What do you think?
Rate this book
The early papacy to the synod of Chalcedon in 451 by Adrian Fortescue. 1920 [Leather Bound]
{ 14.60 x 22.86 cms} Leather Binding on Spine and Corners with Golden Leaf Printing on round Spine (extra customization on request like complete leather, Golden Screen printing in Front, Color Leather, Colored book etc.) Reprinted in 2022 with the help of original edition published long back [1920]. This book is printed in black & white, sewing binding for longer life, printed on high quality Paper, re-sized as per Current standards, professionally processed without changing its contents. As these are old books, we processed each page manually and make them readable but in some cases some pages which are blur or missing or black spots. If it is multi volume set, then it is only single volume. We expect that you will understand our compulsion in these books. We found this book important for the readers who want to know more about our old treasure so we brought it back to the shelves. Hope you will like it and give your comments and suggestions. - English, Pages 73. COMPLETE LEATHER WILL COST YOU EXTRA US$ 25 APART FROM THE LEATHER BOUND BOOKS. {FOLIO EDITION IS ALSO AVAILABLE.} . Complete The early papacy to the synod of Chalcedon in 451 by Adrian Fortescue. 1920 [Leather Bound] Fortescue Adrian
73 pages, Leather Bound
First published January 1, 1920
9 people are currently reading
194 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
January 29, 2022
An excellent book that first defines the role and powers of the papacy, followed by proving that the same papacy we have today was practiced in the first 500 years of the Church. A great primer for the subject, and the average Catholic will find that the boundaries of the pope’s responsibility will be explained to them, perhaps for the first time.
June 8, 2022
Although written in response to Anglican controversy post-WW1, this work by Fr. Adrian Fortescue is an excellent support and testimony against arguments Eastern schismatics, learned protestants, and others who attack the Papacy on the grounds that it was not recognized in the early Church. Proof of antiquity is not the primary reason why a Catholic believes in the Papacy - faith in and submission to the authority of the Church is. Neither is it as sure and effective, as one can always argue their own interpretation of historical documents by any criterion that suits their fancy. Even so, it is another welcome confirmation of the truth of Catholic doctrine.
My favorite part was the chapter on the universal jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome. It is the doctrine that is the most overlooked as the keystone of all the modern confusion surrounding the Papacy, and in my opinion illuminates the simplicity of the more controversial doctrine of Infallibility. It is also the Petrine doctrine that has the most and clearest textual and historical evidence of proof, the most famous being St. Clement's first letter to the Corinthians.
In summary, I highly recommend this book to those who want a greater confidence in the antiquity of the Catholic doctrines relating to the successor of St. Peter. It is short, focused, and well written. For those wanting in faith because of the current crisis of Rome I find that the best course of action is devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, especially by saying the Rosary daily. Our Lady promised that those faithful to the Rosary would be protected from heresy.
St. Peter, pray for us.
My favorite part was the chapter on the universal jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome. It is the doctrine that is the most overlooked as the keystone of all the modern confusion surrounding the Papacy, and in my opinion illuminates the simplicity of the more controversial doctrine of Infallibility. It is also the Petrine doctrine that has the most and clearest textual and historical evidence of proof, the most famous being St. Clement's first letter to the Corinthians.
In summary, I highly recommend this book to those who want a greater confidence in the antiquity of the Catholic doctrines relating to the successor of St. Peter. It is short, focused, and well written. For those wanting in faith because of the current crisis of Rome I find that the best course of action is devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, especially by saying the Rosary daily. Our Lady promised that those faithful to the Rosary would be protected from heresy.
St. Peter, pray for us.
February 20, 2011
"[T]he papacy seems one of the clearest and easiest dogmas to prove from [the] early Church." This is the thesis Fr. Fortescue sets out to establish by looking at sources from the early Church from Christ to 451, the Synod of Chalcedon. He culls together sources that establish his thesis. He makes a persuasive, albeit polemical argument (this is likely a function of the time he was writing (1920)). I recommend this book for a good basic read of some of the early sources establishing papal primacy.
July 19, 2025
This is my 4th or 5th time reading this short book. Of all the apologetics and church history books I’ve read, this one has had the most concrete influence on my choice to become Roman Catholic.
Adrian Fortesque’s main goal here is to show how the papal doctrine of Vatican I is clearly found in the first 400 years of Christian history. Specifically he attempts to prove that “(1) The Pope is the chief bishop, primate, and leader of the while Church of Christ on earth; (2) He has episcopal jurisdiction over all the members of the Church; (3) To be a member of the Catholic Church, a man must be in communion with the Pope; (4) the providential guidance of God will see to it that the Pope shall never commit the Church to error in any matter of religion” (pg 39). While this 120 page book is far from exhaustive, it clearly lays out the major historical data and gives a Roman Catholic interpretation of that data.
Fortesque distills a lot of patristic references into this fantastically succinct work without being reductive, and the footnotes do a good job addressing alternative positions or philological controversies. Readers should approach this type of history with a bit of caution, as it’s fairly easy for anybody to select a string of quotations that support their position. That said, the quotations that Fortesque brings up are well known and are always discussed in dialogues about the early papacy; he is addressing the most obvious and popular evidence, not quote-mining to support an untenable position. Anybody interested in studying the formation of the papacy (or at least, the RC belief in it) would do well to start with this book.
Adrian Fortesque’s main goal here is to show how the papal doctrine of Vatican I is clearly found in the first 400 years of Christian history. Specifically he attempts to prove that “(1) The Pope is the chief bishop, primate, and leader of the while Church of Christ on earth; (2) He has episcopal jurisdiction over all the members of the Church; (3) To be a member of the Catholic Church, a man must be in communion with the Pope; (4) the providential guidance of God will see to it that the Pope shall never commit the Church to error in any matter of religion” (pg 39). While this 120 page book is far from exhaustive, it clearly lays out the major historical data and gives a Roman Catholic interpretation of that data.
Fortesque distills a lot of patristic references into this fantastically succinct work without being reductive, and the footnotes do a good job addressing alternative positions or philological controversies. Readers should approach this type of history with a bit of caution, as it’s fairly easy for anybody to select a string of quotations that support their position. That said, the quotations that Fortesque brings up are well known and are always discussed in dialogues about the early papacy; he is addressing the most obvious and popular evidence, not quote-mining to support an untenable position. Anybody interested in studying the formation of the papacy (or at least, the RC belief in it) would do well to start with this book.
April 14, 2015
This book was a fascinating read. Fortescue wrote this book shortly after WWI, when man was horrified by his own capabilities. He was responding to those who were saying what the Cathlolic Church would need to give up if we were going to have a reunited Christianity. Much like today, the central focus was the Papacy.
Most critics cite the Council of Chalcedon as being the "beginning" of the Popes. Not so, teaches the Catholic Church, and Fortescue aims to prove it. But first, he makes a few points worth quoting (note that he does not mince words, and is quite rude at times).
"All these methods of taking some early documents, whether the Bible or the Fathers, and using them as your standard, mean simply a riot of private judgment on each point of religion"-page 22
"The only possible standard is a living authority, an authority alive in the world at this moment, that can answer your difficulties,reject a false theory as it arises, and say who is right in disputed interpretations of ancient documents"-page 22
"But there is also another kind of argument for each dogma, taking each separately and proving that this was taught by Christ and has been believed from the beginning. This line of argument is neither convincing nor safe. It does now involve our private judgment as to whether the ancient texts do, or do not really prove what we claim. It requires knowledge of the texts, of dead languages; to be efficient it requires considerable scholarship. It is impossible that our Lord should give us a religion requiring all this before you know what it is."- page 27
Quotes taken out of context are dangerous because one can always skew the intended meaning,but what is being driven is the important point that we know a dogma is true because the Church teaches it, we are still responsible for inquiring about the details and effects of these, but remember that the answer is already known. This is not a condemnation of freedom to think, it is more of a map to truth, in a way.
Fortescue then goes on to show how the documents of pre-Chalcedon writers defend the authority, jurisdiction, and infallibility when teaching. His job his decent, he quotes, cites, and explains. Some questions are left alone, mostly since the intended audience is Mainline Protestants, he does not investigate the split of communions, it helps that this was post Chalcedon, so it is understandably ignored, though Eastern writers are quoted at times.
To summarize, if you would like a decent argument as to the historicity of the Pope, rather than an apology of the crimes of those in the chair, this is worth reading and discussing with others.
Most critics cite the Council of Chalcedon as being the "beginning" of the Popes. Not so, teaches the Catholic Church, and Fortescue aims to prove it. But first, he makes a few points worth quoting (note that he does not mince words, and is quite rude at times).
"All these methods of taking some early documents, whether the Bible or the Fathers, and using them as your standard, mean simply a riot of private judgment on each point of religion"-page 22
"The only possible standard is a living authority, an authority alive in the world at this moment, that can answer your difficulties,reject a false theory as it arises, and say who is right in disputed interpretations of ancient documents"-page 22
"But there is also another kind of argument for each dogma, taking each separately and proving that this was taught by Christ and has been believed from the beginning. This line of argument is neither convincing nor safe. It does now involve our private judgment as to whether the ancient texts do, or do not really prove what we claim. It requires knowledge of the texts, of dead languages; to be efficient it requires considerable scholarship. It is impossible that our Lord should give us a religion requiring all this before you know what it is."- page 27
Quotes taken out of context are dangerous because one can always skew the intended meaning,but what is being driven is the important point that we know a dogma is true because the Church teaches it, we are still responsible for inquiring about the details and effects of these, but remember that the answer is already known. This is not a condemnation of freedom to think, it is more of a map to truth, in a way.
Fortescue then goes on to show how the documents of pre-Chalcedon writers defend the authority, jurisdiction, and infallibility when teaching. His job his decent, he quotes, cites, and explains. Some questions are left alone, mostly since the intended audience is Mainline Protestants, he does not investigate the split of communions, it helps that this was post Chalcedon, so it is understandably ignored, though Eastern writers are quoted at times.
To summarize, if you would like a decent argument as to the historicity of the Pope, rather than an apology of the crimes of those in the chair, this is worth reading and discussing with others.
March 6, 2022
Very well organised and thorough. Adrian Fortescue does a very good job at bringing together the historical sources and arguments for the Catholic Papacy. The footnotes were not too dense and always added important info that was not around when Fortescue was writing.
May 14, 2012
Worth reading if you are interested in a historical apologetic for the papacy.
March 17, 2020
I wish I hadn't read this book, because it convinced me to stay Catholic instead of converting to Orthodoxy. Consider yourself warned.
February 10, 2018
Extremely logical thesis on the earliest years of the Catholic Church until the year 451 A.D.
This book has helped me view, understand, appreciate, and realize the magnitude of Apostolic succession.
Brilliant writer and one who objectively approaches a topic which is normally filled with emotion, personal baggage, and selfish desires.
He shows that logic can tell us a tremendous amount about the earliest moments of the Church - The Roman Catholic Church - one from the fisherman's hands of Peter.
This book has helped me view, understand, appreciate, and realize the magnitude of Apostolic succession.
Brilliant writer and one who objectively approaches a topic which is normally filled with emotion, personal baggage, and selfish desires.
He shows that logic can tell us a tremendous amount about the earliest moments of the Church - The Roman Catholic Church - one from the fisherman's hands of Peter.
July 30, 2021
Very easy read. I whizzed through this, hardly even taking my time. The author makes very funny, witty remarks near the beginning of the book about Protestants (especially toward Anglicans), but throughout the book he goes over the top in an historical proof that the "See of Peter" was supreme from the early Church.
December 5, 2024
Offers some compelling proof texts, but it's weakness is the many, many things it leaves out. Fortescue himself may not have been aware of these texts and events, but this one sided approach is deceptively convincing.
December 31, 2018
Super polemical, and way too quick in argumentation.
August 28, 2023
A solid, brief introduction to the issue of the papacy in the Early Church. Fortescue builds a good dialectical case for the acceptance of Vatican Council I's papal powers in the Early Church. Would recommend for both Catholics and curious non-Catholics alike.
May 13, 2025
I'd be fascinated to hear a protestant's argument against this book.
December 13, 2024
“The Early Papacy” is a succinct and easy to read historical apologetic for the Papacy. The most this book proves is that early Christians believed the Catholic doctrines around the papacy; if you want an exegetical or philosophical argument for the papacy look elsewhere.
Fortesque is a bit hasty in his argumentation, and he could be criticized here for “quote-mining” without providing much context for the quotes he uses. That said, most of the quotes about the bishop of Rome in this book are so clear and forceful that the context would need to be extraordinary for them to mean anything other than what they seem to.
One would need to do a lot more historical study of the early church to “prove” the papacy, but this book is a very good collection of the most compelling patristic evidence for it.
Fortesque is a bit hasty in his argumentation, and he could be criticized here for “quote-mining” without providing much context for the quotes he uses. That said, most of the quotes about the bishop of Rome in this book are so clear and forceful that the context would need to be extraordinary for them to mean anything other than what they seem to.
One would need to do a lot more historical study of the early church to “prove” the papacy, but this book is a very good collection of the most compelling patristic evidence for it.
January 17, 2018
This books makes a strong case for the leadership of the Bishop of Rome over the rest of the christian world. The model of the papacy is similar to the one that is currently in power today. It does show that churches had more autonomy however and while the Bishop of Rome had supreme authority it was not used as much in practice.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews