What do you think?
Rate this book
Church History: A Crash Course for the Curious
In this concise, accessible guide, author Christopher Catherwood takes his readers through the history of the faith, educating them about the uniqueness of Christianity from its birth to the diverse, global Evangelical Church we know today. Church History is the perfect place to start for anyone who wants to know where to begin this quest for knowledge. Enjoy discovering more about the lives of men and women from various times and places, not only to better understand the church, but also to know how to live wisely in this age. These are some of the many reasons why history is so important. From those who desire to learn more about their fellow followers of Jesus Christ throughout history to those who want to learn more about church for themselves, this book will test you to dig deeper in your faith.
224 pages, Paperback
First published April 1, 1998
36 people are currently reading
192 people want to read
About the author
Christopher Catherwood
65 books15 followersChristopher Catherwood is a writer and historian based in Cambridge. He has taught at the University of Cambridge and the University of Richmond, Virginia. An expert on Winston Churchill, his previous books include the bestseller Winston’s Folly.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
May 26, 2015
Christopher Catherwood's Church History: A Crash Course for the Curious is a mixed bag of tricks. While there were flashes of brilliance, the book only superficially dealt with history of the church and left me (and lots of other readers, I would assume) still curious.
Let's start with the positive....
Catherwood's handling of religious influence on the founding of America is brilliant. I find many modern voices over-emphasizing the religious influence on America's founding fathers, turning a willfully blind eye towards the Deistic views that informed some Founders' seemingly Christian speech. Many of our founders, based upon their own writings, would fall outside of orthodox Christianity. However, other liberal voices negate any Christian influence on the founding of America. Such a view is also anachronistic and ignorant. Catherwood, as a Brit, speaks in a balanced way when it comes to America's founding. He writes, "So while it is natural for us as evangelicals to emphasize the Puritans - so many of whose views and values we share as deeply as ever today - it is historically quite inaccurate to see the origins of the USA through Puritan spectacles. When we talk - anachronistically it should be said - of reclaiming America, do we mean Puritan New England or Cavalier Virginia? Both, for good or ill, are equally America" (144).
Catherwood also offers the best definition of 20th Century neo-orthodoxy I have ever read. He calls it "a fuzzy, halfway house theology that recognized the failings of Liberalism and yet was unable to make a full return to biblically orthodox theology" (193). I wish my seminary professors had been this clear when describing Karl Barth and his contemporaries!
Church History falls short on several accounts. Most significantly, it gives far too superficial a treatment to most major historical events that shaped Christianity. For example, Luther, who is given a far more generous treatment than others, is covered in 8 pages. Poor Calvin gets three pages. Johnathan Edwards gets only one page. Curious readers should consider instead Christian History Made Easy by Timothy Paul Jones or, for the more ambitious reader, Justo Gonzalez's excellent two volume The Story of Christianity.
Did you know that Catherwood was the maternal grandson of Martyn Lloyd-Jones? If you didn't, you will after you read this book. Catherwood mentions his relationship to Lloyd-Jones on numerous occasions. One can hardly fault Catherwood for his sense of pride being connected to Lloyd-Jones. After all, the Good Doctor may have been THE preeminent preacher of the preceding century. However, the frequency with which Dr. Lloyd-Jones is mentioned and quoted is off-putting. The book could have been titled, Church History: Through the eyes of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
In closing, I think this is a nice book written by an author who is vastly more knowledgable and talented than this book demonstrates. I think there are better options for the reader curious in church history.
Let's start with the positive....
Catherwood's handling of religious influence on the founding of America is brilliant. I find many modern voices over-emphasizing the religious influence on America's founding fathers, turning a willfully blind eye towards the Deistic views that informed some Founders' seemingly Christian speech. Many of our founders, based upon their own writings, would fall outside of orthodox Christianity. However, other liberal voices negate any Christian influence on the founding of America. Such a view is also anachronistic and ignorant. Catherwood, as a Brit, speaks in a balanced way when it comes to America's founding. He writes, "So while it is natural for us as evangelicals to emphasize the Puritans - so many of whose views and values we share as deeply as ever today - it is historically quite inaccurate to see the origins of the USA through Puritan spectacles. When we talk - anachronistically it should be said - of reclaiming America, do we mean Puritan New England or Cavalier Virginia? Both, for good or ill, are equally America" (144).
Catherwood also offers the best definition of 20th Century neo-orthodoxy I have ever read. He calls it "a fuzzy, halfway house theology that recognized the failings of Liberalism and yet was unable to make a full return to biblically orthodox theology" (193). I wish my seminary professors had been this clear when describing Karl Barth and his contemporaries!
Church History falls short on several accounts. Most significantly, it gives far too superficial a treatment to most major historical events that shaped Christianity. For example, Luther, who is given a far more generous treatment than others, is covered in 8 pages. Poor Calvin gets three pages. Johnathan Edwards gets only one page. Curious readers should consider instead Christian History Made Easy by Timothy Paul Jones or, for the more ambitious reader, Justo Gonzalez's excellent two volume The Story of Christianity.
Did you know that Catherwood was the maternal grandson of Martyn Lloyd-Jones? If you didn't, you will after you read this book. Catherwood mentions his relationship to Lloyd-Jones on numerous occasions. One can hardly fault Catherwood for his sense of pride being connected to Lloyd-Jones. After all, the Good Doctor may have been THE preeminent preacher of the preceding century. However, the frequency with which Dr. Lloyd-Jones is mentioned and quoted is off-putting. The book could have been titled, Church History: Through the eyes of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
In closing, I think this is a nice book written by an author who is vastly more knowledgable and talented than this book demonstrates. I think there are better options for the reader curious in church history.
August 13, 2025
Gives a fly-by of church history. It is not exhaustive, but still provides excellent detail while highlighting things I want to now look more into.
May 13, 2016
Loved it! Catherwood does exactly what he sets out to do—give a whirlwind introduction to church history. Inevitably this means the book is not exhaustive nor extensive, but it doesn't purport to be. So, for what it is (a "crash course"), I found it interesting, easy-to-read, and lucid, with some insightful analysis. Catherwood does his best to remain fair and balanced, though he inevitably writes from a Reformed evangelical perspective (which is perhaps what endeared the book to me...?). I must say, though, I found Catherwood's repeated reference (at least 5 times by my count) to "Crossway author Mark Dever" slightly odd...
July 2, 2015
I would like to meet Christopher Catherwood someday and talk with him about his late grandfather, Martyn Lloyd-jones, a man I have grown to admire through the reading of his books.
I thoroughly enjoyed Catherwood's book, "Church History" and would encourage others to take the 'crash course.'
I thoroughly enjoyed Catherwood's book, "Church History" and would encourage others to take the 'crash course.'
July 4, 2024
What was good:
The subtitle of “a crash course for the curious” is accurate - this is a great overview of the key events in church (particularly the Protestant church) history. It is written in a way that is interesting and understandable. I also like how the author explains how certain events impacted other people/events/ways of thinking at that time and even down through the centuries. If you want a good and fairly superficial overview of church history with some discussion around the impact of these events, this book is for you. If you are wanting a lot more detail, then probably not. However, I found myself keeping a mental list of things he mentioned in passing that I would like to explore a bit more on my own.
The author is British and bravely tackled the notion that America’s founding fathers were devout Christians. Even though this book was written well before the Christian nationalism that we see in the American church today, what he has to say on the topic is excellent.
Criticisms:
1. The author is a bit repetitive regarding his own doctrinal positions and favourite Christians from history - he tends to talk quite repetitively about Dr. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and Francis Schaeffer, for example. I also lost count of how many times the author mentioned his own position as a Reformed Calvinist.
2. I would have liked to have seen a bit more discussion on the contribution of women in church history. This is a book very centred on men. He does mention Hildegard of Bingen but in the context of her actions being a great example of how women influenced the church “without usurping the role of men”. I had to roll my eyes a bit at that comment!
Overall, though, this was an excellent book and I would definitely recommend it! I couldn’t put it down and finished it in just a few days.
The subtitle of “a crash course for the curious” is accurate - this is a great overview of the key events in church (particularly the Protestant church) history. It is written in a way that is interesting and understandable. I also like how the author explains how certain events impacted other people/events/ways of thinking at that time and even down through the centuries. If you want a good and fairly superficial overview of church history with some discussion around the impact of these events, this book is for you. If you are wanting a lot more detail, then probably not. However, I found myself keeping a mental list of things he mentioned in passing that I would like to explore a bit more on my own.
The author is British and bravely tackled the notion that America’s founding fathers were devout Christians. Even though this book was written well before the Christian nationalism that we see in the American church today, what he has to say on the topic is excellent.
Criticisms:
1. The author is a bit repetitive regarding his own doctrinal positions and favourite Christians from history - he tends to talk quite repetitively about Dr. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and Francis Schaeffer, for example. I also lost count of how many times the author mentioned his own position as a Reformed Calvinist.
2. I would have liked to have seen a bit more discussion on the contribution of women in church history. This is a book very centred on men. He does mention Hildegard of Bingen but in the context of her actions being a great example of how women influenced the church “without usurping the role of men”. I had to roll my eyes a bit at that comment!
Overall, though, this was an excellent book and I would definitely recommend it! I couldn’t put it down and finished it in just a few days.
July 22, 2021
Catherwood is a good writer and he has undertaken the monumental, if not impossible, task of surveying 2,000 years of church history in 217 pages. So kudos for making the attempt. Such a task would, by necessity, require one to be selective and sparse in what people and events one treated. Catherwood seems to follow a broadly chronological approach which he combines with a thematic approach. It generally works but not always. He also frequently makes links to our contemporary society and church with the result that the reader is bouncing back and forth from the past to the present and back to the past. Also, the author is both descriptive (what happened and why) and judicial (giving his approval or disapproval). Thus, the book moves between recounting of history and social or ecclesiastical critique. Those expecting a straight history book may find this tendency distracting. That said, many of his critiques are, to my mind, insightful and helpful. Others, not so much. Some were rather puzzling. He frequently refers to his other books and those of others but gives no bibliographical information so that an interested reader can easily find them. He also has an annoying habit of cross-promotion. This edition of his history is published by Crossway and several times he refers to Mark Dever as "Crossway author Mark Dever." I like Mark Dever's books and I like Crossway but this cross-promotion annoyed every time I read it. Perhaps this was the editor/publisher's doing but either way it should be avoided. In all, the book is a good read but would not be my first or second recommendation for a church history survey as it attempts to do to many things.
August 1, 2023
This book was a pretty good synopsis on church history since it’s founding in Acts. Be cautioned- this book is heavily written from a reformed bent. But nonetheless, I think the author is effective and efficient in chronicling major movements in Christianity through the ages.
June 17, 2017
This is not a reliable history. It is driven by personal perspective and bias. The propensity to name drop was unfortunate as well.
March 18, 2020
I enjoyed the premise of the book. However, the author was very opinionated throughout the book and gave personal anecdotes. Which is fine if the book was not a history one.
June 7, 2023
Good overview of themes for certain time periods. Easy enough to follow to get a big picture view. Worth re-reading until you get really familiar with the material.
March 19, 2025
It had some good information. There was a lot of time jumping when discussing future evangelists with past evangelists, which got confusing at times. The author also inserted his own opinion more than I would have liked.
April 8, 2020
This book is exactly what it says on the cover: a crash course in Church history. The uathor is the grandson of Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and from the reformed wing of evangelical Christianity. He is sound and writes with a personal tone, and many people will love this book. He wrote another book that I liked very much - his family portrait of Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
Nevertheless I cannot give this book quite the glowing review of the other reviewer below. This book was very good and collates a huge amount of information and detail into a small space, making it readable and accessible. The author is up front about being from the reformed wing of evangelicalism, and we know when he is putting his personal view on an issue. The presence of his personal opinions is by no means illegitimate in a book on history.
But even though I too am from the reforemed and evangelical wing of the Church, and have every on of Martyn Lloyd-Jones' books on my bookshelf (and read too!) I felt, reading this book, that it had some issues in terms of time spent on evangelical church history as opposed to the broader sweep of church history.
Some of this is my own bias, but - for instance - some very important people in curch history, such as Theodosius for instance, do not even get named. Many others are little more than footnotes. There is brief mention of early church doctrinal disputes, but the issues are so briefly covered that it is hard to get a feel for how all encompassing they were. Arianism gets reasonable coverage. Gnosticism is hardly mentioned (in fact maybe not at all). Constantine is briefly covered, although his mother is nothing more than a footnote.
This is a crash course though, so maybe I should not expect so much from this work. At least these people are mentioned - but I would have liked perhaps a pointer at least to something like J N D Kelly's excellent "Early Church Doctrines". In mentioning the medieval dispute over the number of angels that dance on a head of a pin, it would have been nice to extend that to another paragraph at least, explaining how the real issue in that dispute was over corporeal/non corporeal forms, and why this was actually considered a valid point of inquiry.
But come the reformation we are then given pen portraits of a selection of important figures in Church history. These have a strong bias to evangelical tradition. All this information is valid and useful, but here is my problem with this approach: It feeds confirmation bias.
Readers from the reformed and evangelical traditions will enjoy reading about the great evangelical leaders, but there is little here to challenge them to consider the broader sweep of church history. This could be an altogether too comfortable book for evangelicals. On the other hand, anyone reading from another tradition will probably dismiss it as an example of evangelical bias, and again not allow themselves to be challenged by the distinctive evangelical contribution to Christianity. Lloyd-Jones may be family, but for a book on the broad sweep of church history he seems to get mentioned rather often. (On the other hand, Lloyd-Jones' treatment of the history of dispensationalism is fuller than the one on this book, so that is a good place for further reading).
I think what I would have preferred was a longer work that considered the issues more thoroughly, and guided interested readers into further reading, and that was more challenging. There were some challenges though - a clear call for Christians to avoid isolationism, and the insight (found elsewhere also) that separation of religion from the state is good for Christianity, and that the state cannot legislate morality. All these are good insights.
Despite thos criticisms, this is not a bad book and one I could happily recommend to anyone who has no knowledge at all of church history. I could imagine adapting some of the material for a sunday school lesson plan on the subject.
Nevertheless I cannot give this book quite the glowing review of the other reviewer below. This book was very good and collates a huge amount of information and detail into a small space, making it readable and accessible. The author is up front about being from the reformed wing of evangelicalism, and we know when he is putting his personal view on an issue. The presence of his personal opinions is by no means illegitimate in a book on history.
But even though I too am from the reforemed and evangelical wing of the Church, and have every on of Martyn Lloyd-Jones' books on my bookshelf (and read too!) I felt, reading this book, that it had some issues in terms of time spent on evangelical church history as opposed to the broader sweep of church history.
Some of this is my own bias, but - for instance - some very important people in curch history, such as Theodosius for instance, do not even get named. Many others are little more than footnotes. There is brief mention of early church doctrinal disputes, but the issues are so briefly covered that it is hard to get a feel for how all encompassing they were. Arianism gets reasonable coverage. Gnosticism is hardly mentioned (in fact maybe not at all). Constantine is briefly covered, although his mother is nothing more than a footnote.
This is a crash course though, so maybe I should not expect so much from this work. At least these people are mentioned - but I would have liked perhaps a pointer at least to something like J N D Kelly's excellent "Early Church Doctrines". In mentioning the medieval dispute over the number of angels that dance on a head of a pin, it would have been nice to extend that to another paragraph at least, explaining how the real issue in that dispute was over corporeal/non corporeal forms, and why this was actually considered a valid point of inquiry.
But come the reformation we are then given pen portraits of a selection of important figures in Church history. These have a strong bias to evangelical tradition. All this information is valid and useful, but here is my problem with this approach: It feeds confirmation bias.
Readers from the reformed and evangelical traditions will enjoy reading about the great evangelical leaders, but there is little here to challenge them to consider the broader sweep of church history. This could be an altogether too comfortable book for evangelicals. On the other hand, anyone reading from another tradition will probably dismiss it as an example of evangelical bias, and again not allow themselves to be challenged by the distinctive evangelical contribution to Christianity. Lloyd-Jones may be family, but for a book on the broad sweep of church history he seems to get mentioned rather often. (On the other hand, Lloyd-Jones' treatment of the history of dispensationalism is fuller than the one on this book, so that is a good place for further reading).
I think what I would have preferred was a longer work that considered the issues more thoroughly, and guided interested readers into further reading, and that was more challenging. There were some challenges though - a clear call for Christians to avoid isolationism, and the insight (found elsewhere also) that separation of religion from the state is good for Christianity, and that the state cannot legislate morality. All these are good insights.
Despite thos criticisms, this is not a bad book and one I could happily recommend to anyone who has no knowledge at all of church history. I could imagine adapting some of the material for a sunday school lesson plan on the subject.
February 20, 2017
Wonderful! I have been taking a seminar from the author, and his unique voice and knowledge base shines through in this readable but insightful book. I only wish that the secular (non-seminary) version were still in print.
September 15, 2010
I picked this book up looking for an objective view of the history of the church, but I should have paid closer attention to the back of the book. The author is an Evangelical Christian and the church history is approached from his standpoint, and it is my own fault for not paying close enough attention to have realized it before picking it up.
That said, Mr. Catherwood does try to incorporate other views somewhat, although he often disparages them. In the author's defense, he very much acknowledges the church's long and tumultuous role in killing other Christians, interfering with government, and persecuting other religions, along with all the good things it has accomplished. So it is not an entirely one-sided story, which helped keep my interest enough to read it through.
Also, the book taught me a lot of church history I wasn't aware of, for such a small volume. The facts are there, albeit with an evangelical slant. I would have given "Church History" 2.5 stars had there been the option, possibly a 3 had it been a bit more in-depth, but after some deliberation I have decided to rate it "OK."
If you are looking for a purely historical and fully objective view of the history of the church (if such a book exists,) this is not it. However, I do recommend this for Christians seeking a crash course in the knowledge of the Christian religion, its roots, and its many branches and effects on history.
That said, Mr. Catherwood does try to incorporate other views somewhat, although he often disparages them. In the author's defense, he very much acknowledges the church's long and tumultuous role in killing other Christians, interfering with government, and persecuting other religions, along with all the good things it has accomplished. So it is not an entirely one-sided story, which helped keep my interest enough to read it through.
Also, the book taught me a lot of church history I wasn't aware of, for such a small volume. The facts are there, albeit with an evangelical slant. I would have given "Church History" 2.5 stars had there been the option, possibly a 3 had it been a bit more in-depth, but after some deliberation I have decided to rate it "OK."
If you are looking for a purely historical and fully objective view of the history of the church (if such a book exists,) this is not it. However, I do recommend this for Christians seeking a crash course in the knowledge of the Christian religion, its roots, and its many branches and effects on history.
August 8, 2011
Catherwood does a great job making his book live up to its title. If you are looking for in depth analysis of the history of the church, don't start here. But if you have a general interest in Church history, this is a great place to begin researching it.
The book reads much like a survey course in college. The chapters cover several centuries in balanced detail. Catherwood takes special care to mention as many important people, dates, and events as he can without having to exegete every detail. He leaves that up to the reader to research further. For example, if I wanted to know more about John Calvin, I could definitely research more about him. But Catherwood shows enough of Calvin's life and ministry for me to feel comfortable in my understanding of how he fits in the history of the Church.
But, Catherwood explains just enough detail for the reader to have a good, intro-level understanding of the history of the church, starting with Jesus and ending with postmodernism.
This truly is a crash-course for the curious because Catherwood paints in broad strokes the history of the Church leaving room for the reader to pursue the subtleties that have been purposely omitted.
The book reads much like a survey course in college. The chapters cover several centuries in balanced detail. Catherwood takes special care to mention as many important people, dates, and events as he can without having to exegete every detail. He leaves that up to the reader to research further. For example, if I wanted to know more about John Calvin, I could definitely research more about him. But Catherwood shows enough of Calvin's life and ministry for me to feel comfortable in my understanding of how he fits in the history of the Church.
But, Catherwood explains just enough detail for the reader to have a good, intro-level understanding of the history of the church, starting with Jesus and ending with postmodernism.
This truly is a crash-course for the curious because Catherwood paints in broad strokes the history of the Church leaving room for the reader to pursue the subtleties that have been purposely omitted.
June 4, 2025
This was OK, good in parts, but overall not especially good. I think it lacks the focus it would have needed to really work well as a brief outline of church history.
My main issue with the book is that it was trying to be a primer on church history and also draw some of the outlines of evangelical theology, and ends up doing neither particularly well. I understand what the author was trying to do, as all human history (and particularly church history) has a theological component, I just feel that it could have been executed better, and I was left a bit disappointed. It's always going to be difficult to cover 2000 years of church history in 200 pages, and some sections were very tightly written and gave a great overview of events, but overall, it had a bit of a muddled feel.
Some of the chapters didn't really give an outline at all, and felt like a pick and mix of assorted thoughts on church history and theology - enjoyable enough to read, but not giving a coherent outline. I don't think I'd particularly recommend this as a church history overview, and I probably won't revisit it.
My main issue with the book is that it was trying to be a primer on church history and also draw some of the outlines of evangelical theology, and ends up doing neither particularly well. I understand what the author was trying to do, as all human history (and particularly church history) has a theological component, I just feel that it could have been executed better, and I was left a bit disappointed. It's always going to be difficult to cover 2000 years of church history in 200 pages, and some sections were very tightly written and gave a great overview of events, but overall, it had a bit of a muddled feel.
Some of the chapters didn't really give an outline at all, and felt like a pick and mix of assorted thoughts on church history and theology - enjoyable enough to read, but not giving a coherent outline. I don't think I'd particularly recommend this as a church history overview, and I probably won't revisit it.
February 4, 2017
The structure of the book was a little difficult to figure out at first. Instead of telling the history by ages and then getting into specifics with people, places, and events, the author picks major events and speaks about them in decent detail. It was just what it said it was, a crash course. I enjoyed hearing the author's outsider views of the American church (He is a British Evangelical). Those were very insightful and often challenging. There were many times when I thought the author was Very over eager to plug Crossway books. Not that I disagree with him, but I didn't need to read, "a Crossway author" after every mention of a person.
July 7, 2012
More than a few good insights here and there. However, the book as a whole is not very well-written, for the writer's opinions and commentary too often override any objective analysis of historical events.
December 13, 2011
Not so much an intro to history as a intro to theology from an avowed evangelical-baptist-episcopalian. The flow of the book was so poor it was really hard to follow or get a clear outline of church history.
February 8, 2013
Definetely a "crash course". Though interesting and pretty good for a quick overview, a lot of the stuff is oversimplified and the statement that King Henry VIII broke from the Catholic church purely for political reasons made my head hurt. But, if you're curious, this has got the content ;)
January 25, 2014
It's a solid "Crash Course" on church history.
expect it to be simple, quick and sometimes over simplifying. If you do, you will like the book.
Some readers may have expected a more in depth writing, but the title says its a quick run through. If you expect that, you will be satisfied
expect it to be simple, quick and sometimes over simplifying. If you do, you will like the book.
Some readers may have expected a more in depth writing, but the title says its a quick run through. If you expect that, you will be satisfied
December 31, 2014
Avereage Overview
Reads well. A bit disappointed so little time was spent on Aquinas. Only 5 mentions of his name compared to 24 occurrences of Martyn Lloyd-Jones. Seems a bit out of balance.
Reads well. A bit disappointed so little time was spent on Aquinas. Only 5 mentions of his name compared to 24 occurrences of Martyn Lloyd-Jones. Seems a bit out of balance.
February 7, 2015
The material is interesting, but addressed far too quickly. There wasn't always enough info for me to really understand why that material was included. I wouldn't read this book again, but I would give the author another shot.
November 27, 2015
There are no dry facts in this introduction to church history. Catherwood is an affable and somewhat chatty, conversational author intent on conveying both events and their theological implications. A truly informative--and effortless--read.
Read
July 29, 2012So fast it makes your brain hurt. It really is a crashcourse. I have read this book a few rimes now and alwaya feel refreshed.
Currently reading
January 5, 2015Fascinating
Once I started reading this book, I could not get away from it. A must read for those who want to learn about Christ's church, in an easy but intellectual read!
Once I started reading this book, I could not get away from it. A must read for those who want to learn about Christ's church, in an easy but intellectual read!
Read
November 7, 2022Pretty good. It certainly does what it sets out to do and acts as a great primer encouraging the reader to go into greater depth with more expansive works.
March 30, 2017
Short, easy to read. Helpful.
A great introduction.
A great introduction.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews