What happens to justification in contemporary theological systems when the theologian has a political, metaphysical, existential or ecumenical axe to grind? Mattes meticulously analyses the role of justification in the work of five major contemporary Protestant theologians, four of whom, he believes, wield such axes in their dogmatic efforts. Mattes argues that these four theologians – Eberhard Jüngel, Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jürgen Moltmann and Robert Jenson – in order to secure some particular agenda for the theological enterprise, limit justification to first-order discourse and thereby prevent the doctrine from bearing on second-order theological concerns. Accordingly, justification is made to serve as a foundation for the theological system – as one starting point among many from which the theologian may or may not choose to depart – but is not positioned in its rightful location as the ‘hub by which all aspects of doctrine and life are configured’ (p. 4), or as the ‘lens through which all Christian truth must be presented’ (p. 180). Mattes is concerned that this subtle methodological shift is one of fatal consequences. Theology becomes divorced from the church's proclamation and practice; the theological enterprise too quickly becomes ensnared in a tangled web of alien agendas.

Mattes identifies and judiciously exposits the agendas that he believes undercut these contemporary systems. Eberhard Jüngel, with his curious and selective mixture of Barthian, Lutheran and Bultmannian themes, is charged with marrying the doctrine of justification to both a highly existentialist anthropology and a theology of divine transcendence, and by doing so reducing justifying faith to a subjective, private and intellectualised experience. Pannenberg is called out for subjecting justification to ecumenical, eschatological and metaphysical concerns. According to his system, Mattes argues, God saves us from ‘ontological limitation and separation’ (p. 83) and for union with Christ in the eschaton. Moltmann is portrayed as having constructed a thoroughgoing political theology within which the concept of justification becomes the divine verdict pronounced against oppression and tyrannical exploitation. Freedom – particularly political liberation – is set forth as the determining theme of justification, salvation and faith. Jenson is accused of ‘conflating gospel with church’ (p. 122); of interweaving justification with the church's experience of participation in the life of the triune being. In doing so, Mattes remarks, he divests the doctrine of justification of its forensic character and, together with theologians of the so-called ‘new Finnish school of Luther Research’, redefines justification as a ‘real-ontic’ bond between God and man.

In contrast to these four theologians, Mattes opines that justification is only rightly understood as both the basis and the boundary of theology – as the discrimen that shapes all other doctrines and practices. Consequently, justification should define and demarcate theological interaction with philosophy, metaphysics, politics and experience, and not the other way around. ‘All systematic theological frameworks’, he writes, ‘are subordinate to the doctrine of justification’ (p. 5).

To demonstrate this proper role of justification, Mattes turns to a fifth contemporary theologian, Tübingen systematician Oswald Bayer, whose work remains largely inaccessible to those who lack adequate German language skills. According to Mattes, Bayer eschews the agenda-orientated narrowness characteristic of most contemporary theologies and opts instead for a system within which ‘it is difficult, if not impossible, to separate the doctrine of justification from [his] thinking at virtually any point’ (p. 145). He resists the existentialist tendency to reduce justification to egoistic and individualistic concerns. Rather, while retaining the experiential import of justification, Bayer insists that God's justifying activity is universal in scope, affecting the whole of the created order. Furthermore, Bayer rejects the notion that the theologian must choose between forensic and effective justification, suggesting instead that forensic justification is pregnant with ontological significance. And, although he recognises and upholds the political and ecclesial implications of the doctrine, Bayer, reports Mattes, flatly refuses to subject justification to any a priori political and ecclesial positions. Again, Bayer is presented as the hero of this study precisely because, according to Mattes, he correctly perceives that justification precedes and thereby informs the construction of responsible theological statements and systems.

Recent ecumenical documents, and the appearance of a host of new academic publications on the subject, reveal that the doctrine of justification is among the most pressing concerns in this theological era. The Role of Justification in Contemporary Theology is a finely constructed and well-written contribution to this discussion. Mattes's probing analyses of these major contemporary theologians is both helpful and illuminating, and he has proven himself to be quite adept at isolating the broad methodological issues at stake in the theologies in question. To be sure, many will not agree with Mattes's Lutheran conviction that justification, as the articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae, is the sole criterion – the discrimen – that should shape and determine all theological statements and systems. However, even those who disagree with this position should benefit from this cogent defence set in the context of thorough and precise theological critique.