Modern Istanbul - Sultan Ahmet mosque is in the foreground and the Sancta Sophia behind.
Due to the threats faced to
Rome, Constantine moved the capital of the Roman empire to a tiny city
on the Bosphorus, then only with 50 000 residents and renamed it after
himself: Constantinople. He set about reuniting an empire fragmented
into different races, political groups and religions, threatened by
civil war and ravaged by attack from outside.
The populace was divided among different competing
religious groups. Many clung to traditional Greek and Roman mythology
with gods like Zeus and his son Dionysus. Others, including the emperor
himself followed Mithras. These gods are quite fascinating in their
similarity to Christianity and both had mystery cults with special
initiation.
If you consider that Constantine was a kind, mild
Christian man you are far from the mark, he was a brutal, autocratic
ruler. He had his son killed and his wife smothered in a bathhouse for
reasons that remain unclear, it is likely that they were plotting
against him, and there are suggestions of a sexual relationship between
them.
As to his founding of the church, whilst it's head, he was also the
chief priest of Mithraism a fascinating religion that predated
Christianity but has clear parallels in it's philosophy. Mithras or
Mithra was the eastern name for Sol Invictus, (the invincible sun god),
the Latin name for the same deity. Constantine also bore the title of
Pontiflex Maximus as he served as high priest of Zeus/Apollo and the
gods of the Greco Roman Parthenon. This indicates he was, to say the
least, hedging his bets. Why ? To protect his immortal soul, or to
please the supporters of other religions ?
The original Sancta Sophia was probably on the site of this later church.
Perhaps the most important step
for the church was the Council of Nicaea, there in 325 in the Church of
the Holy Wisdom, Constantine mandated the leaders of the church to
decide on one doctrine and they produced a 'first draft' so to speak of
the Nicene creed, which was later to be expanded to what we have today.
He even presided over the council himself. The bishops also condemned
the Arian Doctrine, which suggested that Jesus was not wholly God and
set the date for Easter.
The gospels we use today were also being selected at
this time: others were dismissed and destroyed. Why these Gospels were
selected is a matter of debate, Eusebius, the Bishop of Caesarea, in
his 'History of the Church' goes to some length in justifying their
selection, thought perhaps we should treat him with some caution, as he
was a close friend and supporter of Constantine.
According to Eusebius in his
Life of Constantine, around 323 he presented the emperor with 50
beautifully scribed copies of his approved Gospels. It is said that
Constantine and is mother favoured the Arian doctrine, though for the
sake of unity accepted the Nicene approved creed.
Of around 1800 bishops, only 300 attended and two
were excommunicated for failing to accept its rulings. The bishop of
Rome did not attend as Constantine refused to ceremonially prostrate
himself before the bishop during his coronation. How democratic was
such a Council ?
In 1945 the Nag Hammadi gospels were discovered in
Egypt and represent some of the texts expunged so effectively by
Constantine. Gospels appertaining to have been written by for example,
Thomas the brother of Jesus, were revealed for the first time in 1600
years and give a different perspective on the early church. It is not
the purpose of the author to labour points about these documents, as
there are ample books and web sites on the topic already.
Christianity was declared the official religion of
the Roman Empire, yet Constantine persisted to have coins minted
bearing the inscription Sol Deus Invictus - the invincible sun god.
Tomb showing the bull of Mithras and lions
Tomb showing head of Bacchus and angels
Christian tomb
?
Constantine's column
When he dedicated the city on
11 May 330 C.E., years after Christianity had become official religion,
the ceremony was only half-Christian. The chariot of the sun god (Sol
Invictus) was set up in the main square with the cross of Jesus. He
erected a column, which still stands, despite earthquakes and fires. On
top was a statue of him portrayed as Zeus/Apollo (the sun god), holding
a sceptre in his right hand, a globe in is left and a crown of suns
rays on his head.
In the same way as western Christians incorporated
Paganism into their new religion, so did Constantine. When westerners
cerebrate Christmas with their holly and Yule log they are in reality
celebrating the Viking winter festival Yule, (in Danish and Norwegian
'Jul') even the name is still retained. At the time of Constantine
religions strove to meet the public needs. In an agricultural society,
spring and winter festivals are necessary - birth with the start of the
New Year and resurrection at Easter in spring.
Mithras had a miraculous birth, died and was
resurrected; there was heaven and hell, immortal souls and a last
judgement. Sunday was held as their holy day, Sunday being dedicated to
the sun god, (the Jews hold Saturday). Mithras was born on the 25 of
December, celebrated a spring festival, like Easter and his followers
used bells, holy water and candles in their ceremonies. All very
familiar, but Mithras was born 100 years or so before Jesus, so which
is original ? Which is nearer to Christianity: Judaism or Mithraism ?
Which was Christianity derived from ?
In the west Easter still bears the name of the pre-Christian
festival of Eostre - a Celtic goddess, All Saints Day (Hallowe'en) was
also an important pre-Christian festival, and St John The Baptist's
birthday was placed at Midsummer, balancing the Winter Solstice for
Jesus' birthday.
Head of Bacchus c. 550 CE
Note the similarity to Celtic 'Greenmen'
We can extend the comparison to
Dionysus (or Bacchus in Latin). He may in fact have evolved from much
earlier pagan Greek nature gods, similar to the Celtic Greenman, but we
also find yet more parallels to Jesus. It simply grows boring relating
them.
In reality many of the ancient gods were identical
deities, simply worshipped under different names. As far back as the
5th century BCE Herodotus noted in his 'Histories' that the Greek and
Egyptian religions were parallel, Osiris was Dionysus for example.
Diana could also be compared to Isis. The Greeks regarded them as one
in the same and may simply have held Jesus in the same light too, just
one more god.
?
Isis with child
A black Madonna with child
Mary is not an important figure
in the New Testament, but the virgin goddess Artemis was very important
to the Greeks and Diana to the Romans. Her most important temple was
that at Ephesus. Strangely, there is what is claimed to be the site of
Mary's house in Ephesus. What mention of Mary in made in Paul or Jesus'
teaching ? Why is she revered by some churches ? Has she simply
replaced goddess worship ? To add to the confusion is the existence of
black madonnas in Roman Catholic churches, Mary was a Semite, not
black. However, the confusion clears when you understand that the
Osiris/Isis cults had a black goddess called Isis with her son Horus.
Osiris too was killed, but after three days ascended
to heaven to judge the dead. We can also make parallels between Jesus
and Horus, the child of Isis.
Consider a modern Italian home with a shelf for
statues of saints. Compare this to ancient Roman houses, they had
statues of the household gods on a shelf, only the names have changed,
the same customs persist.
What we see in many churches is a religion reflecting
absorption of the former religions practised in that area, not a
catholic religion at all, but one with local differences incorporated
into it which even after hundreds of years has never been homogenised.
The religions of Jesus' day borrowed from each other and many people
may have held a universal view that they all amounted to worshipping
the same gods in slightly different way. The Eastern Church borrowed
more from Mithras, while the church in Rome seems to have taken more
from the Isis cult from Egypt.
The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem, build on the site of the Temple of Venus (Eusebius)
If the reader is interested in
historic churches, he or she may be aware of the many beautiful
examples in Israel and the Palestinian Territories. Many of these sites
were found by Constantine or his mother Queen Helena. Their
archaeological findings included the Church of the Holy Sepulchre,
housing the alleged tomb of Jesus and Golgotha, where it is said was
found the true cross. Further south in Bethlehem she uncovered the
birthplace of Jesus and founded the church of the Nativity. This
certainly is one of more interesting churches. A further find was the
Cave of the Innocents, where the bodies of children massacred by Herod,
who was seeking to kill the child Jesus, were claimed to have been
found.
Queen Helena may have been an amazing archaeologist
and discovered authentic sites until then unknown. Perhaps the sites
were already places of pilgrimage and she simply popularised them.
Maybe she was simply tricked into believing these sites were true, or
possibly she went to find concrete evidence to support a religion that
she wished to promote, a religion that lacked anything really concrete
substantiate to it. I leave the reader to form his or her own
conclusions.
?
Istanbul gate Iznik (Nicaea)
Interior of the Sancta Sophia, the bird like shapes in the upper corners are said to represent the Holy Spirit or Cherubim
One more enigma relates to the
Gnostics who were purged by Constantine. They appear to have held in a
rather more spiritual and philosophical belief rather than the somewhat
more physical worldly religion that Constantine required. They held
that secret knowledge was important.
Some of the oldest and most important Greek churches
(in Istanbul, Nicaea etc) were dedicated to Holy Wisdom - Sancta
Sophia. I have been advised that this refers to the Holy Spirit, which
appears to be prominently portrayed within the Sancta Sophia in
Istanbul. However, perhaps it may have implied some other alleged
secret knowledge, paralleling the eastern mystery religions like
Mithraism.
?
Even Paul alludes to secret wisdom, paralleling the Gnostics, for example, in I Corinthians 6-7 he says: We
do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the
wisdom of this age, or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to
nothing. No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been
hidden, and that God destined for our glory before time began. And later II Corinthians 12:3I know a man in Christ who 14 year ago was caught up to the third heaven. Where
in the bible are there references to levels of heaven ? The concept of
7 heavens was taken from the Gnostics and refers to levels of
progression or enlightenment. Was Paul really a Gnostic heretic ?
Conclusion
How much were Constantine's aims religious and
how much were they simply political ? It is my view that they were the
result of political convenience rather than any religious conviction.
It was simply politically expedient to have one religion for the
empire. The problem is what compromises did that one religion face to
be able to be adopted by Constantine ?
Constantine may have simply amalgamated the popular aspects of
contemporary religions into Christianity so it could be accepted by all
his subjects. To do this he excluded documents which did not suit his
aims but may well represent the original religion proposed by Jesus and
continued by his brother James. The pro Greco Roman books of Paul were
included en mass whilst the more Semitic documents found at Nag Hammadi
were excluded. The teachings of Paul to his Greek and Roman audiences
were much more appealing than the Jewish theology of Jesus and his
brothers.
As Christianity rose, the other religions disappeared from
contemporary records. They were not, with the exception of the Gnostic
and Arian Christians expelled, their worship was perhaps simply
incorporated into the Churches liturgy.
