On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 15:42:18 -0700 (PDT), The Old Man
wrote:
>
>Pete - I generally agree with your ideas but....
That's very good of you. Shows your discernment . But disagreeing
is much more fun, don't you think? It's always good to see different
opinions.
>Constantine was the one befhind the Council of Nicea, which but the
>current form of Christianity at the forefront, declared the others to
>be heretical and established which texts were dogma and which were
>apocrapha. Without that Council, the face of Christianity will be
>changed in that other forms of Christianity will still be around for
>the foreseeable future and religious wars and desputes will be more
>likely. (Which, I have heard, was one of the reasons for calling the
>meeting)
>In return for their co-operation, the Bishop of Rome got to be called
>pontifex maximus (Supreme Pontiff), a title that he still uses. That
>title denoted the chief priest of Rome and was formerly held by the
>Emperor.
I think the emperors were using the title pontifex maximus well after
Nicea. Wikipedia says the first not to hold it was Gratian (50 years
after Nicea), which sounds about right.
>I don't see one of the otrhers going this far. (Don't forget, although
>he didn't baptize until his deathbed,Connie's Mother Helen was a
>staunch, maybe even fanatical Christian)
A lot of the early Christians didn't get baptised until they were
dying. As far as I know, it was something to do with the idea that
baptism washed away all your sins, and you couldn't be baptised twice,
so it was safe to wait for the very last moment to give yourself as
little opportunity as possible to sin again, and thus end up in hell
(no flies on these blokes!). I don't know when confession and
absolution for the dying was introduced, but I think some time later.
As for not establishing an orthodoxy - I don't think allowing people
their own beliefs was really part of the ancient mind set. I take your
point about Constantine being the major force behind the Council of
Nicea, but I don't see why a different Christian emperor shouldn't
have held a different council for similar purposes. After all, it's
not as if the Council of Nicea ended the disputes between rival
Christian factions - thre was a good 500 years between Nicea and the
last council, 500 years in which different ideas were accepted as
orthodox or condemned as heresy before the orthodox doctrine was
finally decided on. I simply don't see how Constantine can be
responsible for developments which took 500 years to unfold
(responsible in the sense that removing him would prevent it all, or
at least change it radically).
I do think that the establishment of Christianity as a state religion
is at least very likely in any TL with a POD after 300, so of course,
what I've said above won't be relevant if you reject that premise.
Pete Barrett |
