Constantine and the Invisible Enemies

"Our Emperor, [Constantine] like a faithful steward of the Almighty, drives away from the sight of men the invisible enemies that once oppressed the human race; and those hostile powers which previously hovered over the earth and led men astray into idolatry."¹

— Eusebius of Caesarea, Oration in Praise of Constantine (c. 336 AD)

Eusebius, a contemporary of Constantine, believed in overthrowing opposing supernatural forces and viewed Constantine's conversion as a significant fulfillment of God's plan for His people to rule and reign in the world. Through Constantine, the Church gained considerable influence in Roman society and was given a formative role in Western Civilization. This had positive effects on the culture, including providing more justice for the poor. There was also growth in the number of Christians. Fifty years after Constantine's conversion, Christians grew from 10% to 50% of the Roman Empire. Was this a prime example of bringing about transformation in society, having it reflect the Kingdom of God more, by a Christian occupying a place of power?

There are two very different perspectives on the conversion of Emperor Constantine, and the subsequent impact on Western Civilization and the Church. On one side, thinkers like Eusebius celebrated the church’s new civic power as an avenue for real societal good and gospel expansion. On the other, the Desert Fathers viewed imperial favor as a corrupting influence. Instead of celebrating the positive impact of Christians on Roman society, they lamented the negative impact of Roman society on Christians. Fearing that worldly status was eroding true discipleship, they chose withdrawal, seeking God in isolation.

What are we to make of these opposite perspectives as we seek to integrate our faith into our work lives? The Desert Fathers are revered for their contribution to contemplative spirituality. Yet, their lifestyle also fostered the idea that secular labor in the world is spiritually inferior to monastic retreat. While we can honor their desire for uncompromised devotion, their solution of withdrawal leaves little room for a theology that values work as a primary site of Christian mission and societal renewal.

So, do they have the wrong perspective on the effect of Constantine's conversion? Not necessarily...

I did some thought exploration around the growth of the Church under Constantine. It would seem that the expansion of Christians from 10% to 50% of the Empire in fifty years would be indicative of a triumph over supernatural forces that would be seeking to prevent that kind of increase. Surely that level of spreading the gospel far outweighs any negative effects of a corrupting influence, and is a net gain for the Kingdom of God. However, I started asking questions about the growth rate of Christianity prior to Constantine. Based on what scholars estimate that growth rate to have been, Christianity would have expanded along similar lines without the favor of Constantine, had that rate continued. And that raises an entirely different way to look at what was happening between the Church and Constantine.

I can imagine a scenario in which Satan realized that the gospel was spreading at an alarming rate, and that he was not able to stop it with persecution. He might have changed his strategy so that as it spread, it lost some of its power, its saltiness. When we point to the positive influence of Christians on Roman society and Western Civilization as a result of Christianity being favored by Constantine, maybe we need to consider what influence the Christians who eventually made up 50% of the Empire would have had if faith had continued to spread without that favor. Perhaps the impact would have been much greater because the faith of those Christians would have been less corrupted.

This is all speculation, but it does offer some insights into spiritual warfare and social transformation. It is likely that Satan tempts Christians with greater social influence if that would compromise their devotion to God and Christlike character. What looks like a path to gaining power to transform culture may be a path where Christians lose their saltiness. It is possible that Satan did not view the conversion of Constantine as a defeat, but rather as a means of corrupting the faith. That is how the Desert Fathers viewed it.

But it is even more likely that Satan was pleased to have the Christians who were the most devoted to God leave society and go to live in the desert. What is the lesson of this speculation? Like Peter when he rebuked Jesus for talking about suffering at the hands of His enemies, we are capable of serving Satan's interests when we believe that we are acting for God. That is a sobering thought.

In the next blog post, does the New Testament indicate that Jesus and his disciples had a goal, and expectation, of Christians triumphing over Satan and recovering the rightful rule and reign in the world?

¹ Eusebius of Caesarea, "Oration in Praise of Constantine," in Eusebius: Church History, Life of Constantine the Great, and Oration in Praise of Constantine (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1890), 2.5, p. 582.