In Patristic and Medieval Atonement Theory: A Guide to Research, Junius Johnson offers a clear and succinct volume that endeavors to orient the reader to three interrelated topics: the basic contours of atonement theory, decisive figures in its history, and important resources for further academic work. Accordingly, he has divided his study into three major parts: “Part I: Atonement Theory Explained”; “Part II: Key Thinkers in Atonement Theory”; and “Part III: Annotated Bibliography of Selected Resources.” Although the volume ostensibly treats of ancient and medieval theories of atonement, modern concerns are never far from the author's mind. As a result, the volume attempts to give traditional models of the atonement a fair hearing to contemporary readers, who might otherwise be dismissive of some patristic and medieval views.

Part 1 consists of three chapters, each of which is designed to expose the logic behind various atonement theories and the different systematic loci that determine them. Although this section is the most demanding of the volume, the analytic clarity with which the reader emerges equips him or her with considerable resources for thinking through the available options in the doctrine of the atonement.

Chapter 1, “Introduction to Atonement Theory,” defines key terms and offers a number of possibilities for how atonement might work. Johnson proposes three sets of “controlling considerations” (10): those that arise from human sinfulness, those that arise from the person and work of Christ, and those that arise from the nature of God. These are not meant to be mutually exclusive, and indeed within each of the three further distinctions are made.

Chapter 2, “Illuminating the Context,” is the most analytically ambitious portion of the volume. Especially important are Johnson's discussions of the doctrine of God, freedom, and sacrifice. In this section Johnson demonstrates that an unexpectedly large number of divine attributes are relevant for atonement theory. For instance, divine simplicity, which might seem to be unrelated, leads to the claim that “God is not just a just person, but justice itself,” and the same holds for mercy (41).

Chapter 3, “Christ our Brother,” is divided into two sections that stand in generative tension with one another. The first, “Christ's Likeness to Our Human Nature,” outlines the reasons that Christian theology has insisted on some degree of similarity between Christ and human beings. The second section, “Christ's Unlikeness to Us,” reminds the reader that, for all of Christ's entering into the human condition, Christian theology has maintained that Christ must be distinct from us in important regards.

In part 2, Johnson shifts from his largely systematic treatment to a historical examination in which influential theologians are selected as exemplars of important models of atonement. Some of Johnson's choices will strike the reader as slightly unusual for the theories those figures are asked to represent. Various objections notwithstanding, Johnson effectively demonstrates that each of his chosen representatives offers rich reflections on the topic selected. Moreover, Johnson points out other soteriological motifs in his figures’ thought beyond the organizing principle of any given chapter.

Chapter 4, “Athanasius (c. 296–373): The Image of God in Us,” looks closely at Athanasius's On the Incarnation. Johnson locates a number of themes in the text, but he highlights as most significant that which begins with humanity's loss of the image of God, which involves the loss of rationality (74). Mired in our lack of knowledge, we require a new image, Christ, who as the image of the Father restores the image that had been obscured.

Chapter 5, “Gregory Nazianzen (329–390): Deification,” examines Nazianzen's Oration 45, a key portion of which Johnson summarizes as follows: “Christ becomes what we are to make us what God is” (83). Here Johnson helpfully observes that, for Nazianzen, deification is intimately connected to Christ's death, and should therefore not be confused with sanctification.

Chapter 6, “Gregory of Nyssa (335–395): Ransom Theory,” outlines Nyssa's version of the ransom theory of the atonement, as found in The Great Catechism. Nyssa holds that Satan sees in Christ someone for whom he would trade all of humanity. However, as Johnson puts it, “God cannot belong to Satan” (89), so the attempted acquisition of Christ is thwarted and death is defeated.

Chapter 7, “Augustine of Hippo (354–430): Legal Conceptuality,” examines books four and thirteen of The Trinity. Johnson exposes elements of deification and the ransom theory in Augustine's thought before noting Augustine's divergence from Nyssa (and his anticipation of elements of Anselm's position): “Christ's death, being completely voluntary . . . abolished guilt” (98). As a result, the devil no longer has any legal claim on us.

Chapter 8, “Anselm of Canterbury (c. 1033–1109): Satisfaction Theory,” notes the enormous influence of Anselm on atonement theory, and Johnson appropriately makes this the lengthiest chapter in part 2. Johnson offers a highly precise exposition of Anselm's theory, noting possible objections along the way. Refreshingly, Johnson does not shrink from weak points in Anselm's argument that Christ's freely offered death satisfies God's offended honor.

Chapter 9, “Peter Abelard (1079–1142): Moral Influence,” characterizes Abelard as more “stringently philosophical” than any other thinkers in the volume (119), and Johnson duly notes the possible points of criticism that Abelard raises in relation to previous atonement theories (122). Johnson then succinctly conveys Abelard's constructive position by organizing it around love: “In order to be forgiven, it is necessary that we love God” (123).

Chapter 10, “Bonaventure (1221–1274): Nuanced Anselmianism,” casts Bonaventure as a “coda to Anselm” (125) in that he subscribes fully to Anselmian satisfaction. However, Bonaventure differs from Anselm, according to Johnson, in that satisfaction is not the only way that God could save, even though it is the most fitting (130).

Chapter 11, “Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274): Christ's Merits,” observes that, although Aquinas subscribes to a notion of satisfaction, it is of a distinctly non-Anselmian variety in that Christ's death does not need to satisfy an infinite debt. Instead, it simply needs to be “more lovable” (135) in the eyes of the one offended (i.e., God).

In Chapter 12, “Julian of Norwich (1342–1416): Courtesy and At-one-ment,” Johnson claims that Julian views Christ's atoning work as centering on his condescension to us, the “courtesy” of which “unites those who believe in him in a [profound] union” such that God no longer assigns blame to us (149). Throughout part 2, close exegesis of primary texts is illuminated by systematic analysis, and Johnson emerges from this tour as an exceptionally insightful and trustworthy guide.

Part 3 demonstrates command of an extremely broad range of sources, and Johnson organizes his bibliography around primary and secondary sources for both the patristic and medieval periods. Here he gives his reader ample resources for further research.

Johnson's impressive study will be welcomed by those seeking a concise, analytically rigorous orientation to atonement theory.