between laity and clergy so as to make clergy a class apart, complete with restrictions on marrying.

    Much more serious, in my view, was Constantine's transformation of Christianity into Christendom. This is not, BTW, a Protestant/Catholic thing. Luther and the Reformation did not undo the damage created by Constantine - they simply tried to supplant Catholic Christendom with Protestant Christendom, which was often even more vicious and unChristian.

    Here is a summary of how Christendom perverted Christianity:
    1. The adoption of Christianity as the official religion of a political power.
    2. The assumption that all citizens (except Jews) were Christians by birth.
    3. The removal of freedom of religion.
    4. The definition of 'orthodoxy' as something everyone believed determined by powerful church leaders with State support.
    5. Imposition of Christian morality on the entire society (more often based on the Old Testament than the New Testament).
    6. Infant baptism as an obligatory incorporation into Christian society.
    7. Legal sanctions to punish heresy, immorality and schism.
    8. The division of clergy and laity with laity reduced to a passive role.
    9. Sunday as a holiday with church attendance a legal obligation.
    10. Obligatory tithes (rather than voluntary contributions) to finance the Church.
    11. The abandonment of pacifism, resulting in waging wars against other parts of the world (heathendom) by Christendom.
    12. Use of political and military force to impose Christianity, regardless of personal conviction. (St Augustine was the main villain in providing theological justification for this barbaric attitude).


  • Options
    #50
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    PDN wrote: »
    The Church basically adopted many pagan practices and tacked Christian names onto them. The most obvious examples were the retention of the pagan high priest title of Pontifex Maximus, celebrating Christ's birth on the day devoted to to the sun God (25th December), and the deepening of the gulf between laity and clergy so as to make clergy a class apart, complete with restrictions on marrying.
    My question is was the parctice of the Christian religion paganized by Constantine even if the doctrines weren't?
    PDN wrote: »
    Here is a summary of how Christendom perverted Christianity:
    1. The adoption of Christianity as the official religion of a political power.
    2. The assumption that all citizens (except Jews) were Christians by birth.
    3. The removal of freedom of religion.
    4. The definition of 'orthodoxy' as something everyone believed determined by powerful church leaders with State support.
    5. Imposition of Christian morality on the entire society (more often based on the Old Testament than the New Testament).
    6. Infant baptism as an obligatory incorporation into Christian society.
    7. Legal sanctions to punish heresy, immorality and schism.
    8. The division of clergy and laity with laity reduced to a passive role.
    9. Sunday as a holiday with church attendance a legal obligation.
    10. Obligatory tithes (rather than voluntary contributions) to finance the Church.
    11. The abandonment of pacifism, resulting in waging wars against other parts of the world (heathendom) by Christendom.
    12. Use of political and military force to impose Christianity, regardless of personal conviction. (St Augustine was the main villain in providing theological justification for this barbaric attitude).
    Were these practices adopted by the bishops or were they imposed, do you thing?

    BTW, do you have a source for these 12 points? It's not that I doubt you, my knowledge of history was never all that good.

    Just on the freedom of religion question, what happened to those who weren't Christian and which era are you referring to? Around 325AD? And how was heresy etc punished?

    Thanks,
    Noel.


  • Options
    #51
    hairyheretic
    Registered Users Posts: 1,257 ✭✭✭hairyheretic


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Just on the freedom of religion question, what happened to those who weren't Christian and which era are you referring to? Around 325AD?

    Here's one example, from the 15th century, concerning the expulsion of the Jews from Spain.

    http://www.mcs.drexel.edu/~gbrandal/Illum_html/Secret.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marrano

    There is also the economic and other pressure exerted to force Iceland to become officially Christian (Section 4 specifically) in the 11th century

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Iceland

    And some of the other violence in Scandinavia in general around the same period

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianization_of_Scandinavia

    I know Wikipedia isn't exactly the best source to take information from, but it's the best I can get at short notice. I have come across the same information in assorted other spots, on and offline both.
    kelly1 wrote: »
    And how was heresy etc punished?

    Harshly.

    Have a search for the Cathar Heresy in France, around the 1300s or so. If you've ever come across the phrase "Kill them all, God will know his own" or some variant on that, I believe it was attributed to this period. The story I read was that a young knight had asked an Inquisitor how they would tell the cathars from the catholics in the towns bordering the region the cathars lived in. That was the response he received.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    kelly1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,026 ✭✭✭kelly1


    Hello HairyH, you're talking about dates that are about 1000 years after Constantine.

    I'm interested really in what happened around the time of Constantine or shortly after his death.


  • Options
    #53
    hairyheretic
    Registered Users Posts: 1,257 ✭✭✭hairyheretic


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Hello HairyH, you're talking about dates that are about 1000 years after Constantine.

    I'm interested really in what happened around the time of Constantine or shortly after his death.

    Ah, ok. I didn't realise it was just that time period you were looking for.

    I do recall seeing some other stuff on wikipedia that was referencing then,

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianisation

    Section 3.2 will give you some info. Given its not a period I'm overly familiar with, I can't comment on its accuracy.


  • Options
    #54
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    hairyheretic wrote:
    There is also the economic and other pressure exerted to force Iceland to become officially Christian (Section 4 specifically) in the 11th century
    Thanks for the link -- I hadn't come across this piece of christian history before. It's the kind of cultural imperialism that I find to be as arrogant as it is saddening.


  • Options
    #55
    SubjectSean
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭SubjectSean


    kelly1 wrote: »
    Hello HairyH, you're talking about dates that are about 1000 years after Constantine.

    I'm interested really in what happened around the time of Constantine or shortly after his death.

    Noel I believe the Church didn't use the state to murder its first 'heretics' until around 380CE. I've been looking all over for a reference but I can't find it yet or even remember the nature of the heresy. If I get it I'll edit this post.

    [EDIT] Here's the poor victims, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priscillian, I don't think Jesus would have cut their heads off. (I suppose when you're free from the Law though you can do as ever you please so long as you have Faith)


  • Options
    #56
    SubjectSean
    Registered Users Posts: 458 ✭✭SubjectSean


    hairyheretic wrote: »

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianisation

    Interesting link, I didn't know that the labarum had a pre-Christian history. Is that symbol Pagan enough for you Noel? :)


Advertisement