Customer Reviews

One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic: The Early Church Was the Catholic Church

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This book's focus is on the Early Catholic Church and covers five primary areas in five huge chapters (the book itself is a soft covered book of over 300 pages). The topics covered are 1. The Church of the Apostles, 2. The Church of the Early Church Fathers, 3. The Church of the First Four Great Councils, 4. The Primacy of Rome in the Early Church and 5. The Early Church Was the Catholic Church.

This book is an excellent read, some of it being in story form which makes it an easier and more interesting read than some other apologetic material. It is strongly rooted in history, presenting historical facts to prove that the Catholic Church of today is a direct descendent of the Early Church of the time of the Apostles.

I would recommend this book for anyone who is involved in Catholic Apologetics, or who would like to learn more about the Early Church. It draws upon a huge source of early Church literature, it develops a very interesting picture of the Early Church and ties them all together to give us the Catholic Church we have today.

Keneth Whitehead historically based apologetic work on the early church, uses history to show the early church was in fact the Catholic church in all essential respects. I am writing this review to show how previous reviewers that maligned this book, on the basis of lacking footnoting is total bogus and has more to do with their own biases. I'm a former Graduate student in Political Science at the University of Central Oklahoma. Political Science scholarship often used Parethical text citation instead of footnoting. While it is true Mr. Whitehead's book does not use footnoting, his sources are well documented.
The structure of the book is composed of four chapters and a conclusion.
Chapter One is "Church of the Apostles". I hardly think footnoting is necessary when quoting the Apostle Paul the author merely documents this as (1 COR 10:17). Anyone even remotely familar with the Bible can recognize this.
Chapter two is the "Church of the early Fathers" in which sources are identified in the text such as the classic historians like Eusebius Ecclesiastical History and early church fathers such as Ignatius. Ignatius only wrote seven letters around 107 A.D which are well known even among Protestants, and the book identifies which letter he is quoting from in each case. Anyone with even most limited knowledge of early church fathers can look up the author's references. Similarly when Emperor Constantine Edict of Milan is quoted from, the parethical reference is sufficient.
Chapter three is on the "Church of the Four Great Councils"
It includes lengthly quotes from Great Church council offical documents. Consider on Pg. 84 of this book being reveiwed, the author quotes a statement made by the Arian Emperor Constantius in 355 A.D as saying "take my will for a canon". This source is cited in the text as (St. Athanasius, History of the Arians, 33). There are many similar examples to this one. This argument about footnoting to attack this book is totally bogus and without foundation. It is made by people with their own biases and agendas.
The reason is clear. The final chapter of book and much of the meat of the book on the "Primacy of Rome" in the early centuries is filled with historically damaging information. In particular, the documentary evidence is overwhelming (w/ Page Numbers!) of Eastern Christianity putting themselves to writing in Ecumenical councils recognizing the formal primacy of the Bishop of Rome despite what they and Protestants assert today.

The central premise of Kenneth Whitehead's 300+ page work is that, despite the protestations of "reformers," the early church was indeed the Catholic Church. The author carefully takes the reader through the early centuries of the Church, exploring the development of the institution and hierarchy from the time of the apostles and the early church fathers through the four great councils, establishing the primacy of Rome from the earliest of times.

The author's arguments are carefully laid out and full developed in a flowing narrative3, offering the reader a systematic exploration of doctrinal developments as well as evidence of papal primacy. One weakness, particularly for those of a more critical bent or for those with a greater intellectual curiosity, is the lack of footnotes to accompany the extensive bibliography. However, given the intended audience, this is a minor criticism, detracting only slightly from what is well-crafted prose. The combination of scriptural, doctrinal and traditional exposition provides a good overview of the Catholic Church's apostolic roots.

Whitehead aspires to write for the common believer who wishes to have an introduction into the validity of the Church's claim to be "One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic" according to the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed. The text is a good introduction into this material, its development and history in Church thought.

The number of names and heresies is nearly head-spinning if one does not have a great grasp on early Church history. Because of this, I think that an extra index should exist with the names of the individuals written about along with a brief explanation of their stance (with textual cross references). Such cross-references would be nicely added to the already existing heresy index. This is mostly a nice addition, as an index does exist for the text.

I must also agree with the complaints of other reviewers about the lack of footnotes. However, this is a minor issue, as the text is not meant to be technical but to be an apologetic help.

I think the text is good for all who want to have a better view of the early Church and do not have a thorough knowledge thereof. It is an easy read, although a bit factually overwhelming for the non-historians, even if you are somewhat-experienced in theology. The author can be a bit pedantic, reminding the reader that what he is writing supports his thesis and also is a bit heavy on the proof for the primacy of Rome in the early Church, while neglecting other topics related to the creedal formula. Nonetheless, I suggest this book highly, as stated above!

this book strength lies in its broad scope and in the blending of institutional history whith theological development and historical fact. Unlike many books of this kind, this one devotes considerable attention to the development of early Christianity. msujanto10@hotmail.com

I had purchased this book when it first came out, but just now got around to reading it. I thought it was going to be a rehash of Catholic apologetics that I pretty much have a handle on. This book would more appropriately be placed in the history section of your library. I already had a rudimentary knowledge of Church Councils and the various heresies, but after reading this book I am now more knowledgeable of how and why the Councils came about and why the heresies were so dangerous. Whitehead goes into quite a bit of detail on the Arian heresy and just how close Christianity came in denying Christ's divinity.

Only if your mind is closed or you have axes to grind with the Catholic Church will you NOT come away reading this with a better understanding of what the early Christian Church was and give you a better appreciation of what the Church is now.

This book is fascinating! The more I learn about the ancient history of Catholicism the more I am convinced that is really is the church willed by Christ and built on Peter. As the title indicates, this book goes into depth about the four pillars of Catholicism as professed in the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed better known as just the Nicene Creed.

Using scripture and the ancient writings that have come down to us from the early Church fathers such as St. Ignatius of Antioch (who first used the term "Catholic Church" in 110AD) Whitehead convincingly defends the theology, tradition, and authority professed by the Roman Catholic Church. This is not a polemic. While the implication is that non-Catholic Christian churches have some explaining as to why they claim to want to "get back to the early church" (as long as it's not Rome), Whitehead simply lays out the facts based on very thorough research.

A full third of the book is devoted to the apostolic succession of the popes from Peter. Council after council, century after century, there was rivalry, but not breach, between the great sees of Christianity (Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Rome and, later, Constantinople). Whitehead ably demonstrates that, even while politics drove a wedge between East and West, the ultimate schism need not have happened as the orthodox theological giants of the day were in agreement that Jesus was very clear when he said, "You are Peter." As Richard John Neuhaus wrote in First Things, 1000 years is a long time to us mortals. But in God's time it's nothing. We should all pray that this schism will someday heal.

The Appendices are excellent, especially the one that lists and explains the major heresies that plagued the early Church.

My only complaint is that Whitehead didn't spend much ink on the sacraments, especially the Eucharist. In light of the major post-Reformation variations of belief about the Real Presence (especially among modern non-denominational churches), it would have been interesting to learn more about the early mass and the fact that the Eucharist was a part of it from the beginning. Other books The Mass of the Early Christians have been written on this subject, but some information here would have amplified the book's subtitle: The Early Church Was the Catholic Church.

All in all an excellent and approachable book with great information for the Catholic who wants to better understand the history of our faith, but also the non-Catholic who wants to understand why Catholics are so steadfast in claiming to be the church Christ did indeed will.

Despite some breathlessness and awkwardness, Kenneth Whitehead makes a very strong case for his contention that "The Early Church Was The Catholic Church" and that the Church today is distinctly similar to the Church then. While agreeing with Mr. Whitehead, I would argue that the Church since the Second Vatican Council bears far less resemblance to the "Early Church" than it should.

If you are a Catholic, wanting to truly understand your Faith as the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church -- The ORIGINAL Christian Church -- then please take the time to read this. If you are merely looking into the hitory and basic beliefs of the Church, then you'll benefit greatly from this, too. I highly recommend this book to anyone looking for the True Church. God bless.

This book was very interesting- because it covers the beginnings of the church. Whitehead discusses the four great councils in the first four hundred years and offers some good information on the early papacy. However, as one who studied history in college, I must add that this is one of the worst books for those who are looking for information on the beginnings of the early papacy. Very arkwardly written and very poorly referenced. There were some passages in which the author offers his opinion, and I was wondering where did he get those sources and how did he get his opinion. NO FOOTNOTES!!!!! Only a paltry list of bibliography in the back. If the man wishes to offer his case for the one, holy, and catholic church, then he MUST use footnotes to let people know where he got those sources. Even the Catholic Catechism uses this method and I am appalled at Mr. Whitehead's lack of concern for the importantance of historical scholarship. A waste of money. To those serious seekers of historical authencity of the Catholic Church's claims as the CHURCH that Christ founded, I would recommend trying the library for an overall view of the founding of the Church based on Biblical AND historical sources... Try the primary sources, not second hand sources.

One more thing. a reminder to Catholic apologetic writers, please use footnotes and use lots of references because it will make your case stronger- I'd recommend taking a course on writing history.