This book represents the cumulative fruit of William Loewe's scholarly work on soteriology. It covers the work of Irenaeus, Anselm, Aquinas, Luther, Schleiermacher, and Lonergan, taking a developmental perspective on how the question of God's saving work in Christ has evolved. More than just a historical review of ideas, it delves deeply into what is going forward methodologically and theologically in each of these authors.
Loewe cites the work of Gustav Aulén in the introduction. This reference is apt, since Loewe's book accomplishes the kind of broad sweep of history that Aulén's work, Christus Victor, did in its day. Published in 1931, Aulén's book set out a threefold typology of theories of salvation that influenced many generations. Lex Crucis does not directly challenge this typology, nor does it create new categories of soteriology to replace that typology. Nevertheless, the book traces shifts in meaning from one era to another in order to situate our theological tasks today.
The thread that carries the book forward is the stages of meaning as articulated in Bernard Lonergan's theological method. The three stages are common sense, theory, and interiority. Loewe understands Irenaeus’ work as within the mode of common sense in that his greatest accomplishment involved articulating a story of Christian salvation. Irenaeus did this over against the gnostic myth of salvation. He made his theological points by articulating a countermyth on which Christian orthodoxy might stake its claim to truth.
Anselm represents a first move toward explanatory theology, whereby what drives Anselm's inquiry is a search for ratio et necessitas—a reasoned argument to explain why God became human. Aquinas picks up Anselm's category of satisfaction but in his much more extensive quest for a coherent theological system nuances Anselm's accomplishment. His focus is not on the necessity of God's plan for reconciliation but on its fittingness, drawing out the supernatural work of grace through charity as the heart of the matter.
Anselm and Aquinas represent the shift from common sense, with its images and symbols, to systematic theology, with a need for precise terminology. While Luther's role in Christian theological history cannot be denied, his theology was not in the theoretical mode. Some (Aulén for one) see him as moving back to the world of common sense, in which the conversion of the believer is most salient. Loewe sees him, instead, as moving toward the modern era, in which the interior life of religious conversion becomes central to the theological task.
Schleiermacher makes explicit what Luther only intimates; he thematizes the source of theology as the religiously converted human. He represents the modern “turn to the subject” in theology. What is the ground from which faith emerges, either centuries ago or in believers’ lives today? While Schleiermacher clearly posed the question, his answer was mired in the “misadventures of modern thought since Descartes” (11). Loewe's final chapter deals with Lonergan's analysis of interiority as well as his Latin works on soteriology, integrating the two to reveal an empirically based but theologically nuanced account of human aspiration, sin, and redemption.
Several things commend this book. It is evident that Loewe has worked extensively with the primary sources of each author he reviews. He has uncovered the questions that drove each of these theologians in his era. His heuristic categories aid his work but do not dominate; his historical scholarship is evident in its own right. In addition, each chapter includes a careful review of the interpreters of the primary authors, sorting out the issues that drive differing assessments of these theologians in their traditions (for example, Luther and his Lutheran interpreters). The chapter on Lonergan is a tour de force, in which Loewe deftly connects Lonergan's Latin work, written in Scholastic mode, with his later articulation of human consciousness, generalized empirical method, and a theory of history.
I would add only a few further points. The book lacks an index, which reduces its usefulness. In addition, the concept of realms of meaning as driving the development of soteriology would have been clearer if each chapter more explicitly discussed how it illustrates the realm of meaning it represents; a conclusion to each chapter and/or an epilogue drawing it all together would have helped. That said, the introduction becomes the key to the book and should be read carefully before, during, and after working through the substance of each chapter.
In conclusion, Lex Crucis is meticulously researched, deftly written, and well worth a thorough read.
