Feature story
With her work, entitled “Creed, Sword, and Empire: Why Did the Emperor Constantine Convoke the Council in Nicaea?” she invites a reevaluation of one of Christianity's pivotal historical moments—the Council of Nicaea (325 AD)—through a critical lens that challenges traditional narratives about emperor Constantine’s intentions and motivations.
Griffin, a scholar with a focus on early Christian history, delves deeply into Constantine's political ambitions, arguing that the council was less about theological unity and more about securing the stability of a fractured empire.
Drawing from historical accounts and contemporary scholarship, she questions whether Constantine’s alignment with Christianity was primarily a matter of faith or a strategic move to consolidate power across the vast Roman Empire.
At the core of Griffin’s argument is the relationship between political authority and religious influence. Using the perspective of historians like Carlos Antonio Aguirre Rojas, she contends that to understand Constantine, it is crucial to question official histories and consider the power dynamics behind his actions. Constantine’s actions, as she argues, were not driven by a personal commitment to Christian doctrines but rather by his need to solidify control over diverse and often conflicting territories within his empire.
Griffin’s analysis reveals that Constantine employed Christianity as a tool for political unity, transforming it into an “imperial religion” to strengthen his hold on power. By convoking the Council of Nicaea, she posits, Constantine was able to formalize a version of Christianity that served the state’s interests. This version of Christianity aligned religious leaders with imperial authority, effectively merging “creed, sword, and empire” to reinforce the emperor’s agenda.
Griffin delves into Constantine’s nuanced approach to religious policy. Despite his public alignment with Christianity, he retained the title of pontifex maximus (chief bridge maker) and honored traditional Roman deities in his communications with Western provinces. These actions demonstrate, according to her, a pragmatic willingness to accommodate both Christian and traditional imperial religious practices for political stability, rather than a devout conversion to Christianity.
Image
Rev. Dr Kathleen M. Griffin.
Constantine’s decision to preside over the Council of Nicaea further exemplified his strategic use of religious authority, as he worked to align various factions under an imperialized form of Christianity.
Griffin’s presentation also examines how the Council of Nicaea affected marginalized Christian groups, particularly those who opposed imperial control. She explores the experiences of Donatist Christians and other sects, many of whom were exiled or suppressed following the council’s decisions. Her findings underscore the ways in which Constantine’s policies often escalated religious and political conflicts, especially in regions like Roman North Africa, where local Christian sects resisted imperial influence.
Through this examination of Constantine’s role, Griffin reflects on the enduring impact of aligning religious institutions with political power. She draws parallels between the ancient “wedding of creed, sword, and empire” and modern-day challenges faced by faith communities and nations navigating political and religious alliances.
Her analysis calls for a reexamination of the power structures within contemporary religious and ecumenical organizations, urging a move towards inclusivity and ethical integrity that respects diverse voices and experiences.
The conference “Towards Nicaea 2025: Exploring the Council’s Ecumenical Significance Today” is bringing together theologians, students, and individuals interested in the intersection of Nicaea, ecumenical theological education, and faith and order perspectives. Participants, either in person or online, are engaging in robust academic discussions, attending plenary sessions, and contributing to panel discussions.
