Hello all, and welcome back to The Moral Vision of Jesus Christ, the most detailed and lengthy study of the moral code of Jesus that will ever be written. If this is your first time here, feel free to start from the beginning by following this link.
Today, we will be finishing up our study of Chapter Five of the Gospel According to Matthew. The Six Antitheses are now behind us as we prepare to move into Chapter Six, which continues Jesus' all-important Sermon on the Mount. We will proceed today with an abbreviated version of our regular study plan, followed by something a little different.
Because of the density of Christ's moral teaching in our readings of late, we've had little opportunity to broaden our aperture to the wider historical Christian context. Since today's reading is fairly unambiguous, and only stands to reinforce the teaching from Matthew 5:43-45, we will use this as a break in the action to learn a little about the Emperor Constantine, who we discussed briefly last we met. Consider this an indulgence on my part; as much as I love studying the Gospel in its most narrow context, I would be lying if I said I didn't love studying the broader subject of ancient history at least ninety percent as much. The Roman Emperors, in all their forms, both evil and admirable, hold a very special place in my heart.
Without any ado, then, let's get started.
Matthew 5:46 through 5:48
46 For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same?
47 And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same?
48 So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.
------------------------------
--------
The Usual Koine Greek Section
Let's dive straight into the Greek.
First, please note that we already know the Greek word for "love," that is, "agapaó." We're also already familiar with the Greek term for "brother," which is "alephos." "Heavenly" we get from the term "ouranos," which we have also previously discussed. As we move forward, we will frequently repeat translations of terms we have already studied in order to increase our capacity to recall those terms.
The new terms this week are "recompense," "tax collectors," "greet," pagans," "perfect," and "father."
We arrive at the word "recompense" from the ancient Greek "misthos," which can be alternatively translated as "wages," "pay," "hire," "punishment," or "reward." In the first sentence of verse 46, then, Jesus is asking "what great reward do you reap by loving those who love you?"
The next phrase, "tax collectors," comes from the Greek "telónés," meaning a "farmer or collector of tolls, customs, or taxes of the state." As we will come to find out, tax collectors were held in very low esteem in ancient times, especially by First Century Jews in Palestine. The translation here is quite precise.
The word "greet" comes out of the Greek term "aspazomai" which means not only to "greet," but also "to salute," "to welcome kindly," "to kiss, embrace, or caress," or "to be glad that." The English word "greet" may not do proper justice to the term "aspazomai," here, and it is helpful to see that this word denotes affection and kindness.
"Pagan" is translated from the word "ethnikos," meaning, simply, "national." This word is sometimes translated as "gentile," and, in the New Testament, generally refers to anyone who doesn't believe in the Jewish God. More broadly, it would seem that "ethnikos" might be referring to any foreigner from outside of the Near East, especially any foreigner clinging to the customs and habits of the Greeks. It is critical to note that the English word "pagan" has roots in the Latin "paganus," which means "rural" or "rustic."
"Perfect" is the English counterpart of "teleios" which can alternatively represent a laundry list of English terms. Some of the alternatives include "complete," "entire," "without blemish," "omnipotent," "infinite," or "absolute." A Godly word, indeed.
Finally, "father" is translated from the Greek "patér." The spectrum of possible translation here is narrow; "patér" usually just means "father." It is important to note, though, that the Ancient Greeks frequently referred to Zeus, their highest deity, as "patér," or "Zeus Patér," so the word had a divine connotation prior its use in Christian theology.
What Did Jesus Mean?
To understand today's three verses, remember what we read last time we met. To paraphrase, last time, Jesus told his followers that they are not to harbor hatred in their hearts - not even for their enemies. He proposed an alternative: "love your enemies."
Today, Jesus expounds his commandment to love one's enemies. He says "what good is it to love only those who love you, or to treat with kindness only those who you consider to be your brother? Even the least moral among us, the tax collectors and the Gentiles, do these things. We must strive to a higher morality than this."
These words are again, like so many of the words in the Sermon on the Mount, unambiguous. They can only be taken one way. Jesus, here, is merely reinforcing what he said in the previous verses. His followers are to aspire to a higher morality by loving all other humans - even those that act as their enemies. He offers no exceptions.
Jesus doesn't say "love your enemies, unless you feel they are threatening your property or life."
Jesus doesn't say "love your enemies, unless they are of a different religion than you."
Jesus doesn't say "love your enemies, unless they are champions of a pro-choice, LGBT agenda."
Jesus doesn't say "love your enemies, unless they fly planes into your buildings."
Jesus says, without exception, "love your enemies." And then he doubles-down on it.
This commandment is one of the most important and potent commandments of the Christian moral code. It informs almost every aspect of our social lives, and carries the promise of immediate and long-lasting relief from the ills and pains of society. We will revisit this commandment again and again. I cannot stress enough its primacy in Christ's teaching.
--------
Now for a departure from the immediate context of our readings, into the Third Century AD. Buckle up.
The Emperor Constantine: Champion of Christendom?
Part I: The Crisis of the Third Century
Part I: The Crisis of the Third Century
The defining moment of the life of Emperor Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus, known briefly as Constantine, occurred during the night of October 27, 312 AD. On that evening, Constantine was preparing the Roman troops in his command to march against the Roman troops under the command of Emperor Marcus Aurelius Valerius Maxentius, or, henceforth, Maxentius. As Constantine's men sharpened their blades and polished their armor that evening, he is said to have had a miraculous celestial vision telling him to conquer by the sign of the Christian cross. On the following morning, Constantine is said by some sources to have instructed his soldiers to paint the Christian cross on their shields, per his vision. That day, with his men's shields decorated with large crosses, Constantine led his forces to an epic victory in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge, a battle that would leave Constantine sole ruler of the Western Roman Empire and the most powerful man on the planet. It was on that day that the official Christianization of the Roman Empire began, changing the course of history forever.
We will talk more about the events of the night of October 27, 312 AD, and of the battle that followed, in Part III of this study. Here in Part I, we are going back in time to discuss the "Crisis of the Third Century" that led up to the reign of one Emperor Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus, or Diocletian as we know him today. In Part II, we will discuss some of the actions this Diocletian took while in power to end the Crisis of the Third Century, including the formation of a new form of government called a "tetrarchy." We will discuss how Diocletian's novel form of government ultimately failed and led to civil war between the competing Emperors Constantine and Maxentius, culminating in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. After discussing that battle in detail in Part III, we will spend Part IV looking at the reign and reforms of Emperor Constantine, and the lasting effect that they had on the whole of history.
The Crisis of the Third Century can be described most succinctly as the near total collapse of the Roman Empire which occurred in the middle of the Third Century AD. The period was struck through with severe economic depression marked by runaway inflation, civil wars leading to constant changes in leadership at the highest levels of government, invasions of barbarian peoples, and outbreaks of various deadly infectious diseases. Today, let us start our study by briefly discussing each of these main contributors to the Crisis.
1. Economic Woes Caused by Hyperinflation and Disruption of Trade Routes
Due to a number of factors, some of which will be shortly made clear, Roman Emperors were increasingly dependent on their armies as the primary source of their power in the early Third Century. This increased dependence was adequate leverage for the Legionaries to extract substantial pay-raises and bonuses from their leaders. Unfortunately for the Emperors at that time, the Empire was struggling financially, and couldn't exactly afford the increased expenditure on the Legions. In order to make good on the increased payments, the Empire began debasing its currency - that is to say that the Empire began manufacturing coinage that had increasingly less precious metal in it than its titular value suggested. People in the Empire were savvy to this debasement, and prices for everyday goods skyrocketed as Roman currency was understood to be worth less and less throughout the Third Century. The value of Roman currency was further eroded by the tendency of the population to hoard the older, more pure coinage, and to generally only spend the newer debased coinage.
As we will see, the Third Century was marred by civil unrest. That unrest, in addition to the devaluation of Roman currency, led to a near halt of trade across the Empire's vast internal trade network. Without a dependable coinage, it had become difficult to reliably turn a profit on long distance trading, and, because the Legions at this time were often busy fighting one another or tamping down internal rebellions, many of the most important trade routes were no longer secured by an effective military force. The physical movement of goods across the Empire became much more difficult and less profitable at this time.
Many of the citizens of the Empire were reduced to barter economy for want of a reasonable currency, and subsistence farming became commonplace among people who had previously been able to make fortunes on long distance trading. The quality of life for vast swathes of the Empire dipped significantly because of these economic factors, and made the possibility of civil unrest that much more likely.
2. Civil Wars
During the Third Century, power changed hands from Emperor to Emperor rapidly. There were no accepted rules of Imperial succession, so the throne went to whoever could wield enough military power to take it. The Senate was marginalized, and could do little to arrest the political chaos. The best example of these rapid changes in leadership is the year 238 AD, the infamous "Year of the Six Emperors," during which six separate men were successively recognized as sole ruler of the Empire.
Since power was up for grabs to the strongest of the military strong men, civil war among various Roman military commanders became rampant. In a fifty year period, there were at least twenty-six different claimants to the throne. The citizens of the Empire became used to Roman warlords fighting Roman warlords. They became used to hailing the victorious of these warlords as their new Emperor. Instability at the highest echelons trickled down into the whole Empire; all things in business and government were subject to change on a constant basis, and the certainty of the Pax Romana was a distant memory. As we mentioned above, the constant civil war was a contributing factor to the impetus to increase the salary and bonus structure of the armies, which sped up the economic deterioration of the Empire. The distraction of civil war from defensive affairs also contributed to said deterioration.
3. Encroachment of Barbarian Tribes
Because the armies of the Empire were busying themselves with the work of fighting one another in the name of this warlord or that, they had less and less time to patrol the frontiers of the Empire than they had in the past. The frontiers were about as long as they had ever been in the Third Century, and border security was a monumental task critical to the stability of life in much of the Empire. In the Third Century, Rome failed miserably at this task.
One of the two areas most at risk of incursion was the border formed by the Rhine and the Danube rivers. Due to the negligence of the Roman contenders for power, various tribes of foreigners were allowed to make constant gains in this region throughout the century. Goths, Vandals, Carpians, and Alamanni had victories crossing this frontier and sacking Roman cities that had once enjoyed peace of mind through the security of the Legions. The eastern frontier of the Empire at this time also faced an increasing existential threat in the form of the Sasanian Persian Empire, which was annexing strategically important cities there. The disruption of civil affairs in these areas increased the Empire's reliance on military might for control, and added to the breakdown of trading routes, both of which compounded the economic collapse and increased the likelihood of further internal strife and rebellion.
You can see how a "perfect storm" of mutually compounding factors is taking shape here...
4. Disease
Two significant plagues played major roles in the cause and continuation of the Crisis of the Third Century. The first is known as the Antonine Plague, which occurred at the tail end of the Second Century. The second was the Cyprian Plague, which occurred between 249 and 262 AD.
The Antonine Plague is suspected by modern scholars to have been either smallpox or measles, and appears to have been brought into the Roman Empire from the Near East by Legionaries returning home from war. The Antonine Plague did much to set the stage for the Crisis of the Third Century by putting significant stresses on the Roman military apparatus and economy, making in-fighting and instability more likely. The plague was responsible for upwards of five million deaths. Cassius Dio describes the plague briefly in his History of Rome as follows:
We will talk more about the events of the night of October 27, 312 AD, and of the battle that followed, in Part III of this study. Here in Part I, we are going back in time to discuss the "Crisis of the Third Century" that led up to the reign of one Emperor Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus, or Diocletian as we know him today. In Part II, we will discuss some of the actions this Diocletian took while in power to end the Crisis of the Third Century, including the formation of a new form of government called a "tetrarchy." We will discuss how Diocletian's novel form of government ultimately failed and led to civil war between the competing Emperors Constantine and Maxentius, culminating in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. After discussing that battle in detail in Part III, we will spend Part IV looking at the reign and reforms of Emperor Constantine, and the lasting effect that they had on the whole of history.
The Crisis of the Third Century can be described most succinctly as the near total collapse of the Roman Empire which occurred in the middle of the Third Century AD. The period was struck through with severe economic depression marked by runaway inflation, civil wars leading to constant changes in leadership at the highest levels of government, invasions of barbarian peoples, and outbreaks of various deadly infectious diseases. Today, let us start our study by briefly discussing each of these main contributors to the Crisis.
Mutually Compounding Factors of the Crisis of the Third Century
1. Economic Woes Caused by Hyperinflation and Disruption of Trade Routes
Due to a number of factors, some of which will be shortly made clear, Roman Emperors were increasingly dependent on their armies as the primary source of their power in the early Third Century. This increased dependence was adequate leverage for the Legionaries to extract substantial pay-raises and bonuses from their leaders. Unfortunately for the Emperors at that time, the Empire was struggling financially, and couldn't exactly afford the increased expenditure on the Legions. In order to make good on the increased payments, the Empire began debasing its currency - that is to say that the Empire began manufacturing coinage that had increasingly less precious metal in it than its titular value suggested. People in the Empire were savvy to this debasement, and prices for everyday goods skyrocketed as Roman currency was understood to be worth less and less throughout the Third Century. The value of Roman currency was further eroded by the tendency of the population to hoard the older, more pure coinage, and to generally only spend the newer debased coinage.
As we will see, the Third Century was marred by civil unrest. That unrest, in addition to the devaluation of Roman currency, led to a near halt of trade across the Empire's vast internal trade network. Without a dependable coinage, it had become difficult to reliably turn a profit on long distance trading, and, because the Legions at this time were often busy fighting one another or tamping down internal rebellions, many of the most important trade routes were no longer secured by an effective military force. The physical movement of goods across the Empire became much more difficult and less profitable at this time.
Many of the citizens of the Empire were reduced to barter economy for want of a reasonable currency, and subsistence farming became commonplace among people who had previously been able to make fortunes on long distance trading. The quality of life for vast swathes of the Empire dipped significantly because of these economic factors, and made the possibility of civil unrest that much more likely.
2. Civil Wars
During the Third Century, power changed hands from Emperor to Emperor rapidly. There were no accepted rules of Imperial succession, so the throne went to whoever could wield enough military power to take it. The Senate was marginalized, and could do little to arrest the political chaos. The best example of these rapid changes in leadership is the year 238 AD, the infamous "Year of the Six Emperors," during which six separate men were successively recognized as sole ruler of the Empire.
Since power was up for grabs to the strongest of the military strong men, civil war among various Roman military commanders became rampant. In a fifty year period, there were at least twenty-six different claimants to the throne. The citizens of the Empire became used to Roman warlords fighting Roman warlords. They became used to hailing the victorious of these warlords as their new Emperor. Instability at the highest echelons trickled down into the whole Empire; all things in business and government were subject to change on a constant basis, and the certainty of the Pax Romana was a distant memory. As we mentioned above, the constant civil war was a contributing factor to the impetus to increase the salary and bonus structure of the armies, which sped up the economic deterioration of the Empire. The distraction of civil war from defensive affairs also contributed to said deterioration.
3. Encroachment of Barbarian Tribes
Because the armies of the Empire were busying themselves with the work of fighting one another in the name of this warlord or that, they had less and less time to patrol the frontiers of the Empire than they had in the past. The frontiers were about as long as they had ever been in the Third Century, and border security was a monumental task critical to the stability of life in much of the Empire. In the Third Century, Rome failed miserably at this task.
One of the two areas most at risk of incursion was the border formed by the Rhine and the Danube rivers. Due to the negligence of the Roman contenders for power, various tribes of foreigners were allowed to make constant gains in this region throughout the century. Goths, Vandals, Carpians, and Alamanni had victories crossing this frontier and sacking Roman cities that had once enjoyed peace of mind through the security of the Legions. The eastern frontier of the Empire at this time also faced an increasing existential threat in the form of the Sasanian Persian Empire, which was annexing strategically important cities there. The disruption of civil affairs in these areas increased the Empire's reliance on military might for control, and added to the breakdown of trading routes, both of which compounded the economic collapse and increased the likelihood of further internal strife and rebellion.
You can see how a "perfect storm" of mutually compounding factors is taking shape here...
4. Disease
Two significant plagues played major roles in the cause and continuation of the Crisis of the Third Century. The first is known as the Antonine Plague, which occurred at the tail end of the Second Century. The second was the Cyprian Plague, which occurred between 249 and 262 AD.
The Antonine Plague is suspected by modern scholars to have been either smallpox or measles, and appears to have been brought into the Roman Empire from the Near East by Legionaries returning home from war. The Antonine Plague did much to set the stage for the Crisis of the Third Century by putting significant stresses on the Roman military apparatus and economy, making in-fighting and instability more likely. The plague was responsible for upwards of five million deaths. Cassius Dio describes the plague briefly in his History of Rome as follows:
Moreover, a pestilence occurred, the greatest of any of which I have knowledge; for two thousand persons often died in Rome in a single day.
The later Cyprian Plague is suspected to have been smallpox or pandemic influenza, and was recorded in detail by the early Church Father Cyprian, the Bishop of Carthage. The Cyprian plague is named as such because of Cyprian's dutiful record of it. Cyprian described the symptoms of the plague thus, in his De Mortalitate:
...now the bowels, relaxed into a constant flux, discharge the bodily strength; that a fire originated in the marrow ferments into wounds of the fauces; that the intestines are shaken with a continual vomiting; that the eyes are on fire with the injected blood; that in some cases the feet or some parts of the limbs are taken off by the contagion of diseased putrefaction; that from the weakness arising by the maiming and loss of the body, either the gait is enfeebled, or the hearing is obstructed, or the sight darkened...
Brutal stuff. Whereas the Antonine Plague was said to be killing two-thousand per day in Rome, the Cyprian Plague was said to claim, at its apex, five-thousand per day in the Eternal City. Millions died, and the Roman Empire was nearly brought crumbling down as the plague further aggravated every other factor of decline apparent during the Crisis of the Third Century.
The. Perfect. Storm.
Conclusions
The century leading up to the rule of the first "Christian" Emperor, Constantine, was indeed fraught with turmoil and upheaval. A series of missteps and tragedies paved the way to the miserable Crisis of the Third Century, and it is not possible to point to any one component of the chaos as the ultimate culprit. Plague, internal unrest, external threats, and economic catastrophe all worked in tandem to create perhaps the darkest period of time in Roman history.
The pertinence of all of this to our study will be shortly self-explanatory, but we will lay it out here to be thorough. Without a Crisis of the Third Century, there would have been no Emperor Diocletian. Without an Emperor Diocletian, there would have been no Tetrarchy. Without a Tetrarchy, there could have been no Emperor Constantine, and, without an Emperor Constantine, there is no telling whether or not there would have ever been a "Christian" Roman Empire.
Next time, we will learn why Diocletian is generally credited as having ended the Crisis of the Third Century and as having saved the Roman Empire from imminent collapse, extending her longevity for another century and a half. We will also learn why some Christians still shudder with fear and disgust today when they hear the name "Diocletian."
------------
Ok, that does it for today. Thank you so much for reading and sharing this writing. Your time and attention mean the world to me. Do join us next time for Part II of our study-within-a-study, plus more Gospel reading.
Love.
-------------------------
To read what came prior to this, click here.
