What do you think?
Rate this book
Through Western Eyes: Eastern Orthodoxy: A Reformed Perspective
The culture of the Eastern Church is alien to our experience. Yet the more we familiarize ourselves with the Eastern Church the more we recognize, for all the differences, the family resemblances. The family has been parted for a very long time. But chances have arisen to meet again and get to know one another.
In recent years, Eastern Orthodoxy has emerged vividly on the radar of Western Christians - hitherto, it was largely ignored. The separation has been due to the long-term historical disruption caused by differences in language, outlook and theology and eventually by the depredations of Islam. Because of these East and West went their separate ways. As a result, the respective theologies appear at times to inhabit parallel universes.
However, this ignorance is changing. Eastern Orthodoxy is increasingly popular in the Anglo-Saxon world. It conveys a sense of mystery, of continuity with the past, of dignified worship at a time when evangelical Protestantism is increasingly cheapened and trivialized.
This book examines the history and theology of Orthodoxy from a Reformed perspective. There are clear and significant areas of agreement - a common allegiance to the triune God; the person of Christ; the authority of Scripture and the truth of the gospel. At the same time there are many areas of disagreement, where it seems that Orthodoxy and Protestantism are at odds. However, there are also misunderstandings on both sides, where proponents of either position are not normally dealing accurately with what the other holds to be true. In drawing attention to the agreements and misunderstandings Robert Letham trusts that readers may come to a better understanding of exactly where the real differences lie. We can learn from Orthodoxy - if our assumption is that the most important thing is to grow in our knowledge of Christ.
In recent years, Eastern Orthodoxy has emerged vividly on the radar of Western Christians - hitherto, it was largely ignored. The separation has been due to the long-term historical disruption caused by differences in language, outlook and theology and eventually by the depredations of Islam. Because of these East and West went their separate ways. As a result, the respective theologies appear at times to inhabit parallel universes.
However, this ignorance is changing. Eastern Orthodoxy is increasingly popular in the Anglo-Saxon world. It conveys a sense of mystery, of continuity with the past, of dignified worship at a time when evangelical Protestantism is increasingly cheapened and trivialized.
This book examines the history and theology of Orthodoxy from a Reformed perspective. There are clear and significant areas of agreement - a common allegiance to the triune God; the person of Christ; the authority of Scripture and the truth of the gospel. At the same time there are many areas of disagreement, where it seems that Orthodoxy and Protestantism are at odds. However, there are also misunderstandings on both sides, where proponents of either position are not normally dealing accurately with what the other holds to be true. In drawing attention to the agreements and misunderstandings Robert Letham trusts that readers may come to a better understanding of exactly where the real differences lie. We can learn from Orthodoxy - if our assumption is that the most important thing is to grow in our knowledge of Christ.
320 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2007
16 people are currently reading
313 people want to read
About the author
Robert Letham
30 books24 followersRobert Letham (MAR, ThM, Westminster Theological Seminary; PhD, Aberdeen University) is professor of systematic and historical theology at Union School of Theology in Bridgend, Wales, and the author of a number of books, including The Lord's Supper and Union with Christ.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews
April 13, 2020
Letham illustrates and explains the rifts between the three primary divisions of Christendom, giving particular attention to Eastern Orthodoxy. His overall presentation is critical, sympathetic, and emphatically filial. Letham “examines the history and theology of Orthodoxy,” seeking along the way “to learn from Orthodoxy, on the assumption that the most important thing is to grow in our knowledge of Christ” (13). From his stated aim and the illustration in the opening paragraph on page 11, it is clear that Letham regards the Eastern Orthodox church as a branch of the true church of Jesus Christ, no matter how exotic it may appear from a Reformed perspective.
In the first section of the book, Letham recounts the story of Eastern Orthodoxy, giving particular attention to the early history and patriarchs which Eastern Orthodoxy shares with the western church. In the second section, he presents and evaluates the faith and practice of Eastern Orthodoxy, all the while acknowledging (though not really proceeding upon) the common refrain from Orthodox believers that “worship and the liturgy” (i.e., practice) share the principial position over theology as-such (19). In the third and final section of the book, he summarizes the preceding chapters and encourages his readers to pursue correct understanding and unity where possible, citing Christ’s High Priestly Prayer in John 17. He seems especially concerned to make the case that there exists an organic “family connection” between Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and Protestantism, the latter two of which stand together under the umbrella of western Christianity. In other words, Letham takes care to avoid the suggestion that Eastern Orthodoxy is sub- or non-Christian, and he does not directly rule Roman Catholicism as outside the bounds of biblical Christianity.
The strength of Through Western Eyes is Letham’s lucid, careful, and studied examination of Eastern Orthodoxy. The sections on the doctrine of the Trinity, soteriology/deification, and the church in relation to theology are useful for understanding Orthodoxy. His use of sources drawn from the Orthodox tradition and select modern commentators is impressive, and his analysis is compelling at many points. On the other hand, the weaknesses of the book include unnecessary redundancy (the fault of poor editorial oversight), incomplete and overly conciliatory discussion of the Eastern Orthodox use of icons, and broad critiques of Western Christianity’s lack of engagement in trinitarian piety. The last of these weaknesses took the book down to a 2/5 from an initial 3/5.
In the first section of the book, Letham recounts the story of Eastern Orthodoxy, giving particular attention to the early history and patriarchs which Eastern Orthodoxy shares with the western church. In the second section, he presents and evaluates the faith and practice of Eastern Orthodoxy, all the while acknowledging (though not really proceeding upon) the common refrain from Orthodox believers that “worship and the liturgy” (i.e., practice) share the principial position over theology as-such (19). In the third and final section of the book, he summarizes the preceding chapters and encourages his readers to pursue correct understanding and unity where possible, citing Christ’s High Priestly Prayer in John 17. He seems especially concerned to make the case that there exists an organic “family connection” between Eastern Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and Protestantism, the latter two of which stand together under the umbrella of western Christianity. In other words, Letham takes care to avoid the suggestion that Eastern Orthodoxy is sub- or non-Christian, and he does not directly rule Roman Catholicism as outside the bounds of biblical Christianity.
The strength of Through Western Eyes is Letham’s lucid, careful, and studied examination of Eastern Orthodoxy. The sections on the doctrine of the Trinity, soteriology/deification, and the church in relation to theology are useful for understanding Orthodoxy. His use of sources drawn from the Orthodox tradition and select modern commentators is impressive, and his analysis is compelling at many points. On the other hand, the weaknesses of the book include unnecessary redundancy (the fault of poor editorial oversight), incomplete and overly conciliatory discussion of the Eastern Orthodox use of icons, and broad critiques of Western Christianity’s lack of engagement in trinitarian piety. The last of these weaknesses took the book down to a 2/5 from an initial 3/5.
August 13, 2015
I never expected an elder from an ultra-conservative, ultra-protestant denomination to write such a critique. Letham's book was so fair and sympathetic that he almost convinced me of icons when he was critiquing icons!
Letham's point is that Protestants have more in common with the East than they realize. Both are committed to Scripture, the Supernatural, Christ, etc. Liberalism and the Enlightenment, so often the bane of Protestants, never touched the East. And like Protestants, the East has serious issues with Roman Catholicism. Below are the highlights of Letham's book:
Historical Survey:
Letham surveys the early church until this century. He gives particular attention to Church councils and Patristic fathers. If you have read his book on the Holy Trinity, you can skip this part since he (admittedly) borrows chapters. The excellent part of this was the church's heroic stands against Islam and communism.
Icons:
This is the sticky part of the book. Letham gives a fair analysis of icons. He notes that many people who oppose icons employ blatant Christological heresies to do so. But on the other hand, he points out how Scripture never warrants praying to departed saints and icons. He admits there is no way to solve the conundrum at the moment. This is the most intereting part of the book becase we see how opposed to manicheanism, dualism, and gnosticism the East is. If we learn nothing else, we must appreciate these points.
Other topics:
He notes that even when the East employs a synergistic view of salvation, they never deny (at least logically) justification by faith alone. He is very appreciative of how the East saturates an entire service with Scripture.
My book had abou 15 pages missing, so I will leave the review of this. The book is good in its analysis but it does leave you hanging at times.
Letham's point is that Protestants have more in common with the East than they realize. Both are committed to Scripture, the Supernatural, Christ, etc. Liberalism and the Enlightenment, so often the bane of Protestants, never touched the East. And like Protestants, the East has serious issues with Roman Catholicism. Below are the highlights of Letham's book:
Historical Survey:
Letham surveys the early church until this century. He gives particular attention to Church councils and Patristic fathers. If you have read his book on the Holy Trinity, you can skip this part since he (admittedly) borrows chapters. The excellent part of this was the church's heroic stands against Islam and communism.
Icons:
This is the sticky part of the book. Letham gives a fair analysis of icons. He notes that many people who oppose icons employ blatant Christological heresies to do so. But on the other hand, he points out how Scripture never warrants praying to departed saints and icons. He admits there is no way to solve the conundrum at the moment. This is the most intereting part of the book becase we see how opposed to manicheanism, dualism, and gnosticism the East is. If we learn nothing else, we must appreciate these points.
Other topics:
He notes that even when the East employs a synergistic view of salvation, they never deny (at least logically) justification by faith alone. He is very appreciative of how the East saturates an entire service with Scripture.
My book had abou 15 pages missing, so I will leave the review of this. The book is good in its analysis but it does leave you hanging at times.
July 15, 2021
Good overview of the ecumenical councils and doctrine. Could use some further editing for repetition and such.
November 8, 2023
I was a bit apprehensive as I began to read this book as I come from a reformed Presbyterian background and have converted to Eastern Orthodoxy; my parents and siblings are still quite reformed and they’ve read this book.
He was surprisingly fair and gracious to a lot of points within Orthodoxy. However he definitely still gets some stuff wrong as his Western mindset is still at play and the misinterpretation of Scripture which then leads to misunderstanding. It is also evident that he hasn’t lived or come and seen the Orthodox faith.
Still, an excellent read and much, much fairer than I had anticipated.
He was surprisingly fair and gracious to a lot of points within Orthodoxy. However he definitely still gets some stuff wrong as his Western mindset is still at play and the misinterpretation of Scripture which then leads to misunderstanding. It is also evident that he hasn’t lived or come and seen the Orthodox faith.
Still, an excellent read and much, much fairer than I had anticipated.
July 21, 2022
A brilliant and charitable overview and assessment of Eastern Orthodoxy from a Reformed perspective. Letham is especially adept at exposing misunderstandings and highlighting areas of real agreement and disagreement. While I can only speak for the Reformed side of the camp, this book would seem to model the ideal standard in careful theological engagement between traditions.
February 16, 2013
I read this book because Douglas Wilson recommended it here. While I was waiting for its arrival, I noticed this review of it here. What struck me was that Douglas Wilson, a Reformed Protestant, favorably recommended the book, but so too did Robert Arakaki, the Eastern Orthodox blogger at Orthodox Bridge. After I began reading it, I noticed that Pastor Wilson had retracted his recommendation here.
I have to say that I liked this book, and I looked Letham's approach in writing it. He begins by addressing the history of the Church, doctrines, and councils, then introduced key players in the Orthodox Church (the Cappadocian Fathers, Chrysostom, Maximus the Confessor, and others). Then, he presents the Orthodox view of several key doctrines, such as justification, atonement, original sin, prayer, icons, liturgy, etc. Then he shows what the Orthodox and Reformed have in common, and what they disagree on. He concludes with a chapter on Jesus' prayer in John 17 for unity.
I've read a bit on Orthodoxy, mainly by Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy) Ware. Letham does it well, from what I can tell, at presenting Orthodoxy as it is--avoiding straw man presentations through out. He acknowledges where he thinks the Reformed can learn from Orthodoxy and vice versa. You can tell that he is writing in order to help build communication between the Orthodox and Reformed.
Pastor Wilson is correct, though, that Letham might present Orthodoxy too favorably. By that, I mean that I don't think this book would dissuade a Reformed person who was considering Orthodoxy from crossing the Bosphorus. On the other hand, I don't see where Letham was too favorable in a way that made them look better than they actually are. It seemed pretty fair from both sides.
I also felt like Letham wrote accessibly, although there was a bit in the history/doctrine section where I felt I might have gotten a bit bogged down had I no familiarity with Church history. Overall, though, this would be a good book for any Protestant--especially Reformed--to read regarding Orthodoxy, and for any Orthodox to read who wants to better understand how the Reformed see them. If it were widely read--which it may be, I do not know--it may achieve the open line of communication it was hoping to achieve.
I have to say that I liked this book, and I looked Letham's approach in writing it. He begins by addressing the history of the Church, doctrines, and councils, then introduced key players in the Orthodox Church (the Cappadocian Fathers, Chrysostom, Maximus the Confessor, and others). Then, he presents the Orthodox view of several key doctrines, such as justification, atonement, original sin, prayer, icons, liturgy, etc. Then he shows what the Orthodox and Reformed have in common, and what they disagree on. He concludes with a chapter on Jesus' prayer in John 17 for unity.
I've read a bit on Orthodoxy, mainly by Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy) Ware. Letham does it well, from what I can tell, at presenting Orthodoxy as it is--avoiding straw man presentations through out. He acknowledges where he thinks the Reformed can learn from Orthodoxy and vice versa. You can tell that he is writing in order to help build communication between the Orthodox and Reformed.
Pastor Wilson is correct, though, that Letham might present Orthodoxy too favorably. By that, I mean that I don't think this book would dissuade a Reformed person who was considering Orthodoxy from crossing the Bosphorus. On the other hand, I don't see where Letham was too favorable in a way that made them look better than they actually are. It seemed pretty fair from both sides.
I also felt like Letham wrote accessibly, although there was a bit in the history/doctrine section where I felt I might have gotten a bit bogged down had I no familiarity with Church history. Overall, though, this would be a good book for any Protestant--especially Reformed--to read regarding Orthodoxy, and for any Orthodox to read who wants to better understand how the Reformed see them. If it were widely read--which it may be, I do not know--it may achieve the open line of communication it was hoping to achieve.
February 3, 2022
3 stars is following Goodreads criteria of "liked it".
This is a strange book. It purports to be about Eastern Orthodoxy as viewed through the lens of a Reformed pastor. But the first half of the book is straight up just a dry retelling of early church history (read Needham for a more engaging presentation at this level). It's only the second half where you get actual insights into the E.O. world. And considering the level of detail in which the author covered early church controversies (points on which the reformed world, indeed, the entirety of orthodox Christianity are in more or less lockstep agreement), the second half moves pretty rapidly over his actual insights in the E.O.
Those insights are what save the book and make it worth a read if you want to learn more about this branch of the Church. Just tell yourself as you slog through the various views on the will/s of Christ that the second half will all be worth it.
Also, just as an addendum, the author presents a lot of how the E.O. view the reformed world, from the perspective of a reformed pastor. So he really gets a bit far afield from his title.
This is a strange book. It purports to be about Eastern Orthodoxy as viewed through the lens of a Reformed pastor. But the first half of the book is straight up just a dry retelling of early church history (read Needham for a more engaging presentation at this level). It's only the second half where you get actual insights into the E.O. world. And considering the level of detail in which the author covered early church controversies (points on which the reformed world, indeed, the entirety of orthodox Christianity are in more or less lockstep agreement), the second half moves pretty rapidly over his actual insights in the E.O.
Those insights are what save the book and make it worth a read if you want to learn more about this branch of the Church. Just tell yourself as you slog through the various views on the will/s of Christ that the second half will all be worth it.
Also, just as an addendum, the author presents a lot of how the E.O. view the reformed world, from the perspective of a reformed pastor. So he really gets a bit far afield from his title.
February 7, 2016
This book is very good as the author clearly wants to understand the subject of his study while being faithful to his own Reformed tradition. The historical sections give a very useful overview of the history of Eastern Orthodoxy and the major influences upon its thinking. At times, however, he is way too generous to his opponents. The critique of icons almost reads like a defence, though he does offer some pertinent criticisms of the East's view of this subject. Moreover, he concedes too much ground in relation to the Eastern Orthodox understanding of the Trinity. Having said that, the good bits far outweigh the bad. The impartial reader will find himself instructed and challenged, and will find that there are some surprising areas of agreement between the Reformed and the Eastern Orthodox in opposition to Rome.
March 21, 2022
Slow going but helpful. I really appreciated Letham’s balanced and gracious approach, showing the areas of agreement between Reformed churches and Eastern Orthodoxy, where the Reformed can learn from the Orthodox, and where they disagree. His chapter on unity at the end was challenging: “Doctrine matters, and so does the visible unity of the church. That too is doctrine.”
November 10, 2023
After reading a few books about Eastern Orthodoxy, I wanted to find a book that was a good critique. This book is written from a Reformed perspective, and as a reformed Baptist, I thought it would be a good one to start with. This one fit what I was looking for perfectly.
It's so refreshing to read a Christian book critiquing another denomination that does not use straw men arguments. Letham, the author, is very gracious to the orthodox position and does not criticize what many would consider to be easy targets, such as Icons. He genuinely seems to have written this book in order to provide a path for both of these strands of Christianity to find some common ground and unity, but he doesn't sweep real differences under the rug either.
The last chapter is a short exposition on John 17, the high priestly prayer, and it is excellent. This is one of the most highlighted books I have read through in a long time, it is worth your attention. Highly recommended. Note: I found Part One pretty dry and by far the least interesting. If it doesn't grab your attention skip ahead to part 2, you won't miss anything.
It's so refreshing to read a Christian book critiquing another denomination that does not use straw men arguments. Letham, the author, is very gracious to the orthodox position and does not criticize what many would consider to be easy targets, such as Icons. He genuinely seems to have written this book in order to provide a path for both of these strands of Christianity to find some common ground and unity, but he doesn't sweep real differences under the rug either.
The last chapter is a short exposition on John 17, the high priestly prayer, and it is excellent. This is one of the most highlighted books I have read through in a long time, it is worth your attention. Highly recommended. Note: I found Part One pretty dry and by far the least interesting. If it doesn't grab your attention skip ahead to part 2, you won't miss anything.
July 22, 2025
It’s a helpful overview that spends much time asking what we can learn from each other. I was hoping for that along with a serious polemic. I don’t think laity who pick this book up will grasp the seriousness of the issues debated. At times he seemed to take the east’s definition of idolatry as valid instead of the reformed perspective.
It’s worth a read and has many good qualities but I’m still looking for a more practical polemic for laity being tempted by EO. This is not the book for that imo.
It’s worth a read and has many good qualities but I’m still looking for a more practical polemic for laity being tempted by EO. This is not the book for that imo.
March 22, 2021
Helpful introduction to Eastern Orthodoxy although Bob Letham exhibits some weirdness about icons. Letham goes too far trying to find affinity with Eastern Orthodoxy, but his entry-level treatment of Orthodoxy's key beliefs will be useful in my future ministry. Not exceptionally well written, but I don't know of another book of its kind. He quotes Timothy Ware extensively so I'd probably read Timothy Ware instead, and make my own judgments about Orthodoxy's affinities to Protestantism.
March 2, 2022
I have to admit that I picked this up expecting a lot less honestly, but I was pleasantly surprised. The author is not only careful to accurately represent EO, but handles subjects of disagreements in a really upright way. I think this really shows itself on the discussion of Nicea II and icons, wherein I have typically found knee jerk reactions to be most often the case.
There were somethings the author glazes over that left me a little disappointed (in fact, he said he spoke about their view of hell, but I missed it evidently and there’s not an index), however, he spent time addressing areas of misconceptions and he did so well. I appreciated his historical evaluation of the councils, though, he didn’t seem to mention (as far as I remember) that EO actually condemned Calvinism, caricature or not, which is significant to note and does come up in dialogue with EO adherents. I noticed he didn’t spend as much time on ancestral sin as I would have liked and so I wished he would have fleshed that out more.
Given EO’s diversity I think the author did a good job overall focusing on that which was certain. The book will leave you hanging on occasion but it’s well done generally. You can tell he learned on Timothy Ware’s book quite a bit, which is cited throughout Leetham’s book, but he also draws from an impressive amount of other sources. He certainly did his research!
There were somethings the author glazes over that left me a little disappointed (in fact, he said he spoke about their view of hell, but I missed it evidently and there’s not an index), however, he spent time addressing areas of misconceptions and he did so well. I appreciated his historical evaluation of the councils, though, he didn’t seem to mention (as far as I remember) that EO actually condemned Calvinism, caricature or not, which is significant to note and does come up in dialogue with EO adherents. I noticed he didn’t spend as much time on ancestral sin as I would have liked and so I wished he would have fleshed that out more.
Given EO’s diversity I think the author did a good job overall focusing on that which was certain. The book will leave you hanging on occasion but it’s well done generally. You can tell he learned on Timothy Ware’s book quite a bit, which is cited throughout Leetham’s book, but he also draws from an impressive amount of other sources. He certainly did his research!
May 24, 2021
Picked this up after watching Jordan Peterson do an interview with a member of the Orthodox church. I had previously watched a brief interview where a Protestant questioned an Orthodox priest on matters of doctrine. Honestly, some of his answers made absolutely no sense to me. After I finished this book, I went back and watched that interview again and everything makes sense! While this book wasn't particularly stylistically compelling, it answered all of my questions and more. At the heart of my previous misunderstanding was the reality that this book illuminates: the East and the West don't only arrive at different answers, they're asking different questions. While Geneva and Rome disagree, they do agree on what the questions are. My motivation for the research was that I wanted to know if Peterson converts to Orthodox Christianity, is he truly saved. The answer? Maybe. Letham does a remarkable job of presenting Orthodox Christianity in its best possible light. Which is to be commended. There are a lot more areas of agreement than I'd previously thought. Which is encouraging both for discussions between these different church traditions and for eternity.
March 24, 2025
Letham is an excellent writer and meticulously cites his sources. The author acts as a sort of tour guide through church history, which he presents very fairly and accurately - showing grace to all three streams of Christianity while pulling no punches when necessary. For the remainder of the book he compares and contrasts Reformed doctrine with Orthodoxy - which he accomplishes in a well articulated manner. Letham does what I have seen no other Protestant author do with Orthodoxy, he recognizes its strengths - and there are many!
Being in the Reformed tradition myself while residing in a region heavily populated by RC and EO, this book was very enlightening and cleared up many of the questions I have had while dialoguing with EO friends that could not be adequately answered between ourselves due to the non-defining of terms. In conclusion, I closed this book with a fonder view of Orthodoxy (something I had not anticipated) while becoming even more confident and rooted in my Reformed understanding and convictions.
Being in the Reformed tradition myself while residing in a region heavily populated by RC and EO, this book was very enlightening and cleared up many of the questions I have had while dialoguing with EO friends that could not be adequately answered between ourselves due to the non-defining of terms. In conclusion, I closed this book with a fonder view of Orthodoxy (something I had not anticipated) while becoming even more confident and rooted in my Reformed understanding and convictions.
December 9, 2015
Really enjoyed this one. I've always been curious about the Orthodox church and have been drawn to its (visual) aesthetic by the Byzantine-style art that I've always loved. As I read this book I felt like I was learning about Christian brothers we've discovered living another planet. The East was isolated from the West for hundreds of years with the result that the two halves of Christendom viewed God, scripture, etc. through such different lenses. Letham's exercise of comparing and contrasting the Reformed and Orthodox worlds was fascinating and showed me many blind spots in how I understand the Trinity and our relationship with Him. The doctrine of deification was perhaps the most intriguing of the Orthodox teachings that I was only vaguely familiar with before reading this book. Great read.
Read
July 24, 2011Letham, a Reformed theologian, reviews the history and theology of the Orthodox church, with the goal of clarifying the common ground and differences between the Orthodox and Reformed theology as represented by the Westminster Confession. His is an irenic approach, but does not paper over what he perceives to be the real differences between the traditions. He surveys the church councils and gives a précis of the primary fathers and influential theologians of the Orthodox. For some readers the detailed tracking of changes and differences in theological formulations of the Trinity and Christology will be off putting. For those interested in church history and history of doctrine, this book is a great read.
January 15, 2016
A perfect introduction to Eastern Christianity for the Reformed thinker. Letham is scholarly and popular in his writing--a rare mix. He is open and properly engages with Orthodox thought. After covering the history of the Church as it most influences how the Eastern Orthodox view themselves he moves on to the chief areas of disagreement between West and East; especially between Reformed catholics and the best minds of the modern EO Church.
As a result of his genuine engagement, Letham reveals a few areas were we might learn from the Orthodox without ever wishing to go to Constantinople. Certainly they can teach us to be more overtly Trinitarian in our worship and piety, and to place more emphasis on the incarnation.
Loved it.
As a result of his genuine engagement, Letham reveals a few areas were we might learn from the Orthodox without ever wishing to go to Constantinople. Certainly they can teach us to be more overtly Trinitarian in our worship and piety, and to place more emphasis on the incarnation.
Loved it.
December 9, 2023
As a new Orthodox Christian I am not entirely sure why I read this book. I never would have touched it but my unofficial mentor who is retired philosophy professor recommended this book to my dad to better understand Orthodoxy from a Protestant perspective. I thought I should read it before commenting my marriage to the Orthodox church and hopefully to understand the meeting points between these "traditions".
The first third of the book was for me boring since Ware's the Orthodox Church did it better. There was so much theology hashing with the different councils only a Protestant could enjoy. However I did enjoy the section on the Saints and thinkers as I am still learning about the Saints.
The rest of the book was somewhat repetitive and also frustrating to watch a Western Christian critique Holy Tradition from a rational perspective that utterly misses the entire point. Such a critique invalidates itself before it can ever get started.
The most interesting part for me as someone who grew up in the evangelical side of things was to learn what the Reformed side of Protestantism had to say although indirectly. The Reformed are a huge step up from Evangelicals in that they at least pretend to have a tradition and respect it and they a church structure of sorts. While they have more similarity to the Orthodox then other aspects of Western Christianity they still completely miss the spirit of Orthodoxy more fully then even Evangelicals or Roman Catholics.
One interesting part when talking about Icon's he says Calvin turned the world into an Icon and this set loose the Dutch Maters of painting. Even if true though it still begs the question of the hideous state of Protestant art since then. The Orthodox only fail to produce art when they are poor and enslaved while the Protestants have gotten more wealthy then anyone ever and yet have nothing to show for it. The last several centuries of Byzantium despite it's falling power grew in wealth and large amounts of artistic production.
As I said before his critique's of Orthodoxy I found lacking due to their perspective yet I must say they were very gently which has angered many Reformed readers haha. The author tries really hard to be balanced and fair and he achieves this. The author has a very genuine respect for Orthodoxy and what angers some Reformed is the book seems to be less poking holes in Orthodoxy and more trying to separate the Reformed from the rest of Protestantism in the eyes of the Orthodox. I think the author achieves this but superficially. Roman Catholics set Tradition over the Bible, Evangelicals set the Bible over Tradition and then dismiss Tradition, Reformed set the Bible over Tradition but try to not throw it out. However, while the Reformers have agreed with many of the 7 Councils they conveniently ignored the part on Icons. Which means Reformed Tradition is based on the Reformers picking and choosing and thus interpreting what they think Tradition is and thus castrating it.
While the author disagrees with Icon's and praying to Saints he does not think that warrants heresy charges.
Interesting parts:
Islam turned the Arab raid into a holy war. Talk about justifying what one wants haha
"At the height of Stalin's tyranny the census of 1937 asked Soviet citizens whether they believed in God. The response was so overwhelming that the authorities were forced to suppress the result, so as not to discredit their atheistic policy."
Against the charges of the Iconoclasts the author says they are ridiculous since the early synagogues had pictures in them and for other reasons.
He says the Reformed notion that the Bible came into being prior to the church is untenable but says the Orthodox overstate their claim that the church gave us the Bible. He thinks they both emerged together.
In the west Piety stems from rational activity while in the east theology and piety are inseparable as theology stems from experience checked against tradition and the scriptures.
The Byzantine mind refused to reduce theology to one aspect of the human his intellect and instead bases it on a person.
The author says that Sola Scriptura was a slogan from the 18th century and meant the Bible is the highest source of authority and not the only source for theology. As I was writing this it struck me how ridiculous this excuse is. This is one area the author tried to distance the reformed from the rest of Protestantism but I think fails. Since what tradition they have was arose from Sola Scriptura.
The Orthodox view marriage as both joy and martyrdom since it entails sacrifice. During the ceremony they place crowns on their heads to signify this.
The author thinks that the filioque clause did not subordinate the Holy Spirit as Orthodox claim but the Spirit loses it's personhood in Augustine's take that the Spirit is the love between Christ and the Father. Nor does he see it as the source of the authoritarianism of the Pope.
The West places emphasis on the divine substance and unity of the Godhead while Orthodox place emphasis on the personhood and uniqueness of the Trinity. The author thinks the that whichever one you emphasize first you lose the other and it should be seen as a mystery (my words not his) which I thought was the Orthodox view to begin with. Since the Trinity makes no rational sense at all but like quantum physics and the particle and wave issue makes a lot of sense in reality.
He says the Orthodox take sin more seriously then conservative Protestants.
Despite the book of James clearly saying otherwise he says works flow from faith but contribute nothing to justification.
The first third of the book was for me boring since Ware's the Orthodox Church did it better. There was so much theology hashing with the different councils only a Protestant could enjoy. However I did enjoy the section on the Saints and thinkers as I am still learning about the Saints.
The rest of the book was somewhat repetitive and also frustrating to watch a Western Christian critique Holy Tradition from a rational perspective that utterly misses the entire point. Such a critique invalidates itself before it can ever get started.
The most interesting part for me as someone who grew up in the evangelical side of things was to learn what the Reformed side of Protestantism had to say although indirectly. The Reformed are a huge step up from Evangelicals in that they at least pretend to have a tradition and respect it and they a church structure of sorts. While they have more similarity to the Orthodox then other aspects of Western Christianity they still completely miss the spirit of Orthodoxy more fully then even Evangelicals or Roman Catholics.
One interesting part when talking about Icon's he says Calvin turned the world into an Icon and this set loose the Dutch Maters of painting. Even if true though it still begs the question of the hideous state of Protestant art since then. The Orthodox only fail to produce art when they are poor and enslaved while the Protestants have gotten more wealthy then anyone ever and yet have nothing to show for it. The last several centuries of Byzantium despite it's falling power grew in wealth and large amounts of artistic production.
As I said before his critique's of Orthodoxy I found lacking due to their perspective yet I must say they were very gently which has angered many Reformed readers haha. The author tries really hard to be balanced and fair and he achieves this. The author has a very genuine respect for Orthodoxy and what angers some Reformed is the book seems to be less poking holes in Orthodoxy and more trying to separate the Reformed from the rest of Protestantism in the eyes of the Orthodox. I think the author achieves this but superficially. Roman Catholics set Tradition over the Bible, Evangelicals set the Bible over Tradition and then dismiss Tradition, Reformed set the Bible over Tradition but try to not throw it out. However, while the Reformers have agreed with many of the 7 Councils they conveniently ignored the part on Icons. Which means Reformed Tradition is based on the Reformers picking and choosing and thus interpreting what they think Tradition is and thus castrating it.
While the author disagrees with Icon's and praying to Saints he does not think that warrants heresy charges.
Interesting parts:
Islam turned the Arab raid into a holy war. Talk about justifying what one wants haha
"At the height of Stalin's tyranny the census of 1937 asked Soviet citizens whether they believed in God. The response was so overwhelming that the authorities were forced to suppress the result, so as not to discredit their atheistic policy."
Against the charges of the Iconoclasts the author says they are ridiculous since the early synagogues had pictures in them and for other reasons.
He says the Reformed notion that the Bible came into being prior to the church is untenable but says the Orthodox overstate their claim that the church gave us the Bible. He thinks they both emerged together.
In the west Piety stems from rational activity while in the east theology and piety are inseparable as theology stems from experience checked against tradition and the scriptures.
The Byzantine mind refused to reduce theology to one aspect of the human his intellect and instead bases it on a person.
The author says that Sola Scriptura was a slogan from the 18th century and meant the Bible is the highest source of authority and not the only source for theology. As I was writing this it struck me how ridiculous this excuse is. This is one area the author tried to distance the reformed from the rest of Protestantism but I think fails. Since what tradition they have was arose from Sola Scriptura.
The Orthodox view marriage as both joy and martyrdom since it entails sacrifice. During the ceremony they place crowns on their heads to signify this.
The author thinks that the filioque clause did not subordinate the Holy Spirit as Orthodox claim but the Spirit loses it's personhood in Augustine's take that the Spirit is the love between Christ and the Father. Nor does he see it as the source of the authoritarianism of the Pope.
The West places emphasis on the divine substance and unity of the Godhead while Orthodox place emphasis on the personhood and uniqueness of the Trinity. The author thinks the that whichever one you emphasize first you lose the other and it should be seen as a mystery (my words not his) which I thought was the Orthodox view to begin with. Since the Trinity makes no rational sense at all but like quantum physics and the particle and wave issue makes a lot of sense in reality.
He says the Orthodox take sin more seriously then conservative Protestants.
Despite the book of James clearly saying otherwise he says works flow from faith but contribute nothing to justification.
January 29, 2018
Well done, save that, in my opinion, Letham unnecessarily pulls some punches in his zeal for a good clean fight. In particular, icons should have received a hard clean uppercut and he was too generous and soft on justification. Letham gets the win, but it should have been a K.O.
January 21, 2020
A very helpful history of the theolgoy the Eastern Church and its relationship with its Western counterpart.
March 25, 2022
An in-depth look at Eastern Orthodoxy from a Reformed point of view. There's some definite high marks of the book. I especially enjoyed the historical overviews with the emphases on the varying theologians of the East such as Palamas and John of Damascus of whom little is known about in the West. I can appreciate the descriptions on doctrine held by the East too. Thus, this isn't the worst book in the world, and it seeks to open a dialogue between the two churches.
That being said there's some major issues with this book. One is his willingness to let bygones be bygones when it comes to some major differences between East and West. I think he mistakes union to Christ and deification with the divine energies as overly similar. There is some similarity in scope, but a major difference in substance. His willingness to pass over the iconography debate is also disheartening since he chalks it up to the difference of dulia and latria; the Reformation was in large part over worship. His critique of Western Trinitarianism needs massive revisitation; Letham should read John Owen, Polanus, or Aquinas again to understand that the West has a robust doctrine of the Trinity historically. Rather than quoting from Torrance or Barth he should look at more historical Reformed sources.
There's other issues with the book that I'd have a hard time swallowing. Suffice it to say, it's helpful for an introduction while understanding that Athanasius and the Cappadocians properly belong to the church catholic and not the East alone; most in the East are disciples of John of Damascus rather than Athanasius and Basil. It's helpful for a broad overview, and I'd recommend it for someone wanting to understand EO from a Reformed view.
That being said there's some major issues with this book. One is his willingness to let bygones be bygones when it comes to some major differences between East and West. I think he mistakes union to Christ and deification with the divine energies as overly similar. There is some similarity in scope, but a major difference in substance. His willingness to pass over the iconography debate is also disheartening since he chalks it up to the difference of dulia and latria; the Reformation was in large part over worship. His critique of Western Trinitarianism needs massive revisitation; Letham should read John Owen, Polanus, or Aquinas again to understand that the West has a robust doctrine of the Trinity historically. Rather than quoting from Torrance or Barth he should look at more historical Reformed sources.
There's other issues with the book that I'd have a hard time swallowing. Suffice it to say, it's helpful for an introduction while understanding that Athanasius and the Cappadocians properly belong to the church catholic and not the East alone; most in the East are disciples of John of Damascus rather than Athanasius and Basil. It's helpful for a broad overview, and I'd recommend it for someone wanting to understand EO from a Reformed view.
April 6, 2019
This is a very good overview of Eastern Orthodox theology as it compares to Reformed Protestant theology. It's written from a solidly Reformed standpoint, though it does its best to maintain an even-handed tone, being open to the shortcomings of Reformed Christianity throughout the ages and willing to acknowledge areas where Reformed Christians can learn from the Orthodox church.
I rated this four stars for two reasons:
1) It is fairly challenging reading. Letham writes well and even engagingly, but he tackles some difficult and complex theology, delving into some of the intricacies of the 7 Ecumenical Councils and taking us into terrain and ways of thinking necessary to understand the Orthodox church but not very familiar to us.
2) Some readers may feel that at times Letham goes too far in giving credit to Orthodox theology. I personally don't think that he "sells out", and he does ardently defend Reformed distinctives; however, he does make a concerted effort to explain Orthodox theology as it is understood by its own adherents, and while I think this is commendable, it may raise some hackles. For this reason, some discernment and care are advised in reading this.
I did find this a worthy read. Those who want to get a basic understanding of Eastern Orthodox theology will find this book very helpful.
I rated this four stars for two reasons:
1) It is fairly challenging reading. Letham writes well and even engagingly, but he tackles some difficult and complex theology, delving into some of the intricacies of the 7 Ecumenical Councils and taking us into terrain and ways of thinking necessary to understand the Orthodox church but not very familiar to us.
2) Some readers may feel that at times Letham goes too far in giving credit to Orthodox theology. I personally don't think that he "sells out", and he does ardently defend Reformed distinctives; however, he does make a concerted effort to explain Orthodox theology as it is understood by its own adherents, and while I think this is commendable, it may raise some hackles. For this reason, some discernment and care are advised in reading this.
I did find this a worthy read. Those who want to get a basic understanding of Eastern Orthodox theology will find this book very helpful.
January 20, 2022
It's a shame and a surprise that it took me so long to get started on this, start again, and finish. It's dense with information, especially in the early chapters on the councils, but is highly readable all the way through. Discrepancies between Orthodoxy and a particular form of Reformed Protestantism are presented frankly, with respect given to both traditions. Interestingly, Letham lays out the Orthodox system of belief by discussing the councils, but never specifies the precise position he is coming from and buries a remark about the "unacceptable" state of denominational variety near the end. The most interesting sections are those which grapple with the Orthodox doctrines of the Trinity and the position of Scripture in Orthodoxy. Where the former is concerned, he emphasizes the essence-energies distinction but is sometimes unclear about what he finds acceptable and objectionable about it. With regard to the latter, he makes an argument from a Second Timothy passage which, given a more complete reading, greatly weakens his argument by predicting the proliferation in teachings. If the book could use one thing, it is a deeper dive into the question of free will in the Reformed tradition. The issue clearly deserves more explanation than that of justification (as it lies at the root), but is handwaved almost identically as practically the same in both traditions.
April 3, 2025
Similar to other reviewers, I stand torn with this book. On one hand, Letham accomplishes his goal to give an overview of Eastern Orthodoxy and to show that they are not the weird cousin Protestants think they are. As someone with little to no knowledge of Orthodoxy, I learned a great deal and was greatly instructed by this book. I appreciated his use of primary sources and Orthodox works to teach.
However, as is often the case, a books greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. His evaluations of Orthodoxy lack clarity as Letham muddies or minimizes the significant differences between the Orthodox and Reformed traditions. This is seen particularly in the chapter on the Trinity. Letham spends a majority of the chapter explaining and clarifying what the East believes regarding the Trinity and agreeing with their critiques towards the West. Despite evaluating both, he spends most of his time criticizing the Western approaches to the Trinity. This leaves one thinking that the East has it right; however, in his conclusion of the book, Letham concludes that the Orthodox view is problematic and must be resolved before stronger unity can be achieved. This switch leaves the reader wondering whether Letham is for or against Orthodoxy’s approach to the Trinity.
However, as is often the case, a books greatest strength is also its greatest weakness. His evaluations of Orthodoxy lack clarity as Letham muddies or minimizes the significant differences between the Orthodox and Reformed traditions. This is seen particularly in the chapter on the Trinity. Letham spends a majority of the chapter explaining and clarifying what the East believes regarding the Trinity and agreeing with their critiques towards the West. Despite evaluating both, he spends most of his time criticizing the Western approaches to the Trinity. This leaves one thinking that the East has it right; however, in his conclusion of the book, Letham concludes that the Orthodox view is problematic and must be resolved before stronger unity can be achieved. This switch leaves the reader wondering whether Letham is for or against Orthodoxy’s approach to the Trinity.
February 29, 2020
Letham interacts with Eastern Orthodoxy in this book by presenting both historical and contemporary perspectives. History and culture have influenced theological development more than we would think. Letham's work takes that seriously.
Over the course of the book he takes several unusual positions with regard to Eastern Orthodoxy and perhaps with regard to Reformed Christianity as well (being Reformed himself). Sometimes he's dealing with "popular" versions of the two, and it's not always clear that he's doing them justice. He disagrees with Bavinck on the implications of EO's rejection of the filioque (a divorce of spirituality from theology). Presbyterians will find him a bit weak on the question of icons, among other issues.
"...while there has never been a Calvinist Pope (yet), there has been a Calvinist Patriarch of Constantinople, although his Calvinism was soon repudiated..." (p. 286)
Over the course of the book he takes several unusual positions with regard to Eastern Orthodoxy and perhaps with regard to Reformed Christianity as well (being Reformed himself). Sometimes he's dealing with "popular" versions of the two, and it's not always clear that he's doing them justice. He disagrees with Bavinck on the implications of EO's rejection of the filioque (a divorce of spirituality from theology). Presbyterians will find him a bit weak on the question of icons, among other issues.
"...while there has never been a Calvinist Pope (yet), there has been a Calvinist Patriarch of Constantinople, although his Calvinism was soon repudiated..." (p. 286)
October 22, 2021
I found this a helpful beginners guide to the Eastern Orthodox Church. Unashamedly Reformed in his convictions (it’s in the title!), Letham still clearly attempts to understand the Orthodox Church from within their own system. After laying out a history of the Eastern Church along with some of their key theologians, he then moves onto analysing points of theological difference and similarity between the Eastern tradition and the Reformed.
I particularly enjoyed Letham’s ability to respect the distinction between veneration and worship, and do his best to see what the Eastern Church sees. Nevertheless, I imagine Eastern Orthodox Christians might find this book frustrating, although I don’t know enough about the nuances of their belief to be confident in that.
For any Protestant interested in the Eastern Church this will be a good place to start, but never forget this is a book written ‘through Western eyes!’
I particularly enjoyed Letham’s ability to respect the distinction between veneration and worship, and do his best to see what the Eastern Church sees. Nevertheless, I imagine Eastern Orthodox Christians might find this book frustrating, although I don’t know enough about the nuances of their belief to be confident in that.
For any Protestant interested in the Eastern Church this will be a good place to start, but never forget this is a book written ‘through Western eyes!’
February 26, 2023
I struggled with how to review this book. Ultimately, I think the author pulled far too many punches that can be made at the Orthodox church, and instead directed them to the Reformed faith he was supposed to be contending for. Some of the sweeping generalizations he made against the Reformed faith were just ridiculous, while he lets the Orthodox church get away with the denial of the atonement with barely a slap on the wrist. If they deny that Christ was paying the price for sin, they have no gospel. The book was never very engaging either, with the first part being a drudgery and the latter two parts feeling like a rush through every topic. There were some parts that were good, but I don't feel like I've gotten a lot from this book.
December 18, 2021
My yearly non-fiction read is finally complete! I like that this book tries to ground the subject first with history and then explaining to a western audience some of the distinctives of the Eastern Orthodox church. I wish there was more about the different types of Orthodox churches, but overall I appreciate what the author was trying to do and his attempt to present both sides from a position of charity. It was a bit repetitive at points and not the most scintillating read as evidenced by the fact that it took me the better part of a year to read this.
February 13, 2024
Fascinating.
I’m glad I’ve had this book on my shelf to read as a sudden interest in EO sparked up. We have a lot in common with EO.
This is an incredible introduction to EO thought from a Reformed perspective. If you’re looking for a book that heavily critiques the EO Church, this is not the book to read. There is 1) A great explanation of Eastern thought here (and if you can understand presuppositionalism, it’s much easier to get) and 2) A whole lot of complements to the Eastern Tradition.
I’m glad I’ve had this book on my shelf to read as a sudden interest in EO sparked up. We have a lot in common with EO.
This is an incredible introduction to EO thought from a Reformed perspective. If you’re looking for a book that heavily critiques the EO Church, this is not the book to read. There is 1) A great explanation of Eastern thought here (and if you can understand presuppositionalism, it’s much easier to get) and 2) A whole lot of complements to the Eastern Tradition.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 54 reviews