I admit that I have only read volume 2 in this series, though I hope to pick up the others as time allows. Might seems strange to start with volume 2 and not 1, but hey, you go with the copies you get!
Needham presents a history of the Church from a Reformed Baptist perspective, but his Scottish background removes him somewhat from the typical American Evangelical opinion. Right off the bat, he aims for a more historically appreciative approach. He avoids the obvious by stating his priors in the introduction. He's a Reformed Protestant. There will be things, especially in a medieval history volume, that his readers won't like. Some readers won't like that he doesn't dismiss each event in Church history with Reformed denunciations and proof texts. Catholic and Orthodox readers won't like that his treatments are sometimes critical as relates to biblical truth. Secular readers won't like that he takes faith seriously and is not interested in laborious take-downs of power structures and systemic inequality. Needham does what I think the best historians do; he tells a compelling story. He biases that story toward appreciation and understanding of the past as a foreign country (so to speak). He looks for what is sincerely Christian and of encouragement to modern readers without masking the unpleasant. In sum, the story is one of how Christ's Bride has continued to endure, triumph, evangelize, build culture, and disciple unto and devote herself to Jesus.
And given its massive scope, it's surprising how readable the book is! Very accessible.
Volume 2 traces the history of the Church from ~AD 600 to 1500. In doing so, readers see the development of the orthodox catholic Church into Orthodox and Catholic churches. The first chapter deals with the rise of Islam and the expansion of Muslim armies throughout Rome's eastern and north African territories. The story continues through the evangelization of Germanic Arians, the Carolingian Renaissance, the evangelization of the Slavs and Russians, the development and strengthening of the papacy, and the increasing fractures between East and West. Soon after come the Crusades, the rise of medieval scholasticism, the collapse of the Byzantine Empire, and the consiliar movement, and the rise of gnostic and proto-Protestant groups.
There are three areas where I think Needham truly excels. The first is by noting the development of Roman Catholic doctrine and practice over time. Often popular conceptions of church history view the medieval Church as a monolithic edifice. In other words, sometime after the early Church period (maybe between Constantine and Augustine, maybe after), the Church transformed overnight into the boogeyman of Luther's polemics. This is far from true, as Needham demonstrates. Doctrines like the Immaculate Conception, predestination, transubstantiation, and even clerical celibacy were not at all resolved in 800 or even 1200. It is rather, as Needham points out in the introduction, that the Reformers had a point when they claimed that they were pitting the best of the medieval tradition (Thomas a Kempis, Ratranmus, Anselm, Bernard of Clairveaux) against what they deemed to be the worst. Not without cause did Alister McGrath claim that the Reformation is an argument inside Augustine's head broken out in the real world; Augustine on grace (the Protestants) vs. Augustine on the Church (the Roman Catholics).
Second, Needham tells the Orthodox story alongside the Roman Catholic one. Many volumes will split East and West at some point and treat them separately. This makes it hard for the reader to see how the two drifted apart simultaneously. It tempts readers to conclude that the Western church (Catholic/Protestant) continued on one track while the Eastern church went off to do its own thing. This is not so. Needham shows how the existence of "the Other" continued to affect each wing of the Church. Efforts at reconciliation continued well after the Great Schism of 1054. There would have been no Carolingian Renaissance nor any Holy Roman Empire without the Iconoclastic Controversy. The strengthening papacy always had to keep in mind the objections of the Orthodox patriarchs in Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria (and later Kiev/Moscow and Bulgaria). Though Needham is not the first to note this, he made clear again and again that the distinction between Latin and Greek actually affected the theological concerns of East and West. The Latin Church became more concerned with legal definitions of how justification, faith, and grace worked whereas the Greek Church became more concerned with ontology/being (who God is).
Third, and of most value to local churches and Sunday school teachers, Needham provides lots of primary sources at the end of each chapter. The goal of these excerpts is to demonstrate the themes of the chapter and, more often, to provide a sampling of what modern Christian readers might find spiritually beneficial even today. Peruse some selections of St. Sava of Serbia, St. Anselm, Julian of Norwich, John of Damascus, or Bernard of Clairveaux. See how relevant and helpful their writing remains for Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestant readers even today! Especially as a Reformed Baptist myself, I'm eager to point folks to the reality that the "Third Testament" doesn't just belong to other traditions. Church history is our shared heritage, and anything that has been written that accords with Scripture is beneficial and good. Don't re-invent the wheel every generation! These readings provide a great sampling to be a springboard for further study.
One critique I have of Needham concerns his treatment of the Inquisition. I think that, for all the work Needham does to explain why the Crusades were compelling to Christians at the time (without necessarily justifying them), he skirts the Inquisition. This time in Church history (not to be confused with the later Spanish Inquisition) is often misunderstood. It was not nearly as fearsome or unjust as has been portrayed these days. For example, confessing any potential or known heresy to an inquisitor would absolve the accused. Naming a person who might have a grudge against you would result in the inquisitor dropping the investigation entirely. I don't say these things because I am defending the Inquisition; in fact, much Anglo-American common law exists because of contemporary objections to the Inquisition in England. Rather, I dislike boogeymen. It's bad history. A thing can be not as bad as it has been made to be without being good. Needham ignores this in this instance. However, the fatal flaw of any history survey is that no one historian can be an expert on everything. It's a small blemish, especially given how much attention Needham gives to the Serbian, Bulgarian, and Russian Orthodox saints and churches... something I've never seen from a Protestant author. I actually learned a lot about those faithful men and women!
Overall, I would recommend this book to any Christian pastor, ministry leader, and laymen and/or laywomen who are looking for a neatly-organized, spiritually-astute, and objective-aspirant history of the Church. If the other volumes are anywhere near this strong, they would form a VERY strong basis for Sunday School courses. Worth it!