Gibbon and Christianity

Reading for a second time The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire has been enlightening and entertaining experience. As I tell anyone who will listen (and many who would probably rather not), Gibbon's prose style is second to none: he is a master of irony and insight and has a facility with English few authors can equal.

I have just finished volume I, which ends with two chapters on the rise of Christianity. They are perhaps his most famous chapters and provoked the most heated response immediately upon publication. Several of his first readers were so upset by Gibbon's treatment of the early church that they attacked it in print. Gibbon, in turn, responded with A Vindication of Some Passages in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Chapters of the History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, a work in which he at great length and with much success defends his book and reputation and attacks his critics.

"Our curiosity is naturally prompted to inquire by what means the Christian faith obtained so remarkable a victory over the established religions of the earth."

But back to Christianity. What I have always found perplexing is how this religion grew so quickly into the dominant doctrine of the Roman Empire. According to Gibbon, Christianity owed its rapid and pervasive growth to the following factors, which are best given in his own words:

1 The inflexible and, if we may use the expression, the intolerant zeal of the Christians, derived, it is true, from the Jewish religion, but purified from the narrow and unsocial spirit which, instead of inviting, had deterred the Gentiles from embracing the law of Moses.

2 The doctrine of a future life, improved by ever additional circumstances which could give weight and efficacy to that important truth.

3 The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive church.

4 The pure and austere morals of the Christians. 

5 The union and discipline of the Christian republic, which gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the heart of the Roman empire.

I am not familiar with the relevant scholarship in the 240 years since Gibbon penned those remarks, but I would venture that few would now subscribe to these or only these causes. Nevertheless, Gibbon remains worth reading on this important and interesting topic, for he makes the past, with all its personalities, beliefs, and forces, come alive in a way that few writers and fewer historians can match.