History Of The Church #1 The Early Church Revised [Paperback]

Henry Chadwick's The Early Church goes a long way in solving this problem. Written as part of Penguin's History of the Church series, this excellent work is a great place for those with an interest in early Church history to begin their investigations. Chadwick arranges the sections thematically rather than chronologically - allowing a clearer focus for the reader - and masterfully covers all the major currents in the patristic era without leaving his audience adrift in a sea of minutiae. Beginners to the subject of Church history may find it useful to read the book, digest the information, and then reread it, as they will be better prepared to see how the various theological and political currents interacted in the development of Christian orthodoxy.

Those who approach the topic with a theological axe to grind will not find solace in this book. Chadwick is nothing if not an honest historian and both sides in the Protestant/Roman Catholic apologetics wars may feel a bit uncomfortable at times. The centrality of the Eucharistic liturgy as the defining act of Christian worship from the Church's inception, the implementation of the episcopacy as the main defense against heresy, and the long and arduous process of arriving at a canon attack much of the contemporary Protestant ethos. On the other hand, Roman Catholic believers will feel a little uneasy at the scant evidence for anything resembling the modern papacy. Indeed, after reading Chadwick's work, the reader may come to the realization that many battle lines drawn between the two sides would have seemed alien territory to early Christians with an entirely different set of cultural presuppositions.

Although there are certainly more comprehensive works, one would be hard pressed to find a better introductory volume on the early Church than this one. For its clarity, thoroughness, and impartiality, The Early Church is the best place to start any study of this period.

What he explains is neither Roman Catholic or Protestant, he explains the Church like it was and still is in the Orthodox Church which is really shocking for RCs and Protestants that it wasn't either way but rather just how it is, if they know about it, in the Orthodox Church. That there was no Sola Scriptora and that the sacraments and lituragy were an integral part of Christian worship from the time of Christ on is odd for most Protestants of a non-traditional background.

For the Roman Catholics it is shocking to find out there was no Filioque or the theology which goes with it and that it was actually condemned by the Church at the city of Rome from the beginning of its introduction. Nor was there anything like the modern day papacy. That in fact, the Pope was just a bishop among bishops, all he could do was rule over the city of Rome just as any other bishop and could give a judgement to two bishops if they both decided to appeal to him to solve a minor problem of jurisdiction (a primus interpares), there was no Papal infallibility, cardinals, madatory celibacy for the priesthood, purgatory, etc. and how the "Rock" Christ says he will build His Church on, when read in Greek, is not refering to Peter, but is refering to his proclamation which all Church Fathers, even Augustine agreed on.

As a convert to Orthodox Christianity I was not at all surprised to read what I read, even though it's from an Anglican who still manages to surport Orthodoxy simply through telling it how it is.

I highly recommend it, short read, full of important and integral history to Christianity, a must read.