Why did the early Church grow?

Cite some possible reasons for the Church's success, summarizing the different theories. Say
how important you think they were, relative to each other, which you think were most
important and give evidence for this conclusion.

The story of how 11 fearful disciples spawned a movement that within weeks saw hundreds
being converted, and within less than four centuries had spread through almost the entire
known world to become the official state religion of the Roman Empire is well-known.1
However, this legendary growth requires some examination to both define its true extent by
the end of the 4th century, and also to understand its causes. This essay will focus on two
factors affecting growth; firstly, environmental factors which facilitated growth; secondly,
factors intrinsic to the church and its faith which promoted growth. Having examined these
some brief consideration will be given to a theological dimension and the extent to which the
agency of God can be seen within the growth of the church.
While the geographic expansion and spread of the church is indisputable, it is far more
difficult to quantify the numbers of Christians within the church. The New Testament clearly
documents the expansion of the church throughout the Mediterranean through apostolic
missions (primarily those of St Paul). In addition to the Hellenic East, there is ample
evidence of subsequent expansion into North Africa including the centres of Alexandria and
Carthage, with North Africa having at least 130 bishops by 256. 2 Similarly, in Western
Europe, settled churches are recorded in Spain, Gaul and Germany towards the end of the
second century. Beyond the Mediterranean, there are reports of a certain Pantaenus on a
mission to India around 180 finding Christians already there who traced their faith back to
St Bartholomew.3 Both Christian and non-Christian sources provide a clear picture of the
spread of the church to all points of the compass within its first three centuries.4
The actual number of Christians within this church is far less clear. Schor concludes that by
the year 350 there could have been as many as 15.8 million Christians within the Roman
Empire.5 However, Robin Lane Fox argues that outside Rome Christians were distributed
patchily, if at all, citing the third-century Christian writer, Origen, who admitted that

Acts, Chapters 1-2

Robin Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians (London: Penguin, 1988), 272.
3
P. Schaff and H. Wace, A select library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, M: W. M. Eerdmans,
1961), 537.
4
For example, Suetonius, Tacitus and Pliny.
5
A.M. Schor, Conversion by the Numbers: Benefits and Pitfalls of Quantitative Modelling in the Study of Early
Christian Growth, Journal of Religious History 33.4 (2009), 473.
2

Christians were only a tiny fraction of the worlds inhabitants.6 Latourette is probably the
most realistic: The complete story of the spread of Christianity in its first five centuries
cannot be told, for we do not possess sufficient data to write it. 7 Nevertheless it was
indisputable that Christianity had grown from a tiny sect in the Middle East to become the
state religion of the Roman Empire by the end of the fourth century.
Exploring the reasons for this growth, Michael Green correctly draws attention to the
environmental factors noting that probably no period in the history of the world was better
suited to receive the infant church than the first century. 8 The reasons for this were
threefold: the political influence of the Romans, the cultural and intellectual influence of the
Greeks, and the religious influence of the Jews.
The first centuries of Christianity were dominated by the Roman Empire, a single political
entity that spanned almost all the known world, and encompassed many different peoples
held together by a political philosophy of accommodation which both allowed subjected
people to maintain their cultural identity and also to enjoy a shared identity as Roman
subjects. This unity was reinforced by the Pax Romana, a period of stability under the
protection of the Roman military. It is worth noting that while the Roman army maintained
order, which aided the spread of new ideas, the army itself could also be an avenue for the
spread of these new ideas: it was Roman practice to post soldiers far away from their
homeland and this meant ideas travelled with them. Moreover the Roman Empire was
supported by an unprecedented infrastructure to facilitate this movement. Throughout the
Empire roads were built which stretched thousands of miles connecting cities and allowing
travel, freedom of movement and the spread of ideas. The missionary journeys of St Paul,
though exceptional, were by no means unique.
The road network of the Roman Empire thus provided the hard-wiring for the transmission
of new ideas. Greek culture and intellectual heritage provided the soft means in the form of
language. Through the conquest of the Hellenistic world the Roman Empire absorbed the
Greek language with its philosophical heritage and vocabulary. By the first century Greek
had to a large extent become the international language of the intellectual classes containing
vocabulary well-suited to the spread of ideas. Early Christian writers -and indeed the
Jewish writers of the Septuagint - used Greek as their language of choice to promulgate their
message, (although it should be noted that New Testament Greek is a somewhat colloquial
adaptation of classical Greek containing some vocabulary unique to the Christian faith).This
6

Adolf von Harnack, and J. Moffatt, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries
(London: Williams and Norgate, 1908), 79.
7
Kenneth S. Latourette, A History of Christianity (London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1964), 65.
8
Michael Green, Evangelism in the Early Church (Guildford: Eagle, 1995), 13.

formula of a broadly-spread common language of ideas with an appropriate base of

vocabulary enabled the early Church to develop a following among the intellectual elite
through its numerous apologists: a notable example would be Justin Martyr as a student of
philosophy who was converted by the force of intellectual argument in the 2nd century.
Importantly, the religious climate of the time was receptive to new ideas. The Roman world
was essentially pagan and pluralist. We have already observed that as the Roman Empire
grew, so the cultures and religions of the conquered peoples were absorbed and adopted
more often than they were eradicated. This was not just politically expedient; it also had a
religious rationale. In a world of pagan belief where Gods could be benevolent, malevolent,
or simply whimsical, it would not be wise to stake too much on any single deity. 9 Rather it
made sense to accept any, and all, Gods into the Roman pantheon. This created religious
pluralism providing

what

E.

R.

Dodds

described

as

bewildering

mass

of

alternatives. 10 However this pluralistic approach also contained an inherent weakness.

Gilbert Grindel articulates this point arguing that paganism was most seriously crippled by
its want of dogmatic teaching.11 The weakness of pagan pluralism and therefore the
opportunity for Christianity was that it did not provide the sense of belonging inherent in
the religious views and practices.12 The religious environment could hardly have been more
suitable for the planting of a new and different monotheist faith like Christianity.
Thus Christianity was born into a receptive and favourable environment; however, this alone
was not enough to ensure its success over the divers other cults appearing in this climate.
Christianitys success hinged upon a number of intrinsic factors which allowed it to exploit
this climate much more successfully than its competitors. One advantage Christianity had
over its rivals was its appeal. It was not enough simply to be different; it also had to be
attractive. Its attractiveness could be found in three features.
Firstly, Christianity simply offered more. Paganism provided for security and earthly wellbeing, but the Christian message offered answers for more deeply felt human needs both in
this world, and the next.13 Robin Lane Fox argues that Christianity changed the way people
viewed lifes momentous events ...the relationship between people and their God, and the
one certainty of life death.14 It offered both a new moral code and also an answer to issues

Fox, Pagans and Christians, 78.

E.R. Dodds, Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 133.
11
G. E. A. Grindle, The Destruction of Paganism in the Roman Empire: from Constantine to Justinian (Oxford:
B.H. Blackwell, 1892), 11.
12
Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity (New York, NY: Harperone, 1997), 196-215.
13
Ramsay MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire (Newhaven, CT: Yale University Press, 1984), 12.
14
Fox, Pagans and Christians, 23.
10

of the afterlife, precisely answering the weakness of pagan pluralism highlighted by Dodds
and providing one irrevocable choice where the road to salvation was clear.15
In addition, Christianity was more socially inclusive, crossing racial, class and gender lines.
This is evident from the epistles of St Paul and other contemporary observers. 16 Early
Christianity saw many converts from the lower strata of society (Chadwick records accounts
of slaves converting to Christianity and being freed by their masters.17) It also saw converts
from the elite; for instance, relatives of the Emperor Domitian (his nephew, the consul T.
Flavius and his wife Flavia Domitilla) were known to be Christians (and were executed and
exiled respectively for their faith).18 However, what radically distinguished Christianity from
other contemporary religions was not simply that its adherents were drawn from all classes,
but that they entered the community of believers as equals.
Most importantly, however, Christianity was an active religion. Lane Fox argues that
Christians never preached outright social reform; nevertheless the love shared among
believers and the social good provided by the movement drew significant comment and
attracted converts. 19 Eusebius writing about a great famine in Armenia draws particular
attention to the effective witness of the socially active and compassionate Christian
community: they (Christians) alone in the midst of such ills showed their sympathy and
humanity by their deeds... so that this thing became noised (spoken of) abroad among all
men, and they glorified the God of the Christians and, convinced by the facts themselves,
confessed that they alone were truly pious and religious.20
Such a noticeable movement however did not earn universal approval. The persecutions
suffered by the early church are well-known, but it is worth noting that, perhaps surprisingly,
they made a two-fold contribution to the church of the growth, by both scattering Christians
and thus spreading the message, and also by drawing the attention of observers to a faith
that people were willing to die for. This point is emphasised in Tertullians Apologia in 197.
We grow up in greater number as often as we are cut down by you. The blood of Christians
is their harvest seed.21
Continuing to consider how the inherent nature of Christianity contributed to its growth, it
would be a mistake to believe that the spread of Christianity was simply a by-product of

15

Dodds, Pagan and Christian, 133.

See, for example, Galatians 3:28
17
H. Chadwick, The Early Church (Harmondsworth: Pelican, 1986), 58.
18
Latourette, History of Christianity, 80.
19
Fox, Pagans and Christians, 21.
20
Schaff, and Wace, A select library, 589.
21
B. Altanter, Patrologie (Freiburg: Herder, 1951), 126.
16

other factors. Mission was an imperative from the outset; a commandment of the founder;
the practice of the apostles. Pantaenus mission to India was exceptional only in its
destination. Schor gives great weight to intentional mission and Goold & Lake similarly cite
The Didache, (probably early 2nd century) references to travelling teachers continuing if
his teaching be for the increase of righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him
as the Lord22. The spread of Christianity was clearly never accidental, simply brought about
by circumstance; its growth was in large measure the result of intentional mission.
These missionary enterprises not only won converts, but also formed churches. The pagan
writer Celsus (c. 180) marvelled at the close-knit structure and coherence of Christians.23 The
establishment of these communities has given rise to a further explanation of the growth of
the church in sociological terms. The network theory sees churches as nodes which formed
reference points and support for a network contributing both to the maintenance of
established faith, and further proliferation via support offered to travelling missionaries.24
Many historians as well as sociologists have noted that this practice of communal living and
corporate worship was part of the early churchs Jewish heritage. Meeting in the Synagogue
was a central part of Jewish tradition, which had been spread through the Empire in the
Diaspora. Recognising the Jewish heritage of the Early Church is a further factor in
understanding the contribution the intrinsic nature of Christianity made to its growth.
Christianity, of course, was born out of Judaism, and initially was viewed essentially as a
Jewish sect; much of its distinctiveness that has already been noted was Jewish in origin.
The Jewish heritage of Christianity gave it a solid foundation of history, morality and
religious literature, which it built upon, modified, and made its own.25 However in one major
respect Christianity and Judaism were radically different. Judaism was exclusive and,
although willing to accept converts, did not proselytise. As we have noted above, intentional
mission was a core component of Christianity. But this only really became significant once
Christianity and Judaism separated in their approach to the Gentiles. Had Christianity not
opened itself up to Gentile converts then its growth would certainly have been negligible. The
decision of the Council of Jerusalem allowing Gentiles to be included in the faithful marked
Christianity out as something much broader than a narrow Jewish sect: It is my judgment,
therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God,

22

G.P Goold and K. Lake, The Apostolic Fathers (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1975),324325
Chadwick, The early church, 62.
24
Stark, Rise of Christianity, 79.
25
T. R. Glover, The Conflict of Religions in the Roman Empire, (London: Methuen & Co., 1909), 144.
23

declared the Apostle James.26 The decision of the Council of Jerusalem in a very real sense
opened up the whole world to the early Church.
However to understand the reasons for the churchs growth fully, it is necessary to
understand why this decision was taken. This introduces the theological dimension: Jesus
commissioned St Peter as the rock on which He would build His Church.27 It was Peter who
received a vision from God to bring the gospel to the first Gentiles in Caesarea. 28 And it was
Peter who convinced the Council in Jerusalem that God made a choice among you that the
Gentiles might hear the message of the gospel and believe. 29 The Early Churchs
acceptance at the Council of Peters testimony to Gods direction made a clear statement of
belief that God was supremely responsible for directing the Church into growth. St Paul was
later to express this same conviction to the fledgling church in Corinth thus: neither he who
plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.30
In conclusion, therefore, this essay has explored a number of factors influencing the growth
of the Early Church within two major groups. Firstly, it has examined environmental factors,
the political impact of the Roman Empire, the opportunities provided by Greek culture and
intellectual language and the influence of the Jewish heritage. These factors combined to
create a highly favourable environment for the growth of the Early Church. Secondly it has
examined the intrinsic nature of the Early Church: in its distinctive message, its inclusive
approach, its deliberate and energetic mission, and its network structure, it positioned itself
uniquely to capitalise on the opportunity for growth afforded by the environment in which it
operated. Within this, the overwhelming importance of the early strategic decision taken in
the Council of Jerusalem which made the Church genuinely open to Gentile converts has
been given due weight. This decision above all created the opportunity for all the other
factors noted to have an impact. The Early Church, (and indeed Christians today) believe this
decision was inspired by God, which adds a theological dimension to the reasons for the
success of the Early Church, and suggests that its growth was, above all, the result of the
agency of God.
(Word Count 2654)

26

Acts 15:19.
Matthew 16:18.
28
See Acts 10.
29
Acts 15:7.
30
1 Corinthians 3:7.
27

Bibliography
Altaner, B., Patrologie: Leben, Schriften und Lehre der Kirchenvter. Freiburg: Herder,
1951
Bray, G. Creeds, Councils and Christ: The Continuity between Scripture and Orthodoxy in
the First Five Centuries. Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1984.
Chadwick, H. The Church in Ancient Society: from Galilee to Gregory the Great. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2001.
Chadwick, H. The Early Church. Harmondsworth: Pelican, 1986
Dodds, E.R. Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety. New York, NY: Cambridge
University Press, 1991
Frend, W. H. C. The Rise of Christianity. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1984.
Fox, Robin Lane. Pagans and Christians. London: Penguin, 1988.
Goold, G. P., and K. Lake. The Apostolic Fathers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
1975.
Grindle, G.E. The Destruction of Paganism in the Roman Empire: from Constantine to
Justinian. Oxford: B.H. Blackwell, 1892.
Grant, R. M. Greek Apologists of the Second Century. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1988
Green, Michael. Evangelism in the Early Church. Guildford: Eagle, 1995.
Glover, T. G. The Conflict of Religions in the Roman Empire. London: Methuen & Co., 1909
Hall, S. G. Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church. London: SPCK, 1991.
Von Harnack, Adolf, and J. Moffatt, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First
Three Centuries. London: Williams and Norgate, 1908.
Latourette, K.S. A History of Christianity. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1964.
Lehane, B. Early Celtic Christianity. London: Constable, 1994.
Macmullen, R. Christianizing the Roman Empire. Newhaven, CT: Yale University Press,
1984.
Schaff, P., and H Wace. A select library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Grand Rapids,
MI: W.M. Eerdmans, 1961.
Schor, A. M. Conversion by the Numbers: Benefits and Pitfalls of Quantitative Modelling in
the Study of Early Christian Growth. In Journal of Religious History 33 (4), 2009: 472498.
Stark, R. The Rise of Christianity. New York, NY: HarperOne, 1997.
Williams, R. Arius: Heresy and Tradition. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1987.