Left: Bust of Roman Emperor Licinius, Vatican Museums.
Right: Head of the colossal statue of Constantine I, Musei Capitolini, Rome. Marble, Roman artwork, 313–324 CE.
Posted on 06/19/2013 5:10:26 AM PDT by annalex
Constantine Augustus and Licinius Augustus
When I, Constantine Augustus, as well as I Licinius Augustus fortunately met near Mediolanum (Milan), and were considering everything that pertained to the public welfare and security, we thought -, among other things which we saw would be for the good of many, those regulations pertaining to the reverence of the Divinity ought certainly to be made first, so that we might grant to the Christians and others full authority to observe that religion which each preferred; whence any Divinity whatsoever in the seat of the heavens may be propitious and kindly disposed to us and all who are placed under our rule And thus by this wholesome counsel and most upright provision we thought to arrange that no one whatsoever should be denied the opportunity to give his heart to the observance of the Christian religion, of that religion which he should think best for himself, so that the Supreme Deity, to whose worship we freely yield our hearts) may show in all things His usual favor and benevolence. Therefore, your Worship should know that it has pleased us to remove all conditions whatsoever, which were in the rescripts formerly given to you officially, concerning the Christians and now any one of these who wishes to observe Christian religion may do so freely and openly, without molestation. We thought it fit to commend these things most fully to your care that you may know that we have given to those Christians free and unrestricted opportunity of religious worship. When you see that this has been granted to them by us, your Worship will know that we have also conceded to other religions the right of open and free observance of their worship for the sake of the peace of our times, that each one may have the free opportunity to worship as he pleases ; this regulation is made we that we may not seem to detract from any dignity or any religion.
Moreover, in the case of the Christians especially we esteemed it best to order that if it happens anyone heretofore has bought from our treasury from anyone whatsoever, those places where they were previously accustomed to assemble, concerning which a certain decree had been made and a letter sent to you officially, the same shall be restored to the Christians without payment or any claim of recompense and without any kind of fraud or deception, Those, moreover, who have obtained the same by gift, are likewise to return them at once to the Christians. Besides, both those who have purchased and those who have secured them by gift, are to appeal to the vicar if they seek any recompense from our bounty, that they may be cared for through our clemency,. All this property ought to be delivered at once to the community of the Christians through your intercession, and without delay. And since these Christians are known to have possessed not only those places in which they were accustomed to assemble, but also other property, namely the churches, belonging to them as a corporation and not as individuals, all these things which we have included under the above law, you will order to be restored, without any hesitation or controversy at all, to these Christians, that is to say to the corporations and their conventicles: providing, of course, that the above arrangements be followed so that those who return the same without payment, as we have said, may hope for an indemnity from our bounty. In all these circumstances you ought to tender your most efficacious intervention to the community of the Christians, that our command may be carried into effect as quickly as possible, whereby, moreover, through our clemency, public order may be secured. Let this be done so that, as we have said above, Divine favor towards us, which, under the most important circumstances we have already experienced, may, for all time, preserve and prosper our successes together with the good of the state. Moreover, in order that the statement of this decree of our good will may come to the notice of all, this rescript, published by your decree, shall be announced everywhere and brought to the knowledge of all, so that the decree of this, our benevolence, cannot be concealed.
from Lactantius, De Mort. Pers., ch. 48. opera, ed. 0. F. Fritzsche, II, p 288 sq. (Bibl Patr. Ecc. Lat. XI).
Both texts translated in University of Pennsylvania. Dept. of History: Translations and Reprints from the Original Sources of European history, (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press [1897?-1907?]), Vol 4:, 1, pp. 28-30
I fixed a few typos. A-x
For your pinging pleasure.
Next question: Did Constantine really believe in Jesus Christ? Or did he “convert” for political purposes?
Summarized “You will no longer pick on the Christians and give them back all the property you took from them no matter who owns it today”.
And yet some “Christians” view this as a bad thing.....
He received a vision of the Holy Cross. That does not agree with the theory of calculated political move.
Christians are known to have possessed not only those places in which they were accustomed to assemble, but also other property, namely the churches, belonging to them as a corporation and not as individuals
First decree in regards to religious freedom.
Indeed. And since the times of, Timothy and Titus, there were those appointed by a higher ranking church man [paul] assigned to territories to appoint and depose parish level leaders too. What is that called, an Episcopal structure ? And there were also teachers without authority, who were the ones causing all the confusion per Acts, then as now .....
Ping!
Next you are going to make the claim that Jesus really meant it when he said "This is My Body" and "This is My Blood".
both those who have purchased and those who have secured them by gift, are to appeal to the vicar if they seek any recompense from our bounty, that they may be cared for through our clemency,.
Plainly freedom of religion, but Constantine does not seem to be identified as a Christian.
No, we are just asking what the pope has to do with the word of god from the Bible.
RE: He received a vision of the Holy Cross. That does not agree with the theory of calculated political move.
The Israelites were blessed with the parting of the Red Sea and various miracles from God through Moses Himself. That did not make them obedient to God.
Here is something from the life of Constantine many people do not know:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great#Executions_of_Crispus_and_Fausta
On some date between 15 May and 17 June 326, Constantine had his eldest son Crispus, by Minervina, seized and put to death by “cold poison” at Pola (Pula, Croatia).
In July, Constantine had his wife, the Empress Fausta, killed at the behest of his mother, Helena. Fausta was left to die in an over-heated bath.
Their names were wiped from the face of many inscriptions, references to their lives in the literary record were erased, and the memory of both was condemned. Eusebius, for example, edited praise of Crispus out of later copies of his Historia Ecclesiastica, and his Vita Constantini contains no mention of Fausta or Crispus at all.
Few ancient sources are willing to discuss possible motives for the events; those few that do offer unconvincing rationales, are of later provenance, and are generally unreliable. At the time of the executions, it was commonly believed that the Empress Fausta was either in an illicit relationship with Crispus, or was spreading rumors to that effect. A popular myth arose, modified to allude to Hippolytus–Phaedra legend, with the suggestion that Constantine killed Crispus and Fausta for their immoralities.
One source, the largely fictional Passion of Artemius, probably penned in the eighth century by John of Damascus, makes the legendary connection explicit.
As an interpretation of the executions, the myth rests on only “the slimmest of evidence”: sources that allude to the relationship between Crispus and Fausta are late and unreliable, and the modern suggestion that Constantine’s “godly” edicts of 326 and the irregularities of Crispus are somehow connected rests on no evidence at all.
Although Constantine created his apparent heirs “Caesars”, following a pattern established by Diocletian, he gave his creations an hereditary character, alien to the tetrarchic system: Constantine’s Caesars were to be kept in the hope of ascending to Empire, and entirely subordinated to their Augustus, as long as he was alive.
Therefore, an alternative explanation for the execution of Crispus was, perhaps, Constantine’s desire to keep a firm grip on his prospective heirs, this—and Fausta’s desire for having her sons inheriting instead of their stepbrother—being reason enough for killing Crispus; the subsequent execution of Fausta, however, was probably meant as a reminder to her children that Constantine would not hesitate in “killing his own relatives when he felt this was necessary”.
Seriously since I have been on this forum no less than 20 non Catholics have told me Constantine was the first Pope.
BTW in answer to your question I am certain you may have heard that our first Pope (Peter) wrote two books, 1 Peter, and 2 Peter.
You folks have taken those out mistake as well have you?
BTW in answer to your question I am certain you may have heard that our first Pope (Peter) wrote two books, 1 Peter, and 2 Peter.
And you did not answer my question which i do not believe was a trick question and has everything to do with the truth.
Which is this
Where is Pope even mentioned in the Bible, and where is it mentioned that Peter was made pope.
Personally i hold peter as the highest where the apostles are concerned but Jesus said that is not the way it was to be.
Mark 20
25
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
26
But it shall not be so among you:
Constantine was the 89th pope...elected in 708, died in 715.
Nothing against you; I am trying to make a strict policy of dealing only with the topic of the thread. I have been pulled into way to may tangential topics lately.
As it would be rude to not answer your polite request I will state that Catholics do not believe in the practice of Sola Scriptura. The reason being that there are many truths that many Christians believe which are not found EXPLICITLY in the Bible. Examples would include "The Rapture", The Trinity, the "Sinners" prayer, etc....
If you want to start a different thread discussing any of those then please ping me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.