Introducing Eastern Orthodox Theology

I have read Andrew Louth’s “Introducing Eastern Orthodox Theology” on two separate occasions, and enjoyed the book much more my first time through. Overall, this was a helpful introduction on the topic of Eastern Orthodox theology to someone who is new to Orthodoxy and seeking a primer, or for someone who is familiar with the church and seeking a refresher course on the main tenets of the EOC. Although brief, it is surprisingly detailed and provides many nuances/facets of Orthodoxy not touched upon in other introductions. I do have a few concerns, though. For example, on page 74 the author writes “Do Christians have to believe that Adam and Eve existed, and that they sinned, and that their sin has infected all subsequent human beings?” I have no qualms with the author believing, or not believing, these things. My issue, however, is found a few pages later when the author asserts that the church fathers, such as Basil, did not believe in a literal Adam and Eve, nor did they hold to a literal fall. Even a cursory reading of the early fathers, and Basil himself, however, abundantly demonstrates that they did, in fact, hold the belief that Adam and Eve were literal people, and that they did commit a literal sin that has effected the world in a profoundly negative way. Louth is obviously well educated and extremely well read (as the book demonstrates), so it leaves the reader wondering what exactly happened? Is the author being deceptive? Does he genuinely not know the beliefs of the early church fathers on this topic? Does he have ulterior motives? This egregious error, whether intentional or not, leaves the reader wondering where else the author is in error and misrepresenting the church’s position? Is this the only instance in the book where this occurs, or are there others? For me personally, this casts doubt on an otherwise solid presentation of orthodoxy.

I read this years ago and had an opportunity to return to it again in response to a question from a friend asking for an introduction to Orthodox theology. There are many introductory books on this topic, some quite bad, some misleading and some frankly arcane. After re-reading it, the conclusion I have come to is that Louth's work is none of the above, fair, and very readable. In my opinion the best contemporary introduction to specifically Orthodox theology in the 21st century.This is a fairly substantial accomplishment: Orthodoxy is marked by many theologies in fact, since what is dogmatic is quite limited and the Fathers of the Church were far from univocal - Louth manages to distill a common essence that is faithful to the Tradition and no rooted in controversial theologumenon (of which there are many). He also offers thoughtful commentary on how Orthodoxy relates to contemporary issues that plague segments of American protestantism such as opposition to basic science, which should certainly be a breath of fresh air for anyone caught up in the fundamentalist arguments of that world.

Eastern Orthodox theology is difficult to grasp because of its focus on worship and experience. You will be often told to "come and see" when you inquire about Orthodoxy. I am invited to Divine Liturgy more often than I am given a book when I ask what the Orthodox Church is about. I believe Dr. Louth does an astounding job of explaining Orthodoxy by referencing both their worship and their more recent theologians. Andrew Louth makes constant use of the prayers sung in the Divine Liturgy and cites Orthodox theologians of the last two centuries. Both of these choices give readers a clearer since of what Orthodoxy is like today than other introductions I have read. Kallistos Ware's "The Orthodox Way" lacks both of these things which makes "Introducing Eastern Orthodox Theology" a fantastic complement to that classic introduction.If you are at all interested in this often obscure tradition, I cannot recommend Andrew Louth's book highly enough.

I was looking for an introduction to Eastern Orthodox Theology. This book served that purpose well. I will return to it often.

I highly recommend this must read book to catechumens, Orthodox and seekers alike. Well written and engaging, the pages fly by while profound detail unfolds in each new section. The Theology is presented clearly and orderly building in a step-by-step fashion in a rigorous, thorough - for the size of the volume - and yet accessible style. As a survey of the major theological point of Orthodoxy, the work undertakes a daunting task, but delivers such that each area is covered as to not leave the reader wanting, while proving a framework for deeper inquiry. A very good foundation and an enjoyable read.

This was a beautiful journey to read through. I am currently investigating Orthodoxy because I find it so deeply in line with my own understanding and experience of Deity, the scriptures, and Church history. I've spent half a decade adrift, searching for a way in which I could moor myself in Christ, and this book has very well described some of the ways in which I, personally, have found the Orthodox Church the place where I can bring both the heart and mind into unity, in Jesus.

Introducing Eastern Orthodox Theology  by Andrew Louth is an excellent resource for those new to Eastern Orthodox theology like myself, or someone who has been part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church for many years. This book helped open my Protestant eyes to the beauty of Orthodoxy. While it's true that no book can, or should, replace the in-person experience of the Divine Liturgy, and a relationship with the parish priest, I can say that this book will at least serve as a guide to the Orthodox Church.

This is an exceptional introduction to Orthodox Theology. The author delves into important theological topics that are vital to the Orthodox faith in a way that is approachable and interesting. There are inevitable comparisons with Western Christian theology, but the author does not offer criticisms with his comparisons. Overall it is factual, interesting reading that should appeal both to the experienced and the neophyte.

I had read Louth’s ‘The origins of the Christian mystical tradition’ with a great deal of enjoyment and edification; the former was due to quality of writing, and the latter to the level of erudition presented by a patristic authority, without any fanfares, or sounds of trumpets. The same kind of quiet assurance permeates this book. He begins by defining terms, and points out that Eastern has nothing to do with the orient, but rather refers to areas east of Rome, who have developed their own orthodoxies for historical reasons, and are yet united within a particular form of Christianity. I remember visiting the beautiful Greek Orthodox cathedral in Kilburn for a wedding, contrasting it with the austerity of the (Russsian?) Orthodox church, in Kensington. The paradox is that I could feel at home in both, whereas given the pomp and Gloria in St Paul’s in London, I felt more at home in the austerity of Southwark Cathedral or the magnificent Durham. This has enabled it to meet the contingencies of time and place; be they in Poland, or Greece, or Russia, etc. by a theology which is apothatic, which is not about ‘some kind of higher way with concepts, some ultimate refinement of human conceptual theology – kataphatic theology being deployed as we handle our concepts of God like the tacking a pilot uses in sailing a boat.’ It reminded of the guidance given by St Columbo (and Columbanus), to the pre-Romanised monks who set out in their little coracles from the coasts of Ireland – a profound faith in the Mystery. Chapter 3 looks at the doctrine of creation, and simply describes the resolution of the antimony between the belief that everything created was created out of nothing by Divine Fiat, which actually seems to be in conflict with Genesis 1 which posits, darkness, the void, and the deep. The Platonic distinction between the Unchanging and the Changing, became first the distinction between the Uncreated and the Created, and then, between the Unknowable and the Knowable. (Quite where that leaves the statement in Ecclesiasticus 1:4, is beyond our brief.) Different sections will invite further questions from different readers, but this is only an introduction and the bibliography at the end is full enough to suggest a next step. To provide a detailed overview of each of the subsequent chapters would make this review very long, because so much ground is covered with both care and concision. The remaining chapters cover not only what is in common between the East and the West, but also what is not in common, for each have their own riches. I think Andrew Louth has done a really good job, for the benefit of both eastern and western readers, and anyone who sees themselves in a different camp.

Flicked through it and the content seems fairly comprehensive but easy to understand. I purchased this book as a gift for someone but it arrived with scuffed edges. I'm miffed to have paid full price for a book that seems a bit too worn for brand 'new'. Had I known this upfront, I would have sourced a copy from elsewhere. It arrived late so maybe it was a return a other copies will be okay.

Well, I've really enjoyed reading Andrew Louth's little introduction. Louth is clearly quite passionate about his tradition and provides a very engaging and quite personal account. What struck me quite strongly (coming from an Anglican perspective), is just how surprising 'alien' some aspects of the tradition appear to be, especially 'Christian materialism' and the use of ikons; the use of these is justified by arguments to do with the Incarnation. The use of Scripture differs quite strongly too.It is hard not to make comparisons. I would have thought Anglicanism more 'enlightened', but Louth is a little critical of the Western tradition; don't be too upset by that, he is bold and loves his tradition; and why not? You get a sense that this is a tradition that makes full use of ancient written sources in a way that the western churches certainly do not. The liturgy is also more fully developed, and therefore not vague. You also get a sense that this is a tradition that one can't be half hearted about; one can be a casual Anglican, but the same wouldn't apply here.It is my guess that in the western traditions, the impact of Augustine is more strongly felt, and there is therefore more salvation anxiety (perhaps not helped by Calvin); but the Orthodox church seems to have escaped this; it is less individualistic.But we Anglicans are keen to see our towns won for Jesus; we don't yet feel convinced that the use of ikons will have much of a role in this.

The material is inherently difficult but I wonder if it could have been put more clearly? If Fr Louth has the time he usefully revise the text, perhaps with an editor.

Very readable introduction to Eastern Orthodox spirituality. I have read many books on the Orthodox church and would rate this very highly