What do you think?
Rate this book
The Age of Paradise: Christendom from Pentecost to the First Millennium
“Before there was a West, there was Christendom. This book tells the story of how both came to be.” (from the Introduction) “Before there was a West, there was Christendom. This book tells the story of how both came to be.” (from the Introduction).
The Age of Paradise is the first of a projected four-volume history of Christendom, a civilization with a supporting culture that gave rise to what we now call the West. At a time of renewed interest in the future of Western culture, author John Strickland—an Orthodox scholar, professor, and priest—offers a vision rooted in the deep past of the first millennium. At the heart of his story is the early Church’s “culture of paradise,” an experience of the world in which the kingdom of heaven was tangible and familiar. Drawing not only on worship and theology but statecraft and the arts, the author reveals the remarkably affirmative character Western culture once had under the influence of Christianity—in particular, of Eastern Christendom, which served the West not only as a cradle but as a tutor and guardian as well.
The Age of Paradise is the first of a projected four-volume history of Christendom, a civilization with a supporting culture that gave rise to what we now call the West. At a time of renewed interest in the future of Western culture, author John Strickland—an Orthodox scholar, professor, and priest—offers a vision rooted in the deep past of the first millennium. At the heart of his story is the early Church’s “culture of paradise,” an experience of the world in which the kingdom of heaven was tangible and familiar. Drawing not only on worship and theology but statecraft and the arts, the author reveals the remarkably affirmative character Western culture once had under the influence of Christianity—in particular, of Eastern Christendom, which served the West not only as a cradle but as a tutor and guardian as well.
304 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2019
105 people are currently reading
383 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 - 30 of 31 reviews
August 23, 2021
I will first admit that I have grown tired of reading Orthodox church histories. Especially in recent times, Orthodox (especially converts) tend to want to give an idealized view of Orthodox history and try to contrast the corrupt "West" with the East which preserves a more pure form of Christianity. There is plenty of bad news in Orthodox history. Strickland's history is interesting as he endeavors to show a commonality in all of Christendom (West and East) for much of the first thousand years of its history (which is what the book covers). He notes when divisions do occur, but still sees both halves of the Roman Empire as trying (not always successfully) to hold to the oneness of the Church. He has accepted what has become popular among some Orthodox converts that Celtic Christianity is much more closely related to Eastern Orthodoxy than to Latin Catholicism. Strickland's thesis is that from the beginning of the apostles going out into all the world, Christianity had a goal to create a Christian culture or civilization. I have lots of doubts about this and it strikes me as a position taken by cultural warriors. I would say from reading his intro to the book that Strickland is among them, but in communicating with him, he doesn't accept that label for himself and denies that is his intention in this book though admits he understands how people might get that idea from the introduction. After the introduction he doesn't overly press the culture war viewpoint. He certainly points out some of the problems with Eastern Orthodoxy's version of a Christian civilization, but he still assumes it is the goal of Christianity in bringing heaven to earth - its incarnation occurs in a culture. I probably learned more about the Western papacy from this book then I learned at seminary (when I was there in the mid-1970s the Christian West was taught in one semester while I had 7 semester courses on Orthodox history in the 3 years of seminary). Strickland is setting the stage in this book for his thesis, Christian civilization and why it is crumbling in the West and the alternative that Orthodoxy offers to those still hoping for one.
August 16, 2022
This is one of three series I've been reading about Christian history and is so far my favorite. Highly readable and offers in-depth interpretation on topics that were glossed over for me in past church history classes. I was especially grateful for the sections on Constantine, Pope Gregory the Great, Charlemagne and the Carolingian renaissance, the filioque, and the evangelization of Russia.
January 1, 2020
Well written, well researched, and well told. I am geekily excited that my copy is personally signed by the author.
April 6, 2020
So well written and engaging! Until now I have only had just a bare bones understanding of the timeline of pre-schism Christianity. I love that this book filled in so much of what was missing. There is SO much more to the story than I was aware of and so many pieces came together for me as I was reading. I think Father John is spot on when he says that if we want to understand how and why Western Christian culture has devolved into its current state we need to go back to its beginning and find the roots of the problem. So many people don't even know what happened between the book of Acts and the Great Schism. This book is an excellent remedy for that ignorance. I hope many people will read it!
June 18, 2022
A thorough overview of how the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church became, over a millennium, a church of two cultures and two very different perspectives.
I found the information both informing and riveting, and at times I would have to reread sections and take notes because of the depth and complexity of new information. History told from an eastern perspective has a completely different slant to it than the church history I've known until now and I found certain historical events interpreted very differently, as new light was shed on them.
Major milestones that I had merely taken before as the triumph of Christendom in the west --The Carolingian Empire and the expansion of Christianity into all parts of western Europe through German emperors--are now less glorious and show a side of inflexible pressure placed on Bishops and Popes to adopt heresy and make wars that will ultimately unite the western world under Latin Rome, estrange the Eastern church, and set the stage for the Crusades.
Overall, a deeply satisfying overview of the first 1000 years of Church history from a completely new perspective, though at times it was difficult to keep times and players straight.
I wish the book included a timeline and maps. I found myself regularly pulling up online resources to help me place information visually so that I could better understand how and when things were happening. Also the births and deaths of major player and persons of influence would have been helpful with that timeline.
I found the information both informing and riveting, and at times I would have to reread sections and take notes because of the depth and complexity of new information. History told from an eastern perspective has a completely different slant to it than the church history I've known until now and I found certain historical events interpreted very differently, as new light was shed on them.
Major milestones that I had merely taken before as the triumph of Christendom in the west --The Carolingian Empire and the expansion of Christianity into all parts of western Europe through German emperors--are now less glorious and show a side of inflexible pressure placed on Bishops and Popes to adopt heresy and make wars that will ultimately unite the western world under Latin Rome, estrange the Eastern church, and set the stage for the Crusades.
Overall, a deeply satisfying overview of the first 1000 years of Church history from a completely new perspective, though at times it was difficult to keep times and players straight.
I wish the book included a timeline and maps. I found myself regularly pulling up online resources to help me place information visually so that I could better understand how and when things were happening. Also the births and deaths of major player and persons of influence would have been helpful with that timeline.
October 31, 2024
This was great. I'm used to Church history books focusing on ecumenical councils, but Fr. Strickland sort of gives a political and cultural overview, as well as ecclesiastical, without the main emphasis being on the councils.
I appreciate his perspective and it shined some further light into periods of Church history that are black boxes or ambiguous to me. The time period that stood out to me the most was that of Emperor Charlemagne. That was a major turning point in Church history that I hadn't really heard about before and sets the stage for a lot of what unfolds in the following centuries.
Looking forward to the rest of the series!
I appreciate his perspective and it shined some further light into periods of Church history that are black boxes or ambiguous to me. The time period that stood out to me the most was that of Emperor Charlemagne. That was a major turning point in Church history that I hadn't really heard about before and sets the stage for a lot of what unfolds in the following centuries.
Looking forward to the rest of the series!
December 8, 2022
Christian nationalism is in the air. While that obscure term has been weaponized recently to whip up hate against Christians, it is a real thing, with many historical manifestations. For both Christianity and nationalism are excellent and awesome, and like the chocolate and peanut butter in Reese’s, they are even better together than alone. Still, the combination of state and religion has not always been well executed. It must be, however, for mankind to flourish, which is why one pillar of Foundationalism is establishing the proper balance in the society of the future. To this end, we can learn a lot from this history of the first thousand years of Christianity.
Political advice is not the intended focus of John Strickland’s book. What he offers is cultural history suffused with religion, in the tradition of Christopher Dawson—though pitched to a less-informed audience than Dawson’s, because educational standards have declined very far since Dawson wrote. Strickland is an Eastern Orthodox priest and academic, and this book is the first volume of his just-completed four-volume history of Christendom. He writes from an explicitly Orthodox perspective, and so for anyone who knows Christendom only from the Western (read—papal and Germanic) perspective, this book will be eye-opening. But Strickland emphasizes the commonality of Christendom, not the differences. He is not breaking new ground, really—this topic has been well-covered before, by men such as Robert Louis Wilken and Rodney Stark. He does add his own perspectives, however, and his book is quite accessible.
First-millennium Christian culture was not, for the most part, otherworldly, desirous of total separation from temporal concerns, as is sometimes claimed today. Quite the contrary—Strickland identifies the core of Christendom as a “transformational imperative,” “an evangelical mandate to participate in the renewal of the cosmos by bringing it into alignment with the kingdom of heaven.” Action here, action now, to bring the world closer to God. First-millennium Christianity was nonetheless primarily “paradisiacal”—focused on the kingdom of heaven, both in this life and the life to come. The kingdom of heaven was something towards which men could work in this life, and while true divinization, theosis, was only possible in the next, men did not see a sharp separation. Strictly temporal concerns were, however, secondary matters.
In Strickland’s telling, this transformational imperative was interpreted with an optimistic view of man and the heights he could reach, with the help of God, and this optimism was a key part of why Christianity spread. Once the Great Schism, between the Eastern and Western churches, occurred, or rather as it came to full flower over several hundred years, in the West the focus turned to a harsher view of this world and a pessimistic view of man. No doubt in his later volumes Strickland continues this theme, but it is mostly only prefigured here.
In its first thousand years, Christianity passed through two distinct phases—one where politics was only tenuously connected to Christians, and one where politics was everywhere among Christians. Strickland relies heavily on the Book of Acts to explicate the first Christian cultural phase, “a history of how the Gospel revealed by Christ and confirmed by the Holy Spirit became assimilated by Christians living in the world.” Acts shows how early Christians saw God as immanent, as saturating every element of the world—in the all-encompassing love that Christ insisted was to permeate the community, in the sacraments that involved God’s direct participation in this world, and in the collective continual focus on paradise, the kingdom of heaven. (This also means Christians rejected Gnosticism, the heresy that the material world is evil; in fact, the world is filled with God.)
The Book of Acts, along with other sources, serves for Strickland to cover the pre-political phase of Christianity. In this early period politics was for Christians a one-way street, with Christians being on the receiving end of political action by non-Christians. Fear of Christians creating an alternate political culture drove much of the Roman persecutions. While Strickland does not mention it, famously Pliny the Younger, in his correspondence with the Emperor Trajan in A.D. 112, focused on the dangers to the state of hetaeriae, associations or political clubs, sometimes secret, organized around a common purpose, which frequently became involved in political disturbances. Christianity was perceived as potentially problematic to the extent believers acted as a hetaeria, and therefore were a possible threat to the social order. We can see now that Christians were not political in the sense the Romans feared, but it is understandable the Romans were suspicious, not helped by the enemies of Christians being happy to spread lies about them, and few outsiders being able to distinguish between actual Christians and Gnostic sects with more extreme practices.
Christians were not separated from the world. They have always realized, and acknowledged, that they must be in the world to reveal Christ to the world. This truth, often expressed today using the metaphor of “salt and light,” cribbed from several New Testament passages, has a bad odor nowadays among Christians who are not infected by Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. This is because the metaphor is commonly used by flabby Christians to justify submitting to the dictates of Christ’s enemies, while they stay silent, salving their consciences by pretending their weak-tea Christianity will somehow translate to their overlords through osmosis, and that because this possibility exists they have fulfilled their Christian duty. Thus, supposed Christians send their children to be groomed in government schools, because that is an easier choice than home schooling or a private school, and they say nothing as Christianity is attacked in their workplace and everywhere around them. But, properly applied, it is undoubtedly true that the obligation of Christians is to reveal Christ to the world; they just have to, you know, do some revealing.
After several hundred years of such witness by Christians, who often received martyrdom for their efforts, Christianity transitioned to the overtly political phase of Christianity, inaugurated by the Emperor Constantine. In the Orthodox Church, Constantine is a saint (despite his many temporal shortcomings); in fact, in my own church I frequently pass a large icon of him and his mother Saint Helena, who located and retrieved the True Cross. In this process, Christianity became an integral component of the state, something that lasted until the twentieth century in the West. Given that Christians viewed the sanctification of the world, this present world, as a crucial goal, this opened many new opportunities.
But from the first, the can of worms opened by this change was obvious, and debated by Christians. Strickland contrasts two visions as emblematic of contending views. That of Eusebius, where “Christ’s incarnate presence in the world was manifested by a righteous political order,” and the Christian, Constantinian state was an extension of the kingdom of heaven. And that of Augustine’s The City of God, setting a gulf between the two realms, with little confidence in a Christian state and a view of Christians as largely set apart from the world, a separate city. (On a side note, my daughter, who is reading The City of God for high school, has half-persuaded me to read that entire book, unabridged. It’s long.) Strickland acknowledges that Augustine was more sophisticated than Eusebius, who was essentially a Constantinian apologist, yet that does not change that these are the two basic poles of Christian political thought.
Today, of course, we have been thoroughly propagandized by the anti-religious that religion should not be any part of the state, and that terrible things inevitably result if it is. This modern conceit is not only obviously false, as a historical matter, but was incomprehensible to men before the modern era. Yet many modern Christians, and Christian theologians, have swallowed this line. For example, Strickland analyzes modern theological attacks on “constantinianism,” a pejorative term used by, among others, Stanley Hauerwas. But as Strickland accurately notes, neither Scripture nor tradition holds guidance for how Christians should govern, or participate in governance, so disagreements are inevitable. No surprise, given human nature, if Christianity becomes intertwined with the state, and therefore tied to power and riches, the gospel will often not be held as central as it should be, and this is the only legitimate argument for keeping Christianity and the state at all separate.
But we will return to this question. In the back half of his book, Strickland spends a considerable amount of time explaining the background and the chain of events that led to the Great Schism, beginning in the eighth century. This includes disputes about the filioque, which originated in changes to the Nicene Creed made as part of Roman attempts to resist the Arianization of warlike Germanic tribes, though doctrinal arguments followed (and also existed before the controversy took on great importance). Strickland also covers the rise of Islam and the subsequent, related iconoclast controversy, in which the tangling of church and state played a crucial role, to the detriment of the church. That controversy resulted in the Seventh Ecumenical Council (a matter of great importance in the Orthodox Church, largely forgotten in the West), and also helped to alienate the Roman church from the East. Beyond iconoclasm, Strickland blames Charlemagne, helped by the papacy, for much of the increasing tension between East and West, manifesting less as direct conflict and more as Charlemagne and his successors simply going their own way. This resulted in a series of incomplete and partially-healed schisms, culminating in the Great Schism.
Strickland does not cover the Great Schism itself; he ends with the millennium, along the way touching on other first-millennium matters, such as monasticism and conversions of the Slavs. As to the millennium, Strickland explains that the popular myth, much in evidence twenty years ago but still embedded in our consciousness, that Christendom regarded the turn of the first millennium in apocalyptic terms, is exactly that. It’s a very convenient myth, whose apogee twenty years ago coincided with the rise of the now-fallen New Atheists, in that it portrays Christians as credulous, unlike us sophisticated moderns. But as Strickland points out, the immanence of Christ was a standard belief in Christendom, and the millennium held no special significance. It was just another year in the ongoing transformation of the world in God’s image; certainly Christ would return, but not at some magical date. And there Strickland leaves us, to pick up in his next volume.
I have earlier expounded on the role of religion in the Foundationalist state, and called for Christianity to be the religion officially and formally favored by the state, in what I term “pluralism lite.” This leaves open, however, precisely how the relationship between church and state will operate. An established church can take many forms, ranging from complete unity of church and state in a theocracy to mere state encouragement of religious institutions which are otherwise kept entirely separate from the state. The problems with intertwining Christianity and the state have been grossly exaggerated by Enlightenment propagandists. But as with any human political structure which tries to keep two different horses tied to the same wagon, they are real. The question is not how we can avoid problems, but how we can minimize problems. So is an order that intertwines the Christian church and state a good idea, and if so, how should it be done?
As to the first question, I have little doubt that it is a good idea. But does this not contradict Christ’s mandate, that his kingdom is not of this earth? Only if one mistakes an earthly Christian kingdom for the kingdom of heaven. My goal is not to achieve a paradisiacal culture. The purpose of having a Christian political order is to assist in good governance and to achieve human flourishing, something to which Christianity (real, robust Christianity) has long proven an asset. I also happen to think that a Christian political order assists, as Strickland also argues, as did Eusebius, in achieving what God wills, but this is a secondary concern to Foundationalism, which does not seek a confessional state, rather one that optimizes, not perfects, the society in which it operates.
The major challenge in executing the combination of religion and state is not, as many would have it, that it depends on virtue in both the secular and spiritual rulers. It is that it also depends on the virtue of the mass of the people. Not total virtue, to be sure, but partial virtue that respects and uplifts those with more virtue, recognizing that as the ideal, even if most fall very far short. What we have now is contempt for virtue at all levels of society, and that makes it impossible to successfully weave religious belief into the state. Thus, the Foundationalist state assumes that the populace, high and low, will have regained significant virtue, which can only be done by a mass return to religion. And it likely must be Christian religion, because only Christian religion has ever been associated with true flourishing of a society that achieves anything of value (and it is also the true religion).
Again, then, how and to what degree should the institutions of Christian religion be integrated with the state? Some among the so-called integralists have an easy answer—let’s return to papal supremacy, which for some reason they think worked well, although they can’t precisely tell you when or where. Others who are viewed as integralists, such as Andrew Willard Jones in his analysis of the France of King Saint Louis IX, blur the difference between church and state, alleging the separation is an inexact or inapplicable modern conception. That is as may be, but in practice Jones actually is pushing a variation on the Byzantine, or Orthodox view, much in evidence in Strickland’s book, that what society should seek is “symphony.” Symphony means, in short, that while church and state exist as separate institutions, they overtly seek the same goals, and cooperate toward those goals. One might call it the original Christian nationalism. Strickland summarizes symphony as “the emperor, as head of state, was expected to rule in harmony with the church’s bishops.” And on the further end of the scale is caesaropapism, where the state dominates the religious establishment, as seen during periods of the iconoclast controversy, for example.
We can learn from history what works and what doesn’t, although historical examples cannot be completely mapped onto the future. From the very first, symphony was at best a seesaw. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, famously forced the emperor Theodosius to submit and repent for a mass slaughter. This happened before claims of papal supremacy, but clearly along the continuum toward it, in terms of who was the ultimate authority. On the other end of the seesaw, strong emperors and weak bishops, along with fraught controversies such as Arianism, often meant the emperor dictated the rules. This was more common than supremacy of the religious establishment. I conclude that it’s not at all evident, looking at history, that symphony works very well in practice for any length of time; it seems to depend on having precisely the right combination of leaders, both secular and religious, and the right external conditions for the nation. This suggests that symphony is more ideal than anything else. Like a bowling ball, it tends to fall into the gutter on either side of the straight path, and this tends to harm the flourishing of the society under consideration. But again, an ideal that is partially achieved is better than no ideal at all.
Symphony, and its relationship to the real-life alternative of papal supremacy, bears a close parallel to the difference in church decision making between West and East. In the West, the Pope decides doctrine; this was touted for many years by Catholics on the Right as a way of preventing the corruption that had spread throughout the West among the Protestants, although most of those Catholics have been mighty quiet lately, as they see what they thought was a feature is in fact a bug, as the Church is turned into a tool of Satan by Jorge Bergoglio. In the East, a council decides, which modulates rapid change. The drawback there is that unless those in authority are willing to gather and hash matters out, in a way that will probably gore somebody’s ox, little can be done, and sclerosis can result—or at a minimum, important questions cannot be resolved, something we see today in Orthodoxy. Whether inside a church or in church and state reaching joint decisions, for symphony to work, there must be harmony.
The only places where a form of symphony exists today, whether Christians like to admit it or not, are Muslim countries. In Islam . . . [review completes as first comment]
Political advice is not the intended focus of John Strickland’s book. What he offers is cultural history suffused with religion, in the tradition of Christopher Dawson—though pitched to a less-informed audience than Dawson’s, because educational standards have declined very far since Dawson wrote. Strickland is an Eastern Orthodox priest and academic, and this book is the first volume of his just-completed four-volume history of Christendom. He writes from an explicitly Orthodox perspective, and so for anyone who knows Christendom only from the Western (read—papal and Germanic) perspective, this book will be eye-opening. But Strickland emphasizes the commonality of Christendom, not the differences. He is not breaking new ground, really—this topic has been well-covered before, by men such as Robert Louis Wilken and Rodney Stark. He does add his own perspectives, however, and his book is quite accessible.
First-millennium Christian culture was not, for the most part, otherworldly, desirous of total separation from temporal concerns, as is sometimes claimed today. Quite the contrary—Strickland identifies the core of Christendom as a “transformational imperative,” “an evangelical mandate to participate in the renewal of the cosmos by bringing it into alignment with the kingdom of heaven.” Action here, action now, to bring the world closer to God. First-millennium Christianity was nonetheless primarily “paradisiacal”—focused on the kingdom of heaven, both in this life and the life to come. The kingdom of heaven was something towards which men could work in this life, and while true divinization, theosis, was only possible in the next, men did not see a sharp separation. Strictly temporal concerns were, however, secondary matters.
In Strickland’s telling, this transformational imperative was interpreted with an optimistic view of man and the heights he could reach, with the help of God, and this optimism was a key part of why Christianity spread. Once the Great Schism, between the Eastern and Western churches, occurred, or rather as it came to full flower over several hundred years, in the West the focus turned to a harsher view of this world and a pessimistic view of man. No doubt in his later volumes Strickland continues this theme, but it is mostly only prefigured here.
In its first thousand years, Christianity passed through two distinct phases—one where politics was only tenuously connected to Christians, and one where politics was everywhere among Christians. Strickland relies heavily on the Book of Acts to explicate the first Christian cultural phase, “a history of how the Gospel revealed by Christ and confirmed by the Holy Spirit became assimilated by Christians living in the world.” Acts shows how early Christians saw God as immanent, as saturating every element of the world—in the all-encompassing love that Christ insisted was to permeate the community, in the sacraments that involved God’s direct participation in this world, and in the collective continual focus on paradise, the kingdom of heaven. (This also means Christians rejected Gnosticism, the heresy that the material world is evil; in fact, the world is filled with God.)
The Book of Acts, along with other sources, serves for Strickland to cover the pre-political phase of Christianity. In this early period politics was for Christians a one-way street, with Christians being on the receiving end of political action by non-Christians. Fear of Christians creating an alternate political culture drove much of the Roman persecutions. While Strickland does not mention it, famously Pliny the Younger, in his correspondence with the Emperor Trajan in A.D. 112, focused on the dangers to the state of hetaeriae, associations or political clubs, sometimes secret, organized around a common purpose, which frequently became involved in political disturbances. Christianity was perceived as potentially problematic to the extent believers acted as a hetaeria, and therefore were a possible threat to the social order. We can see now that Christians were not political in the sense the Romans feared, but it is understandable the Romans were suspicious, not helped by the enemies of Christians being happy to spread lies about them, and few outsiders being able to distinguish between actual Christians and Gnostic sects with more extreme practices.
Christians were not separated from the world. They have always realized, and acknowledged, that they must be in the world to reveal Christ to the world. This truth, often expressed today using the metaphor of “salt and light,” cribbed from several New Testament passages, has a bad odor nowadays among Christians who are not infected by Moralistic Therapeutic Deism. This is because the metaphor is commonly used by flabby Christians to justify submitting to the dictates of Christ’s enemies, while they stay silent, salving their consciences by pretending their weak-tea Christianity will somehow translate to their overlords through osmosis, and that because this possibility exists they have fulfilled their Christian duty. Thus, supposed Christians send their children to be groomed in government schools, because that is an easier choice than home schooling or a private school, and they say nothing as Christianity is attacked in their workplace and everywhere around them. But, properly applied, it is undoubtedly true that the obligation of Christians is to reveal Christ to the world; they just have to, you know, do some revealing.
After several hundred years of such witness by Christians, who often received martyrdom for their efforts, Christianity transitioned to the overtly political phase of Christianity, inaugurated by the Emperor Constantine. In the Orthodox Church, Constantine is a saint (despite his many temporal shortcomings); in fact, in my own church I frequently pass a large icon of him and his mother Saint Helena, who located and retrieved the True Cross. In this process, Christianity became an integral component of the state, something that lasted until the twentieth century in the West. Given that Christians viewed the sanctification of the world, this present world, as a crucial goal, this opened many new opportunities.
But from the first, the can of worms opened by this change was obvious, and debated by Christians. Strickland contrasts two visions as emblematic of contending views. That of Eusebius, where “Christ’s incarnate presence in the world was manifested by a righteous political order,” and the Christian, Constantinian state was an extension of the kingdom of heaven. And that of Augustine’s The City of God, setting a gulf between the two realms, with little confidence in a Christian state and a view of Christians as largely set apart from the world, a separate city. (On a side note, my daughter, who is reading The City of God for high school, has half-persuaded me to read that entire book, unabridged. It’s long.) Strickland acknowledges that Augustine was more sophisticated than Eusebius, who was essentially a Constantinian apologist, yet that does not change that these are the two basic poles of Christian political thought.
Today, of course, we have been thoroughly propagandized by the anti-religious that religion should not be any part of the state, and that terrible things inevitably result if it is. This modern conceit is not only obviously false, as a historical matter, but was incomprehensible to men before the modern era. Yet many modern Christians, and Christian theologians, have swallowed this line. For example, Strickland analyzes modern theological attacks on “constantinianism,” a pejorative term used by, among others, Stanley Hauerwas. But as Strickland accurately notes, neither Scripture nor tradition holds guidance for how Christians should govern, or participate in governance, so disagreements are inevitable. No surprise, given human nature, if Christianity becomes intertwined with the state, and therefore tied to power and riches, the gospel will often not be held as central as it should be, and this is the only legitimate argument for keeping Christianity and the state at all separate.
But we will return to this question. In the back half of his book, Strickland spends a considerable amount of time explaining the background and the chain of events that led to the Great Schism, beginning in the eighth century. This includes disputes about the filioque, which originated in changes to the Nicene Creed made as part of Roman attempts to resist the Arianization of warlike Germanic tribes, though doctrinal arguments followed (and also existed before the controversy took on great importance). Strickland also covers the rise of Islam and the subsequent, related iconoclast controversy, in which the tangling of church and state played a crucial role, to the detriment of the church. That controversy resulted in the Seventh Ecumenical Council (a matter of great importance in the Orthodox Church, largely forgotten in the West), and also helped to alienate the Roman church from the East. Beyond iconoclasm, Strickland blames Charlemagne, helped by the papacy, for much of the increasing tension between East and West, manifesting less as direct conflict and more as Charlemagne and his successors simply going their own way. This resulted in a series of incomplete and partially-healed schisms, culminating in the Great Schism.
Strickland does not cover the Great Schism itself; he ends with the millennium, along the way touching on other first-millennium matters, such as monasticism and conversions of the Slavs. As to the millennium, Strickland explains that the popular myth, much in evidence twenty years ago but still embedded in our consciousness, that Christendom regarded the turn of the first millennium in apocalyptic terms, is exactly that. It’s a very convenient myth, whose apogee twenty years ago coincided with the rise of the now-fallen New Atheists, in that it portrays Christians as credulous, unlike us sophisticated moderns. But as Strickland points out, the immanence of Christ was a standard belief in Christendom, and the millennium held no special significance. It was just another year in the ongoing transformation of the world in God’s image; certainly Christ would return, but not at some magical date. And there Strickland leaves us, to pick up in his next volume.
I have earlier expounded on the role of religion in the Foundationalist state, and called for Christianity to be the religion officially and formally favored by the state, in what I term “pluralism lite.” This leaves open, however, precisely how the relationship between church and state will operate. An established church can take many forms, ranging from complete unity of church and state in a theocracy to mere state encouragement of religious institutions which are otherwise kept entirely separate from the state. The problems with intertwining Christianity and the state have been grossly exaggerated by Enlightenment propagandists. But as with any human political structure which tries to keep two different horses tied to the same wagon, they are real. The question is not how we can avoid problems, but how we can minimize problems. So is an order that intertwines the Christian church and state a good idea, and if so, how should it be done?
As to the first question, I have little doubt that it is a good idea. But does this not contradict Christ’s mandate, that his kingdom is not of this earth? Only if one mistakes an earthly Christian kingdom for the kingdom of heaven. My goal is not to achieve a paradisiacal culture. The purpose of having a Christian political order is to assist in good governance and to achieve human flourishing, something to which Christianity (real, robust Christianity) has long proven an asset. I also happen to think that a Christian political order assists, as Strickland also argues, as did Eusebius, in achieving what God wills, but this is a secondary concern to Foundationalism, which does not seek a confessional state, rather one that optimizes, not perfects, the society in which it operates.
The major challenge in executing the combination of religion and state is not, as many would have it, that it depends on virtue in both the secular and spiritual rulers. It is that it also depends on the virtue of the mass of the people. Not total virtue, to be sure, but partial virtue that respects and uplifts those with more virtue, recognizing that as the ideal, even if most fall very far short. What we have now is contempt for virtue at all levels of society, and that makes it impossible to successfully weave religious belief into the state. Thus, the Foundationalist state assumes that the populace, high and low, will have regained significant virtue, which can only be done by a mass return to religion. And it likely must be Christian religion, because only Christian religion has ever been associated with true flourishing of a society that achieves anything of value (and it is also the true religion).
Again, then, how and to what degree should the institutions of Christian religion be integrated with the state? Some among the so-called integralists have an easy answer—let’s return to papal supremacy, which for some reason they think worked well, although they can’t precisely tell you when or where. Others who are viewed as integralists, such as Andrew Willard Jones in his analysis of the France of King Saint Louis IX, blur the difference between church and state, alleging the separation is an inexact or inapplicable modern conception. That is as may be, but in practice Jones actually is pushing a variation on the Byzantine, or Orthodox view, much in evidence in Strickland’s book, that what society should seek is “symphony.” Symphony means, in short, that while church and state exist as separate institutions, they overtly seek the same goals, and cooperate toward those goals. One might call it the original Christian nationalism. Strickland summarizes symphony as “the emperor, as head of state, was expected to rule in harmony with the church’s bishops.” And on the further end of the scale is caesaropapism, where the state dominates the religious establishment, as seen during periods of the iconoclast controversy, for example.
We can learn from history what works and what doesn’t, although historical examples cannot be completely mapped onto the future. From the very first, symphony was at best a seesaw. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, famously forced the emperor Theodosius to submit and repent for a mass slaughter. This happened before claims of papal supremacy, but clearly along the continuum toward it, in terms of who was the ultimate authority. On the other end of the seesaw, strong emperors and weak bishops, along with fraught controversies such as Arianism, often meant the emperor dictated the rules. This was more common than supremacy of the religious establishment. I conclude that it’s not at all evident, looking at history, that symphony works very well in practice for any length of time; it seems to depend on having precisely the right combination of leaders, both secular and religious, and the right external conditions for the nation. This suggests that symphony is more ideal than anything else. Like a bowling ball, it tends to fall into the gutter on either side of the straight path, and this tends to harm the flourishing of the society under consideration. But again, an ideal that is partially achieved is better than no ideal at all.
Symphony, and its relationship to the real-life alternative of papal supremacy, bears a close parallel to the difference in church decision making between West and East. In the West, the Pope decides doctrine; this was touted for many years by Catholics on the Right as a way of preventing the corruption that had spread throughout the West among the Protestants, although most of those Catholics have been mighty quiet lately, as they see what they thought was a feature is in fact a bug, as the Church is turned into a tool of Satan by Jorge Bergoglio. In the East, a council decides, which modulates rapid change. The drawback there is that unless those in authority are willing to gather and hash matters out, in a way that will probably gore somebody’s ox, little can be done, and sclerosis can result—or at a minimum, important questions cannot be resolved, something we see today in Orthodoxy. Whether inside a church or in church and state reaching joint decisions, for symphony to work, there must be harmony.
The only places where a form of symphony exists today, whether Christians like to admit it or not, are Muslim countries. In Islam . . . [review completes as first comment]
March 22, 2025
Good stuff.
Read
September 18, 2019You never really grasp how much you don’t know, until you try to teach someone. This was me. My children are now elementary school aged and I ambitiously decided to work with them on Church history. I knew about that: I attend Divine Liturgy, I’ve read some of the works of the Church fathers, I know the lives of the Saints. However, the more I tried to condense my knowledge to small lessons, the more I realized I didn’t know. Enter John Strickland’s The Age of Paradise.
This book is a both approachable and in-depth look at the Church from Pentecost to the First Millennium. But it is more than that. Interwoven with a more traditional tracking of history (names, dates, places) is the development of Christianity, theology, philosophy, and worship. It was amazing to watch the early Christians and the early Church coalesce into the Divine Liturgy that I know today. I loved seeing old friends such as St. Constantine and St. Helen, St. Patrick, St. Theodora, and many more, emerge from the pages of the book to become more than the delightful stories I know—instead taking their proper place in the context of time, place, and history.
I have read this book through once, and am already starting to read it again. This is the type of book from which you can glean new information, new ideas, and new thoughts every time it is read. And this time I’m taking notes to be able to truly introduce my children into the history of the Church—our Church, their Church.
This book is a both approachable and in-depth look at the Church from Pentecost to the First Millennium. But it is more than that. Interwoven with a more traditional tracking of history (names, dates, places) is the development of Christianity, theology, philosophy, and worship. It was amazing to watch the early Christians and the early Church coalesce into the Divine Liturgy that I know today. I loved seeing old friends such as St. Constantine and St. Helen, St. Patrick, St. Theodora, and many more, emerge from the pages of the book to become more than the delightful stories I know—instead taking their proper place in the context of time, place, and history.
I have read this book through once, and am already starting to read it again. This is the type of book from which you can glean new information, new ideas, and new thoughts every time it is read. And this time I’m taking notes to be able to truly introduce my children into the history of the Church—our Church, their Church.
September 9, 2019
Large fan of the podcast 'Paradise and Utopia', and this book is essentially the podcast converted into book form. Unsurprisingly, the book (volume one of four to come) is great as well. A pretty familiar historical narrative for anyone who has studied Christian history is elevated by an insightful cultural analysis. Also ties the lines of development of Christian history, and the rise of 'the West' (distinguishing itself from the Byzantine East) to many of our current cultural ailments in a convincing manner.
October 9, 2024
Before reading this book I was already questioning my allegiance to Western Civilization due to many reasons not least it's current state of barbarousness and blatant evil criminality but also the only thing it seems to excel at is self deception where every value and ideal is false and a lie.
However, this book discusses the age of Paradise of Christendom from Pentecost to the 11th century. Paradise in contrast to Utopia. For this age was just as rough as any other but Christendom was a transformational culture that had radically changed pagan Rome to Christian Romanitas that widely impacted the world even outside of the Byzantine Empire. What made it Paradise was it's sacramental nature. The whole culture was immersed in Christianity. The author defines this sacramentalism as having four features of doctrinal integrity, divine participation, heavenly immanence and spiritual transformation.
The Franks under Charlemagne and other heads started to try and distinguish themselves from the "Greeks of the East". The very emergence of "Western civilization" is in reaction to Byzantine Empire and the rest of Eastern Christendom. No wonder the Western mind has a massive blind spot in all things relating to the East. Our very identity from it's very beginning is oppositional to all that by definition.
This becomes even more shocking and obvious when one realizes that for the first thousand years of Christendom all focus was towards the East as every church faced East. The very term of Western Civilization is in reaction to this Eastward orientation in favor of the West. The significance of this is so simple and yet so revealing.
This is the first I have ever encountered the explanation of the rise of the Pope being due to a century of embarrassment. Where different secular clans controlled and forced the Pope to due their bidding. This trend is reversed by the Pope's claiming papal supremacy over not only other bishops sees but also over secular powers.
It's interesting to see different factions using the filioque clause. The Franks used it to separate and distinguish themselves from Constantinople for obvious reasons when they were drowning in heresy themselves. They eventually force it on the Pope and Rome who refused it for the most part but then when the Pope demand supremacy they oddly keep it. Probably to consolidate their possessions.
The east really struggles with casaeropapism where Emperors legislate and control the church. And the church hardly ever resists.
Notes:
pg 107 talks very much like Rene Girard and how Constantine changed the sacrificial nature of the culture from very bloody sacrifices to a bloodless sacrifice.
pg 223 The West's concept of absolute transcendence makes it so that God is above and not connected to his creation which means Christ loses his place as head of the church and the Pope takes his place. Discussed in relation to the Nicolaitan schism.
pg 277 He says the single greatest cause of the collapse of Christendom is the loss of confidence in the potential spiritual transformation of the cosmos and the experience of salvation in that cosmos.
However, this book discusses the age of Paradise of Christendom from Pentecost to the 11th century. Paradise in contrast to Utopia. For this age was just as rough as any other but Christendom was a transformational culture that had radically changed pagan Rome to Christian Romanitas that widely impacted the world even outside of the Byzantine Empire. What made it Paradise was it's sacramental nature. The whole culture was immersed in Christianity. The author defines this sacramentalism as having four features of doctrinal integrity, divine participation, heavenly immanence and spiritual transformation.
The Franks under Charlemagne and other heads started to try and distinguish themselves from the "Greeks of the East". The very emergence of "Western civilization" is in reaction to Byzantine Empire and the rest of Eastern Christendom. No wonder the Western mind has a massive blind spot in all things relating to the East. Our very identity from it's very beginning is oppositional to all that by definition.
This becomes even more shocking and obvious when one realizes that for the first thousand years of Christendom all focus was towards the East as every church faced East. The very term of Western Civilization is in reaction to this Eastward orientation in favor of the West. The significance of this is so simple and yet so revealing.
This is the first I have ever encountered the explanation of the rise of the Pope being due to a century of embarrassment. Where different secular clans controlled and forced the Pope to due their bidding. This trend is reversed by the Pope's claiming papal supremacy over not only other bishops sees but also over secular powers.
It's interesting to see different factions using the filioque clause. The Franks used it to separate and distinguish themselves from Constantinople for obvious reasons when they were drowning in heresy themselves. They eventually force it on the Pope and Rome who refused it for the most part but then when the Pope demand supremacy they oddly keep it. Probably to consolidate their possessions.
The east really struggles with casaeropapism where Emperors legislate and control the church. And the church hardly ever resists.
Notes:
pg 107 talks very much like Rene Girard and how Constantine changed the sacrificial nature of the culture from very bloody sacrifices to a bloodless sacrifice.
pg 223 The West's concept of absolute transcendence makes it so that God is above and not connected to his creation which means Christ loses his place as head of the church and the Pope takes his place. Discussed in relation to the Nicolaitan schism.
pg 277 He says the single greatest cause of the collapse of Christendom is the loss of confidence in the potential spiritual transformation of the cosmos and the experience of salvation in that cosmos.
December 14, 2020
I highly recommend this book to anyone who has even a passing acquaintance with the Catholic church. I was raised in a generic-Protestant environment in a family that never attended church. I was baptized and confirmed into the Catholic faith at the age of twenty-three. By the grace of God, I was chrismated into the Orthodox church at the age of twenty-nine. During the short period that I was Catholic, I learned everything I could about the Catholic church, including the history and dogmas. Well, this book is the missing history - the history that no one teaches about the Catholic church and where it strayed away from the one true faith.
Mr. Strickland connects all the dots to complete the picture of Protestant history. He explains where the Catholic church has deviated from the faith, the absolute mess their deviation has caused, and the continuing repercussions. Think of all the "Protestant" religions there are today. They all stem from the Catholic church. Every flavor of Christianity belongs to the Catholic church in some form, except the one true faith of Orthodoxy. The Orthodox church has been safeguarding the faith as it was handed down to the Apostles for over 2,000 years. Mr. Strickland makes clear where our paths diverged, what keeps up apart, and why the only way to reconciliation is complete repudiation by the Catholic church of all their teachings over the past 1,000+ years.
We've been warned, and it is a well known tactic that in order to shift public opinion from right to left it needs to be done in small steps. This is exactly what the Catholic church did, and it was driven initially by a very small group. The popes claimed more and more power until they ultimately declared themselves to be the Vicar of Christ, Christ's representative on Earth. This was not a teaching handed down from the Apostles, and it is found nowhere in scripture. Clearly, it is a purely human invention in order to manipulate and control others.
Mr. Strickland breaks down the various differences between Orthodox and Catholic by explaining the subtle changes Rome brought to their faith in relatively small doses. And, he does it by making very astute observations, such as Augustinianism vs. the Eastern Fathers. Simple comparison, but it explains so very much! This book isn't always an easy or straight-forward read, and you can get lost in the history if you're not careful, but I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in a real explanation of the differences between East and West.
Mr. Strickland connects all the dots to complete the picture of Protestant history. He explains where the Catholic church has deviated from the faith, the absolute mess their deviation has caused, and the continuing repercussions. Think of all the "Protestant" religions there are today. They all stem from the Catholic church. Every flavor of Christianity belongs to the Catholic church in some form, except the one true faith of Orthodoxy. The Orthodox church has been safeguarding the faith as it was handed down to the Apostles for over 2,000 years. Mr. Strickland makes clear where our paths diverged, what keeps up apart, and why the only way to reconciliation is complete repudiation by the Catholic church of all their teachings over the past 1,000+ years.
We've been warned, and it is a well known tactic that in order to shift public opinion from right to left it needs to be done in small steps. This is exactly what the Catholic church did, and it was driven initially by a very small group. The popes claimed more and more power until they ultimately declared themselves to be the Vicar of Christ, Christ's representative on Earth. This was not a teaching handed down from the Apostles, and it is found nowhere in scripture. Clearly, it is a purely human invention in order to manipulate and control others.
Mr. Strickland breaks down the various differences between Orthodox and Catholic by explaining the subtle changes Rome brought to their faith in relatively small doses. And, he does it by making very astute observations, such as Augustinianism vs. the Eastern Fathers. Simple comparison, but it explains so very much! This book isn't always an easy or straight-forward read, and you can get lost in the history if you're not careful, but I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in a real explanation of the differences between East and West.
January 4, 2024
Fr. John Strickland is an excellent writer, and does a great job describing the anthropological pessimism that developed in the west, as opposed to a more hopeful worldview in the east (which seeks to transform, rather than escape the world) and the ramifications of each respective ideology as they grew farther apart. Fr. John’s prologue and introduction in particular are more dense but incredibly efficient as they describe the evolution of the ideological movements, and what happens when an empire either strives towards a “paradise on earth” model, or reaches the logical conclusion of a morally empty utopia.
In chapter four, Fr John beautifully describes the Celtic conversion to orthodoxy as the fulfilment of the optimistic, eastern view of creation. This is a prime example, he writes, of a uniquely Christian, transformational cosmology. In chapter five, we get to the crucial details of Charlemagne’s reformation and rise of filioquism in the west. This, along with the convoluted court politics of the east, makes for a complicated chapter, but Fr. John walks the reader through these events and explains difficult theological concepts in way that is accessible and easy to understand.
The only flaw is that the book doesn’t clearly establish the role of the pope in the first few centuries of Christendom. A major question on everyone’s mind, Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox, would be regarding the claims of papal supremacy and infallibility, especially if this is a topic they are approaching without much prior knowledge. Spending some time on these definitions (for example, why was the Roman bishop called a “pope” while the eastern patriarchs are not, and why did the rest of the east consider Rome to be “obviously pre-eminent within the pentarchy” on moral matters, pg. 138, while Pope Gregory fought staunchly against the papacy’s universal pre-eminence, pg. 143?) Establishing some more background regarding the western papacy would have helped to clarify these conflicts. I have a reasonable, if limited knowledge of early medieval history but I still struggled with this distinction.
But apart from that, this is a fantastic book, well-structured and easy to follow. I learned so much from this book and would recommend it to anyone who wants to learn more about the first 1000 years of the Church, and how early Christians really lived, what they believed, and how their theology shaped the world around them.
In chapter four, Fr John beautifully describes the Celtic conversion to orthodoxy as the fulfilment of the optimistic, eastern view of creation. This is a prime example, he writes, of a uniquely Christian, transformational cosmology. In chapter five, we get to the crucial details of Charlemagne’s reformation and rise of filioquism in the west. This, along with the convoluted court politics of the east, makes for a complicated chapter, but Fr. John walks the reader through these events and explains difficult theological concepts in way that is accessible and easy to understand.
The only flaw is that the book doesn’t clearly establish the role of the pope in the first few centuries of Christendom. A major question on everyone’s mind, Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox, would be regarding the claims of papal supremacy and infallibility, especially if this is a topic they are approaching without much prior knowledge. Spending some time on these definitions (for example, why was the Roman bishop called a “pope” while the eastern patriarchs are not, and why did the rest of the east consider Rome to be “obviously pre-eminent within the pentarchy” on moral matters, pg. 138, while Pope Gregory fought staunchly against the papacy’s universal pre-eminence, pg. 143?) Establishing some more background regarding the western papacy would have helped to clarify these conflicts. I have a reasonable, if limited knowledge of early medieval history but I still struggled with this distinction.
But apart from that, this is a fantastic book, well-structured and easy to follow. I learned so much from this book and would recommend it to anyone who wants to learn more about the first 1000 years of the Church, and how early Christians really lived, what they believed, and how their theology shaped the world around them.
November 26, 2025
This is more an essay style history book than a story telling dramatic history book, so it is not my favourite style of history, however it is still a great book.
He has some themes he explores, he looks at how the church and christianity and christendom were different in the past.
Probably my favourite thing with this book is that it gives the background for how the whole frankish capture of the western church happened, and how the first cracks which led to the Great Schism appeared.
Unfortunately, I feel like I must have only seen biased takes of this. Biased in the sense that they are way too favourable towards the byzantines! Strickland is not greek or russian, he is western himself and his bias seems to be a love for celtic stuff (not relevant to this issue or most things), so he actually gives a fair treatment here.
I had NO IDEA that the byzantines were just as bad with their cesaropapism as the franks and that they were just in full blown heresy with the iconoclasm and that the byzantine emperor SENT SHIPS OF ASSASSINS at least two times to kill the pope for going against their heresy. Or the fact that they were milking the south of Italy and not giving anything in return. Then the actions of the popes and the western church, while not great in hindsight, become a lot more understandable. And you realise that it really could have gone either way, the eastern church could have gone off the rails too - in fact, it did, for many periods - and it's only by multiple miracles that it didn't.
And then the Franks.. it definitely seems to be mainly their fault for causing the schism and it seems to be political. But you kind of see why the Franks ended up at the top. Because what were the other options? The Muslims who they ejected from France? All the other germanic tribes who are Arians? Italian nobles who turned the Lateran palace into a brothel? The Franks seem better than all the other possibilities at the time.
The author seems to be a visual person, there is a lot of description of art and so on. The book might do well in a documentary, visual form. I liked the imagery of the silver plates of the creed next to Saint Peter's tomb at the end of the book.
He has some themes he explores, he looks at how the church and christianity and christendom were different in the past.
Probably my favourite thing with this book is that it gives the background for how the whole frankish capture of the western church happened, and how the first cracks which led to the Great Schism appeared.
Unfortunately, I feel like I must have only seen biased takes of this. Biased in the sense that they are way too favourable towards the byzantines! Strickland is not greek or russian, he is western himself and his bias seems to be a love for celtic stuff (not relevant to this issue or most things), so he actually gives a fair treatment here.
I had NO IDEA that the byzantines were just as bad with their cesaropapism as the franks and that they were just in full blown heresy with the iconoclasm and that the byzantine emperor SENT SHIPS OF ASSASSINS at least two times to kill the pope for going against their heresy. Or the fact that they were milking the south of Italy and not giving anything in return. Then the actions of the popes and the western church, while not great in hindsight, become a lot more understandable. And you realise that it really could have gone either way, the eastern church could have gone off the rails too - in fact, it did, for many periods - and it's only by multiple miracles that it didn't.
And then the Franks.. it definitely seems to be mainly their fault for causing the schism and it seems to be political. But you kind of see why the Franks ended up at the top. Because what were the other options? The Muslims who they ejected from France? All the other germanic tribes who are Arians? Italian nobles who turned the Lateran palace into a brothel? The Franks seem better than all the other possibilities at the time.
The author seems to be a visual person, there is a lot of description of art and so on. The book might do well in a documentary, visual form. I liked the imagery of the silver plates of the creed next to Saint Peter's tomb at the end of the book.
September 5, 2022
Fr. John in his first Volume of a four-volume history on the history of Christianity has given an overview and reflection of events throughout the first thousand years. His book is a wonderful addition to other church sources on that period. The audio book in which I listened to is a little over 11 hours. I found it easy to follow along on long drives and in the evening before bed. Anyone familiar with Church history from the Orthodox perspective will not find anything new. However, Fr. John’s narration is a Joy. I would not suggest this book to those first seeking the Orthodox Faith, but those familiar with the Faith and wanting more depth of the history of the Church will find it useful. This series of books is truly a gift to any English speaking Orthodox, not since Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware) (May his memory be eternal), has a concise and easy narrative been attempted. It would be an excellent for course work source. I highly suggest this book and the others in the series.
SbDn Constantine Stayton
SbDn Constantine Stayton
March 14, 2022
Context Provides Clarity
This book provides a historical context that allows you to start seeing the patterns and trends of our time with clarity. I attended public schools in the United States and I was never how the Roman Empire, Christianity, and the Christian Church influence history. When I did learn about Christianity in school it was to highlight a scandal or atrocity, but I never had much context for what lead to these events. This book doesn’t hides the foibles and failings of self-proclaimed Christians, nor does it haughtily judge our ancestors from a self-righteous perspective. Like the self-righteous perspective of a modern person who has confused the gift of a world transformed by our ancestors, who sacrificed to make it a better place, with their own virtue and achievement. Bravo! Thank you for this book John Strickland. I look forward the the rest in this series.
This book provides a historical context that allows you to start seeing the patterns and trends of our time with clarity. I attended public schools in the United States and I was never how the Roman Empire, Christianity, and the Christian Church influence history. When I did learn about Christianity in school it was to highlight a scandal or atrocity, but I never had much context for what lead to these events. This book doesn’t hides the foibles and failings of self-proclaimed Christians, nor does it haughtily judge our ancestors from a self-righteous perspective. Like the self-righteous perspective of a modern person who has confused the gift of a world transformed by our ancestors, who sacrificed to make it a better place, with their own virtue and achievement. Bravo! Thank you for this book John Strickland. I look forward the the rest in this series.
August 1, 2021
A very thorough presentation of the first millennium of Christendom from the perspective of an Orthodox Priest and excellent Historian. Brief warning; Reading this work (Volume 1 of 4) might change your view of history quite a bit, as it reveals a joyful, bright and life-affirming Christianity which was enhancing and enriching the here-life and embraced Love (also in Marriage for the Clergy) as one of the main portals, into the Divine.
A highly recommended book, as it indirectly illuminates the stark contrast that happened after the Schism in 1054, when a different Western tradition started emerging. A thought-provoking and important book.
A highly recommended book, as it indirectly illuminates the stark contrast that happened after the Schism in 1054, when a different Western tradition started emerging. A thought-provoking and important book.
August 21, 2022
"The Age of Paradise" lays out church history from Pentecost to the eve of the Great Schism in a format accessible and understandable to a variety of listeners. Through its flowing, almost narrative, style the author recounts nearly a thousand years of councils, church fathers, conflict, and intrigue within a relatively compact book. I appreciated the Orthodox lens through which events were interpreted, shedding light on the historical events which formed our current church structure in relation to the broader world. I would be interested to see the direction the following books in this series take in their exposition of Christianity's past.
September 8, 2022
The strength of John Strickland's book is its combination of historical analysis with spiritual edification. As someone who loves to study Orthodox writings, Strickland dives into the historical narrative of the early church without being dry; in fact, quite the opposite. Many times I felt myself both encouraged and convicted as he described the acts of the martyrs, of the actions of women in the early church, and an analysis of how a divergence from this historical faith has led to the overwhelming feeling of nihilism felt today, without despair. I cannot recommend this book highly enough!
January 23, 2024
This book is very thorough in its explanation of all that was lost to the Church’s witness when there was a split between the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches. This book explains how St. Augustine’s teaching shaped the Great Schism and much of what Western Christians believe in their theology. This book exposes the mistakes and the beauty of the Church. Mostly it asks the question: what if the Great Schism had not taken place? Would the witness of the church been more effective?
December 7, 2025
Phenomenal history of the first thousand years of Christianity and Christian civilization, very well written and engaging; Strickland presents a fresh thematic synthesis of the history.
"The single most important cause of the collapse of Christian culture is the loss of confidence in a spiritually transformed cosmos and the experience of human salvation within that cosmos."
The Age of Paradise p. 277.
"The single most important cause of the collapse of Christian culture is the loss of confidence in a spiritually transformed cosmos and the experience of human salvation within that cosmos."
The Age of Paradise p. 277.
June 4, 2023
A Detailed History of Christendom
A detailed yet readable history of the first thousand years of Christianity and the civilization that grew out of Christianity. The modern, non-scholarly layout uses numerous endnotes (100+) rather than footnotes and a separate bibliography.
A detailed yet readable history of the first thousand years of Christianity and the civilization that grew out of Christianity. The modern, non-scholarly layout uses numerous endnotes (100+) rather than footnotes and a separate bibliography.
April 11, 2022
Fr. John Strickland shows historically how the "west" was created when the roman see ceased to look to the east.
April 26, 2023
Very interesting history on the early church that I was unaware of most of it.
May 20, 2024
Enjoyable ride from beginning to end. Would recommend. Not overly technical.
October 13, 2024
Good comprehensive church history! Up to 1054 AD.
January 24, 2026
A lot to get through in some points, but a very important read. I recommend that Christians read it.
September 27, 2019
When this book was announced, I was so excited to request a free copy to review. The Age of Paradise Christendom from Pentecost to the First Millennium sounded like a great book to read for Bible / History in our homeschool this year 😀 This is Volume 1 of a 4 volume set that author John Strickland is set to write. This volume is about Paradise and Utopia The Rise and Fall of What the West Once Was.
The author, John Strickland is an Orthodox priest and former college professor. He blogs at https://johnstrickland.org/author/pou... and his podcast can be found at https://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts....
I love all the information that Fr. Strickland imparts in this book. He lays the foundation of Christianity / Christendom as a basis of where current Christianity came from. He is very thorough in his descriptions.
There is something about this book that I just can’t get past. I could not finish it, which has been so very stressful for me 😞 There are very few books I haven’t finished, especially ones that I wanted to read as much as I wanted to read this one. And there’s LOTS of info I have underlined in this book. But, as I read this book I would have to go back and re-read many sections. I sat outside with my kids while they played one day and read this book, after I read a page and half I realized I had all ready read that section. I have struggled with writing this review, I don’t ever want to write a negative review if I can help it. Although there is much great information in this book, the writing just does not connect with me (or my husband). There are many good reviews, please read them too.
The author, John Strickland is an Orthodox priest and former college professor. He blogs at https://johnstrickland.org/author/pou... and his podcast can be found at https://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts....
I love all the information that Fr. Strickland imparts in this book. He lays the foundation of Christianity / Christendom as a basis of where current Christianity came from. He is very thorough in his descriptions.
There is something about this book that I just can’t get past. I could not finish it, which has been so very stressful for me 😞 There are very few books I haven’t finished, especially ones that I wanted to read as much as I wanted to read this one. And there’s LOTS of info I have underlined in this book. But, as I read this book I would have to go back and re-read many sections. I sat outside with my kids while they played one day and read this book, after I read a page and half I realized I had all ready read that section. I have struggled with writing this review, I don’t ever want to write a negative review if I can help it. Although there is much great information in this book, the writing just does not connect with me (or my husband). There are many good reviews, please read them too.
September 21, 2019
The Age of Paradise by John Strickland will surely become a cherished text in any but especially in an Orthodox Christian library, be it in the home or the parish.
The book starts at the “Dawn of Christendom”, with Christ Himself, and travels through Christianity’s historical milestones up to the first millennium. What distinguishes “The Age of Paradise” from other books covering the same, is its approachability because of a style that is more like a hagiography than that of an history book. Theological thought, the impact of philosophy, worship, the varied concerns of Gospel and Epistle writers, martyrology in context of pagan overlordship – the whole is clearly expressed so that the reader can easily apprehend the link between the Kingdom above and the earthly realm.
What is refreshing in The Age of Paradise is that Fr. Strickland does not assume the reader’s background (national, religious), and is clearly on the side authentic Christian culture which is cosmological, sacrificial, and ecclesiastical – all without being polemical. Part of the book’s beauty was in the moments of resonance: when I was struck by how very familiar but nonetheless very new the content seemed.
Much like that special time of year which is the journey through Holy Week to Pascha, The Age of Paradise will become for many a ‘place’ which will be often revisited in joy and anticipation, and from which there will be renewal.
Full disclosure: I was provided with an e-copy of the book for a fair review.
The book starts at the “Dawn of Christendom”, with Christ Himself, and travels through Christianity’s historical milestones up to the first millennium. What distinguishes “The Age of Paradise” from other books covering the same, is its approachability because of a style that is more like a hagiography than that of an history book. Theological thought, the impact of philosophy, worship, the varied concerns of Gospel and Epistle writers, martyrology in context of pagan overlordship – the whole is clearly expressed so that the reader can easily apprehend the link between the Kingdom above and the earthly realm.
What is refreshing in The Age of Paradise is that Fr. Strickland does not assume the reader’s background (national, religious), and is clearly on the side authentic Christian culture which is cosmological, sacrificial, and ecclesiastical – all without being polemical. Part of the book’s beauty was in the moments of resonance: when I was struck by how very familiar but nonetheless very new the content seemed.
Much like that special time of year which is the journey through Holy Week to Pascha, The Age of Paradise will become for many a ‘place’ which will be often revisited in joy and anticipation, and from which there will be renewal.
Full disclosure: I was provided with an e-copy of the book for a fair review.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews