Week 3: The August Shield: How the Immaculate Heart Fortified the Martyrs of Red, White, and Green

Week 3: Saint Helena (248-328), White Martyr

Quote: Pope Saint Gregory the Great stated, White martyrs use the “spiritual sword” to put carnal desires, selfishness, and pride to death in their own heart.

Statue of Saint Helena holding the True Cross and nails. Location: Saint Peter’s Basilica, Vatican City, Italy

St. Helena, also known as Helena Augusta, occupies a singular place in early Christian history as both the mother of Emperor Constantine the Great and one of the most influential Christian women of late antiquity. Her life reflects the quiet heroism of white martyrdom, a spiritual endurance that mirrors the Immaculate Heart of Mary, who suffered silently beneath the Cross. Like Mary, Helena bore interior sorrows—repudiation, obscurity, and long separation from her son—that purified her faith rather than diminished it. This Marian-inspired resilience later blossomed into her Passion-centered devotion, culminating in her determined search for the True Cross at nearly eighty years old. Yet despite the depth of her spiritual life, Helena’s story was preserved only through the writings of historians, not biographers.

Only a limited number of early Christian writers discussed St. Helena because her role in Christian history was primarily imperial and devotional rather than theological. Patristic authors generally reserved their attention for doctrinal controversies, scriptural interpretation, and ecclesial leadership, leaving figures like Helena—who did not participate directly in theological debates—to be discussed mainly by Christian historians such as Eusebius of Caesarea, Tyrannius Rufinus, Socrates Scholasticus, Salamanes Sozomenos, and Theodoret of Cyrus.

Helena entered the imperial household as the consort of Constantius Chlorus, with whom she had one son, Constantine. When Constantius rose within the Tetrarchy, Helena was set aside, yet Constantine’s loyalty to his mother never wavered. After Constantine became emperor in AD 306, Helena’s status was formally restored. She received the title nobilissima femina in AD 317, a Latin designation meaning “most noble woman,” used for highly honored female members of the imperial family. In AD 324, Constantine elevated her further to Augusta, a Latin title meaning “venerable, majestic, exalted,” which conferred imperial dignity, authority, and public honor. Helena’s rise from marginalized consort to honored Augusta reflects both Constantine’s devotion to her and her growing prominence within the Christianized imperial court.

But why was Helena set aside by Constantius Chlorus? Patristic evidence explains that Helena and Constantius likely began their relationship as a concubinatus, which is a Latin term used in ancient Roman law meant to recognize long-term monogamous life partnership between a man and a woman who were not formally married. This was common when Roman nobles were prohibited from marrying women of lower rank.

When Constantius was elevated to the rank of Caesar in AD 292, the senior emperor Maximian required him to strengthen political alliances by marrying into the imperial family. Constantius therefore repudiated Helena and married Maximian’s stepdaughter, Theodora. This was a political requirement of the Tetrarchy, where marriage served dynastic and strategic purposes. Regardless of the legal category, Helena’s removal from Constantius’ household functioned like a divorce—she was replaced by another woman, separated from her husband, and no longer part of his public life.

Helena’s emotional trauma from being set aside by Constantius was never recorded by early Christian writers, largely because these authors were historians rather than biographers. Historians in antiquity focused on past events, political structures, societies, and broad collective trends, while biographers aimed to reconstruct the detailed inner life of a single individual.

Patristic historiography, like Eusebius of Caesarea in particular, blended historical reporting with theological interpretation to explain the rise and triumph of Christianity. As a result, the key concerns were political developments, ecclesiastical affairs, doctrinal controversies, and moral exempla—not the psychological experiences of historical figures. Within this framework, Helena’s repudiation fell outside the scope of what these writers considered relevant, leaving her personal suffering unrecorded.

What were the losses Helena suffered from this repudiation? With no words remaining from Helena’s own era, the only picture that can be painted of her suffering comes from the lens of human empathy. Helena’s removal from the imperial household would have carried significant social humiliation, personal loss, and political displacement. Roman repudiation—especially when a woman of lower status was replaced by a politically advantageous bride—was legally permissible but socially painful. Helena lost not only her partner but also her position, security, and influence within the imperial family.

The emotional wound of being set aside did not end with the act itself; its psychological effects likely lingered and deepened as Helena confronted the realities of her altered position. Being dismissed so that Constantius could marry into the Tetrarchic dynasty likely produced feelings of injustice, vulnerability, and powerlessness, especially since she had no legal recourse. Her separation also meant losing daily contact with her son Constantine, who was sent to the imperial court as part of political grooming. This separation alone would have been emotionally devastating for a mother.

It is speculated that for more than a decade, Helena lived far from the centers of power, separated from the son she had raised alone. While Constantine was groomed in the imperial court of Diocletian, Helena remained in the western provinces, likely in Trier, with no role in the political world she once inhabited. She would have watched from a distance as her son rose through the ranks of the empire, unable to see him, unable to influence his future, and unable to reclaim her place. Only when Constantine became emperor did he bring her back, restoring her honor after years of quiet obscurity.

Throne and Tradition: The Ascent of Constantine and Helena

Constantius died in AD 306 at York while campaigning in Britain, and Constantine was present at his father’s bedside during his final illness. Ancient sources describe Constantius’ death as the result of a sudden decline in health—likely a fever or chronic ailment rather than a battlefield wound—bringing an end to his western reign. With Constantius’ passing, the legions stationed in Britain and Gaul immediately proclaimed Constantine as Augustus in a traditional act of military acclamation, lifting him on a shield and wrapping him in the purple cloak. This moment not only marked the beginning of Constantine’s rise to imperial power but also initiated Helena’s restoration to the court after years of political repudiation and personal separation from her son.

Several factors may help explain Constantine’s elevation of his mother Helena to Augusta:

• Affection and Loyalty: Constantine’s deep personal devotion to Helena likely motivated him to honor her after years of marginalization under Constantius.

• Compensation for Suffering: He sought to restore her dignity by bringing her to court, granting her imperial rank, minting coins with her image, and giving her full access to the imperial treasury.

• Dynastic Legitimacy: After defeating Emperor Licinius and unifying the empire, proclaiming Helena as Augusta strengthened the political and dynastic legitimacy of Constantine’s ruling family.

Key Moments in St. Helena’s Conversion:

None of the early patristic historians recorded Helena’s conversion, yet Eusebius’s Life of Constantine strongly implies she was already Christian when Constantine restored her as Augusta in AD 324. Eusebius describes Helena as “most devout” and praises her “pious conduct in the churches,” language that assumes an established Christian identity rather than a recent conversion (Eusebius, Life of Constantine, Cameron and Hall 148). Because these remarks appear immediately after her return to imperial life, Cameron and Hall interpret Eusebius as indicating that Helena’s Christian commitment was already mature by the end of her repudiation period, which lasted from AD 293 to AD 306.

Modern historians build on this implication by examining Helena’s circumstances during the years of her repudiation. During this period she lived in the western provinces—most likely in or near Trier—where Christianity was spreading rapidly and local Christian communities were already well organized. These communities offered social stability, charitable support, and a sense of belonging to those who were isolated or politically displaced, making it plausible that Helena found both practical assistance and spiritual formation during her years of obscurity.

Timothy D. Barnes argues that Helena’s later zeal “presupposes a long-standing Christian commitment,” making it historically plausible that she encountered and embraced the faith during this period of obscurity (Constantine and Eusebius, 45). Her immediate activity in Christian works once restored as Augusta further reinforces the conclusion that her conversion occurred well before Constantine’s rise.

By the time Constantine restored Helena to the imperial court in AD 317, her Christian identity was already firmly rooted, shaped during the long years of her repudiation when faith had become both her refuge and her strength. Once elevated to Augusta in AD 324, Helena’s devotion quickly moved from private conviction to public expression, revealing a woman whose spiritual maturity demanded action. Her deepening piety, combined with Constantine’s support and the resources now available to her, opened the way for a new chapter—one in which Helena would carry her faith beyond the western provinces and into the very heart of Christian memory. It was this interior resolve, forged in obscurity, which ultimately propelled her toward Jerusalem and the pilgrimage that would define her legacy.

Stones of Devotion: Saint Helena’s Pilgrimages and the Birth of Christian Architecture:

Helena’s eastern journey can be understood on several levels: as an expression of Christian devotion, as an imperial and dynastic undertaking, and as a formative moment in the development of Christian sacred geography. She undertook her pilgrimage to the Holy Land between AD 326 and 328, when she was approximately eighty years old. Her journey was not a simple act of piety but a turning point in Christian history—one that blended her own spiritual longing with Constantine’s imperial vision and the emerging Christian desire to reclaim the holy places (Barnes 52–55; Pohlsander 33–38).

• Religious Devotion: Most historians agree that Helena’s pilgrimage was fundamentally religious, rooted in a mature Christian faith. Her zeal for locating the sites of Christ’s Passion reflects a long-standing interior devotion. She traveled to Jerusalem to pray where Christ suffered, honor the holy places, and strengthen the Christian identity of the empire (Drake 210–212; Brown, Cult of the Saints, 86–89).

• Dynastic and Political Purposes: Although not ordered by Constantine, the pilgrimage was fully supported and served important political functions. Helena’s public role as a pious imperial matriarch projected stability at the heart of the Christian dynasty. Some scholars argue that her journey helped integrate the newly conquered eastern provinces into Constantine’s sole rule by physically tying the landscape of imperial authority to Christian memory (Barnes 60–63; Lenski 314–318).

• Relics and Sacred Topography: Another major scholarly view emphasizes relics and sacred geography. By the early fourth century, Christians were increasingly venerating holy sites, yet Jerusalem’s sacred places had been obscured by Roman construction. Helena’s excavation of Golgotha and the discovery of the True Cross fit into a broader imperial effort to reclaim and monumentalize Christian sacred space. Historians such as Peter Brown and Cyril Mango argue that her mission was part of a deliberate strategy to anchor Christian worship in physical places associated with Christ’s life and Passion (Brown, Rise of Western Christendom, 92–95; Mango 115–118). Her pilgrimage helped establish the material culture of Christianity—churches, relics, and shrines—that would shape Christian devotion for centuries.

A Crown Laid Down: Saint Helena, the True Cross, and the White Martyrdom of the Immaculate Heart

Helena’s pilgrimage to Palestine around AD 326–328 is described by Eusebius as a journey of fervent devotion and imperial purpose, during which she sought out the physical traces of Christ’s Passion and restored the earliest Christian memory of Jerusalem (Life of Constantine, Cameron and Hall 146–150). Historically, Helena’s role in clearing and monumentalizing the holy sites is well attested, including her involvement in the excavation of Golgotha. According to long-standing Christian tradition, she was credited with discovering the True Cross during these works. Later writers such as Rufinus and Sozomen recount the recovery of three crosses, the titulus, and nails believed to be from the Crucifixion—relics Helena distributed for veneration and imperial protection (Rufinus, Ecclesiastical History 10.7; Sozomen 2.1).

Rufinus describes the search at Golgotha unfolding amid the ruins of a pagan temple, where laborers dug through layers of earth until they uncovered a hidden chamber containing three crosses, the titulus, and iron nails. Unsure which cross belonged to Christ, Bishop Macarius brought the relics to a dying woman; the first two crosses had no effect, but when the third touched her, she rose healed, revealing the True Cross by a miracle that astonished all present (Ecclesiastical History 10.7). Sozomen adds that Helena herself directed the excavation, that the titulus was found lying apart from the crosses, and that the nails were sent to Constantine—one incorporated into his helmet, another into his horse’s bridle—so that the emperor might be protected by the instruments of the Passion (Ecclesiastical History 2.1). Together, these accounts portray Helena’s discovery not merely as an archaeological event but as a moment of divine intervention woven into imperial history.

Historians suggest that Helena’s daily life in Palestine blended prayer, consultation with clergy, supervision of laborers, and visits to emerging Christian communities—tasks undertaken by an elderly woman traveling through rugged terrain with unwavering resolve. In this demanding pilgrimage, Helena lived a form of white martyrdom, embracing physical hardship, emotional intensity, and spiritual self-emptying that mirrored the steadfastness of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, who remained beneath the Cross and whose silent suffering Helena sought to imitate through her devotion to Christ’s Passion.

Mary & Helena: White Martyrdom Shared

• Interior Suffering: Mary endured silent sorrow beneath the Cross; Helena endured years of repudiation (AD 293–306) and the emotional weight of her pilgrimage.

• Steadfast Fidelity: Mary remained faithful through Christ’s Passion; Helena remained faithful through hardship, old age, and the demanding work of locating the holy places.

• Self-Emptying Love: Mary offered her maternal suffering to God; Helena poured herself out in prayer, charity, and relentless devotion during her journey in Palestine.

• White Martyrdom: Mary’s martyrdom was spiritual, not physical; Helena’s was expressed through physical exhaustion, rugged travel, and tireless labor for Christ’s relics.

• Union with Christ’s Passion: Mary’s heart was pierced spiritually at Calvary; Helena sought the very sites and relics of the Passion, entering into Christ’s suffering through action.

In Conclusion

Long before her pilgrimage to Jerusalem, St. Helena’s life radiated a distinctly Christian way of living that transformed the empire from within. Eusebius records that Helena was “continually engaged in conferring benefits on the needy, and relieving the distress of the poor,” a queen whose charity was constant and maternal rather than ceremonial (Life of Constantine 3.47). Even as Augusta, she embraced humility, a virtue noted by St. Ambrose, who emphasized her lowly origins and the modesty she retained despite imperial honor (Oratio de Obitu Theodosii 42). Rufinus further describes her traveling with simplicity, giving generously to the poor, freeing prisoners, and using her wealth only to build churches and care for the vulnerable (Ecclesiastical History 10.7). Through these works, Helena shaped the earliest Christian understanding of pilgrimage—establishing holy sites, founding churches at Bethlehem and the Mount of Olives, and modeling a way of life that sought Christ not only in sacred places but in acts of mercy, humility, and love.

In the end, St. Helena stands as the earliest and most luminous example of a Passionist heart, for she was the first known Christian to devote her life to seeking the relics of Christ’s Passion, longing to touch the physical traces of His suffering so the world might remember His love. She lived a profound white martyrdom, dying daily to herself through humility, charity, and ascetic simplicity even while wearing the imperial diadem. In this hidden self-offering, Helena’s heart quietly mirrored the Immaculate Heart of Mary—burning with love for Christ, steadfast beneath the Cross, and wholly surrendered to God’s will. Celebrated on August 18th, St. Helena is honored as the patron saint of archaeologists, converts, and difficult marriages, a queen whose life continues to guide all who seek Christ with a courageous and tender heart.

Helena’s Foundations and Patronage of Early Christian Churches

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre

The Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre was part of Constantine’s imperial Christian building program. St. Helena played a central role in establishing the Church, directing the excavation of Golgotha and identifying the site of Christ’s tomb (Eusebius, Life of Constantine, Cameron and Hall 146–150). Her efforts ensured that the holiest site in Christianity was reclaimed, honored, and transformed into the monumental shrine that would shape Christian pilgrimage for centuries.

The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem

St. Helena also played a decisive role in the establishment of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, honoring the grotto traditionally identified as the birthplace of Christ and initiating its transformation into a monumental basilica under Constantine’s patronage (Eusebius, Life of Constantine, Cameron and Hall 150–152). The resulting structure—one of the oldest continuously used churches in Christendom—ensured that the mystery of the Incarnation would be honored in a sacred space worthy of its significance.

Sketch of what the Church of Eleona (Greek word meaning olive grove) would have looked like in the 4th century.

The original Church of Eleona was begun during the Constantinian period in the fourth century and associated with Helena’s patronage. It was built by St. Helena around 326–333 A.D. on the Mount of Olives, over the cave where Christ is believed to have taught His disciples. This Constantinian basilica became one of the earliest commemorative churches in Palestine, combining a basilica layout with a sacred cave used for prayer and instruction. It was celebrated by early pilgrims such as Egeria, but later destroyed—first by the Persians in 614 and again by the Fatimid ruler alHakim in 1009.

The Church of Pater Noster

During the Crusader period, a new chapel called Pater Noster was built on the same site to honor the tradition that Jesus taught the Lord’s Prayer there. After its decline, the area saw renewed Christian presence when Carmelite nuns established a convent in 1874, constructing the modern Church of the Pater Noster beside the ruins of Helena’s basilica. Today, the site is known for its grotto—associated with Christ’s teachings—and for its cloister walls covered with over 140 ceramic plaques displaying the Lord’s Prayer in languages from around the world.

Church of St. Michael located in present day Sille Turkey built circa 326-328

St. Helena is traditionally credited with founding the Church of St. Michael near modern day Sille, Turkey, during her travels through the eastern provinces in the early fourth century. According to local Christian tradition, Helena commissioned the church after visiting the region and venerating a site associated with the Archangel Michael, reflecting her devotion to angelic protection and her broader program of establishing Christian worship throughout the empire. Though the original Constantinian structure has undergone later restorations, its foundation is still remembered as part of Helena’s wider effort to strengthen Christian presence in Asia Minor through the building of sacred spaces.

By Patricia Altier

References and Additional Resources:

• Ambrose. Oratio de Obitu Theodosii. In Select Works and Letters, edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wace. Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1896.

• Barnes, Timothy D. Constantine and Eusebius. Harvard University Press, 1981.

• Bralewski, Sławomir. “The Pious Life of Empress Helena, Constantine the Great’s Mother, in the Light of Socrates of Constantinople and Sozomen.” Studia Ceranea, vol. 7, 2017, pp. 27–39. doi:10.18778/2084-140X.07.02.

• Brown, Peter. The Cult of the Saints. University of Chicago Press, 1981.

• —. The Rise of Western Christendom. Blackwell, 1996.

• —. The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity, AD 200–1000. 2nd ed., Blackwell Publishing, 2013.

• Cameron, Averil, and Stuart G. Hall, translators. Eusebius: Life of Constantine. Clarendon Press, 1999.

• Catholic Online. “St. Helena HD.” YouTube, 2016, www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X0xkQfG8nE.

• Catholic Saints. “Life of St. Helena, Empress and Mother of Constantine.” YouTube, 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yt8z8p8lq6U.

• Christian History Institute. “St. Helena: The Empress Who Found the True Cross.” YouTube, 2020, www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk8qkz8Q4nU.

• Drake, H. A. Constantine and the Bishops: The Politics of Intolerance. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000.

• Drijvers, Jan Willem. Helena Augusta: The Mother of Constantine the Great and Her Finding the True Cross. Brill, 1992.

• Eusebius of Caesarea. Life of Constantine. Translated by Averil Cameron and Stuart G. Hall. Oxford University Press, 1999.

• Hillner, Julia. Helena Augusta: Mother of the Empire. Oxford University Press, 2022.

• —. “Helena Augusta: Mother of the Empire.” YouTube, Yale Divinity School, 2022, www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jv0t0Yt6p0E.

• Lenski, Noel. “Empresses and Empire: Imperial Women in the Later Roman Empire.” Historia, vol. 49, 2000, pp. 303–339.

• Mango, Cyril. “The Empress Helena.” Travaux et Mémoires, vol. 12, 1994, pp. 143–158.

• —. Byzantium: The Empire of New Rome. Scribner, 1980.

• McCarty, V. K. “St. Helena: From Roman Concordia to Christian Caritas.” ISEC Conference: The Canonical & Ethical Response of Eastern Orthodoxy, 6 Dec. 2019.

• Pohlsander, Hans A. Helena: Empress and Saint. Ares Publishers, 1995.

• Ritsema van Eck, Marianne P. “Helena on the Move: The Makings of a Medieval Saint.” In Writing Holiness: Genre and Reception across Medieval Hagiography, edited by Jessica Barr and Barbara Zimbalist, pp. 35–64. Brepols, 2023.

• Rufinus of Aquileia. Ecclesiastical History. Translated by Philip R. Amidon. Catholic University of America Press, 1997.

• Sozomen. Ecclesiastical History. Translated by Chester D. Hartranft. In Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II, vol. 2, edited by Philip Schaff. Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1890.

• Van Dam, Raymond. Leadership and Community in Late Antique Gaul. University of California Press, 1985.

Don’t forget to register for our Courageous Parents: Protecting Children in Mind, Body, and Soul brunch this October 24th! You can learn more and register HERE.