Historical figures:
Goths:
Ulfilas converted many Goths to Arianism. However, according to his Wikipedia article, Theodosius helped to establish mainstream Christianity. Visigoths settled in Gaul, then took over in Iberia, whereas the Ostrogoths took over Italy.
9 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I think it was a bad mistake for Theodosius I to have made Catholic Christianity the religion of the Empire--because it too often led to the State claiming the right to interfere in ecclesiastical affairs. Far better, for both Church and State, to remain separate.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Yes and, as I understand it, Constantine stopped short of proclaiming Christ the one god of the state although Anderson states that he did do that.
Paul.
Paul: in theory, he didn't. In practice, it was made unmistakably clear that if you wanted preferment, you'd better take up Christianity.
It probably wasn't clear for a while that this was (apart from Julian the Apostate) a permanent change.
Sean: I agree, but probably the religion wouldn't have spread nearly as far or fast if Theodosius hadn't.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: Then that was a rare mistake Anderson made. And one which slipped past the proof readers.
Mr. Stirling: While the Emperors after Constantine more and more preferred appointing Christians to high office, some pagans continued to hold such offices even under Theodosius himself.
Yes, but whether or not the Church became the official religion of the State, Christianity was still spreading.
BTW, after the Western Empire fell the IDEA of an official state religion seems to have disappeared for a thousand year. When EVERYBODY in France, England, Castile, Aragon, the Holy Roman Empire, etc., was at least formally a Catholic, no one seems to have thought it necessary for there to be an official State Church. Yes, there were plenty of quarrels between Popes, bishops, and kings.
The idea of a STATE church was revived during the "Reformation," when Lutherans and Calvinists, in places where they came to power, made their forms of Protestantism the state religion. With Henry VIII and Elizabeth I doing the same in England.
Catholic states soon followed suit, of course, but it was never as thoroughgoing a process, because the Papacy resented and opposed as much as it could this interference with the Church.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: it would be more accurate to say that there was a State church but it was so ubiquitous that it was unnecessary to say so.
Eg., Church and State cooperated in this like ecclesiastical appointments -- with considerable tug-of-war interludes -- and in punishing heresy.
It became more explicit when Latin Christians took over other areas; the Crusader states, for instance.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
A de facto state Church in medieval Europe, something everyone took for granted? I can see that.
Yes, Church and State did often cooperate in the nomination of bishops, aside from fairly frequent quarrels, when the State pressed its claims too far.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: if it's one thing any ruler covets, it's the ability to hand out patronage.
There's never, ever enough.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
Absolutely! And it was the way Holy Roman Emperors like Henry IV and Henry V treated the Church as a patronage cow which provoked the Investiture Controversy.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment