How did the conversion of Constintine change the dynamics of the Church? Or did it change it any any way, positive or negative?
John Howard Yoder saw it like this:
Prior to Constintine it took exceptional courage to be a Christian. After Constintine it took exceptional courage to be a Pagan.
Would this shift have any negative effects on the message of the kingdom of heaven and the teachings of Christ?
Any thoughts?
9 comments:
This is my first time posting, though I've been reading for awhile.This is a very interesing topic to me, and one I have read some interesting stuff about. Look at the story of the beginning of the church, how it grew and progressed despite impossible odds. If had continued to spread and have the effect it did at the same rate as it had started, the entire world would have been changed in a few hundred years, but it seem that something did go seriously awry when Christianity was embraced by Constantine and the Roman Empire.
How I would describe it is that it became institutionalized. The church had achieved "success" in becoming a part of the most influential power of the time. That "success" really brought compromise of all sorts and changes that took it away from what it had been doing since it's beginning. Many of the practices and forms that the church has today come from that time and originate in pagan or cultural practices and went against its God-given design.
It also seems that the church has always been the healthiest when it faces persecution and a certain amount of hardship, which I think drives us to dependence on God alone. Look at the warnings to the churches in Revelation. Laodicea (I think that's the one) was warned because it was rich and comfortable materially but poor and naked spiritually. I'm also sure that the only church that did not recieve a warning was the one that was suffering in poverty and persecution yet was steadfast in it's faithfullness. Also look at the many warnings Israel was given as the Lord prospered them as a nation, that there was a spiritual danger to prosperity. Those warnings were not heeded and Israel strayed far from Him. The change that occured with Constantine brought prosperity to the church.
Theres a book called "The Open Church" and I will have to post the authors name later, but there is a chapter where he writes about this along with Gene Edwards, who has written extensively about the church.
I'd like to hear more about this from others, especially any historical information.
It does seem that we are far from living as a body under the headship of Christ as we are designed to.
i think you are referring to the book by james rutz.
artmish, thank you for chimming in here. You make some very good points. One of the things that has just been disaterous is the followers of Christ taking up power, Political and military. When we lost the humble, sacrificial servant call, upon all who would follow the Church losts her way. Jesus is The Way and the gospels show us what that looks like.
Maybe someone will add some history to this for us?
Here is an article that might be interesting to some of you.
http://www.christusvictorministries.org/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=44&Itemid=99999999
What are your thoughts on this. This is taken from an article on Theologian Stanely Hauerwas.
If there is a single ambition running through Hauerwas's books, essays, sermons, and occasional writings, it is this: to undo the Constantinian synthesis between the church and the world. The church must reclaim the proclamation that scandalized the ancient world, that the "people who bear the cross," not the sword, are "working with the grain of the universe." (The phrase is borrowed from the Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder.) Hauerwas wants to free the American church from its bondage to idolatrous self-constructions--otherwise known as civil religion--and restore to its mission the countercultural practices of forgiveness and reconciliation, hospitality to strangers, and nonviolence, as well as nonresistance to death and suffering brought on by forces of evil.
Stanley is a bit strange but his writings do get you thinking about a lot of important things.
this historical perspective focuses more on luther, calvin and the enlightenment, but i'll just put this out here for your consideration.
http://perichoresisaudio.homestead.com/index.html
Yes James Rutz is the author, I hoped to skim through and pull out a couple quotes but didn't get to it. I will try to go to the two links that are posted.
I just checked out the article that Kent posted. It's very good!
I've come at this mostly from the angle of how we DO church. What is the form that it has? What does it look like? This article addresses the question of government and the role of the church in wielding the sword which is a huge part of the equation in the whole Constantine subject since the church had an unprecedented position of having that power. Reading and talking with you, Kent about these topics of social justice etc. has been very thought provoking . . .
artmish, thanks for your thoughts here. It sounds like you have thought some about this and it will be fun talking more about it when I see you next. Maybe tomorrow night? I will call you.
Post a Comment