ABSTRACT
Constantine had bad luck. His wish to cement the unity of the Empire with the help of a united Church and to see the Christian religion become an efficacious substitute for the official cults, which were falling into desuetude, ran up against dissent in the Church. This led the Emperor to intervene more directly and deeply in the internal, in particular doctrinal, affairs of the Church. His sons and successors, above all Constantius II, followed the same conduct: they intervened no less than their father had done and influenced the process of doctrinal, viz., Christological clarification. All the time, ecclesiastical parties and bishops solicited support for the consolidation of their opinions and influence, and the willingness of the emperors to promote one group at the cost of another became no doubt a great temptation. On the other hand, the leaders who failed in winning imperial support gradually experienced the burden of the State’s interference in theological issues and this helped them to reconsider the relationship of the Church with the Emperor and to develop a critical attitude. The general enthusiasm for Constantine gradually gave way to a new sense of identity and self-determination vis-à-vis the imperial power, but the way proved to be long and hard. The fact that the last emperor from the Constantinian dynasty turned away from Christianity and tried to restore paganism shocked all Christians. But Julian’s reign did not last long enough, neither to crown his religious policy with success, nor to free the church leaders from their looking out for the powerful hand of the State. The only benefit of Julian’s keeping aloof was that some important parties found ways to join each other and to discover common ground. Thus, the end of the Constantinian dynasty and era became the beginning of a new period and the present chapter consequently runs from the year of the transfer of power in the east (324) until the death of Julian (363).
