Skip to content

Religion and political philosophy

State and religion

How Rome bound civic order to the gods — from the priesthoods of the Republic and the imperial cult of the emperors to Diocletian's persecution and Constantine's turn to Christianity, the long Roman experiment in making religion an instrument of the state.

Religion as a department of state

Rome did not separate religion from politics; it could not have understood the distinction. The gods were members of the political community, the priesthoods were public magistracies, and the favour of the gods (pax deorum) was a public good the state existed partly to maintain. The platform reads state-and-religion as one continuous Roman project — the binding of civic order to the divine — that runs from the augurs of the Republic to the Christian emperors of the late empire, changing its content entirely while keeping its structure intact.

The Republic and the Augustan restoration

Under the Republic the chief priesthoods — pontiffs, augurs, the pontifex maximus — were held by leading senators, and religious authority was distributed like every other power in the constitution. Augustus understood that the civil wars had been read as a sign of divine displeasure at Roman impiety, and he made the restoration of religion a pillar of his settlement: he rebuilt eighty-two temples (he says so in the Res Gestae), revived lapsed priesthoods and festivals, and in 12 BCE took the office of pontifex maximus for himself, fusing supreme religious authority with supreme political authority in a way no Republican had dared. From him onward the emperor was head of the state religion.

The imperial cult and the Christian problem

The Principate added something new: the imperial cult, the worship of the emperor (living in the provinces, formally deified after death in Rome) as a focus of loyalty across a multi-ethnic empire. For most subjects this was simply how one expressed allegiance, and Rome was famously tolerant of local gods so long as the civic cult was honoured. The exception broke the system. Jews and then Christians refused, on principle, to sacrifice to the emperor or the gods of Rome — and that refusal, read as disloyalty rather than mere belief, is the root of the persecutions, which reached their height under Diocletian's Great Persecution of 303.

Constantine and the inversion

Constantine inverted the whole arrangement. By extending toleration (the policy associated with the Edict of Milan, 313) and then favouring the Christian church, he kept the Roman structure — the emperor as the divinely sanctioned guarantor of religious order — and changed its content from the old gods to the new faith. When he summoned and presided over the Council of Nicaea in 325, he was acting in an unbroken Roman tradition: the head of state convening the authorities of the public religion to secure the pax deorum. The platform reads this as continuity disguised as rupture — the same office Augustus had built, now Christian.

Why the platform reads it

The platform reads state-and-religion because Rome is the archetypal case of religion as an instrument of political order, and because the Constantinian fusion of imperial and ecclesiastical authority set the terms for a thousand years of European argument about the relation of church and state. Every later contest — investiture, the divine right of kings, establishment and disestablishment — is conducted in a frame Rome built. The modern separation of religion from the state is defined against the Roman model precisely because the Roman model was the default for so long.