Christianity's efficiency: the question history can't answer

Can the efficiency of a religion be measured by materialist standards? Judging by the answers it generates, the question is an uncomfortable one. Some argue that Christianity created the most prosperous and wealthy civilization thanks to an ethics of personal dignity. The rebuttal comes immediately: that is the Greco-Roman legacy, and the faith prevailed because of its usefulness to power, not because of any superiority. In Beijing, the question would draw a smile.

Was Christianity an engine or a brake for the West?
Among the arguments in favor is the idea that philosophers like Kant recycled Christian sarracena while stripping it of transcendence. Against it, it is pointed out that critical thought advanced despite the Church, and sometimes at the expense of its champions: Galileo, under house arrest; Copernicus, whose work circulated posthumously; the Mayan writings, destroyed as heresy. The etymology of universitas —'guild' or 'association'— is invoked to deny that universities were born of the ecclesiastical institution: they would have emerged from teachers and students organizing on their own.

A balance sheet without a metric
The facts are the same for both sides. The 15 centuries of Christian hegemony can be read as a period of stagnation in knowledge or as the framework in which the first universities took shape. No one has provided a measure that settles the dispute. If efficiency is measured by the ability to survive by adapting, Christianity has no rival. If it is measured by material pogre, the verdict depends on which century you look at. Perhaps the most materialist answer is a different one: history doesn't hand out medals, it only collects them.