Constantine’s Impact on Christian Worship

It seems that the “protestant” spirit has been passed through the ages permeating most of the present perspectives on Christian history and worship. This “spirit” is something suspicious and critical especially in looking at the historical fact of Constantine’s vast influence in the shape and “formality” of worship celebration. It is apprehensive to that fact that it is anti-Catholic and anything that contributes to that development in Christian history is deemed “pagan” and wrong. Hence, in the process of linking Constantine to the progress of Christian worship, he is often viewed with cynical and prejudged conclusion. His historical act is often taken selectively, with a one-sided motive, that is, to confound the imperial church. But maintaining balance to what has been is a different matter to what is at present. There is always a bad and good side to historical event; and it includes that of Constantine.

On one side, paganism may have entered into the church, but at least in a way, such entry opened the door for Christian faith to be viewed upon as a witness to the world. Some viewed the event as a disposal of pagan worship in favor to Christian faith. Pagan elements in worship may have been adopted, but it has been given a new meaning and new emphasis. As it is clear historically, the church has never been an original proponent of any act of worship for before these acts were practiced, it slowly evolved with an influence to some degree from anything “outside” the church. The only thing that makes an act of worship “Christian” is the element of Christ, nothing else, nothing more. All—including preaching, reading of sacred scriptures, singing, sacrifices, and other cultic practices—have their interconnections with other ancient religions and practices. It is only in their Christian content and meaning that the act worship becomes “Christian.”

In a sense, questions on syncretism and secularism may be a technical concept that might be defined here. The mixing of religions as well as the secular influence in politics made the state church really an imperial church. Yet these influences, to some extent, are not hindrances to the development of the body of Christ. The challenge may be is more on the clarification of what is bad and what is good. Outside the Catholic Church, we can also see forms of secularism prevalent among many Protestant churches. Marketing the church is often synonymous with running the church just like any business. The music caters to the popular culture; church meetings—at their best and worst—were identical with what other institutions made. It is a fact; the church cannot do away with what is going on in the world as long as the church is in this world. She has to address to the need of the people who have various cultures, dispositions, and capacities to act with motives that only time will tell. It is true that there was a great change that happened in the body of Christ, but such change was gradual, perhaps because the acceptance of the practice was made with careful consideration. But if our prejudiced convictions will dictate us, it is just as easy as concluding it was a demonic subtlety creeping into the body of Christ. Yes, there may be recesses to the Catholic hierarchy and there are historical records that cites it; in fact, there are many records also concerning the non-Catholic abuses of power, exploitation, discrimination, and scandals available. But in all these things, Christian worship remains developing, innovating, and changing; it is because Christian worship is dynamic.