Most Helpful Customer Reviews
35 of 35 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A good, brief overview..., April 1, 2004
This review is from: Church History: An Essential Guide (Abingdon Essential Guides) (Paperback)
Summing up the history of the Christian church, which spans 2000 years, in a mere handful of pages is no easy task. Any history is necessarily selective -- even the most detailed of analyses of particular events or the most comprehensive of encyclopedic tomes will by design have to include only part of the story, and exclude a great deal. Justo Gonzalez is a name well known in church history circles; there are few more qualified to make the kinds of selection judgements required for a brief overview of church history, and he does this fairly well. 'Church History: An Essential Guide' is part of a series of Essential Guides put out by Abingdon Press, the object of which is to give key topics and subjects a brief but complete outline for introduction, reference, and refresher uses. In fewer than 100 pages, Gonzalez provides a concise yet useful summary of church history. The first chapter is a summary of the summaries -- in one page for each of nine sections, this is the most basic of outlines of church history. The subsequent nine chapters look at church history according to time period, as follows: - The Ancient Church (the origins to 313) - The Christian Empire (313-476) - The Early Middle Ages (476 - 1054) - The High Point of the Middle Ages (1054 - 1303) - The Late Middle Ages (1303 -1453) - Conquest and Reformation (1453 - 1600) - The Seventeenth and Eighteen Centuries - The Nineteenth Century - The Twentieth Century and the End of Modernity Several of the dates signify that serve as chapter division points are key turning points in church history -- 313 was the year of the Edict of Milan (which, ironically, though a major division point for the chapters, is never explicitly explained); 476 is commonly held to be the date of the fall of the western Roman Empire; 1054 is the year of formal division between East and West in Christendom, etc. Each chapter discusses both theological and worship/liturgical practices. After the East/West split, the book is almost exclusively Western in subject material, only occasionally referencing developments in Eastern Orthodoxy (a trend fairly common in church histories generally, although Gonzalez does do a bit more of such referencing than many). Each chapter also has a listing of selected and suggested readings -- given the admitted lack of detail due to space requirements, Gonzalez states that this introduction is meant to inspire readers to seek further information (often from Gonzalez's own well written church histories). There is no index in the book, which is a drawback for those who might want to use this book as a reference tool. However, the book is well-written and concise, so making notes for one's own use in the back pages would not be a bad idea. This is a book designed largely for the busy person in mind -- the reading is simple without being simplistic; there are not too many names and terms to wade through, and the whole of the book could be read in but a few hours, making church history readily accessible to even the busiest of lay persons, and a refresher handily available for the busiest of clergy.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Typical Western Church Historian, January 23, 2012
This review is from: Church History: An Essential Guide (Abingdon Essential Guides) (Paperback)
First of all this book almost entirely focuses on Western Church history, but doesn't actually claim that it's anything less than being full "Church History." That issue aside, there is one major issue that makes me wonder if he's even credible on the Western Church history he focuses on.
On page 46, Gonzales makes a huge mistake that causes one to question his scholarship. He accurately defines the Christology known as "Monophysitism," but then goes on to say that the Armenians, Copts, Syrians, and Ethiopians are Monophysites. For one thing, the communion of churches he's referring to comprise the Oriental Orthodox Church, but he only mentions a few main ones.
The important issue is him defining the Oriental Orthodox Christians as Monophysite is simply wrong; their being attributed with that Christology has been a historical pejorative way of dismissing them as heretics. The Oriental churches at the time condemned Monophysitism as a heresy themselves, whereas they affirmed Miaphysitism.
For those that don't know:
Monophysitism: the Christological doctrine that Christ has one nature, within which His human nature is limited, incomplete, diluted, or absorbed into/because of the divine nature.
Miaphysitism: the Christological doctrine that Christ has one nature, within which He is both fully human and fully divine.
While it may seem small to some, this misinformation has been an obstacle to unifying the Eastern/Oriental Orthodox churches for some 1500 years. For him to write volumes on Church history (not this book, obviously) and be such an acclaimed Western historian on the subject, and then proceed to show that he's incapable of doing proper research on the topics he writes on without just making typical Western assumptions causes his credibility to go right out the window.
For more information please go to:
[...]
[...]
[...]
[...]
This book may be meant as a brief guide, outline, or "map," to Church history, but it should at least remain accurate while being concise.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Wrong on the Non-Chalcedonians, January 15, 2012
This review is from: Church History: An Essential Guide (Abingdon Essential Guides) (Paperback)
The book misrepresents the beliefs of the Non-Chalcedonians (the Armenians, Copts, etc.) and the reasons for our rejection of the Council of Chalcedon. We are not Monophysites, and we believe in Christ's perfect and complete humanity. We rejected Chalcedon because of real concerns that it was allowing Nestorianism in through the back door, despite its condemnation of Nestorius. This is not a very scholarly work. Fr. V.C. Samuel's Council of Chalcedon Re-Examined has a much more thorough and scholarly review of what happened at Chalcedon: The Council of Chalcedon Re-Examined
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|