I think that the proper term to describe this book is as more a biographical tribute than a biography --- one has to get about 80 pages into it before one comes to the details of the Ecumenical Patriarch (EP)'s life. Published in 2016, the 25th Anniversary of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew's accession to the patriarchal throne, it's generally written in laudatory language interspersed with some chapters that are commendations on his legacy by famous personages such as Pope Francis and George Stephanopoulos.
Much of this book contains much on the EP's efforts to bridge differences between the Orthodox Church and other branches of Christianity and, perhaps, even more on his efforts to convene synods and Orthodox church councils. To those unfamiliar with the Orthodox faith, it's probably difficult to appreciate the difficulty in accomplishing these. So I think it's helpful to understand a few things about the position of EP. Most think of him as the East's equivalent to the Pope which he is not. He is not an autocrat, but is more a spiritual and moral authority in the Orthodox world --- as well as occasionally playing the role of referee and an honest broker in those situations where disputes or conflicts between Orthodox jurisdictions arise. As a new Orthodox believer, it seems to me that the EP is something more in terms of religious leader power and authority than the Dalai Lama, something less than the Pope. He is not considered infallible, for example. Some portions of the Orthodox Church ---- like the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, for example --- report directly to him. However, the Orthodox faith, writ large, is subdivided into 14 separate jurisdictions, such as the Russian Orthodox Church and the Church of Greece, each under the leadership of a patriarch. Of these, the EP is "primus inter pares" --- first among equals. He leads by moral authority, not temporal authority, those other 13 patriarchies and he cannot compel these fellow patriarchs to do anything --- unlike Roman Catholicism's Pope who can with respect to its cardinals, archbishops, abbots, etc.
So, just getting 14 patriarchs --- each with their own demands upon them and schedules and issues in their own ministry --- to meet on anything at the same time is no small accomplishment. For those familiar with "Lord of the Rings", like the way the Ents in "The Two Towers" make decisions very slowly and deliberately, and never in haste, via an Entmoot, so it seems to be in Orthodoxy! Unlike in the Vatican where a Pope can simply issue a bull or an encyclical and change the course of the RC Church, in Orthodoxy, the primary body for decision making and approving changes is by Church Council --- which are exceedingly rare events --- so difficult is it to convene such an assemblage of so many hierarchs. So I think that this is why so much of this book is devoted to His All Holiness's efforts and successes on convening Orthodox councils ---- which are not common events. Unfortunately, the book assumes the reader would apparently recognize this, and does not very well explain the significance of these such that, I think, it's likely lost on most non-Orthodox readers.
Much, in the first part of the book, is made of the EP's efforts to build a basis for restoring communion between the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church (broken apart in 1054 by the Great Schism) as well as ecumenical outreach with other groups such as the Anglican Church. However, after I was left wondering, based on what I'd read, why, apparently, the EP never made similar overtures to the persecuted and increasingly isolated Eastern Christian groups outside the Orthodox communion --- the Coptic Orthodox Church, the Armenian Apostolic Church, and the Assyrian Church of the East. No mention is made of them, yet I would have thought that establishing communion between them and the Orthodox Church would be an easier effort than with the Roman Catholic Church, given the centuries of discord between these two in the past.
If I have one criticism about the book, it's that too much of the EP's life is portrayed as too perfect. Because it's a tribute, it tends to go too high on the praise for accomplishments, yet stray away from some of the less positive aspects that likely were encountered in his life --- just as we all do in our own lives. For example, much of the first part of the book is devoted to Bartholomew's efforts to promote religious tolerance, yet little is addressed to that reality impacting the majority of Middle Eastern Christian believers especially --- the growing intolerance of Islamic fundamentalism for religious minorities.
No doubt, this may be a reflection of the reality in which EP Bartholomew must live with --- in Istanbul, Turkey --- a very tiny drop of Christianity in a sea of Turkish Muslims who likely wish he and Turkey's last Christian remnant would go away altogether. Given that over the centuries, previous EPs have been tortured, executed, or dragged out into the Istanbul streets and beaten to death, clearly, the EPs position is one in which every word he says must be carefully measured, yet unfortunately, with respect to a bio, it makes for a book with few rough edges.
What's also interesting in this book --- at least to me --- is what is not said in it, yet --- again to me -- seems so sad. Much is made of Bartholomew's bucolic childhood in the Dodecanese island of Imbros, part of Turkey, --- with its beautiful scenery, healthy environment, and abundant agricultural productivity --- and his fond memories of his collegiate years in the Orthodox seminary of Halki ---- yet these places, as he knew them, no longer exist. In fact, these events leading to this, shocking to me, happened within my lifetime. Imbros was effectively ethnically cleansed over a period of years by the Turkish Government --- its majority Greek population of approximately 6,000 forced out by a series of property seizures and economic and religious restrictions, replaced by 7,000 Turks --- with but a tiny remnant of 200 Greeks remaining. Likewise, the Halki seminary --- shut down in 1971 by the Turks, shuttered to this day. Yet, little to nothing is mentioned, nor can it really be by the EP or his staff within the Phanar, the EP's rough equivalent to the RC's Vatican, given that the EP is likely under almost constant surveillance every day by the Erdogan regime in Turkey.
One of --- perhaps the greatest controversy of Bartholomew's tenure -- will be the Ukrainian Orthodox Church controversy and how Bartholomew dealt with it. It's an issue that has reflected as much on the growing separation between and antagonis between Russian and the Ukraine, and, unlike most Orthodox Church issues, really does have geopolitical ramifications beyond that of the religious sphere. I won't go into all of the issues on this here, and, as far as which side is in the right, depends greatly on all these different interpretations of canon laws, church councils from centuries ago, and "tomos" (basically rulings from patriarchs on issues). But, suffice to say, Bartholomew is generally reviled -- if not outright hated --- in the Russian Orthodox side for how he addressed the Ukrainian controversy --- yet commended in other parts of the Orthodox world. One thing can be said --- this book does provide his side of the story and why Bartholomew feels that his solution is for the best. This, probably more than other thing he's done in his life, will likely, right or wrong, be the measure upon how his legacy is taken by future generations in my faith.
In summary, I cannot honestly say this is a book that will capture the interest of all readers. For those in the Orthodox faith, it will be interesting to them to read to learn more about this most prominent figure in the Church. It's also a good book for those looking for the Ecumenical Patriarchate's involvement in the Ukrainian controversy.