What Constantine Was Not...

Clearing Up Misconceptions About Constantine the Great
with footnotes

     My dear brothers and sisters in Christ...
    Roman emperor Constantine the Great is often a subject that engenders fascination, debate, and purely false information, especially due to his his influence on Roman history, and his role in the early Catholic Church, and ultimately Christianity itself. 
    In order to clear up the many misconceptions and false beliefs about Emperor Constantine's life and legacy, we present this collection of facts to bring clarity to his true impact.... The aim here is not to divide and point fingers, but to support unity.
So lets see what Constantine was NOT.
---
1. NOT THE CREATOR OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, OR CHRISTIANITY
    This is first because it is the most often encountered misunderstanding that circulates about Constantine. It is primarily found among Evangelicals, Bible-only fundamentalists, and independents. These groups tend to be less-than friendly toward the Catholic Church, and are happy to believe anything that purports to to be anti-Carholic.

Constantine often becomes part of their package of prejudices.
    Even after all these centuries, Constantie still fulfills a deeply rooted conspiracy theory among those congregations.

    In short, they have convinced themselves through inventive manipulation of historical fact and self-revelation, that Emperor Constantine created the Catholic Church, and by extension, Christianity (sometimes often referred to as the "Constantinian shift" or "apostasy").
    They would be content to lambaste the Catholic Church alone, but, they must bring Christianity as a whole into this package of ideas.....mostly because they mis-understand all that we will present here in this article.
     I've been told, in their view, that, yes, Christians existed before Constantine, but they were just a loose collection of small communities with no structure. That morphs into a "radical reformation," view of Church history... and by extension, history itself.
    Their claims go on to say that the "true" church (ultimately meaning themselves), was forced to go "underground" after the Edict of Milan in 313 AD. If you don't know what that was, see the link at the end of this section. For now, suffice it to say that Constantine legitimized The Church and lifted the suppression of Chrisitians at that time.
    But after that, they supposedly had to secretly preserve the seeds of "real Christianity" on the sly, until their own denominations got going well after the Protestant reformation.
    In fact, some of them only grudgingly acknowledge Martin Luther's role in the reformation, without which their own development could never have happened. They handily toss him aside as merely opening the door for THEM to arrive.
    Some of this I understand as just mis-interpreting history's true events. But that is developed into their own self-serving tradition, complete with antogonists (The Church), and them as the "good guys." And nothing gets around as quickly as this kind of juicy story! 
    Now for the facts on this. 
    Christianity in the form of the early Catholic Church had been growing for centuries before Constantine was even born. Indeed you cannot separate the two, as they were one and the same.
And they based their doctrines on the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles, not on any Roman emperor. More on that later.
    No, it was not the Catholic Church of today...that was 17 centuries ago! But The Church existed as far more than a few small bands of haggard believers meeting in sheds and backrooms. Even in the Acts of the Apostles we see that - thousands at a time were converted.
    By the time Constantine arrived, The Church had many centers of thought and worship, and whole regions in the ancient world were becoming Christian. The city of Rome would one day become The Church's seat of authority, but it was spread across North Africa, the Middle East, Turkey, Greece...well, all over.
    And it had done all this thanks TO the Roman Empire, even though it had at times persecuted The Church and its members.
    So it is bordering on the ridiculous to claim there was no Catholic Church in that time, waiting for Constantine to create it.
    In fact, Constantine converted to become Catholic HIMSELF. And through the Edict of Milan (313 AD) he granted legal tolerance for The Church and the Christianity it had birthed. He ended Rome's state-sponsored persecution of Christs Church - but he didn’t create or alter the faith itself.
    For the whole story of Constatines conversion and how it led to the growth of The Church and Christianity at large, visit this link:
The Myth of Constantine - Busted!
---
2. NOT A THEOLOGIAN OR CHURCH AUTHORITY
    Constantine is sometimes mistakenly seen as a theological leader or church authority, but he was neither a theologian nor a bishop of the Church. His role was that of a political leader who supported the church's unity in order to maintain the stability of his empire.
    He did convene the Council of Nicaea (325 AD), and he had some influence there (he paid for it, after all!), but he did not dictate theological decisions; the council, led by about 300 Catholic bishops, formulated the Nicene Creed independent of his direct influence.(3)
---
3. NOT THE CREATOR OF THE BIBLE
    This is another real whopper of a Constantine conspiracy theory. The common myth around this one is that Constantine was the one who decided the contents of the Bible, but this is so far removed from reality that it can be nothing BUT an ill-thought conspiracy theory. One can only surmise this is an extension of the false belief that he created the Catholic Church. 
    In fact, the Catholic Church decided the canon of the Bible... around 50 years after Constatintine's death (d. May 22, 337 AD). There was a pope and several councils that ultimately finalized the canon. And the process of canonization, that is, determining which books would be included in the Bible, was a gradual development that involved the early Church over centuries. 
    To be fair, Constantine provided support for Christian scribes in HIS time. But the Bible’s canon was determined thanks to the Sacred Tradtion of The Church (which existed first), several big councils, and a far-reaching theological consensus.... all after Constantine was long dead.
---
4. NOT BAPTIZED FOR MOST OF HIS LIFE
    Constantine is sometimes portrayed as a lifelong Christian, but he did not receive baptism until he was on his deathbed. Though he converted, supported and promoted Christianity, he maintained certain pagan practices during his life. 
    His delayed baptism was somewhat common in that period, in fact. It reflected the common belief that baptism should ideally be received just before death to cleanse all sins.
---
5. NOT THE ORIGINATOR OF “CHRISTIAN ROME” 
    Constantine actually left Rome and moved the empire’s center to Byzantium (later renamed Constantinople - now Istanbul in Turkey), and he did not make Rome, “Christianized.” 
    Pagan worship practices (2) continued in Rome alongside Christian ones, and throughout the empire for centuries after his death. What Constantine did was legitimize Christians and their worship; he returned Church property (1); he officially ended state-sanctioned persecution of Christians. Constantine’s policies opened the way for Christianity’s expansion, but the complete Christianization of the empire was a gradual process achieved by later emperors.
---
6. NOT A PATRON SAINT FOR ALL CHRISTIANS
    Though Constantine is recognized as a saint in Eastern Orthodoxy for his role in supporting Christianity, he is not universally venerated as a saint in all Christian traditions. 
    The Catholic Church and many Protestant groups do not canonize him, as they recognize his complex and sometimes contradictory legacy, including his political ambitions and his controversial, often less-than Christian, activities.
---
7. NOT ALWAYS PEACEFUL OR BENEVOLENT
    Constantine’s rule included violent conflicts and political executions, including ordering the deaths of his son Crispus and his wife Fausta under suspicious circumstances. 
    His reign, like that of many emperors, was marked by political ambition, consolidation of power, and a willingness to use force.
    The problem with history is we often see it in relation to ourselves - as we imagine its significance. So we make the mistake of viewing Constantine as we suppose a Christian should act in OUR time, through OUR lens of Christian virtue.
    But just because he converted and was instrumental in stopping the opposition of Christianity, does not mean he abandoned his position and authority as supreme ruler of the empire.
---
8. NOT THE LAST PAGAN EMPEROR
    This ties to #5; it is the antithesis of making all Rome Christian. The assumption is that because he lifted the censure of The Church, he made it "illegal" for Roman emperors to be pagan. While Constantine supported Christianity, he was not the last Roman emperor with pagan influences. Many later emperors, like Julian the Apostate, openly promoted paganism.
    Constantine’s reign marked a significant shift toward Christianity, but pagan practices and emperors continued to appear in the empire’s history
---
9. NOT AN EXCLUSIVE CHRISTIAN RULER
    Constantine continued to honor traditional Roman deities and customs in the early part of his reign, even dedicating monuments that referenced pagan gods. He was what we would today call, "inclusive" in his approach.
    He was pragmatic and allowed multiple religions to coexist, seemingly without being polarized by one or the other. If he was alive today, the Humanism movement would hail him, since they think that all religions are the same.
    However, HE adopted this method of non-polarizd rule out of the political need for unity and stability in a diverse empire.
---
10. NOT A PERSECUTOR OF PAGANS
    While Constantine supported and protected Christianity, he did not instigate a persecution of pagans, either. Pagan temples continued to operate along side Christian worshiop sites, and Constantine’s policies initially allowed freedom of religion for various faiths.
    His goal was religious tolerance rather than the suppression of paganism. However, his successors would later adopt more forceful, pro-Christian policies, to the exclusion and even persecuton of pagans.
---
11. NOT THE SOLE REASON FOR CHRISTIANITY'S GROWTH
    Though Constantine’s endorsement of Christianity was significant, it was not the only reason for the faith’s rapid spread across the Roman Empire. 
    Christianity had been growing steadily due to its message of salvation, the commitment of early Church communities, and the missionary work of figures like the apostles Paul and Peter. 
    Most people ignore or don't know, that the Apostles and all early Christians used the Roman system of roads, thier postal service, and the governing regional stability of Rome to spread their message. Without Rome, Christianity could not have spread as it did. God used the Romans as part of His plan of salvation.
    Constantine for his part, had an influence that accelerated this growth - but he did not initiate it solely on his own.
---
12. NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR FORCING UNIFORMITY IN CHRISTIAN BELIEFS
    Constantine supported unity within The Church, notably by convening the Council of Nicaea(3), but he did not enforce a single, unifying Christian doctrine across the empire.
    Other Roman rulers would eventually make Christianity the only religion of the Empire, but that was for political reasons. And it would not happen for a long time.
     Disagreements and theological debates continued long after his death, with controversies over doctrines like Arianism and Gnosticism persisting for centuries. 
    Instead, Constantine’s efforts were focused on preventing division as a means to assure political stability, rather than demanding doctrinal conformity.
---
13. NOT A MODEL OF COMPLETE MORAL TRANSFORMATION
    Constantine’s conversion to Christianity did not lead to an immediate transformation of his moral conduct or imperial practices.
    He continued to rule with the often ruthless efficiency expected of a Roman emperor, involving military campaigns, political purges, and even the execution of family members under questionable circumstances. 
    His conversion was complex and gradual rather than an abrupt change to a saintly life.
---
14. NOT A “MODERN” CHRISTIAN
    Constantine’s form of Christianity was different from the Christian practices and beliefs of today. 
    His understanding and practice were deeply influenced by Roman imperial customs, and he held to certain pagan ideas even after endorsing Christianity. 
    His approach blended elements of Roman culture with emerging Christian values, resulting in a unique and somewhat syncretic practice of faith that greatly differed from modern interpretations.
   Again, we too often make the mistake of seeing everything through our own minds eye. Even if we study, "how it was back then," we still tend to see things from a modern perspective and cannot completely grasp the differences. 
---
15. NOT THE FINAL UNIFIER OF EAST AND WEST CHRISTIANITY
    Although Constantine founded Constantinople, which would become a major Christian center, he was not the unifier of Eastern and Western Christianity.
    The division between Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Catholicism grew over centuries due to theological, cultural, and political differences, ultimately culminating in the Great Schism of 1054 AD, long after Constantine’s time. 
    Constantine’s actions set a foundation for Christianity in both East and West, but he did not achieve a lasting unity between them.
---
16. NOT A PATRON OF COMPLETE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
    While Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in 313 AD, granting Christians the freedom to worship, property rights and an lessening of persecution, this did not establish full religious freedom across the empire.
    Although the edict allowed other religions to continue, Constantine’s policies gradually favored Christianity and reduced support for certain pagan practices. 
    Over time, his successors would implement restrictions on paganism, signaling a gradual shift from religious tolerance to a more Christian-centered state.
---
17. NOT A “CHRISTIAN EMPEROR” IN THE FULL SENSE OF THE TITLE
    While Constantine is often called the first “Christian emperor,” this is nod to our own sensibilities. In fact, he retained many pagan practices and symbols, including sun worship. For much of his reign, he continued to honor Sol Invictus, the Roman sun god, and only formally received baptism on his deathbed.
    His Christian commitment was sincere, but was also eclectic... a sort of "jack of all trades," Christian. He mixed the political and cultural influences of his time, making him a unique figure rather than a purely “Christian” ruler.
---
18. NOT THE FIRST TO LEGALIZE CHRISTIANITY
    Although Constantine’s Edict of Milan played a major role in legitimizing Christianity, he was not the first to show leniency toward Christians. 
    His predecessor, Emperor Galerius, had already issued an edict of toleration in 311 AD, which allowed Christians to practice their faith under certain conditions. 
    Constantine’s actions expanded on this policy, moving Christianity from tolerated to being eventually privileged, but he did not single-handedly introduce legal tolerance.
---
19. NOT A THEOLOGICAL SCHOLAR OR INFLUENCER OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
    As we've already pointed out, Constantine was not a religious figure in the sense of a prophet, or, say, The Apostle Paul. People ascribe far too much importance to him in that regard. He played a role in convening the Council of Nicaea, but he was not a theologian and did not directly shape Christian doctrine.
    His interest was primarily in maintaining unity within the empire, not in interpreting theological matters. He LIKED Christianity, because it represented a side of his empires populace that was growing in prominence - and he did have that vision about the Battle of Milvian Bridge!...(see link in footnotes)
    But he left the theological discussions to bishops and theologians, such as Athanasius, while he focused on political stability.

---
20. NOT A PROMOTER OF HUMBLE, APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY
    Constantine’s form of Christianity was intertwined with Roman imperial culture, marked by grandeur and authority. 
    He supported the construction of large, ornate churches and also adopted ceremonial practices that reflected Roman imperial customs rather than the humble, apostolic lifestyle of early Christians.
    His embrace of Christianity was an imperialized version, blending elements of the faith with the structure of Roman governance. This is where many get the idea that Catholicism is just an extension of Roman rule, or an abomination of what they think Christianity should be. It is simply a fallacy they have adopted as their own version of the truth. 
---
CONCLUSION 
    Emperor Constantine was a pivotal figure in the history of the the Catholic Church and by extension, Christian history. He was, of course, an important firgure in the Roman Empire, too, because he marked a weather change in HOW Rome was promoted after him. But he was not a creator of Church doctrine, nor a religious fanatic, or an absolute force for Christianity alone. 
    His role was complex, balancing political ambitions, religious influences, and a pragmatic, even eclectic, approach to ruling a diverse empire. But he was still an imperical ruler of his empire.
    By clarifying what Constantine was not, however, we gain a clearer perspective on his true contributions - and limitations - in shaping the course of Western history, The Catholic Church, and Christianity.

Footnotes
(1) This is another sign that by the time Constantine came along, The Church was established. If it had property to be returned - it was concrete. It was in place..., extant.
    The issue here arises from the mental conflict people may have of The Church vs. Christianity. Non-Catholics today have been trained to think of the two as separate, with Christianity being "good,".... and The Church "bad."
    However, that is the result of 500 years of post-reformation, Protestant animosity. The fact is, there was no Christianity separate from The Church back then - The Church WAS Christianity.
Just as it IS today.
(2) Pagan influences - when we say,"pagan" in this context we mean the Roman pantehon of deities. The Romans had a large number of "gods" from major to minor deities, and a  very sophisticated religious system. But any non-Christ based religion is generally referred to as pagan. 
(3) Council of Nicaea (325 AD) Constantine convened this conclave of Church bishops, but he did not control the council or its verdicts.
    Instead, he was the sponsor and mediator of the conclave. He did this because he wanted political and religious stability by resolving the Arian controversy — a volatile, heretic movement that threatened to upend Christianity, over whether Jesus was of the same substance as God the Father.    Constantine summoned roughly 300 Catholic bishops*from across the empire to Nicaea, a city near present day Istanbul. He provided a meeting hall and funded the travel and lodging of the bishops.
* 300 bishops.... but these are still those who say The Church didn't exist before Constantine? Pure fantasy.
    He presided over the opening session with a formal speech in Latin, urging peace and unity, but Constantine was not a voting member of the council... and he didn't force himself upon them.
    After 2 months, the council overwhelmingly voted in favor of the Nicene Creed, and Constantine thereafter exiled Arius and his few remaining supporters. 

(4) Battle of the Milvian Bridge...  and Constatine's vision that led him to become Christian.