Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church: A 2,000-Year History

by H.W. Crocker III

For 2,000 years, Catholicism—the largest religion in the world and in the United States—has shaped global history on a scale unequaled by any other institution. But until now, Catholics interested in their faith have been hard-pressed to find an accessible, affirmative, and exciting history of the Church.
Triumph is that history. Inside, you'll discover the spectacular story of the Church from Biblical times and the early days of St. Peter—the first pope—to the twilight years of John Paul II. It is a sweeping drama of Roman legions, great crusades, epic battles, toppled empires, heroic saints, and enduring faith. And, there are stormy Dark Age skullduggery, the Inquistition, the Renaissance popes, the Reformation, the Church's refusal to accept sexual liberation and contemporary allegations like those made in Hitler's Pope and Papal Sin.
A brawling, colorful history full of inspiring pageantry and spirited polemic, Triumph will exhilarate, amuse, and infuriate as it extols the glories of Catholic history and the gripping stories of its greatest men and women.

Genres: History, Religion, Catholic, Nonfiction, Christianity, Church History, Christian

512 pages, Hardcover

First published September 23, 2001

About the author

H.W. Crocker III is the bestselling author of the prize-winning comic novel The Old Limey and several books of military history, including Triumph, Robert E. Lee on Leadership, The Politically Incorrect Guide® to the Civil War, The Politically Incorrect Guide® to the British Empire, Yanks, and Don’t Tread on Me.

His journalism has appeared in National Review, the American Spectator, the Washington Times, and many other outlets. Educated in England and California, Crocker lives on the site of a former Confederate encampment in Virginia.

Reviews

[Patrick Gruber · Rating 5 out of 5]

Out of the nearly 100 books I read in the year 2012, this was certainly by far the best one. This book is a history book. It is a history of the Catholic Church. But because the Catholic Church has been the single most influential organization in world history, it's also a history of western civilization with all it's ups and downs. It's the story of emperor's, and bishops, and wars, and crusades. Not only is it a history, it is a vindication of the Catholic Church's preservation of western civilization. It is a defense of Catholicism against Paganism, Arianism, Pelagianism, Gnosticism, Protestantism, Nationalism, Socialism, And Fascism. This book, through the conquest of kings, plight of despots, and misery of the righteous, tells the story of how the Catholic Church made it. The author somehow manages to tell this amazing story, defend the Church, and make this book very very readable.

This book is literally memorizing. The story of the Catholic Church is a story like no other. This book has gone a very long way towards moving me to the Catholic position. This is a must read.

[Adam · Rating 1 out of 5]

To be honest, this book was so noxious that I never finished reading it. He does a disservice to the Catholic Church in his arrogant strutting and his careless interpretation of the Fourth Crusade and the Protestant Revolt (a term with which I agree). He has the audacity to say that April 12 (the unfortunate in 1204 when the Fourth Crusade despite Pope Innocent III's threat of excommunication) conquered Constantinople and proceeded to sack it should be made a feast day. It was a horrible event, although perhaps exaggerated by Byzantine chroniclers, that led to the desecration of churches. REMEMBER: THE ORTHODOX HAVE VALID SACRAMENTS!!! If April 12 should be observed in the Church, it should be as a Day of Penance for the sin that the Crusaders committed against the Unity of Holy Mother Church. Protestants were not, as he argues, merely barely civilized Germans but members of a sophisticated European society that had produced a much more restrained Renaissance than the decadent Italian Renaissance. The Catholic Church is indeed the Church established by Christ and is infallible but her triumph is in the fact that despite all the sinfulness, stupidity and just plain hard heartness of Her children she has never failed to teach the Truth and has never erred.

[Erik · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a romp! Unapologetic, brazen, honest (at least it seems to be). This is the Catholic Church in its glory (warts included) throughout history.

Included in the "History and Culture" section of Fr. John McCloskey's 100-book Catholic Lifetime Reading Plan.

[Julie Davis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Crocker can resort to polemics and name calling, which I find unnecessary. The title, after all is "Triumph" so that's a bit of a warning.

However, that doesn't stop this from being one of the liveliest, best written histories of the Church I've read. It explains things clearly so I can both grasp and retain complex historical and religious situations. Since my first reading I've read enough other books, several by non-Catholics, which support Crocker's facts, most recently Dominion by Tom Holland.

It makes surprisingly good bedtime reading.

[Michele · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was a huge disappointment. I heard really great things about it, but I felt like the book was more opinionated than informative in the end. Not all the information was completely accurate, and Crocker's bias made me irritated to the point of questioning whether there was a way to talk about church history positively without bashing other religions completely. More often than not, his best defense of Catholicism turned out to be making all other options seem hypocritical and unreasonable through his snarky attitude rather than actually explaining both sides of the issue completely. While I did get a good laugh out of some of the most biased parts, this book did nothing to give me more confidence in Catholicism or a better understanding of church history than I got from studying history in college.

I would not recommend this book to anyone. It could have been worse, but, like I said, it was a big disappointment and not at all what I was hoping to find.

[Clem · Rating 1 out of 5]

Oh dear. Oh dear.

I’ve read several hundred history/biography books over the last few years (I’ve reviewed many on Amazon) and this was by far the worst “history” book I have ever read. Let me be very clear and state that I am not anti-Catholic nor am I anti-Christian. Many times when one comes across a negative review on Amazon of a Christian topic, the reviewer is clearly biased if they are anti-theist, atheist or agnostic. I am none of the above. Although this book is definitely one-sided in its presentation of the accomplishments of the Catholic church, this is not my issue. By ‘one-sided’, I mean that this book has a highly conservative slant, and am reminded of a minority of Catholics on the far-right fringe who refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of Pope Francis while also stating things on social media such as “It’s a mortal sin to vote for Joe Biden because he is a Democrat”.

Although I disagree with these sentiments, I still maintain that a thoughtful argument can be made by an author and I would be willing to judge the book on such merit. However, you won’t find any “thoughtful arguments” here. The main problem is that the author is too filled with hate and vitriol to be taken seriously. Instead of a serious academic, H.W. Crocker III comes across more like a spoilt 16-year old who is throwing a temper tantrum because his daddy won’t let him take the family car out past curfew on a Saturday night. The Catholic Church deserves better than this. If you are a Catholic and you are wanting to encourage non-believers to become part of your faith (as you should) I would strongly advise you not to recommend this book. Sometimes I really couldn’t believe the author expected to be taken seriously. In fact, there’s a part of me that believes Mr. Crocker is playing a sick joke on his readers, as the “history” he is presenting in this book is so removed from anything that one could consider serious scholarship.

Although he never specifically states so in this book, he seems to believe that the only way the planet can survive is by implementing a strict Catholic theocracy. He seems unconcerned with things such as love, forgiveness, fairness, and helping those in unfortunate circumstances. You know, the very things that Jesus Christ taught. What many people don’t realize, is that such a theocracy existed in western civilization for over a millennium in Western Europe, and it failed simply because you can’t beat people into submission while at the same time preach about a loving redeemer. People must respond to the Gospel of Jesus and invite Him into their heart; they can’t be “commanded to love God”. Our human nature simply doesn’t work this way. (As a side note, the Protestants tried something similar with the Puritan movement when they first arrived in what is now the United States. It didn’t work out too well for them either.)

For those who might not know, the word “catholic” means “universal” and for the first 1500 years since the time of Christ, the Catholic Church was essentially the only Christian church on the planet. For the first several years, there were debates and arguments but for the most part the church stayed healthy. Metaphorically, the problems of the church started like a small snowball rolling down a hill. By the time of the Renaissance, the snowball had grown tremendously in size and speed. We really shouldn’t be surprised at all that the call for reform happened when it did.

When Constantine became emperor of Rome in 306 A.D., he actually made Rome into a Christian theocracy. The problem was that when everyone HAS to be a Christian, you end up having a lot of non Christlike Christians in the kingdom. THIS is why so many people left the cities and went to live in trees and caves called “monasteries” and called themselves “monks”. It’s a fascinating story, yet the author doesn’t cover any of this here. The only reason that I can speculate that he omits this, is that he would have to concede that monasteries and monks were “formed” out of problems they saw with the universal church and the author refuses to admit that the church could possibly ever have such problems.

Sadly, it then proceeds to really get bad (I’m not necessarily commenting on the church, but the author’s treatment of the church). To hear the author talk about things like the Crusades and the Inquisition, you would be left thinking that these were really neat ideas that slightly fell short of the goal, and the world would have been so much better had more blood been shed and more people tortured. We then come to probably the most infamous Pope in the history of the church, Rodrigo Borgia (Alexander VI) and his stained family. Entire books have been written about the evils of the Borgias, yet he author of this book merely slags the negativity away stating that “history has treated them unfairly”. He states that, oh sure Rodrigo Borgia had a mistress, but he was KIND to his mistress! Now, ask yourself this: If you are a Catholic and you go to confession for committing adultery, but you inform your priest that you have no intention of stopping your adulterous affair because you’re “kind” to your mistress, do you really think your priest will absolve you of your sins?? I didn’t think so.

We then make our way to the topic of Indulgences. This was probably the straw that broke the camel’s back in terms of what actually started the Protestant Reformation. Again though, the author states that indulgences were really no big deal. He denies that the church used the tool to get churchgoers and their relatives out of purgatory. I’m not sure how he comes to this conclusion. Every other source that I have studied says completely the opposite. In fact, the author states that indulgences were rather harmless, and priests merely used them as part of the absolution process during confessions. These must have been heavy sins since many peasants ended up giving 1/3 of their yearly wages towards said indulgences. Again, the author doesn’t educate you of this fact. He then makes the absurd claim that had it not been for indulgences, Michelangelo probably wouldn’t have been able to create so many works of beauty for the church. To me that sounds a bit like saying Adolph Hitler stole a lot of property from the Jews after he sent them to wither and die in concentration camps, but it really wasn’t that big of a deal because, well golly gosh darn it, Hitler used this ransacked plunder to improve the buildings in Germany, beautify the cities, and rebuild the economy.

Speaking of Adolph Hitler, we then come to Martin Luther. **I’m** not comparting Luther to Hitler, but the author does. A few times. The author even suggests that Hitler might not have ever come to power had it not been for Martin Luther. Right. Great. We don’t learn anything useful about Martin Luther in this book. He’s clearly the pinnacle of evil in the opinion of the author, and we get to read many horrid descriptions of the man complete with foul adjectives. We read more about his repulsive personal appearance and bowel movement habits than we do anything useful to help understand the man. Again, I’m not saying the author has to agree with Luther and the Reformation, but he should at least paint a fair picture of the man. As a side note, I was assigned to write a term paper on Martin Luther when I was in high school, and I never uncovered any resources that painted the man the way this author does. I received an “A” on my term paper. Had I used this book as one of my references, I probably would have gotten an “F”.

So after the Protestant Reformation, this author blames every problem in Western Civilization for the next 500 years on Protestantism. Atheism? He blames the Protestants. The Age of Reason? He blames the Protestants. Democracy? He blames the Protestants. I wouldn’t have been surprised if he would have blamed his hemorrhoid condition on Protestantism. I’m reminded of when liberal filmmaker Michael Moore actually blamed Ronald Reagan for the fact that he was overweight. This book was written before the Catholic sexual abuse scandal rocked the world a few years ago. I would bet a year’s salary that had this book been written AFTER that tragedy, the author would have somehow blamed Protestants for that scandal as well. All throughout this, the author makes ridiculous statements such as praising a 19th century Pope for banning trains (??) while condemning a later Pope for allowing gas powered streetlamps (??!!)

The latter half of the book became difficult to read because of the author’s strong, hateful opinions. It reminded me of being in a fetid sewer filled with stenches of animal waste. You can only stay in such an environment for so long before you have to come up for fresh air. This was another problem I had. I couldn’t read more than 10-20 pages of this book at a time without having to put this book aside and breathe some fresh air (i.e. common sense).

Fast Forward to the 1960s and Vatican II. MOST Catholics embraced Vatican II, but not this author. He faults Pope John XXIII for Vatican II (he describes the Pope as “fat” along with other lesser terms of endearment. Is it really necessary to continue to dislike people because of their physical appearance??) When Pope John XIII dies in 1963, the author essentially states that the next Pope, Paul VI, really had “no choice” but to continue Vatican II. And on and on and on….

All of this to say that the title of this book is somewhat misleading. It really isn’t a comprehensive history of the Catholic Church, but rather a statement of how Protestantism “destroyed” the church in Europe and, eventually, North America. I don’t recall anything about the recent successes or growth of the church in places like Asia or Africa. We then come to the word in the book’s title “Triumph”. What exactly is “triumphant” about what the author is presenting to us? According to this author, there hasn’t been anything “triumphant” for the Catholic church since Christendom in the Middle Ages. In fact, his conclusion is that the church badly needs “A few good men (not women)” if the church is ever going to rise from its ashes. A depressing thought indeed.

In conclusion, I have to reemphasize that I truly believe that the Catholic church has done many wonderful things and should be praised despite its warts. I never felt encouraged nor upbeat while reading this book, however. It was simply angry and depressing. The author seems to believe that beating subjects into submission is a much better tool than sharing the love of Jesus Christ with our fellow brothers and sisters. As an alternative, I would strongly recommend Justo Gonzalez’ two volume set “The History of Christianity”. Gonzalez is a Christian (not a Catholic), yet he clearly shows the goods and bads of Catholicism and Protestantism throughout the years. It’s much more balanced, fair, real and upbeat.

The Catholic Church deserves a much better retrospective than what is presented here.

[Matt Ebenroth · Rating 3 out of 5]

def con 3

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little dry, but if you fancy good, well-researched history than it really isn't that bad. Offers the real insight of Western Civilization for the past 2000+ years through the lens of the Catholic Church. A chance for the religion to state their claims against many of the wrong accusations and assumptions that have been laid against them for the past two millennium. Clarifies a lot, makes one want to laugh at all the strange, foolish things people have accused them off like the "crusades", the "inquisition", "selling-of-indulgences" (by the way, that was only one man and he got excommunicated almost immediately). One refreshing thing about this is that the writer is also able to own up to the mistakes and actual problems that the Church has faced like the corruption of the Renaissance Papacy. Humbling, insightful, and clear. Good for any history lover's shelf.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well reading text geared around the history of western civilization specifically focused on the Roman Catholic Church. This limits the time periods covered as well as the geographic area. It covers in a decent detail the different periods of schism between east and west as well as ruptures and schisms caused by various heresies throughout Church history. It shows the resolution for all of them but the 2 great schisms (the rupture with Orthodoxy that seems to be a semi-recurring theme in history and the protestant reformation). This is enjoyable to read no matter your bend on Christianity (though it is Catholic in favoring) as it has an enjoyable style that makes it easy and entertaining to read and does well with presenting the historical facts in context.

[Thomas Crown · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ok, ok. So it's an unabashed polemic. Crocker's a convert and is clearly having fun with his writing here, so the centuries-long tussle over, say, the filioque gets reduced to The Orthodox had their nose bent out of joint because of incest, bad incense, and Caesaropapism. That said, it's an enjoyable, fairly light-hearted, well-meaning read, and while he's prone to some hyperbole, I'd never fault Crocker for writing such a good book.

[Gabriel · Rating 1 out of 5]

I only made it about half way through this book. It was way too biased to be good history. The title of the book should have been Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church...At War! Crocker concentrated way to much on wars, and even tries to defend certain attrocities. Little is said about theology and the evolution of Christian thought and spirituality.

[Cara Barkis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Loved it. Followed the class I was taking," Epic.. A Journey Through Church History" perfectly. Gives an overall sense of the connectedness of it all and how all 2,000 years of history flows from one time period / event to the next. H.W Crocker III writes with a tongue in cheek sense of humor which appeals to me.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

The triumph of the Catholic Church, from its beginnings with the Apostles filing out from the Holy land, to its rising to be monarch over kings, to its continued survival and worldwide development against every conceivable persecution, is the most extraordinary story in the world.

[booklady]

Have heard many good things about this book. Definitely want to read this!

[Phillip · Rating 4 out of 5]

Serious Catholic? You gotta read it. Not easy but so well done and complete.

[Josh · Rating 1 out of 5]

Hagiography. That's the only word that can adequately describe this book. This book sacrifices honesty and scholarship on the altar of triumphalism.

[Katarzyna Balutowski · Rating 2 out of 5]

Okay I have thought long and hard about this review and have decided to just be honest. I am Catholic. I am a historian. I also a woman. I was not afraid of the title of this book and figured it would be very pro-Catholic. But that was what I was looking for. There were some good things, some bad things, and some VERY BAD things about this book.
The Good Things:
Relatively short history of Catholic Europe with some moments given to other parts of the world mainly the Americas.
If you are studying Catholic popes, this book offers positive and negatives of a lot of them. Short tributes for the most part, but still a good overview if you are starting studies on Catholic history. (However DO NOT let this be the only book you read on said subject.)
The author shows the worldview of certain American conservative groups most of which have been excommunicated from the Catholic Church, but if you are going to engage with them this book offers a comprehensive look at how they view history.
It is rare to see a positive portrayal of the Church written in a modern fashion. It is worth reading if only to give yourself an opportunity to rethink how you have been conditioned to think about history.
If you are looking for an obviously biased book to use to show students or history curious individuals that all history can have a bias and that supporting documents can be interpreted to support any argument this is a book that does exactly that.
It is mostly written in a compelling way and is easy to read.
This book is meant to inspire men to join the priesthood, however this is not obvious till the very end. Soooo... That makes it a bit awkward...
The bad:
The author places his opinion blatantly and unapologetically everywhere. This makes it impossible to immerse yourself in the story he is telling.
He insults prominent figures constantly. It is gross and uncomfortable. I have read other Catholic histories that do not feel the need to use insult to prove their point. It makes him sound like an extremely insecure and weak man.
Some of the history is boring, repetitive, and just not that interesting (specifically the sections where he goes through successions of popes).
The author is a fanboy of powerful military and political leaders. The pages and pages he dedicates to some of them would be fine if he could compel himself to stop downplaying their serious flaws. (Ignoring Mussolini's governing standards because he made himself an ally of the Catholic Church at the start of his reign as dictator is not okay)
VERY BAD:
This book ignores Catholic female influence with barely a mention of the rich and incredible history of religious and lay women. This is a tradition the Church has honored and called us to remember always. The only time women are mentioned is to downplay their roles (Sts. Joan of Arc and Catherine of Sienna) or by making them into evil whores (Anne Boleyn). To make matters worse the only time women are collectively listed is in statements from religious powerful men about how dumb they are, how they are best being obedient, or how society is best when women are characteristically feminine and put in convents. Essentially in his opinion, based solely on this text, the only good women is one stuck in a convent. At the risk of sounding like a femi-nazi I need to call it as I see it. This book is sexist. Just gross in it's portrayal of women in history. The only exception is Elizabeth I, but he follows his positive review of her statementship with quotes from men about what a shame it is she is not a man.
This book is not historically accurate. The author allows his fanboy mentality towards certain orders, groups, and people color his presentation of history.
He may also be prejudice against minorities and immigrants. I could not collect enough evidence to prove this but his statements about Irish immigrants are... Questionable.... His writings about the Cristeros is odd... It feels forced. Like he had to do it to avoid being labeled a racist. His writing on the Civil War is uncomfortable and weird, where you aren't sure what his point actually is.
This guy is also an elitist. He is the type of person who would very quickly label someone who disagrees with him as a unthinking commoner, while giving himself aristocratic airs.

While there is benefit to this book, I repeat do not let this be the only Catholic history you read. And note that this author's opinions are his OWN not shared by the Catholic Church or even a majority of Catholics.

[Katherine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Though very Cathlo-centric in its perspective, I've never read such a concise history of the Catholic Church over the last 2000 years. So much of church history and politics that I was completely unaware of. Some of our history has nasty, awful chapter....which actually leads to hope. For the current crisis will eventually just be the stuff of history books and Christ will, of course, in the end triumph - as He always has done.

[Appu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Most historians trash the Catholic Church. It is blamed for destroying the classical age and plunging Europe into the dark ages. It is blamed for the inquisition and the crusades. The reformation is blamed on the corruption and decadence of papacy. The religious wars that came in the wake of reformation is attributed to the intolerance of the Catholic faith. Ofcourse, the Catholic church must take the blame for destroying indigenous cultures through its missions. It is seen as the last citadel of reaction and obscurantism and the last fortress against reason, humanism and liberty.
Is this the truth? Obviously, an institution that has survived 2000 years, and has influenced the world more than perhaps any other, cannot be all wrong, especially when you consider the fate of its most virulent critics.
HW Crocker defends the record of the Catholic Church, robustly. In a world which has killed off God and has no moral certainties, Crocker sees the Catholic Church as the last sentinel holding together the western civilisation. He is a fierce critic of liberal catholicism that came in the wake of 2nd Vatican Council. For Croker, Catholicism offers an alternative to modernism, liberalism and secularism.
This is a hard hitting and provocative book.

[Joseph R. · Rating 3 out of 5]

With a title like Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church, any reader can make a reasonable guess about the attitude of author H. W. Crocker III. He's as pro-Catholic a writer as you may ever come across. He covers the two thousand year history of the Catholic Church and hits all the highlights--the apostles' initial efforts, the age of Constantine, the split with the Eastern Orthodox, the challenges of the Middle Ages, the Crusades, the various forms of the Inquisition, etc. etc. An amazing amount of history is packed into fewer than 500 pages, including plenty of lesser known events. The book is thoroughly written and researched.


The book is also thoroughly biased in favor of the church, which is okay when dealing with issues where history about the church has been unclear or distorted. On the other hand, his bias in dealing with groups like the Orthodox church is too heavy-handed and colorful. Crocker goes on about how eastern Christians are so effeminate and self-absorbed and that's what caused and perpetuates the Great Schism. Protestants receive similar treatment (Elizabeth I's sailors are almost always referred to as "sea dogs," while the Spanish Armada gets plenty of respect). While I understand the importance of arguing the Catholic position, I bristle at cheap, unnecessary pot shots in an otherwise scholarly work. Crocker could easily have written just as entertaining and engaging a book without resorting to "boo-hiss, them!" histrionics. Also, that kind of rhetoric undercuts his authority as a historian.


I found this book entertaining and informative in parts but it also made me wince in many other parts. I'm not sure who I'd recommend it too--probably not people outside of the Catholic Church. Proceed with caution!

[Edward C. · Rating 1 out of 5]

I am glad that I bought this book used. I was told that the book was "conservative," and I noted that the author himself calls his book the "conservative response" to Fr. Thomas Bokenkotter's A Concise History of the Catholic Church, but good night! First, I have qualms with Bokenkotter's work--he seems fearful of anything "traditional," actually setting the reader up by always applying the word to negative, even pagan, religious actions in the ancient world only to see it (lo and behold!) pop up again when anything counter to the Spirit of Vatican II (Humanae Vitae! John Paul II! RATZINGER!) comes into the chronology, but Bokenkotter's work, bias aside, is astoundingly well-written, and I would not hesitate to teach from it (especially since my own obligations end before the Council) as there's much depth as well as scholarly and spiritual thought in his, really, very fine work. Triumph, on the other hand, is so poorly written that this ossified manualist couldn't get through two chapters. Bad writing, bad history...Don't waste your time.

For the record, I have undergraduate degrees in history, English, and theology, and I have a master's degree in Catholic studies. I've read a lot, both "conservative" and "liberal," much as I detest the labels when applied to theology. I can't recommend Triumph at all. And since I don't want anyone else to read it, I may have to throw it on a pyre...

[W.B. Habsburg · Rating 5 out of 5]

In an epic sweet across European history, this book portrays a vision of the catholic church as the guarantor of a libertarian political order in which popes restrict the power of otherwise all-powerful kings. While the book can be taken at face value as just a well written history, charting history from the birth of Jesus through to the modern day, the more interesting side of the book lies in the authors perspective on events along the way. Our modern way of viewing the world---perceiving monarchs as inherantly bad etc---can often be disruptive when trying to understand history: it's hard for an athiest to grasp why trivial distinctions between protestants and catholics lead to the thirty years war. The authors staunchly catholic perspective is fascinating to take on board. This is a book which will no doubt set many an athiests on the route to catholicism. It's message will stay with me for many a year.

The book begins with Jesus and Paul the Apostle, describing how the early church was built within the Roman empire, how the faith was strengthened in the crucible of persecution. With echos of the modern age, he notes how Christians distinguished themselves in Rome in an era when most the society was using contraceptives and commiting infanticide. Crocker begins his reevaluation of history early on during the discussion of Emporer Julian, whom Edward Gibbon noted 'deserved the empire of the world' for his role as a philosopher king: he appears to view him instead as just another decadent rationalist indulging himself in paganism to avoid accepting universal morality.

As the Roman empire crumbles, a picture is painted of the church arising triumphant: battling heratics in Europe, Asia and North Africa in favour of a single uniform belief system. When one thinks of these wars outside of context they are hard to understand: did anyone really care enough about the monophysite heresy to fight a war over it? But when framed within the later context of political catholicism the reasoning is clear: a patchwork of states with intermediate levels of pooled sovereignty can only work when it is focused on one agreed moral code. Allowing heresy refutes the possibility of a central authority. Hence it was neccesary to insist on the centrality of the Trinity as interpreted by Rome. One also notes in reading this that the perspective of god which is communicated in the 21st century and which has driven so many people away from the church ('a seperate thinking entity sitting on a cloud directing the ways of the world') is clearly heretical: the genius of the church's early founders becomes clear.

With Rome fallen, it then fell to the church to unify Europe again. We read of St Patrick going to Ireland and raising a literate priestly caste there, establishing many monastries and developing a church government. From here, these Irish priests spread across Europe, teaching and building goverenance systems. Then come the Vikings, pillaging towns and churches across Europe; who was to stand in their way? Who on this disorganised and chaotic continent had a system for raising people into an army to fight back? The abbots and bishops of the catholic church. Not just did they fight though, but they preached, eventually converting the Vikings to the church and unifying them with the people. In Italy, there were invasions by the Moors, driven back by the pope. In the east, there were invasions by Magyars, halted by the Catholic Ottonians. With Otto I we see the Holy Roman Empire coming into form, acknowledging the unity of crown and alter, acknowledging (unlike the degenerate Italians of the time) that even with sovereignty devolved, there must be central morality and direction.

With the Crusades we see the Church as the one force which can unify the disparate peoples of Europe. Byzantium is falling and the Christians of the middle east are under threat. The great holy sites of the anciests are controlled by heretics, and the church falls for united efforts to bring them back under control and to defend the European borders (in Spain and Eastern europe). The story of the Knights Templar is one of the most intriguing parts of this section: how the nobles of Europe would deposit their European estates with the Knights before leaving for crusades, then cashing them in upon arrival in the Outremer, and through this establishing the first international bank. While the Crusades in the middle east eventually failed, those within Europe succeeded and thereby proved that a patchwork of small states can act to defend themselves against external threats, when they share a common philosophical code.

As Europe (and Cristendom) expands out, colonising the Balkans, one sees the Church reaching the height of it's power: the glorious cities and art works of Italy and the medieval world funded through indulgences. But this triggered a reaction: Luther, portrayed here as a deluged madman hand in hand with tyranical calvinists, attempting to engineer society in accordance with their personal (and heretical) notions of what christianity involves. The clash of political catholicism and protestantism is made clear here, with Luther rejecting the need for independence of canon law from the state. He is explicit in portraying the great achievement of christendom is the use of the church as a means to limit the powers of soldiers and kings: something rejected by protestants who then sought to unify church with state. The catholic church is shown as the centre of science and learning, in contrast to a protestantism which believes each man can find god himself: "an educated priesthood is unneccesary when God speaks directly to man".

The inquisitions are portrayed here not as a great crime of the catholic past, but as a neccesary process to maintain Medieval society against the herasies of protestantism. Later in the book it is noted that if the inquisition had operated within 1930's germany, Hitler would never have had the power he did.

While the book is quite light on describing how the Catholic church actually governed it's society, one can see reflections of this when reading about events such as the dissolution of the monastries. How 15000 monks were hurled onto the street when the government seized and dissolved their hospitals, schools and charitable houses. One glimpses a vision of an alternative political system whereby the territorial government only handles 'maintaining peace' and religious orders handle most the functions of society associated with modern governments. This is what political catholicism is really about, and one sees in the remaining chapters of the book how it was destroyed by power hungry monarchs (and then democrats) cheered on by protestants (and then by liberals).

[Charles Lewis · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm about 70 pages in and there is something I find disturbing about this book. For starters, calling Pontius Pilate a good man because he tried to resist the "Jewish mob" is a bit rich. Pilate was the power. It also seems to lend credence to the idea that the Jews collectively killed Christ. Also, if Pilate was so heroic why did he have Jesus flogged and tortured? This book also lacks any humility and humility is part of being a Catholic.
I'm going to continue with this book and give final thoughts but right now I'm finding it toxic.

I forgot to up date this. I ended up quitting and giving it away. I soon found that among many of more orthodox Catholic friends this book was not loved. This overall tone just got on my nerves and the fact is I was learning nothing. I would, never give this book to anyone considering becoming a Catholic.

[William Gill · Rating 4 out of 5]

Somewhat selective and shamelessly chauvinistic in it's Catholic slant, but it can be forgiven it's sins due to the virtue of never boring the reader. I learned several new points of information and for that I am grateful. Highly recommended to Catholics who hold their heads down and hide their faith. There are plenty of good reasons to be proud of the Church.

[Steven H · Rating 3 out of 5]

AN ADMITTEDLY "PARTISAN" GENERAL HISTORY OF CATHOLICISM

H.W. Crocker III is a Catholic convert from Anglicanism, who has also written books such as 'The Politically Incorrect Guide to the British Empire,' 'Robert E. Lee on Leadership: Executive Lessons in Character, Courage, and Vision,' 'Don't Tread on Me: A 400-Year History of America at War,' 'The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Civil War,' etc.

He notes, "Without Rome's central authority, it might have been impossible for the Church to defeat the early heretics." (Pg. 32) He admits that as Tertullian grew older, he "became an extreme puritan---hating women, repudiating Christian service to the state, embracing pacifism, refusing forgiveness, and denying any wisdom outside of revelation." (Pg. 43) He clarifies that Constantine was officially received into the Church only on his deathbed, "an act of prudence from a man who feared he would be called to do unChristian things as an emperor. With baptism a one-time sacrament to wash away sins, Constantine wanted to receive it after the danger of further sin had passed." (Pg. 61)

As the center of the Church moved east, he suggests, "If Constantinople pretended to be the New Rome, it seemed to specialize in producing new Neros." (Pg. 114) About the East/West Church split, he admits that the 'filioque' term had been inserted "by the Roman Church into the Nicene Creed in order to make this point clear to the newly converted tribes... Even in Rome, this insertion was controversial, as it meant a change in the established formula. It was accepted, however, as it clarified Church doctrine, rather than altered it." (Pg. 115)

In his discussion of the Great Schism, he acknowledges that "So confused had the situation become that even today it is not clear whether Alexander (V) was a pope or an antipope." (Pg. 198) He asserts that Martin Luther "propounded a barbarian creed that had no need for priests or their sacraments---something suited to frontier peoples." (Pg. 236) After citing some unkind remarks of Luther, Crocker observes sarcastically, "One can easily see from these remarks why Luther's translation of the Bible is a classic of German literature." (Pg. 249)

Later, he opines, "The idea of devoting oneself completely to God was, to Protestant eyes, the work of Satan... Such early American Protestant attitudes have never really gone away." (Pg. 372)

Crocker's book will not win any awards for its detached, scholarly objectivity. But for persons wanting a staunchly pro-Catholic, very "positive" perspective through history, this is definitely an exciting and well-written account.

[John Renkiewicz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Fascinating Account of Christianity Through 2000 Years!

The main focus of this history is that of the Catholic Church but the history is so intertwined with secular history, the Eastern Church, and the Protestant Reformation that speaks strongly to the reader. It is amazing the power the Church has had throughout the years despite numerous persecutions and being stripped of clergy, churches, lands, and assets. Nonetheless, the Catholic Church has survived and has influenced world events for over two thousand years. Despite the disturbing falling numbers of Catholics and clergy throughout the world Catholicism remains the largest single religion worldwide.

This history is an enlightening read not only for Catholics but for anyone interested in history or religion. I’d love to have this volume on my bookshelf but I do recommend reading the Kindle edition for ease of highlighting, note taking, and looking up some of the vernacular the author uses - he does have a penchant for using antiquated speech and foreign phrases which the Kindle application makes a snap to decipher. This style by the author is why I gave the history four rather than five stars. In general it was an excellent, enlightening read that I highly recommend.

[Giovanni Villalobos · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is history of the Catholic Church told from the perspective of a proud Catholic. It may not be for those looking for a lukewarm exposition of all points of view, that would have made it boring—like most books that treat the subject. Instead, this book reads like a novel, a bingeable novel (I couldn’t put it down, I read it in less than a week). It’s hilariously funny, even if it ruffles some feathers. The author has a propensity for deprecating humor, calling the Greeks effete or roasting Luther as an unstable man who had an infatuation with his poop. Little episodes like these are peppered throughout the book and effectively give the reader much needed respite when dealing with such a dense subject.

If you’re Catholic, this book is a must read. If you’re non-Catholic, you should read this book to get the other side of the story. The Catholic Church has been on the receiving end of hateful propaganda war for centuries and there are few books that expose it better than this title.

Entertaining, informative, edifying and accurate; I highly recommend this polemic in favor of the Catholic Church.

[Jim D · Rating 2 out of 5]

i should have guessed from the title that the book would not be very ecumenical, and it wasn't . The book was a fascinating and detailed trip through the history of the church, and in that regard was really good. i learned a great deal about inner struggles and political machinations that embroiled the church in the middle ages and in the renaissance. The author did not pull punches on detailing the foibles and misteps of many clergy. I wish he was more understanding about protestantism and the liberalization trends in the church thoogh. I believe he is a very conservative believer based on his comments on Vatican two, priestly celibacy, encyclicals on birth control, women priests etc. The book was a good overview of the Vatican over the years and for that reason, i stuck with it. i did not appreciate the slights directed towards non-catholics, and liberal catholics.

[Jed Sanford · Rating 3 out of 5]

As one might expect from the title, this is an overly triumphalistic account of the history of the Church from a Catholic perspective. The book is well-written, often fascinating, and the author's sometimes colorful commentary keeps it entertaining. The only really weak section I noticed was the section on the Protestant Reformation. While it is expected there would be some anti-Protestant bias from a Catholic author, it should not rise to the level of Crocker's numerous clearly historically inaccurate statements about Luther and Calvin's theology. Still, overall, the book is entertaining and informative, though many modern Christians may be put off by Crocker's endorsement of the political and ecclesial status quo of medieval Christendom.

[Dale Garfield · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you're like me and always asked, "well what happened after the events in the Bible", this is your book. This was gifted to me by a gentleman at our church because I asked him exactly that. Starting at the end of the acts of the apostles, all the way to modern times, this book tells the story of the Roman Catholic church. It's a very, very, verrrrry long read, I admit I didn't get all the way through it, but read the history of the first few centuries of the church as well as more of the modern 19th and 20th century history. Great book for anyone that wants to know more about Catholicism and the history of Christianity.