On 3 March 321 AD the Roman Emperor, Constantine, passed two particular laws which show how mixed his faith really was. The first called on all judges, inhabitants of cities and craftsmen to rest on a Sunday, though farmers were allowed to work as necessary. The second law called for an inquiry to be made of soothsayers if a building was struck by lightening as to what the omen meant. If the first law ‘proves’ that Constantine was indeed a Christian, then the second surely causes us to doubt it.

Both laws are included in the Theodosian Codes, a legal document published in 438 that lists the laws passed by various emperors, many of which relate to religion in the empire, and which is quoted in the third chapter of Murray’s Post-Christendom. (You can read the full code here, an academic site on the Christian faith in the 4th century. I'm still salivating over this find!) The laws pertaining to Christian faith show how privileged Christians had become in the fourth and fifth centuries under successive emperors. For example, in 356 the clergy, their wives, children and slaves, are exempt from paying taxes and by 399 a law is passed which bans theatrical plays and horse racing on Sundays, though if the emperor’s birthday happens to fall on a Sunday then it will be celebrated.

Such laws of themselves may appear quite unremarkable and acceptable. But other laws became more sinister. For example, laws were passed which made paganism quite unacceptable. Again in 399 pagan temples in rural areas were to be torn down and in 341 pagan superstition and sacrifices are forbidden. By 346 things are made  worse for pagans as those who try to gain access to those temples closed by the authorities could face capital punishment and their property given to the state. If the laws regarding pagans could be considered repressive then the laws passed against so called heretics – those who disagree with the traditional teaching of the church –  are of great concern. In 379 all heresies are forbidden. While a person may hold them in his/her own mind, they are not to be taught to anyone else and by 381 ‘heretic’ is defined as anyone who denies the Nicene faith (a creed formulated in the Council of Nicea held in 325). In 405 even the remembering of a Donatist (a particular heresy) is banned; all worship is to be uniform; and only one understanding of salvation is recognised.

It has to be stressed that these laws were made by the state – the empire – not the church and that they had one purpose only which was to ensure one unified church and one unified empire. The faith was now controlled by the empire for its own purposes. Dissent and debate were banned – often at the point of death.

Such laws had another effect, of course, which was to ensure that the church continued to grow at a pace. Making orthodox Christianity a position of privilege and heterodox Christianity and paganism anathema ensured that the people streamed into the one true church – whether they were truly converted or not. The church grew within the empire but it also grew outside of the empire also. The borders were porous and people crossed in and out of Christendom picking up the faith as they went. Missionary activities were also occurring and were often directed at the leaders of a nation – for when a king became Christian the subjects followed. Of course, we must also remember the tireless work of outstanding people like Patrick, who spread the good news with a pure motive.

By the 13 and 14^th centuries Europe had become largely Christian, though generally only in name. In accepting new ‘converts’ the church placed more emphasis on teaching ‘correct’ doctrine rather than ethical living. Pagan practices also persisted alongside Christianity as both faiths became fused in many lives. Saddest of all, however, was the suggestion that even in the fourth century the lives of many Christians were no better than those of unbelievers, especially among the clergy. ‘Many recognised Christendom had achieved breadth at the expense of depth’ (page 67).

There can be little doubt, surely, that becoming the state religion was not a good thing for Christianity, despite many positives. Nominalism became a norm as church and state became one. Trying to fight the unravelling of Christendom in Western Europe is surely not the best thing for the church to be doing. Rather we would benefit greatly from being detached from the state even though many of our privileges are lost.