The history of establishing and development of the main principles of Christianity in the Roman civilization and the role of the religion for the progress of the state is characterized by a great number of issues. AD 381 can be considered as the year when the conception of Christianity as the official religion required new meanings. Theodosius, as the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire, provided new visions on the role of the public belief in the process of ruling state. The power of Christianity as the dominant religion of the empire could positively affect the peculiarities of political development of the state because of a number of changes in its conception. They were offered by Theodosius as a result of rethinking of the problems of orthodoxy and the main issues in the state. Moreover, many of these rules were developed later after Theodosius’s ruling.
The necessity of establishing new approach to the problem of Christianity emerged as the reaction on rather unfortunate events in military spheres which could affect the empire’s development. Besides, their political consequences were also analyzed. As a result, the system required a lot of reforms in the sphere of religion because only single official religion could contribute to uniting of the parts of the state in a single one and provide the opportunity to control the public minds with the help of a single Church.
Moreover, the situation was completed because of the fact of the pagan’s pressure in some territories of the empire. It is obvious that the best and the quickest way to solve the problem was the attempt to strengthen the principles of the religion. “Theodosius issued the first of the series of laws against paganism” and furthermore, he “had decided to intervene in support of orthodoxy and in opposition to heresy, the outcome was an authoritarianism based on irrational principles, which presided over the demise of ancient traditions of reasoned debate” (Freeman, p. 156).
Nevertheless, Theodosius faced not only political issues but also the challenges of the impossibility to offer the reform which could satisfy all the viewpoints on the question. The process resulted in the inner Church conflict. “This conflict only occurred because orthodoxy had been proclaimed to which earlier thinkers, long since dead, were now expected to conform” (Freeman, p. 137).
When deciding to present strong resolutions on this problem, Theodosius had to solve a lot of other issues. Thus, Theodosius’s decree gave the end to the strategy of toleration in the question of Christianity and its concepts. Furthermore, this fact proved his inclinations to follow the Nicene formula and approach. The effects of the limitation of the bishops’ power were presented in the fact of development the debates on the problem. “Never before in the Greek or Roman would had there been such a sweeping imposition of a single religious belief alongside the active suppressions of alternatives” (Freeman, p. 1).
Moreover, there was the opinion that the fact of establishing of orthodox Christianity as the official religion rejected the idea of the freedom of thoughts. Any appearances of such freedom were immediately suppressed according to Theodosius’s act.
It should be mentioned here that Theodosius presented not the idea, but a strong proclamation in the form of decree which touched on the crucial principles of Christianity. Ascertaining of the belief in the Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit determined all the other changes in understanding Christianity as the official religion of the empire. It was impossible for the Church and the public not to react the issue.
What effects could the edict provide? As a result, all the political and social issues were subscribed to this new approach to the analysis of the key religious aspects. It was a possible variant to accentuate the human’s dishonor and the impossibility to hope for the God’s grace. Moreover, the Church became greatly dependent on the political needs. From this point of view one of the most significant goals of Theodosius was successfully attained.
The establishing of the principles of orthodox Christianity can be considered as the beginning of a new state in which the suppression of those viewpoints which contradict to the official belief is the way to strengthen the power of this state. According to Freeman, “Theodosius went on to condemn all other Christian beliefs as heresies that would be punished by both the state and the divine judgment of God” (Freeman, p. 1).
Consequently, there developed a strong tendency to consider the controversial opinions and interpretations of the principles of Christianity as the contrary ones to traditional belief. The accepting of Christian orthodoxy as the evitable approach also determined the attitude to the heretics.
The controversial question of the possibility of consensus emerged as the tries to solve the problem without any reforming processes. However, as Freeman states, “It is impossible to believe that the Church would itself have come to an enforceable consensus on the Trinity if an emperor had not provided the legal framework within which the Nicenes could be privileged over the various groups of ‘heretics’ who opposed them” (Freeman, p. 200).
The establishment of orthodox belief can be analyzed as the first step to the justification of the authoritative way of ruling the state. The enforcing of the strong principles of Christianity on the secular life in the empire had the veritable advantages for Theodosius and resulted in increasing of his influence in the state. All the aspects of the life in the empire were under his control.
According to Freeman, all the new principles for the Church were established by the imperial order of Theodosius. “Theodosius’s role was crucial. His powers and status as quasi-divine figure transcended those of this rivals in any case, but the Church was beset by its own internal tensions, which would have precluded consensus” (Freeman, p. 200).
In this situation only the internal Church disagreement prevented the immediate effects of Theodosius’s reforms. In spite of the fact the variety of religious and philosophical opinions in Christian Church could be suppressed because of the significant changes provided by the decree, a lot of inner contradictions required efficient solutions. That was the reason for creating a council of bishops who could support the actions of Theodosius.
There was a strong necessity of the fact that the politics and the bishops could be united for their effective ruling of the state. That is why there was determined an exact place for the political power and the politics’ influence in the well-developed system of the Christian establishment and the hierarchy of the theological issues.
Nevertheless, there is a question if Theodosius could achieve his goals without providing any decrees. The answer can be rather debatable. However, it is obvious that a kind of reforming of the approach to the principles of orthodox Christianity and the changes in the whole structure of the Christian Church was required to control the processes in the state. “What Theodosius achieved was the championing of one Christian faction over another and the strengthening of its position by ostracizing its rivals, both Christian and pagan” (Freeman, p. 200).
Theodosius’s edict on the problem of the orthodox Christianity and further effects of the process resulted in Augustine’s providing greatest suppression on the masses and increasing of the meaning of Aquinas’s viewpoints. The results of Theodosius’s reforms can also be discovered as the fact of politicization of the Christian church through the political interference. Moreover, the principles of Christianity were linked to the requirements of the state and conditioned by the political power of the empire. Thus, the conception of the orthodox Christianity played a decisive role in increasing the power of the state. However, it did not lead to the end of the theological debates. It provided some new problems to solve
Works Cited
Freeman, Charles. A. D. 381: Heretics, Pagans, and the Dawn of the Monotheistic State. New York: The Overlook Press, 2009. Print.