What do you think?
Rate this book
The Eastern Orthodox Church: A New History
An insider’s account of the Eastern Orthodox Church, from its beginning in the era of Jesus and the Apostles to the modern age
In this short, accessible account of the Eastern Orthodox Church, John McGuckin begins by tackling the question “What is the Church?” His answer is a clear, historically and theologically rooted portrait of what the Church is for Orthodox Christianity and how it differs from Western Christians’ expectations.
McGuckin explores the lived faith of generations, including sketches of some of the most important theological themes and individual personalities of the ancient and modern Church. He interweaves a personal approach throughout, offering to readers the experience of what it is like to enter an Orthodox church and witness its liturgy. In this astute and insightful book, he grapples with the reasons why many Western historians and societies have overlooked Orthodox Christianity and provides an important introduction to the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Christian World.
In this short, accessible account of the Eastern Orthodox Church, John McGuckin begins by tackling the question “What is the Church?” His answer is a clear, historically and theologically rooted portrait of what the Church is for Orthodox Christianity and how it differs from Western Christians’ expectations.
McGuckin explores the lived faith of generations, including sketches of some of the most important theological themes and individual personalities of the ancient and modern Church. He interweaves a personal approach throughout, offering to readers the experience of what it is like to enter an Orthodox church and witness its liturgy. In this astute and insightful book, he grapples with the reasons why many Western historians and societies have overlooked Orthodox Christianity and provides an important introduction to the Orthodox Church and the Eastern Christian World.
360 pages, Hardcover
Published March 17, 2020
57 people are currently reading
354 people want to read
About the author
John Anthony McGuckin
42 books34 followersJohn Anthony McGuckin is the Nielsen Emeritus Professor of Byzantine Christian Studies at Union Theological Seminary and Columbia University, and currently professor of early Christianity in the Theological Faculty of Oxford University. An archpriest of the Romanian Orthodox Church and Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, he has written more than thirty scholarly books. He lives in the UK.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
December 23, 2025
Very helpful portrait of how the Orthodox view themselves.
December 3, 2022
Motivated to show that the orthodox tradition is truly the first and oldest christian tradition and thus, can be seen by roman and protestant christians alike as an integral part of their own respective traditions, John Anthony McGuckin proceeds to write a theological history of the Orthodox Church in it's entire history.
The book itself is fascinating both from a historical perspective and a theological one, showcasing the development of certain practices and theologcal perspectives, making it a great place to start for a western protestant/catholic interested in the Orthodox Church. In this sense the Orthodox Church is represented as a repository of the ancient Christian intelectual culture, working as it's guardian and keeper for centuries, always returning to the freshness of the patristic teachings.
The book itself is fascinating both from a historical perspective and a theological one, showcasing the development of certain practices and theologcal perspectives, making it a great place to start for a western protestant/catholic interested in the Orthodox Church. In this sense the Orthodox Church is represented as a repository of the ancient Christian intelectual culture, working as it's guardian and keeper for centuries, always returning to the freshness of the patristic teachings.
January 31, 2023
This book isn’t really a scholarly history; rather, it’s a confessional/theological ecclesiology by a believer/apologist.
April 20, 2022
This is the best book I've read on the Eastern Orthodox Church. I agree with McGuckin, most western church histories neglect the story and distinctiveness of the Orthodox church. But a group of Christians numbering in the hundreds of millions and with ties to the early church fathers is worth studying and understanding.
August 29, 2022
The Lord Jesus promised Peter, "... and on this rock, I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it." (Matt 16:18). One could argue that the first millennium of church history saw the primacy and expansion of the Eastern Church, while the second millennium belonged to the Western church. Indeed, the 2nd millennium has not been kind to the Eastern Church... after suffering through Muslim domination, Communist oppression and Nazi extermination, it is a miracle the church still has 250 to 300 million adherents. But as Jesus promised, it still stands. As we begin the third millennium in an age where the intense sectionalism of the past is fading, a book such as McGuckin's is a timely record of what the Eastern church is and how it has been able to weather its storms for so long.
McGuckin begins the volume by defining the terms which was really helpful. He spends a great deal of time on the Apostolic age, the Era of the Ecumenical Councils and the Great Early Church Fathers. Eastern Orthodox, perhaps more than any other church, can be said to treasure Christology and the Trinity. McGuckin centers on understanding the early church fathers as essential for Orthodoxy: Athanasius, Gregory of Nanzianzus, Cyril of Alexandria, and Maximus the Confessor are covered in some detail. For the orthodox, sola scriptura (the protestant notion that the bible alone as authoritative in the church) is not sufficient for right doctrine. 'Right' Christian life and doctrine is facilitated by the consensus of early church fathers to direct us in how we should live. Indeed, even the reformers like Calvin and Luther began with Augustine as a starting point to launch their revolution. I found this approach somewhat refreshing in that scriptural doctrinal discussions in the Protestant church can become logical and philosophical mind twists, where the orthodox bring it all back to thought and practice working together to manifest "Christ in us". It also avoids the Roman Catholic issues of one infallible Pope and brings us back to a common consensus of early church councils being the key guide. But, as a Protestant, this approach lacks any ability to reframe and rediscover Scripture as it applies to the present age.
The early Eastern church was very adamant about Christian truth we take for granted today. The truth that Jesus was both fully human and divine wasn't just an abstraction, they see it as an essential way for us to touch and feel the Second Person of the Trinity that parted time and space to live with us. His humanity enables us to understand in a practical way that He was a carpenter that got splinters, had colds, and most probably cried when falling down and comforted by His Mother. He experienced anguish and pain like any other human. His divine nature enabled Him to see through the machinations of the pharisees and be able to see a vision of the future as he prayed to the Father in John 17. He saw us on the cross. Oh what a treasure we have in Jesus! Orthodox theology may seem fossilized to some due to its strict adherence to ancient rites, but they have preserved right understanding of the person of Christ more than any other church.
Perhaps where i begin to part away from the orthodox is with icons. The era of iconoclasm was covered without much soul searching in my view. Some reformers thought that the Muslim invasions should prompt an inner review of Orthodox practices that maybe suspect to some; and the fact that icon veneration is a bit too close for comfort to idol worship was an issue that rocked the Orthodox world in the 8th and 9th centuries. However, practically, iconoclastic challenges only seemed to deepen a complex web theological treatises on the differences between adoration and veneration. To be true to their view, they do not genuinely view them as 'idols', just as visual representations of Scripture. Christ parted time and space to be among us and had a physical appearance, so it stands to reason that the visualization of important people and events in Scripture are appropriate.
Persecution has been a fact of life for the orthodox for the last 1,300 years. Church and State separation is not a real concept with the Orthodox, but a concept called 'symphonia'. The church should strive to support and help lead the peoples with the aid of the State. They do not necessarily view Church and State mixing as a bad thing. To be sure, the late Byzantine era saw the Orthodox become a corrupting influence on the State. But Orthodoxy, with its laser like focus on centering back on the person of Christ with a simple, mystical approach, has the ability to shift its priorities back to 'first principles'. Over the long term, they do not appear to have become the pervasive corrupting influence the Roman Catholic Church did in the high middle ages... but instead, the Orthodox faced its own challenges of intense persecution like nothing the West has experienced, starting in the 8th century and continuing to present day.
I would have liked the author to address the downside of symphonia. e.g. the recent tendency to be to be too close to nationalistic governments. The Orthodox have not seemed to be able to transcend nationalistic attachments as is evidenced by numerous autocephalous hierarchies defined by nationalistic identification as opposed to any sort of theological concern. The Russian Orthodox Church, one of the larger bodies, seems to be aligned to the ends of the Russian government rather than distinctly Christian objectives. This presents a major problem as Russian nationalists seek to reclaim Soviet power and justify its invasion of Ukraine. This is not unlike American Protestant Christian tendencies to embrace Trumpian Christian Nationalism.
The church has had various approaches to persecution. It has tried to come to terms with its 'overlords' as a first step... accepting the Ottoman millet system and trying to compromise with the Communist regimes in the Soviet Union. But its numbers suffered greatly and most of the Anatolian lands converted to Islam. The Western naivety regarding so called 'Islamic tolerance' is not shared by the Eastern churches. But you don't find them going off like radical right wingers in the US either... such rants could result in the deaths of their friends. The church became a shell of itself in the Soviet Era as the Communists placed spies in its priestly ranks. This was done after fully 80 to 90% of its leadership and monastic ranks were assassinated. Many fled the Soviet Union and established separate leadership structures. Once communism fell, reconciling the church in exile to the church in the homeland is something that is working itself out through to this day.
Finally, the beauty and perseverance of modern Orthodoxy can be summed up in the story of Maria Skobtsova. 'Mother Maria' as she is affectionately referred to faced persecution by both the Communists and the Nazis. Born in Latvia, Maria's family migrated to Russia in her youth, and she became an idealistic young Bolshevik Like most in her time, the leftists promised so much and it drew her in. She also married a Bolshevik, but it appears that marriage dissolved, but she did have a daughter, Gaiana. While in St. Petersburg, reflections on the humanity of Christ and his persecution slowly drew her in to embracing the Christianity of her parents. She also joined a different party than the Bolsheviks, one more reform minded than socialist minded. As the Bolshevik revolution played out, she saw the horror of what the socialist revolution really meant and fled to Southern Russia. She was tried as a Bolshevik and married her judge (who acquitted her) while in Anapa. She had two more children and actually became the mayor of the town as the Bolsheviks lost control of Russia to the "Whites". As the Bolsheviks consolidated their hold on power a few years later, she and her family fled Russia and eventually found themselves in Paris. While in Paris, Maria and Daniel's daughter died of the flu in 1926 and their marriage never recovered. Through this horrific experience, Maria felt a deeper calling to social work and becoming a mother to all in need. This drove her to write many theological treatises on the practical impacts of taking care of the poor. She became a nun a few years later and poured herself into the life of the church and the poor. She opened a house serving the indigent, needy and the refugees and it steadily grew to many buildings. Her ministry became widely known throughout Europe. As the Nazis invaded France, she made the fateful choice to stay in Paris to take care of the those that could not flee. Once Nazi power took hold in France, her and the orthodox church in Paris began giving Jews certificates of baptism to avoid being taken by the Nazis. She also began sheltering Jews and helping other dissidents escape. Unfortunately, the Nazis caught wind of this and she was jailed. She survived a few years in concentration camps, and actually took another's place in the gas chamber at Ravensbruck while she was weak and lice infested. She came fully into the Lord Jesus's presence on March 30, 1945.
Her radical understanding of the incarnation of Christ in the world led her to believe that all were image bearers of Christ. Her credo was: "Each person is the very icon of God incarnate in the world." With this recognition came the need "to accept this awesome revelation of God unconditionally, to venerate the image of God" in her brothers and sisters. The fire of Orthodoxy remains steadfast even during the darkest of days as long as we realize, like Maria, that the incarnation of Christ in the world means everything has changed...e.g. He is making all things new and we see Christ in everything and everyone we serve.
McGuckin begins the volume by defining the terms which was really helpful. He spends a great deal of time on the Apostolic age, the Era of the Ecumenical Councils and the Great Early Church Fathers. Eastern Orthodox, perhaps more than any other church, can be said to treasure Christology and the Trinity. McGuckin centers on understanding the early church fathers as essential for Orthodoxy: Athanasius, Gregory of Nanzianzus, Cyril of Alexandria, and Maximus the Confessor are covered in some detail. For the orthodox, sola scriptura (the protestant notion that the bible alone as authoritative in the church) is not sufficient for right doctrine. 'Right' Christian life and doctrine is facilitated by the consensus of early church fathers to direct us in how we should live. Indeed, even the reformers like Calvin and Luther began with Augustine as a starting point to launch their revolution. I found this approach somewhat refreshing in that scriptural doctrinal discussions in the Protestant church can become logical and philosophical mind twists, where the orthodox bring it all back to thought and practice working together to manifest "Christ in us". It also avoids the Roman Catholic issues of one infallible Pope and brings us back to a common consensus of early church councils being the key guide. But, as a Protestant, this approach lacks any ability to reframe and rediscover Scripture as it applies to the present age.
The early Eastern church was very adamant about Christian truth we take for granted today. The truth that Jesus was both fully human and divine wasn't just an abstraction, they see it as an essential way for us to touch and feel the Second Person of the Trinity that parted time and space to live with us. His humanity enables us to understand in a practical way that He was a carpenter that got splinters, had colds, and most probably cried when falling down and comforted by His Mother. He experienced anguish and pain like any other human. His divine nature enabled Him to see through the machinations of the pharisees and be able to see a vision of the future as he prayed to the Father in John 17. He saw us on the cross. Oh what a treasure we have in Jesus! Orthodox theology may seem fossilized to some due to its strict adherence to ancient rites, but they have preserved right understanding of the person of Christ more than any other church.
Perhaps where i begin to part away from the orthodox is with icons. The era of iconoclasm was covered without much soul searching in my view. Some reformers thought that the Muslim invasions should prompt an inner review of Orthodox practices that maybe suspect to some; and the fact that icon veneration is a bit too close for comfort to idol worship was an issue that rocked the Orthodox world in the 8th and 9th centuries. However, practically, iconoclastic challenges only seemed to deepen a complex web theological treatises on the differences between adoration and veneration. To be true to their view, they do not genuinely view them as 'idols', just as visual representations of Scripture. Christ parted time and space to be among us and had a physical appearance, so it stands to reason that the visualization of important people and events in Scripture are appropriate.
Persecution has been a fact of life for the orthodox for the last 1,300 years. Church and State separation is not a real concept with the Orthodox, but a concept called 'symphonia'. The church should strive to support and help lead the peoples with the aid of the State. They do not necessarily view Church and State mixing as a bad thing. To be sure, the late Byzantine era saw the Orthodox become a corrupting influence on the State. But Orthodoxy, with its laser like focus on centering back on the person of Christ with a simple, mystical approach, has the ability to shift its priorities back to 'first principles'. Over the long term, they do not appear to have become the pervasive corrupting influence the Roman Catholic Church did in the high middle ages... but instead, the Orthodox faced its own challenges of intense persecution like nothing the West has experienced, starting in the 8th century and continuing to present day.
I would have liked the author to address the downside of symphonia. e.g. the recent tendency to be to be too close to nationalistic governments. The Orthodox have not seemed to be able to transcend nationalistic attachments as is evidenced by numerous autocephalous hierarchies defined by nationalistic identification as opposed to any sort of theological concern. The Russian Orthodox Church, one of the larger bodies, seems to be aligned to the ends of the Russian government rather than distinctly Christian objectives. This presents a major problem as Russian nationalists seek to reclaim Soviet power and justify its invasion of Ukraine. This is not unlike American Protestant Christian tendencies to embrace Trumpian Christian Nationalism.
The church has had various approaches to persecution. It has tried to come to terms with its 'overlords' as a first step... accepting the Ottoman millet system and trying to compromise with the Communist regimes in the Soviet Union. But its numbers suffered greatly and most of the Anatolian lands converted to Islam. The Western naivety regarding so called 'Islamic tolerance' is not shared by the Eastern churches. But you don't find them going off like radical right wingers in the US either... such rants could result in the deaths of their friends. The church became a shell of itself in the Soviet Era as the Communists placed spies in its priestly ranks. This was done after fully 80 to 90% of its leadership and monastic ranks were assassinated. Many fled the Soviet Union and established separate leadership structures. Once communism fell, reconciling the church in exile to the church in the homeland is something that is working itself out through to this day.
Finally, the beauty and perseverance of modern Orthodoxy can be summed up in the story of Maria Skobtsova. 'Mother Maria' as she is affectionately referred to faced persecution by both the Communists and the Nazis. Born in Latvia, Maria's family migrated to Russia in her youth, and she became an idealistic young Bolshevik Like most in her time, the leftists promised so much and it drew her in. She also married a Bolshevik, but it appears that marriage dissolved, but she did have a daughter, Gaiana. While in St. Petersburg, reflections on the humanity of Christ and his persecution slowly drew her in to embracing the Christianity of her parents. She also joined a different party than the Bolsheviks, one more reform minded than socialist minded. As the Bolshevik revolution played out, she saw the horror of what the socialist revolution really meant and fled to Southern Russia. She was tried as a Bolshevik and married her judge (who acquitted her) while in Anapa. She had two more children and actually became the mayor of the town as the Bolsheviks lost control of Russia to the "Whites". As the Bolsheviks consolidated their hold on power a few years later, she and her family fled Russia and eventually found themselves in Paris. While in Paris, Maria and Daniel's daughter died of the flu in 1926 and their marriage never recovered. Through this horrific experience, Maria felt a deeper calling to social work and becoming a mother to all in need. This drove her to write many theological treatises on the practical impacts of taking care of the poor. She became a nun a few years later and poured herself into the life of the church and the poor. She opened a house serving the indigent, needy and the refugees and it steadily grew to many buildings. Her ministry became widely known throughout Europe. As the Nazis invaded France, she made the fateful choice to stay in Paris to take care of the those that could not flee. Once Nazi power took hold in France, her and the orthodox church in Paris began giving Jews certificates of baptism to avoid being taken by the Nazis. She also began sheltering Jews and helping other dissidents escape. Unfortunately, the Nazis caught wind of this and she was jailed. She survived a few years in concentration camps, and actually took another's place in the gas chamber at Ravensbruck while she was weak and lice infested. She came fully into the Lord Jesus's presence on March 30, 1945.
Her radical understanding of the incarnation of Christ in the world led her to believe that all were image bearers of Christ. Her credo was: "Each person is the very icon of God incarnate in the world." With this recognition came the need "to accept this awesome revelation of God unconditionally, to venerate the image of God" in her brothers and sisters. The fire of Orthodoxy remains steadfast even during the darkest of days as long as we realize, like Maria, that the incarnation of Christ in the world means everything has changed...e.g. He is making all things new and we see Christ in everything and everyone we serve.
March 31, 2023
The Eastern Orthodox Church has a lot to offer the Christian world at large. This branch of Christianity has a strong respect and understanding of the early church fathers and the doctrine of the Trinity, to name a few things.
This was a very informative and fun book to read (as fun as church history books can be…). The first 3 chapters were especially helpful, focusing on the NT church up to the end of the patristic period (about 500). The brief appendix, a commentary on the Nicene Creed, was also really helpful! If you want to understand more about the early church, appreciate Scripture more, to be stretched by Christians that bring a unique perspective, and to have a positive experience with a book on church history, check this out!
_____
My ⭐️ rating criteria
- 1 star: I absolutely did not like or totally disagreed with the book and would recommend that no one else read it
- 2 stars: the book was below average style or content, wouldn’t read it again, but wouldn’t beg people not to read it necessarily
- 3 stars: a fine book, some helpful information (or a decent story, for the handful of novels I read), didn’t disagree with too much, enjoyed it decently well
- 4 stars: a very good book, information was very helpful, mostly agreed with everything, was above-average enjoyable to read
- 5 stars: life-changing book, I enjoyed it more than most other books, I want to read it again in the future, I will be telling everyone to read it for the next few weeks
This was a very informative and fun book to read (as fun as church history books can be…). The first 3 chapters were especially helpful, focusing on the NT church up to the end of the patristic period (about 500). The brief appendix, a commentary on the Nicene Creed, was also really helpful! If you want to understand more about the early church, appreciate Scripture more, to be stretched by Christians that bring a unique perspective, and to have a positive experience with a book on church history, check this out!
_____
My ⭐️ rating criteria
- 1 star: I absolutely did not like or totally disagreed with the book and would recommend that no one else read it
- 2 stars: the book was below average style or content, wouldn’t read it again, but wouldn’t beg people not to read it necessarily
- 3 stars: a fine book, some helpful information (or a decent story, for the handful of novels I read), didn’t disagree with too much, enjoyed it decently well
- 4 stars: a very good book, information was very helpful, mostly agreed with everything, was above-average enjoyable to read
- 5 stars: life-changing book, I enjoyed it more than most other books, I want to read it again in the future, I will be telling everyone to read it for the next few weeks
February 27, 2024
Cartea nu se pretează a fi teologie densă, ci mai degrabă relația dintre istorie și teologie și a felului în care Biserica vede trecerea ei prin timp ca „istorie a mântuirii”. „Arena principală de unde se manifestă în istorie strălucirea lui Iisus ca Domn (doxa Lui) este Biserica”.
April 12, 2024
Cum e orice carte de scurtă introducere, monotonă, pe alocuri, dar cuprinsă în spiritul sintetic atât de necesar (sinteza e belșug). Nu e apologetică aici nici măcar atunci când afirmă că ortodoxia refuză să se numească confesiune (doar o altă confesiune creștină).
June 20, 2021
While this is indeed a bit sparse on history, I found the lecture series to be a very useful overview of Orthodoxy and discussed several aspects of the faith that are not mentioned in most books, such as details regarding ecumenical efforts on unifying the church with other Christian denominations, how some aspects of the lives of the saints are symbolic rather than literal in their interpretation, and why Orthodoxy hasn't become more popular or representative of the demographics in America. Each chapter is a lecture that is less than 30 minutes and covers a specific topic (Mary, the Holy Spirit, the Ecumenical Councils, monasticism, etc.) which makes for a concise, broad discussion over the course of the book.
April 2, 2021
It's a nearly impossible task to write a comprehensive history of anything in 300 pages. So I don't fault the author for his decisions about how to go about giving the history. But I would recommend Metropolitan Ware's history over this one for someone completely unfamiliar with the eastern churches. This book was very good but I had two main issues with it.
It felt scattered. I wouldn't say this is a history book. It was more a series of essays mostly about individuals. I'd have preferred more chapters like the ones on the Bulgarians or Romanians. Those were very interesting but too brief. Or a more in depth look at the liturgy. It just felt like the author wasn't sure what kind of book he wanted to write.
The second fault was the weird assertion that the orthodox church, when it fully matures, will start ordaining women. Because that's a big part of the spiritual malaise of modern life is the we don't have enough women in charge. Call me a skeptic. It was an out of place comment and didn't bother to at least point out that such a move would almost certainly lead to a massive schism.
Again, I wouldn't call this a history. But it was definitely worth a read!
It felt scattered. I wouldn't say this is a history book. It was more a series of essays mostly about individuals. I'd have preferred more chapters like the ones on the Bulgarians or Romanians. Those were very interesting but too brief. Or a more in depth look at the liturgy. It just felt like the author wasn't sure what kind of book he wanted to write.
The second fault was the weird assertion that the orthodox church, when it fully matures, will start ordaining women. Because that's a big part of the spiritual malaise of modern life is the we don't have enough women in charge. Call me a skeptic. It was an out of place comment and didn't bother to at least point out that such a move would almost certainly lead to a massive schism.
Again, I wouldn't call this a history. But it was definitely worth a read!
October 11, 2021
Pertinent introduction into the history and dogma of the Eastern Orthodox faith. Interesting for curious laymen and practitioners alike.
July 25, 2025
Really enjoyable. John Anthony McGuckin, a professor at Oxford is perhaps the most well suited to tackle this giant topic. He does it well, and has written what is probably the best introduction to the history and theology of the Orthodox Church.
July 17, 2020
Very stylishly written, a bit too short, but overall very enjoyable. As with all work on the Orthodox church written for the non-Orthodox, it's a bit annoying that McGuckin (which is surely the least 'Orthodox Christian' name imaginable, which delights me) spends so much time on pre-split Christianity. Yes, I know, the first millennium is part of Orthodox history just as it is a part of Western Christian history. But it's the same history. I hope the next person to write a history like this for the general reader just starts it at the split.
December 5, 2024
As a Protestant who has been studying theology for over ten years I still have known very little about the Eastern Orthodox Church. This book is very helpful primer for understanding their history, piety, and practice. Most of the book focuses on the history of the Eastern church followed by chapters on worship and well know believers. The parts on Eastern piety are woven into the chapters on the history of the church when appropriate.
May 6, 2022
I'm not EO, so I can't say whether or not this is a good or accurate history of the church. From what I can tell, John Mcguckin is a well established and respected EO scholar, so I assume it is a good representative of their history.
This was a short history of the Orthodox church. The beginning was very similar to the Western histories I've read. Considering they were the same church at the time, this makes sense. There are some obvious preference differences between the Eastern and Western as time goes on. After the Muslim conquest of Constantinople, it pretty much skips to Soviet Russia and present time.
I enjoyed hearing a history of the Eastern church. I really haven't known much about the EO other than their flat icons and their issue with the filioque. This was nice to learn a little more about them. I'm really curious to figure out how they formulate their theology. I've heard that it's so significantly different from the Western theology that it can't be described using our terms. This book doesn't cover that much since it is just a history. It does mention the EO view of the trinity, which I found quite interesting as it shows the consequence of rejecting the filioque. (Though I do agree that it was added in an incorrect fashion, I do think the theology of the filioque is correct) They see the one essence/nature of God as being the nature of God the Father and that it is consequently shared by the Son and Spirit, whereas the Western church sees the nature as being shared equally between all persons and isn't inherently connected to a single one. If we consider the Eternal Relations of Origin, you can't have the procession of the Spirit from the one nature and have it only be connected to the Father. Believing that the Spirit only proceeds from the Father also removes any ontological relation between the Son and the Spirit.
This was a short history of the Orthodox church. The beginning was very similar to the Western histories I've read. Considering they were the same church at the time, this makes sense. There are some obvious preference differences between the Eastern and Western as time goes on. After the Muslim conquest of Constantinople, it pretty much skips to Soviet Russia and present time.
I enjoyed hearing a history of the Eastern church. I really haven't known much about the EO other than their flat icons and their issue with the filioque. This was nice to learn a little more about them. I'm really curious to figure out how they formulate their theology. I've heard that it's so significantly different from the Western theology that it can't be described using our terms. This book doesn't cover that much since it is just a history. It does mention the EO view of the trinity, which I found quite interesting as it shows the consequence of rejecting the filioque. (Though I do agree that it was added in an incorrect fashion, I do think the theology of the filioque is correct) They see the one essence/nature of God as being the nature of God the Father and that it is consequently shared by the Son and Spirit, whereas the Western church sees the nature as being shared equally between all persons and isn't inherently connected to a single one. If we consider the Eternal Relations of Origin, you can't have the procession of the Spirit from the one nature and have it only be connected to the Father. Believing that the Spirit only proceeds from the Father also removes any ontological relation between the Son and the Spirit.
December 22, 2023
I read the comments from other readers and was surprised by several. It almost felt like we had read different books.
The title to this book is 'The Eastern Orthodox Church: A New History'. In my opinion, it was indeed a new way to present the history of the Eastern Orthodox Church. I don't believe this book was meant to be an exhaustive study and history, but instead an overview. In addition, I did not get the impression that the author's point of view was that it is okay to marry religion (in this case Orthodoxy) with the government, but instead that the people living within the time period he was writing about felt that way. He was simply passing on the information to us. Another time, describing the Orthodox woman who advocated for women to be admitted to the priesthood, I did not get the impression that this was necessarily the author's point of view, but instead he was pointing out what she thought and hoped would materialize in the future.
I enjoyed his outline of various centuries of Orthodox history in the world - mostly taking place within the 'East', since that is where the vast majority of Orthodox believers were and are - and I appreciated the author not glossing over the in-fighting within the Orthodox church itself. He describes the pettiness, betrayals and power grabbing that occurs. Therefore, the author is not attempting to show Orthodox believers/clergy as better than other religious people, but instead the Orthodox faith is ancient, true and helps people become closer to God if they will only follow it's tenets. People are simply people, regardless of their faith. We all fall short. That is why Jesus died for us.
The title to this book is 'The Eastern Orthodox Church: A New History'. In my opinion, it was indeed a new way to present the history of the Eastern Orthodox Church. I don't believe this book was meant to be an exhaustive study and history, but instead an overview. In addition, I did not get the impression that the author's point of view was that it is okay to marry religion (in this case Orthodoxy) with the government, but instead that the people living within the time period he was writing about felt that way. He was simply passing on the information to us. Another time, describing the Orthodox woman who advocated for women to be admitted to the priesthood, I did not get the impression that this was necessarily the author's point of view, but instead he was pointing out what she thought and hoped would materialize in the future.
I enjoyed his outline of various centuries of Orthodox history in the world - mostly taking place within the 'East', since that is where the vast majority of Orthodox believers were and are - and I appreciated the author not glossing over the in-fighting within the Orthodox church itself. He describes the pettiness, betrayals and power grabbing that occurs. Therefore, the author is not attempting to show Orthodox believers/clergy as better than other religious people, but instead the Orthodox faith is ancient, true and helps people become closer to God if they will only follow it's tenets. People are simply people, regardless of their faith. We all fall short. That is why Jesus died for us.
May 25, 2024
I have just finished reading this book, and the author is clearly writing this for a Western audience who may not be familiar with Orthodox thinking.
Having said that, instead of seeing this as a church history book from an Orthodox perspective, it is probably more appropriate to say that this is book on Eastern Orthodoxy through a historical perspective.
I appreciated how the author listed out Athanasius, Gregory, Cyril, and Maximus, whom with their contributions, highlighted the framework which Orthodoxy formulates their theology. I also gained a fresh understanding on why Orthodoxy is more amicable towards working with secular authorities.
The idea that monastic way of life (focused towards prayer and introspection) was what ensured Orthodoxy's survival under foreign domination is something worth considering.
Furthermore, I also appreciated how he listed out a few examples of modern Orthodox figures, showing that Orthodoxy is not a relic of the past; it still has vitality today.
Finally, the author is also kind enough to give an idea of how a typical Orthodox worship looks like at the final chapter. It gives fresh insights to a reader like me who has zero idea on what it looks like, and what to expect.
In conclusion, this book is worth a read, for those who wants to learn about Eastern Orthodoxy, as well as those who would want to better their knowledge of church history from an Eastern Orthodox perspective (which is usually very Western-focused).
Having said that, instead of seeing this as a church history book from an Orthodox perspective, it is probably more appropriate to say that this is book on Eastern Orthodoxy through a historical perspective.
I appreciated how the author listed out Athanasius, Gregory, Cyril, and Maximus, whom with their contributions, highlighted the framework which Orthodoxy formulates their theology. I also gained a fresh understanding on why Orthodoxy is more amicable towards working with secular authorities.
The idea that monastic way of life (focused towards prayer and introspection) was what ensured Orthodoxy's survival under foreign domination is something worth considering.
Furthermore, I also appreciated how he listed out a few examples of modern Orthodox figures, showing that Orthodoxy is not a relic of the past; it still has vitality today.
Finally, the author is also kind enough to give an idea of how a typical Orthodox worship looks like at the final chapter. It gives fresh insights to a reader like me who has zero idea on what it looks like, and what to expect.
In conclusion, this book is worth a read, for those who wants to learn about Eastern Orthodoxy, as well as those who would want to better their knowledge of church history from an Eastern Orthodox perspective (which is usually very Western-focused).
May 16, 2022
This is exactly as I expected and delivers on the authors intention. I agree that the history of the Orthodox Church is largely ignored in general history and “church” history, at least as it was taught to me.
I found some references to other books or writings I plan to read, which is always the sign of a good book in my opinion.
Favorite quote:
“Orthodox writers throughout history have seen the church as a congregation of the living that includes, as still active participants, the angels and the saints of earlier ages, as well as the believers who are currently alive on earth. The living faithful are seen, therefore, not as the owners of the corporation but rather as junior members of a communion that extends far beyond them in space and time, and that is only partially embodied within time and space in any historical locality. Christians of the present age, then, are not seen as having either the power or the ability to alter the charter of what the church is, in order, for example, to update the scriptures' prescripts to modern conditions and attitudes. “
I found some references to other books or writings I plan to read, which is always the sign of a good book in my opinion.
Favorite quote:
“Orthodox writers throughout history have seen the church as a congregation of the living that includes, as still active participants, the angels and the saints of earlier ages, as well as the believers who are currently alive on earth. The living faithful are seen, therefore, not as the owners of the corporation but rather as junior members of a communion that extends far beyond them in space and time, and that is only partially embodied within time and space in any historical locality. Christians of the present age, then, are not seen as having either the power or the ability to alter the charter of what the church is, in order, for example, to update the scriptures' prescripts to modern conditions and attitudes. “
June 15, 2024
Good. The book was not exactly what I was looking for because I was seeking a more theological and less historical overview. However, as McGuckin contends (and not inaccurately so), much of theology springs from history. Because I listened to this book, a ton of the history inevitably escaped me, though the later chapters concerning participating in Orthodox ceremonies (from a more experiential or phenomenological perspective, though McGuckin does not use these terms) helped a lot regarding grasping the flavour or tincture of Orthodox thought.
Importantly, McGuckin writes as a clergyman in the Orthodox church, and thus contends against Western Christianity on issues like the filioque . This bias is not really to be faulted; Jeremiah said that a leopard cannot change its spots, and an Orthodox theologian likely finds it equally hard to change his Trinitarian theology. I come from the Reformed camp, but I found that I appreciated this book probably because it did not have a primarily theological bent. If it did, I would have probably enjoyed it a whole lot less.
Importantly, McGuckin writes as a clergyman in the Orthodox church, and thus contends against Western Christianity on issues like the filioque . This bias is not really to be faulted; Jeremiah said that a leopard cannot change its spots, and an Orthodox theologian likely finds it equally hard to change his Trinitarian theology. I come from the Reformed camp, but I found that I appreciated this book probably because it did not have a primarily theological bent. If it did, I would have probably enjoyed it a whole lot less.
July 1, 2020
I am fascinated by religion(s) and the enormous time, energy and thought that goes into constructing the myths, dogma and rituals that followers are expected to unquestioningly and uncritically follow. A few words spoken by an itinerant Jewish preacher millennia ago are spun into this elaborate (this adjective seems inadequate) web of... well, you fill in the blank. The author is completely addicted to the Kool-Aid.
Otherwise, I suppose this is a nice, short explanation of Christian Orthodoxy. Such a short work couldn’t possibly tackle the big issues—-like Mary/Theotokos and the whole female question. The author almost completely glosses over this, which is troubling and indicative of the deep conservatism of Orthodoxy and its unwillingness and constitutional inability to adapt.
Assignment: Dancing angels/head of pin—-discuss.
Otherwise, I suppose this is a nice, short explanation of Christian Orthodoxy. Such a short work couldn’t possibly tackle the big issues—-like Mary/Theotokos and the whole female question. The author almost completely glosses over this, which is troubling and indicative of the deep conservatism of Orthodoxy and its unwillingness and constitutional inability to adapt.
Assignment: Dancing angels/head of pin—-discuss.
January 21, 2024
I did learn a bit from this book, even though it wasn't a proper history as one might expect; but the author lost stars from me when he went off the rails completely towards the end by advocating for the ordination of women. I don't mind that he mentioned that a particular person he profiled supported it (although there was no historical reason to even include a profile of this person), but to jump in with his own opinion on the matter -- an opinion that is in opposition to the Church's belief and practice -- was completely out of line. He can express his opinions in a different book if he likes, but they have no place in a church history book. I guess that's why it's called "A New History."
August 24, 2024
For as small of a book, overall, as this was, this history does a surprising amount in a short amount of time.
I'd likely classify this as a survey history, as it crosses major periods of time rather quickly. However, McGuckin does a great job at creating an over-arching view of the Eastern Orthodox Church from its beginnings in the Levant, through its expansion under the Byzantine Empire, its subjugation by the Muslim Empires and Caliphates, and finally through the 20th Century into Modern Times. A good read.
I'd likely classify this as a survey history, as it crosses major periods of time rather quickly. However, McGuckin does a great job at creating an over-arching view of the Eastern Orthodox Church from its beginnings in the Levant, through its expansion under the Byzantine Empire, its subjugation by the Muslim Empires and Caliphates, and finally through the 20th Century into Modern Times. A good read.
August 17, 2025
As someone who was raised in a decidedly Protestant tradition, I have always wondered why there was never a Protestant Reformation from Orthodoxy. This question obviously came out of my own ignorance of the history of Christianity east of Italy. I recommend this book if you want an answer to my question or just want to learn about a rich cultural history. I’ve come to appreciate some aspects of Greek Orthodoxy through my Greek wife’s family traditions. Short answer to my query about a lack of an Orthodox Reformation: autocephalous national identity, Islamic invasion, and Communism.
January 15, 2021
This is not dry history; it's narrative, and delves into contemporary application. NOTE: You might want a dictionary handy, as here and there there are some words that I was not familiar with. Also, there are a few British colloquial phrases. He also has another more comprehensive Orthodox Christian history book out there, if that what you want. This one is aimed at a non-academic audience (at least not at the higher levels). So don't be intimidated; you will enjoy it!
September 17, 2025
I was very disappointed in this book--it was not written for the layman. There were so many words I didn't know, and if I had stopped to look up each one, I would still be at the beginning of the book. The last two chapters were the most clearly written, but were not about the history of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Also, there was very little written about the Greek Orthodox Church, which was the original Eastern Orthodox Church.
August 16, 2022
Strongest on the theological disputes of the early Church, which are very clearly explained from an Orthodox perspective. The chapters on the later evolution of the Church are too short to give more than an overview, and less interesting (the near final chapter on modern exemplars of Orthodoxy an exception).
April 17, 2023
This is a really in-depth and detailed account of the EOC. It is very enlightening and explains very well the faith and practices of the EO Christians. However, it is very heavy if you are not acquainted with Orthodox, and theological, terminology before hand.
October 2, 2024
This was a very worthwhile little book, including a chapter on visiting an Orthodox church for the non Orthodox. It's a survey, but McGuckin does a great job balancing big picture with cultural detail.
November 26, 2020
3 ½ stars
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews