Pope Innocent I as a pagan high-priest

Pope Innocent I  was in the office from 401 to his death on March 12, 417.

He was the son of Pope Anastasius I (399-401).

How come?

Well - celibacy was not yet required from the bishops at that period of time.

The security situation was very grave in 410. Two years earlier the Visigoths had lifted the devastating first siege that had caused such widespread sickness and hunger in the city after getting plenty of gold, silver, silk - and most importantly - pepper from the Senate.

But now they were coming back for more.

Many people were thinking that perhaps the pagans were right and the recent misfortunes of Rome at the hand of enemies was revenge of Jupiter and other ancient gods whose temples had been closed and even the Sacred fire of Vesta had been put off in 394 by the order of Emperor Theodosius I.

Saint Augustine writes much about this ideological and theological matter in De Civitate Dei and argues against the claim that abandoning classical paganism doomed Rome to the barbarians.

Well.

Pope Innocent I agreed with the pagans.

In his anxiety with the terrible enemy at the gates of Rome, Pope Innocent I took in year 410 the role of  a high-priest and performed pagan rites to appease the angry gods.

This highly unusual and very telling episode from the Rome at the end of its Classical glory is told by the pagan historian Zosimus in his Historia Nova written in 498-518. (It is unlikely that Church historians would mention such an awkward incident.)

It has been said that because the people of Rome did not participate in great numbers in these private sacrifices and prayers we can see that Christianity had already taken deep root in the hearts of the people.

I am not so sure. Why would Augustine write at such length on the matter if the memory of Jupiter and his court had already disappeared, those Immortals!

Zosimus

The first book sketches briefly the history of the early Roman emperors from Augustus to Diocletian (305); the second, third and fourth deal more fully with the period from the accession of Constantius Chlorus and Galerius to the death of Theodosius I; the fifth and sixth, the most useful for historians, cover the period between 395 and 410, when Priscus Attalus was deposed; for this period, he is the most important surviving non-ecclesiastical source. The work, which breaks off abruptly in the summer of 410 at the beginning of the sixth book, is believed to have been written in 498–518.

The style is characterized by Photius as concise, clear and pure; other historians have judged his accounts confused or muddled, and valuable only because he preserves information from lost histories. The historian's object was to account for the decline of the Roman Empire from the pagan point of view. Zosimus is the only non-Christian source for much of what he reports.
wikipedia

De Civitate Dei
The credibility of Zosimus has been questioned on many grounds and not least by Christian historians. However, I personally find the action of Pope Innocent I as described by him both plausible and understandable.

It gives us rare insight to the minds of people in Rome as the enemy approaches and the memory of the 408 siege lingers fresh.

If even the Pope was in doubt about Jesus Christ... what can we expect from the common people, the citizens bearing the brunt of the attack.

Not for nothing did Jesus Christ direct his servant, Saint Augustine, to write about the matter in depth.

In fact, in such a depth that his writing changed the world.

Earthly Empire of Rome .... the Kingdom of God.

We might say that Rex Regum took one away, pulled the matt from under classical antiquity, and gave instead something new.