If Constantine wanted to dominate the church, the obvious thing for him to do would be to try to widen the divisions in the church and keep them competing with each other. That’s not what he did. Instead of “divide and conquer,” he did his best to unite the church, often against . . . . Continue Reading »
Worship seems so easy. We jump into the car and drive over, find a place to sit, and then we just get started. What could be hard about that? When we think about what we are doing, though, it doesn’t look quite so easy. We are entering into the presence of the Creator of heaven and earth, who . . . . Continue Reading »
Drake notes that Burckhardt sees Constantine’s reign “exclusively in terms of a power struggle between Constantine and the bishops,” and shrewdly recognizes that this is in turn rooted in “an even older premise that the church became ‘worldly’ as a result of . . . . Continue Reading »
Was Constantine converted? Really, truly, deeply, irreversibly converted ? Not just converted, but converted converted? It depends on what “conversion” means. Arthur Darby Nock recognized that conversion has preconditions, but describes the actual event as a “chemical . . . . Continue Reading »
Why celebrate Pentecost? Because the Spirit is the hovering wind that forms the formlessness, fills the void, brightens the darkness. Because the Spirit is the breath that gives Adam life. Because the Lord comes into the garden in the Spirit of the day to breathe out judgment to Adam and Eve. . . . . Continue Reading »
Dick Morris gives us another reason to be grateful for Obama’s election - he’s effectively muzzled and marginalized the Clintons. Hillary is Secretary of State, but Morris points out that “Obama has surrounded Hillary with his people and carved up her jurisdiction geographically. . . . . Continue Reading »
William Appleman Williams’s Empire As A Way of Life is a far from perfect book, but one of the striking things is the surprisingly open way America’s founders spoke of the US as an empire. “No constitution was ever before as well calculated as ours for extensive empire and . . . . Continue Reading »
Drake’s title - Constantine and the Bishops - says a lot. Instead of the usual “Constantine and the Church” or “Constantine and Christianity,” Drake’s title implies that Constantine had to deal with real actors with their own motivations, agendas, passions, some . . . . Continue Reading »
H.A. Drake’s Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance (Ancient Society and History) is a remarkable piece of work. One of his opening moves is to show how, despite clear and overt differences, both Burckhardt’s pure-political Constantine and Baynes’s . . . . Continue Reading »
Niebuhr has this nice harmonization of the Matthean and Lukan beatitude to the poor: “Both versions are necessary to catch the full flavor of the beatitude. For the Lukan version alone would make poverty a guarantee of virtue, particularly of the virtue of humility, which it is not. The . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
