AS shown last week, there had come as early as the latter part of the third century of the Christian era, a falling away from the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, so that the way was fully prepared for the setting up of the Papacy; but the perfect development of that power was not yet complete.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.1

In order to its perfect development the Papacy must have the aid of the State. Before the Bishop of Rome could be exalted to the place he was to occupy and be recognised by all the world as the head of the Church, other bishops must be forced into submission to him by the strong arm of civil power, and the forces were at work that were to accomplish this.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.2

One very important factor in the setting up of the Papacy was the Emperor Constantine. Coming to the throne, Constantine found Christianity a growing religious power in the empire, and after a time he conceived the idea of turning this new religion which seemed to be displacing paganism, to his own account; likewise the bishops, as we have seen, were grasping for civil power. As Draper says: “It was the aim of Constantine to make theology a branch of politics; it was the aim of the bishops to make politics a branch of theology.” Both were in a measure successful.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.3

Of the state of the church at that time, Eusebius bears this testimony:—PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.4

When by reason of excessive liberty we sunk into negligence and sloth, one envying and reviling another in different ways, and we were almost, as it were, on the point of taking up arms against each other, and were assailing each other with words as with darts and spears, prelates inveighing against prelates, and people rising up against people, and hypocrisy and dissimulation had arisen to the greatest height of malignity, then the Divine judgment, which usually proceeds with a lenient hand, whilst the multitudes were yet crowding into the church, with gentle and mild visitations began to afflict its episcopacy, the persecution having begun with those brethren that were in the army. But as if destitute of all sensibility, we were not prompt in measures to appease and propitiate the Deity; some, indeed, like atheists, regarding our situations as unheeded and unobserved by a providence, we added one wickedness and misery to another. But some that appeared to be our pastors, deserting the law of piety, were inflamed against each other with mutual strifes, only accumulating quarrels and threats, rivalship, hostility, and hatred to each other, only anxious to assert the government as a kind of sovereignty for themselves.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.5

The pagan persecution had caused all these divisions and disputes to be laid aside. Every other interest was forgotten in the one all-absorbing question of the rights of conscience against pagan despotism. Thus there was created at least an outward unity among all the sects of whatever name professing the Christian religion in any form. Thus was molded a compact power which permeated every part of the empire, and which was at the same time estranged from every material interest of the empire as it then stood. Here was power, which if it could be secured and used, would assure success to him who would gain it, as certainly as he could make the alliance. This condition of affairs was clearly discerned at the time. Constantine “understood the signs of the times and acted accordingly.”PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.6

Draper says (“Intellectual Development of Europe”):—PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.7

To Constantine, who had fled from the treacherous custody of Galerius, it naturally occurred that if he should ally himself to the Christian party, conspicuous advantages must forthwith accrue to him. It would give him in every corner of the empire men and women ready to encounter fire and sword; it would give him partisans not only animated by the traditions of their fathers, but—for human nature will even in the religious assert itself—demanding retribution for the horrible barbarities and injustice that had been inflicted on themselves; it would give him, and this was the most important of all, unwavering adherents in every legion in the army. He took his course. The events of war crowned him with success. He could not be otherwise than outwardly true to those who had given him power, and who continued to maintain him on the throne.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.8

Constantine was not the only one who saw this opportunity, but he being a accomplished politician, succeeded, while others failed. In addition to the advantages which offered themselves in this asserted unity of the churches, there was a movement among the bishops, which made it an additional incentive to Constantine to form the alliance which he did with the church. Although it is true that all the differences and disputes and strifes among the bishops and sects had been forgotten in the supreme conflict between paganism and freedom of thought, there is one thing mentioned by Eusebius that still remained. That was the ambition of the bishops “to assert the government as a kind of sovereignty for themselves.” Nor was it alone government in the church which they were anxious to assert; butPTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.9

GOVERNMENT IN THE STATE

as well, to be used in the interests of the church. For, as Neander testifies, “There had in fact arisen in the church ... a false theocratical theory, originating, not in the essence of the Gospel, but in the confusion of the religious constitutions of the Old and New Testaments.”PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.10

This theocratical theory of the bishops is the key to the whole history of Constantine and the church of his time, and through all the dreary period that followed. It led the bishops into the wildest extravagance in their worship of the imperial influence, and coincided precisely with Constantine’s idea of an absolute monarchy.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.11

The idea of the theocracy that the bishops hoped to establish appears more clearly and fully in Eusebius’s “Life of Constantine” than in any other one production of the time. The Church was a second Israel in Egyptian bondage. Maxentius, who was emperor in Italy, and one of the four rulers in the whole Roman Empire, each scheming for supreme control, was a second Pharaoh; Constantine, who overthrew him, was a second Moses. As the original Moses had grown up in the palace of the Pharaohs, so likewise this new Moses had grown up in the very society of the new Pharaohs.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.12

When Constantine marched against Maxentius, it was the new Moses on his way to deliver Israel. When the army of Maxentius was defeated on the banks of the Tiber, and multitudes were drowned in the river, it was the Red Sea swallowing up the hosts of Pharaoh. When Maxentius was crowded off the bridge and by the weight of his armor sank instantly to the bottom of the river, it was the new Pharaoh and “the horse and his rider” being thrown into the sea and sinking to the bottom like a stone.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 115.13

Then was Israel delivered, and a song of deliverance was sung by the new Israel as by the original Israel at their deliverance. In describing this, Eusebius uses these words:—PTUK February 20, 1896, page 116.1

“Let us sin unto the Lord, for He has been glorified exceedingly; the horse and rider has He thrown into the sea. He is become my helper and my shield unto salvation.” And again, “Who is like to thee, O Lord, among the gods? who is like thee, glorious in holiness, marvelous in praises, doing wonders?”PTUK February 20, 1896, page 116.2

Such adulation was not without response on the part of Constantine. He united himself closely with the bishops, of whom Eusebius was but one, and in his turn flattered them. A. T. JONES.PTUK February 20, 1896, page 116.3

February 13, 1896

February 27, 1896