Karl Rahner once proclaimed that most Christians are monotheists, meaning not that belief in the Trinity is tritheistic, but rather that most Christians simply do not get the point of the Trinity. In his own way, he attempted to offer an account that would help the (believe it or not) average Christian understand how the Trinity is a radicalized monotheism that accounts for the self-communication of God in Truth (Word) and Love (Spirit). Still, Rahner's radicalization of monotheism does not really answer the question of how such an account of God makes a difference for Christian living. In this book, David Power and Michael Downey set out to do just that. They are up-front about the fact that they are not in the business of offering speculative reflections on the inner life of the Trinity or a reasonable account of why Christians think of God as Trinity. Instead, they offer a reflection on Christian praxis that is a presencing of the trinitarian modes of being of God; it is a manifestation of the Father's Word—God's love as “visible, tangible, and audible”—and the Spirit—the “indwelling, invisible dynamism of God's love creating, animating, bonding, and uniting” (xii). Power and Downey show how trinitarian language can both make sense of and inspire a Christian praxis in which love and justice converge. Given that the question has shifted from “Why God?” to “Why religion?,” this book is a timely and important contribution to trinitarian theology.

Power and Downey begin by invoking David Tracy in order to help discern the signs of the postmodern times in which the human is situated between the Habermasian system and lifeworld, which are mediated by symbols that emerge within concrete historical, cultural, and local contexts. After describing the situation to which a trinitarian praxis must speak, Power and Downey give a very helpful synopsis of recent trinitarian theologies related to praxis from an almost global perspective. I say “almost” global because there is a glaring omission of the Orthodox tradition, which arguably has been quite influential in the history of contemporary Trinitarian theology. This chapter would be very helpful for undergraduate teaching, as long as another essay is added to fill in the Orthodox gap. What I also like about this chapter is that Power and Downey see clearly that what appear to be highly speculative theologies in Karl Barth, Rahner, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and Jürgen Moltmann are, in fact, demonstrations of how the Trinity is really about the presencing of God in creation. They even indicate that this understanding of God as Trinity was at the heart of Athanasius’ own concern, correcting any account of the Trinity that reduces the point simply to soteriology. Although their aim was not a speculative account of the Trinity, Power and Downey manage to offer a very important insight to the overall trinitarian discussion, patristic and contemporary.

In the third chapter, the authors demonstrate how the naming of God occurs through narrative and story and that such a naming is always implicated with ethical and doctrinal meanings. The narrative of the Christian naming of God as Trinity is a continuation of the story of Israel, which itself is a telling of God's promises to the poor and the dispossessed. Thus the naming of God as Trinity cannot be separated from the desire for justice, peace, and love. In chapter 4, Power and Downey spell out more explicitly that the form of justice in terms of human communion is itself a result of the restorative work of Word—the manifestation of God's justice—and Spirit—God's dynamic empowering toward communion. The book ends with the Eucharist as the space in which God's justice is realized as loving communion in Word and Spirit, and as the ground for the Christian praxis of extending God's justice in creation.

Power and Downey have succeeded in showing how the traditional doctrine of the Trinity is not irrelevant to praxis, but emerges from and continually points to the presencing of God's love and justice in the world. It is a must-read on all levels—by undergraduates, graduate students, laity, and theologians.