OpEdNews Op Eds

The American Empire: An Unholy Alliance between Church and State

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

The man hailed as the first Christian emperor of Rome was Constantine, whose alleged "conversion" in 312 A.D. came on the eve of a great battle for the Roman throne. In the simplified version of the legend, Constantine saw a flaming cross in the sky emblazoned with the words "In hoc signo vinces," meaning "By this sign, conquer" - and he proceeded to do just that.

Constantine the Great, however, was far from Christian. Throughout his life, he remained a worshipper of Sol Invictus (the Invincible Sun) and retained the title of "Pontifex Maximus," which meant that, in addition to his duties as emperor, he served as the chief priest of the Roman pagan religion. (Ironically, the Catholic Church continues to bestow that title on its popes.)

Although Christianity was not the official religion of the Roman Empire during the reign of Constantine - that came later when Theodosius took the throne - it was tolerated and protected, which explains why so many Christians in the fourth century readily embraced their new emperor. How could anyone view the end of brutal persecution as a bad thing? In addition, Christians had a strong ally in government.

From Constantine's perspective, his acceptance of Christianity was probably more a marriage of convenience. There were numerous external and internal threats to the empire, so it was naturally easier to work with the Christians than to eliminate them. Their religion was spreading throughout the empire, so why not use that to his advantage? He could win over a growing minority segment of the population by ending their persecution while at the same time appeasing the majority by maintaining the old pagan practices. One of the ways he accomplished this was to merge Christianity with certain aspects of paganism, not the least of which included the celebration of Christmas and Easter.

But the acceptance of Christianity as a legitimate religion by the Roman Empire had its downside. Alistair Kee, in his historical treatise Constantine versus Christ: The Triumph of Ideology, noted that Constantine's reign was "a fundamental turning-point," adding, "From that time the imperial ideology, with all its implications for the accumulation of wealth and the exercise of power over the weak, was given religious legitimation by the church."

Over the centuries, Constantinian Christianity spread like a cancer. Christians became more militant and took up the sword to advance the Kingdom of God. Churches were no longer merely bodies of believers gathering together for worship and fellowship; they evolved into huge, elaborate cathedrals built on the backs of the poor. Popes, cardinals and bishops ruled as merciless tyrants, waging war, imposing burdensome taxes and executing those who dared to challenge their authority. Worst of all, the Bible was kept out of the hands of the layperson; only the clergy had the right to read and interpret scripture.


Christendom brought with it a renewed persecution of Christians. As we saw during the Reformation, believers were martyred not because of their "unbiblical" beliefs, but because they were seen as a threat to the social, political and economic hold the church-state had over the people.

It was this hold that led the framers of our Constitution to establish a separation of church and state. The separation they envisioned, however, had nothing to do with removing the Ten Commandments from courthouses or banning prayer from schools. They merely wanted to prevent government from interfering - both negatively and favorably - with the religious practices of its citizens.

Baron de Montesquieu, who was an inspiration to many of America's Founding Fathers, addressed the issue of the separation of church and state in his book The Spirit of the Laws. He saw the greatest threat coming from those in government who would embrace religion as a matter of official policy:

    A more certain way to attack religion is by favor, by the comforts of life, by the hope of wealth; not by what reminds one of it, but by what makes one forget it; not by what makes one indignant, but by what makes men lukewarm, when other passions act on our souls, and those which religion inspires are silent. In the matter of changing religion, State favors are stronger than penalties.

Within the last few years there has been a strengthening of the bond between church and state. Thanks to President Bush's "Faith-Based Initiatives," Christian organizations have been reduced to little more than political special interest groups. Call me cynical, but I just don't see how the church can honor God when those who should be trusting Him to meet their needs are scrambling for government handouts.

Not surprisingly, the result of this alliance isn't a more God-honoring system of government. In fact, there are some striking similarities between the Roman Empire of Constantine and the United States of America. What we are witnessing is the rise of a modern Constantinian church-state, characterized by a shift among Christians toward a more militaristic worldview.

You may recall Lt. Gen. William "Jerry" Boykin, who stated unequivocally that terrorists are "after us because we're a Christian nation." Boykin implied that our "Christian nation" is leading the charge in what is in fact a spiritual war against Satan, and he also said that Bush is "in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this."

It seems George W. Bush, also a professing Christian, agrees. During a 2004 campaign meeting with an Amish group in Lancaster, Penn., the president said, "I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job."

"Christianese" is like a second language for Washington politicians. Following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush (or was it God speaking through him?) announced the beginning of his "war on terror," claiming that it wouldn't end "until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make: Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

Compare Bush's statement with the words of Jesus Christ in Matthew 12:30: "Whoever is not with me is against me ..." It was no coincidence. Bush knew that his worldwide crusade could only work with the support of his evangelical Christian base. And, sad to say, those on the "religious right" were all too eager to join in the bloodshed.

But none were content to limit the fight to terrorists. Bush expanded the conflict to include nations that had not even attacked our own. When he labeled Iraq, Iran and North Korea as an "Axis of Evil," he was sending the nations of the world a not-so-subtle warning that they dare not mess with America. In essence, Bush was securing his place in the hearts and minds of Christians as Emperor of the Holy American Empire.

It's as if our leader received a divine revelation and we are simply following along, thinking that we are doing God's will. As Constantine's armies rallied behind the cross, we hold aloft the American flag as our sacred symbol - and by this sign, we conquer.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

www.EverVigilant.net

Lee Shelton is the founder and editor of EverVigilant.net and an admitted (though not recovering) "paleoconservatarian." Lee resides with his wife, Dawn, in suburban St. Paul, Minn.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The American Empire: An Unholy Alliance between Church and State

Our Escalating "Victory" in Iraq

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
Your essay is as prescient as it is timely. I coul... by Glenn Kirk on Thursday, Sep 21, 2006 at 8:59:17 AM