pp., appendices, bibliography, indices.).-reviewed by Walter D. Ray. "Almost... not quite..." That summarizes my reaction, as an Eastern Orthodox, to Donald Fairbairn's Eastern Orthodoxy through Western Eyes. Fairbairn begins well. He...
morepp., appendices, bibliography, indices.).-reviewed by Walter D. Ray. "Almost... not quite..." That summarizes my reaction, as an Eastern Orthodox, to Donald Fairbairn's Eastern Orthodoxy through Western Eyes. Fairbairn begins well. He acknowledges that Eastern Orthodoxy is truly different from Western Christianity not only in its external forms but in its "underlying vision of the world, of life, and of Christianity" (2), and that this vision is not necessarily wrong simply because it is different. Before evaluating it, he seeks to understand the Eastern church on its own terms, as it sees itself. Looking first at the sources of the Orthodox vision (Part I) and then at the vision itself (Part II), Fairbairn is able to show that "Eastern theology...presents a remarkably unified vision of the Christian faith...that is systematic and internally coherent" (153). Yet at each point of the discussion I had the feeling that something was missing, something was not quite in focus. Almost, but not quite. This lack of focus becomes especially apparent when Fairbairn turns to a critique of the Orthodox vision from a Western perspective (chapter 8 and conclusion), and even, though to a lesser extent, when he evaluates contemporary Orthodoxy in its popular expressions using the standard of its "official" vision (Part III). Many Orthodox will find Appendix B, which contains suggestions for Western church workers (mainly Protestants) working in Orthodox countries, especially troubling, and not simply because of their Orthodox triumphalism or religious nationalism. Rather, this appendix betrays a continued lack of appreciation for the central value of the Orthodox vision, unity, and the indispensable role of the Church as the manifestation and realization of unity.
