Chapter XV: Early Christianity
0) Apologies
Sorry to be a bit late in posting this weekend. This is the longest chapter so far by a long way, and very meaty. You can read it here, here or here.
1) Good quotes
This chapter features Gibbon's sarcasm at the heights of subtlety, mainly directed against the naive pretensions of faith. He ends with a particularly barbed comment on how nobody else seems to have noticed the miracles reported in the Gospels: But how shall we excuse the supine inattention of the Pagan and philosophic world to those evidences which were presented by the hand of Omnipotence, not to their reason, but to their senses? During the age of Christ, of his apostles, and of their first disciples, the doctrine which they preached was confirmed by innumerable prodigies. The lame walked, the blind saw, the sick were healed, the dead were raised, dæmons were expelled, and the laws of Nature were frequently suspended for the benefit of the church. General silence concerning the darkness of the passion.But the sages of Greece and Rome turned aside from the awful spectacle, and, pursuing the ordinary occupations of life and study, appeared unconscious of any alterations in the moral or physical government of the world. Under the reign of Tiberius, the whole earth, or at least a celebrated province of the Roman empire, was involved in a preternatural darkness of three hours. Even this miraculous event, which ought to have excited the wonder, the curiosity, and the devotion of mankind, passed without notice in an age of science and history. It happened during the lifetime of Seneca and the elder Pliny, who must have experienced the immediate effects, or received the earliest intelligence, of the prodigy. Each of these philosophers, in a laborious work, has recorded all the great phenomena of Nature, earthquakes, meteors, comets, and eclipses, which his indefatigable curiosity could collect. Both the one and the other have omitted to mention the greatest phenomenon to which the mortal eye has been witness since the creation of the globe.
It is tremendous stuff. Gibbon's text, taken literally, appears to mock Seneca and Pliny (and so on) for failing to observe the world around them properly. But no reader could possibly imagine that that is Gibbon's real meaning. However, for a Christian reader to take offence, he or she would need to argue that Gibbon's words should not be interpreted literally; which is precisely the point Gibbon is making about the Gospels. There are lots more passages like this; here is another where Gibbon challenges the Christians a bit more directly: ...in the days of Irenæus, about the end of the second century, the resurrection of the dead was very far from being esteemed an uncommon event; that the miracle was frequently performed on necessary occasions, by great fasting and the joint supplication of the church of the place, and that the persons thus restored to their prayers had lived afterwards among them many years. At such a period, when faith could boast of so many wonderful victories over death, it seems difficult to account for the scepticism of those philosophers who still rejected and derided the doctrine of the resurrection. A noble Grecian had rested on this important ground the whole controversy, and promised Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, that, if he could be gratified with the sight of a single person who had been actually raised from the dead, he would immediately embrace the Christian religion. It is somewhat remarkable that the prelate of the first eastern church, however anxious for the conversion of his friend, thought proper to decline this fair and reasonable challenge.
Most of the good lines, however, require a build-up over the previous paragraph or paragraphs; you really need to read it for yourself.
2) Summary 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. To this inquiry an obvious but unsatisfactory answer may be returned; that it was owing to the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and to the ruling providence of its great Author. But as truth and reason seldom find so favourable a reception in the world, and as the wisdom of Providence frequently condescends to use the passions of the human heart, and the general circumstances of mankind, as instruments to execute its purpose, we may still be permitted, though with becoming submission, to ask, not indeed what were the first, but what were the secondary causes of the rapid growth of the Christian church? It will, perhaps, appear that it was most effectually favoured and assisted by the five following causes: I. 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. II. The doctrine of a future life, improved by every additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to that important truth. III.The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive church. IV. The pure and austere morals of the Christians. V. The union and discipline of the Christian republic, which gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the heart of the Roman empire.
Gibbon starts by explaining how weird the Jews were, in terms of the religious and social practice of the Roman Empire, and then how the early Christians managed to market and expand the new faith by taking over some but not all of the weird Jewish practices and adding weird Christian practices of their own. He is provocative and witty; essentially, Christians are portrayed as threatening the stability of the Roman world because of their rejection of the normal standards of society ("it was not in this world that the primitive Christians were desirous of making themselves either agreeable or useful").
Gibbon says that this and the following chapter were "reduced by three successive revisals, from a large volume to their present size; and they might still be compressed, without any loss of facts or sentiments." The effort was well invested.
3) Matters arising
As I already said, this is a very long chapter, and there was a lot here that I simply had not thought about before. I think the only serious book I have read about very early Christianity (other than the New Testament, which is not much help here) is Keith Hopkins' A World Full of Gods, and I am afraid it is not very good. So I feel somewhat adrift, in a way that is not a problem when I am reading about the high politics of emperors or battles, where the people and geography may change but the principles are the same at any period of history. So I guess I have two sets of questions on this chapter, first on the substance and then on its reception. But I will save the discussion of the reception for a later week.
On the substance: Is Gibbon's viciously sympathetic depiction of the attitude of the sensible and civilised Roman-in-the-street to Jews and Christians still considered accurate? My liberal heart would of course like to believe that everyone really basically got on well with each other at a human level. At the same time his depiction of a subversive element within society which inspired suspicion and repression from its rulers is a very familiar one from other historical contexts.
Despite his sarcasm about miracles, Gibbon actually accepts most of the historical details from early Christian lore; one of the more substantial passages in this chapter tracks the growth of Church political bureaucracy over the first three centuries. But is he right to take it so uncritically? He seems to lean a lot on Cyprian - but was Cyprian just a particularly diligent record-keeper (or fortunate in how much of his writing survived)? To what extent is the historiography now supported (or contradicted) by archæology and other evidence?
4) Coming next
Next week we get the second (and briefer) of the two controversial chapters, on the "conduct of the Roman government towards the Christians, from the reign of Nero to that of Constantine". Read it here or here. I will give notice also that as that marks the end of the original first volume of The Decline and Fall, I intend to take Gibbon's Vindication immediately after; it is on-line here (I can't find it in a single text page so may generate that myself).
Sorry to be a bit late in posting this weekend. This is the longest chapter so far by a long way, and very meaty. You can read it here, here or here.
1) Good quotes
This chapter features Gibbon's sarcasm at the heights of subtlety, mainly directed against the naive pretensions of faith. He ends with a particularly barbed comment on how nobody else seems to have noticed the miracles reported in the Gospels: But how shall we excuse the supine inattention of the Pagan and philosophic world to those evidences which were presented by the hand of Omnipotence, not to their reason, but to their senses? During the age of Christ, of his apostles, and of their first disciples, the doctrine which they preached was confirmed by innumerable prodigies. The lame walked, the blind saw, the sick were healed, the dead were raised, dæmons were expelled, and the laws of Nature were frequently suspended for the benefit of the church. General silence concerning the darkness of the passion.But the sages of Greece and Rome turned aside from the awful spectacle, and, pursuing the ordinary occupations of life and study, appeared unconscious of any alterations in the moral or physical government of the world. Under the reign of Tiberius, the whole earth, or at least a celebrated province of the Roman empire, was involved in a preternatural darkness of three hours. Even this miraculous event, which ought to have excited the wonder, the curiosity, and the devotion of mankind, passed without notice in an age of science and history. It happened during the lifetime of Seneca and the elder Pliny, who must have experienced the immediate effects, or received the earliest intelligence, of the prodigy. Each of these philosophers, in a laborious work, has recorded all the great phenomena of Nature, earthquakes, meteors, comets, and eclipses, which his indefatigable curiosity could collect. Both the one and the other have omitted to mention the greatest phenomenon to which the mortal eye has been witness since the creation of the globe.
It is tremendous stuff. Gibbon's text, taken literally, appears to mock Seneca and Pliny (and so on) for failing to observe the world around them properly. But no reader could possibly imagine that that is Gibbon's real meaning. However, for a Christian reader to take offence, he or she would need to argue that Gibbon's words should not be interpreted literally; which is precisely the point Gibbon is making about the Gospels. There are lots more passages like this; here is another where Gibbon challenges the Christians a bit more directly: ...in the days of Irenæus, about the end of the second century, the resurrection of the dead was very far from being esteemed an uncommon event; that the miracle was frequently performed on necessary occasions, by great fasting and the joint supplication of the church of the place, and that the persons thus restored to their prayers had lived afterwards among them many years. At such a period, when faith could boast of so many wonderful victories over death, it seems difficult to account for the scepticism of those philosophers who still rejected and derided the doctrine of the resurrection. A noble Grecian had rested on this important ground the whole controversy, and promised Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, that, if he could be gratified with the sight of a single person who had been actually raised from the dead, he would immediately embrace the Christian religion. It is somewhat remarkable that the prelate of the first eastern church, however anxious for the conversion of his friend, thought proper to decline this fair and reasonable challenge.
Most of the good lines, however, require a build-up over the previous paragraph or paragraphs; you really need to read it for yourself.
2) Summary 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. To this inquiry an obvious but unsatisfactory answer may be returned; that it was owing to the convincing evidence of the doctrine itself, and to the ruling providence of its great Author. But as truth and reason seldom find so favourable a reception in the world, and as the wisdom of Providence frequently condescends to use the passions of the human heart, and the general circumstances of mankind, as instruments to execute its purpose, we may still be permitted, though with becoming submission, to ask, not indeed what were the first, but what were the secondary causes of the rapid growth of the Christian church? It will, perhaps, appear that it was most effectually favoured and assisted by the five following causes: I. 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. II. The doctrine of a future life, improved by every additional circumstance which could give weight and efficacy to that important truth. III.The miraculous powers ascribed to the primitive church. IV. The pure and austere morals of the Christians. V. The union and discipline of the Christian republic, which gradually formed an independent and increasing state in the heart of the Roman empire.
Gibbon starts by explaining how weird the Jews were, in terms of the religious and social practice of the Roman Empire, and then how the early Christians managed to market and expand the new faith by taking over some but not all of the weird Jewish practices and adding weird Christian practices of their own. He is provocative and witty; essentially, Christians are portrayed as threatening the stability of the Roman world because of their rejection of the normal standards of society ("it was not in this world that the primitive Christians were desirous of making themselves either agreeable or useful").
Gibbon says that this and the following chapter were "reduced by three successive revisals, from a large volume to their present size; and they might still be compressed, without any loss of facts or sentiments." The effort was well invested.
3) Matters arising
As I already said, this is a very long chapter, and there was a lot here that I simply had not thought about before. I think the only serious book I have read about very early Christianity (other than the New Testament, which is not much help here) is Keith Hopkins' A World Full of Gods, and I am afraid it is not very good. So I feel somewhat adrift, in a way that is not a problem when I am reading about the high politics of emperors or battles, where the people and geography may change but the principles are the same at any period of history. So I guess I have two sets of questions on this chapter, first on the substance and then on its reception. But I will save the discussion of the reception for a later week.
On the substance: Is Gibbon's viciously sympathetic depiction of the attitude of the sensible and civilised Roman-in-the-street to Jews and Christians still considered accurate? My liberal heart would of course like to believe that everyone really basically got on well with each other at a human level. At the same time his depiction of a subversive element within society which inspired suspicion and repression from its rulers is a very familiar one from other historical contexts.
Despite his sarcasm about miracles, Gibbon actually accepts most of the historical details from early Christian lore; one of the more substantial passages in this chapter tracks the growth of Church political bureaucracy over the first three centuries. But is he right to take it so uncritically? He seems to lean a lot on Cyprian - but was Cyprian just a particularly diligent record-keeper (or fortunate in how much of his writing survived)? To what extent is the historiography now supported (or contradicted) by archæology and other evidence?
4) Coming next
Next week we get the second (and briefer) of the two controversial chapters, on the "conduct of the Roman government towards the Christians, from the reign of Nero to that of Constantine". Read it here or here. I will give notice also that as that marks the end of the original first volume of The Decline and Fall, I intend to take Gibbon's Vindication immediately after; it is on-line here (I can't find it in a single text page so may generate that myself).