The Early Church (The Penguin History of the Church)

Henry Chadwick’s “the Early Church” is the first of a remarkable seven volume series of the story of Christianity published by Penguin (originally Pelican) Press in England. This volume, first published in 1967 and revised in 1993, maintains present day relevance. Because of its broad sweep, the text is not drastically altered by recent discoveries or interpretations. Constantine’s “Donation” remain the fraud we studied generations ago. And, because the author has focused heavily upon the developing theology and creedal development of Christian identity, and drawn extensively on Christian Fathers and congenial classical authors and philosophers, there is an element of timelessness to the text. Indeed, it is probably fair to say that Chadwick’s work could rightfully be called the history of the Christian ideal, because hard data of the early Christian era is hard to come by and is itself eclectic. We know, for example, that Christians worshipped next door to the Roman Emperor Diocletian, at least for a time, but we have no idea of Mary’s final residence or tomb. The author does not fill in the blanks but is comfortable working with what he has; his goal is the sketching the endurance of the Apostolic Tradition of belief, to the point where this unity is seriously and permanently breeched by the separation of Eastern and Western Churches, a somewhat vague era in post-Justinian times. Chadwick begins with a survey of first century Christian relations with brother Jews, Gentiles, and the Roman Empire. But once the remarkably energetic Christian mission has settled into its own subsistence in the post apostolic era and established a basic order under strong bishops such as Ignatius of Antioch, Christianity became the object of both frontal assaults and interior dissentions. Romans, for example, beheld the Church as separatist and arrogant (and in tough times, unpatriotic.) Moreover, the monotheism of Christianity offended the sensitivities of religious Roman conservatives; this would remain a problem well past the time of Constantine. Internally the Church was beset by a multitude of variations on a theme: the difficulty in accepting a human Jesus in full divine communion with the Father. Gnostics and the followers of Marcion would attack Christian belief from remarkably different vantage points, but the concern remained the same. The Christian apologist St. Justin, or Justin Martyr (c. 160) established a template of for both Christian apologetics and the development of doctrine. He and subsequent authors would emphasize the continuity of the Jewish Scripture with the identity and mission of Christ. But Justin and others were not uncomfortable using the same methodology of incorporating the enduring wisdom of classical pagan authors. Quite the opposite. Justin and many of the Church’s greatest subsequent thinkers, on through Jerome and Augustine centuries later, were products of classical education and saw in Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and others a natural wisdom, a searching or predisposition to the ultimate truth of the Christian God revealed in Jesus Christ. The key problem, which Chadwick gradually articulates, is the reality of classical thought itself. There were significant conceptual and linguistic differences between the Platonic (idealistic) East and the Aristotelian (realist) west. Misunderstanding and clumsy translation was rife. A strong and unified Roman Empire might have prevented wholesale rending, and Constantine seemed to appreciate an emperor’s potential contribution to Christian unity in the face of the Arian heresy of the fourth century. All the same, Constantine divided the empire geographically, a move that would make a serious problem worse. Chadwick neither lionizes nor demonizes Constantine on the whole, but he contends that later emperors, beginning with Theodosius, were more problematic in Church life. Generally illiterate in complex theological matters, emperors were prey for opportunistic or outright heretical bishops, with the result that the voices of orthodox giants such as St. John Chrysostom could and would be silenced. The division of the empire between Rome and the new Constantinople had one more significant impact upon the life of the Church which Chadwick examines in considerable detail, the rise of the monarchical papacy. With the weight of executive and military power shifted east, the Roman West would become a shadow of its old self. The sack of Rome by Alaric in 410 was such a profound religious and psychological event that St. Augustine was compelled to elaborate his “City of God” concept. And yet Rome possessed two irrefutable advantages: its long-held position in history as the mother church established by Peter himself under the aegis of Jesus’ own words (Matthew 16:18ff), and the very bones of the great Peter and Paul. (The importance of these relics is discussed in great length in volume two of this series.) Thus Chadwick discusses in considerable length the two “Greats” of the papal succession, Leo and Gregory. Leo is perhaps best remembered for his dealings with Attila the Hun, an indication in itself of the power vacuum in the Roman west of the fifth century. But it is his historical intervention in the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.) which Chadwick finds as remarkable for its assumption of supreme teaching authority as its theological content. Leo asserts, almost casually, an authority over East and West, whether it be honored in the breech or not. A century later Gregory would exercise this authority in action, overseeing an ambitious missionary program to the north and west among newly arriving ethnic peoples and insuring a lasting Western Roman Church. Chadwick does take note of some features of Christian art, sacramental worship, and the occasional anecdotal inclusion However, as noted above, this work is more of a study of the development of orthodox belief than a microscopic examination of day-to-day church life. There is inclusion of many names, places and philosophies that may be challenging, people and concepts critical for a time but now generally lost from our general historical consciousness. But all the same, the wonderment of the formulation and survival of the tenets of Christian faith is not obscured and the quest is certainly worth the effort.

With the recent resurgence of interest in the historic churches, histories of the early Church have attracted a greater audience. While this development is surely welcome, there is a growing tendency to quote (or misquote) the Church Fathers to support one's own theological position. There have also been works of Church history where the sole purpose appears to be "spinning" historical facts in order to validate theological presuppositions. Such polemical volumes are generally aimed at a large audience and so are often written in a popular style. More impartial works are often comprehensive tomes poorly suited to those seeking an introduction to the patristic era. 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.

Chadwick's history of the early church is widely regarded as the standard work on the subject, and it's easy to see why. It's a dense, dry read, jostling with facts and ideas about the development of Christianity between the ministry of Jesus and the Iconoclasm Controversy in the Early Middle Ages that marks the sundering of the Eastern and Western Churches. Chadwick explores the complex interplay of social, political, and doctrinal forces that worked together to drive the history of the church forward. It's not easy reading and I wouldn't recommend it as a place to start. It greatly benefits from some familiarity with the historical context, particularly the late Roman Empire, and familiarity with the core disputes of early theology, such as the early Trinitarian controversies and the conflict between Catholic and Gnostic forms of Christianity. By and large, the facts are presented without much context of big-picture-building. I was frustrated to find a serviceable presentation of the big picture only in the final pages, in the book's conclusion - it would have been helpful for me if his broad interpretation had been integrated into the story as he was telling it. I would recommend that most readers start with the conclusion, since it's not exactly going to give anything away, and possibly even refer back to it periodically throughout the read. The book evidences several ignominious flaws, which, although commonplace in Christian literature, are no less tedious for it. Women receive little consideration, for example. One might think that not a single woman lived in all of Christendom between Monica and Hildegard of Bingen, reading this book. While the roots of monasticism are considered at length, the origins of the orders of nuns receive not a single word. It probably goes without saying that extra-canonical views are generally treated unsympathetically, to say nothing of so-called "pagans." In the opinion of this reader, it is high time for that imprecise polemical term to be rejected by academic literature. Despite all that, Chadwick does an admirable job in coolly surveying the various forces at work, and is often judicious in recognizing a meaningless political spat in theological guise for what it is. Armed with a general familiarity of the topic, any reader will certainly come away enriched.

The Early Church by Henry Chadwick is a survey of early church history from the time of St. Paul to the schism between East and West. There are certain threads that come up and an abundance of sub-plots. It was fortunate to have the internet handy to help make sense of it all. There is an endless sea of happenings going on and I suppose to his credit or the credit of the subject itself, much seems to become important and one would like more details. Origen was a major figure, maybe a major corrupting figure, he synthesized Christianity with a Platonic view of God. Arian and Arianism or the interpretation that Christ was only human was another that really made many people mad. The Council of Nicaea was called by Constantine to primarily to get the Christian Leadership to agree what they were not; while Constintine had his feet in two relgions, Sun worship and Christian. Almost every question about the church imaginable in modern times for or against, was also asked in the very early stages; including whether or not the church should be so interconnected to the state and its authority. Another question and dispute was a definition of Christ's relationship to God and as God. Is it like water: being solid, liquid, and steam; or something else. The discusion made many upset and there was a lot debate and rivallry between Rome, Antioch, Constantinople, Alexandria, and Jerusalem as well as Carthage until Islam swept all of Rome's competition away (Islam stealing much of Christendom away) and Rome basically won by being the sole survivor and by successfully converting the German barbarians to its way of seeing things, or something close to that. The effect of Music with the Christian's cause and it's admiration and contribution to conversions was also something noteworthy. The Early Church had very convincing musical effects on convincing unbelievers as well as their sense of community and helping those on the fringe. The early formation of one's religion and the early formation of one's country, especially its laws, seems to be two of the most important areas of history one could study. The early Christians were a spiritual people and they radiated something including hope that created many followers. They faced a vast array of outer and inner conflict which the book describes. It is one of the those books that will probably raise more questions than answers in the end. (One of those questions is did the Manichaeists manage to sneak, primarily through St. Augustine, an interpretation of the meaning behind Adam and Eve that stuck and is still sticking but should be considered unchristian).

If you thought the Church was a simple collection of people trying to worship the same God that has always existed and with the same understanding of what it is all about, then read this book. It is a superb narrative of the evolution of the Church over centuries and it makes clear the complexity of the Church and its structures today. Superbly researched and written in a way that captures the reader, even though some of the names of the major players are difficult and similar and very ancient. This objective recounting of the story of the Church as it developed and sought to clarify complex theological issues is very helpful for those who do have some misgivings about some of the taught Mantras of our own day. The author has done a marvellous job in making the debates and the philosophical issues that impacted on Church doctrinal developments comprehensible and he does it in a non judgemental and objective way. Our beliefs are not simple, never have been, never will be. Our God is not understandable in the way we would like Him/her to be.

Only on first chapter but already thoroughly enjoying it. Very informative & well written.

Chadwick's volume tries to give a synopsis of the confusing interplay of personalities and ideas that shaped the early Christian Church. Most of it deals with the struggle to define orthodoxy vs. continued heterodox assaults, often linked with local and Imperial politics. This is where it starts to get really confusing. You can't tell your heretics without a scorecard, it seems. I was thankful for, although dismayed by, the may references to earlier or later sections of the text when a name or concept was mentioned. The book is primarily organized around the big-name theologians of each successive area. I had hoped that the book would have connected some concepts more strongly. Church "tradition" for example, suppressed many other forms of thought on grounds of the "apostolic authority" of scripture, even though they almost certainly knew that some of their canonical books (e.g., John's gospel) were not actually WRITTEN by the apostle but by successors. It was a big political game. This book does about half the job that needed to be done of presenting it that way.

This is a very good introductory book on the early Christian church. It covers the development of church doctrine and shows how Orthodoxy emerged as Christianity established itself as a legitimate religion. Chadwick's knowledge of his subject is vast yet he did not get into long diatribes on any one subject. The pace of the book is steady yet the reader feels well informed upon finishing it. Chadwick shows how the church responded to gnostic writings and how the more conservative elements came to give validation to those scriptures they believed canonical. Gnosticism was perhaps the greatest threat ever to face the early church and once it was subdued it became easier for the church to deal with future heretical teachings. Two other dogmas receive ample coverage in Chadwick's book, Arianism, and the Catholic/Donatist debates. Chadwick also gives mini biographies of several key players fromboth the orthodox school as well as those deemed heretics. Tertullian, Marcion, Augustine, Origen, the early Popes, and even certain emperors are given enough coverage to show how their lives impacted the early church. While Chadwick covers the church well, at times his book suffers a bit from political insufficiencies. The split of the Roman Empire into east and west is not fully explained, even from how it impacted the church's history. He only gives a few sentences on the barbarian sack of Rome in 410 and the removal of the political seat of government to Ravenna. Also there was a mutual distrust between the Roman church and its counterpart in Constantinople, but these issues are not elaborately explained. Persecutions are not detailed to a great extent. But perhaps the intent of Chadwick was to provide enough background information to pique the reader to seek further knowledge. If that was the case then this book is remarkably successful. It may not be the book of choice for college level survey courses, but this book works well in its specific niche and should remain popular for years to come.