Abstract
Matera earned his Ph.D. at Union Theological Seminary in Virginia in 1981 and then went on to have a distinguished career at the Catholic University of America from 1988 until his retirement in 2012. The author of standard texts on New Testament ethics and New Testament theology, as well as commentaries on Galatians, Second Corinthians, and Romans, Matera is known for his solid and careful scholarship communicated in clear, readable, succinct prose—all on display in God’s Saving Grace. In it he seeks to demonstrate the theological coherence within and the theological interrelationships among the Pauline letters, without engaging in harmonization of the diverse texts.
After an introductory chapter on the book’s subject and approach, each of the seven main chapters focuses on one aspect of Pauline theology, with each chapter title containing the key words “saving grace”: first Paul’s experience of that grace, and then Christology, anthropology/soteriology, ecclesiology, ethics, eschatology, and theology proper (the doctrine of God). Each chapter concludes with a helpful section called “Coherence and Meaning in Pauline [Topic]” and a bibliography for further reading. In an age of gigantic Pauline theologies, this work of succinct prose provides substantive information and insight in an economy of space.
Matera argues at length in ch. 2 that the Pauline corpus attributes Paul’s vocation, gospel, and theology, beginning with its emphasis on grace, to his conversion/call. This claim, which is also woven throughout the book, allows for development in Paul’s theology, but the essentials, Matera contends, are rooted in that initial Christophany; it is the “generative center” of Pauline theology (p. 11). The emphasis on grace, and on the central gospel affirmations of Christ’s death and resurrection, permeates all of the Pauline letters. Thus Pauline theology is deeply personal, rooted in Paul’s experience of grace and transformation. Implicit in this approach, I would suggest, is the conclusion that all good preaching and teaching of Pauline theology should be similarly grounded.
As Matera proceeds through each chapter, he considers both some of the distinctive contributions of particular letters and the major recurring themes within each topic, generally looking first at the undisputed letters, then at Colossians and Ephesians, and finally at the Pastorals. Even when discussing the undisputed letters, he appropriately notes differences among them, reminding us that Paul wrote occasional letters, not systematic treatises.
Overall, Matera succeeds admirably in providing a solid synthesis of Pauline theology that finds coherence among the writings even while respecting varying degrees of diversity on the central theological topics. This strength of the book will be especially helpful to preachers and teachers who want to understand Pauline theological themes in general, or those that surface in a particular Pauline text, while also paying close attention to the ancient pastoral situations that generated interest in such themes. For example, in discussing Christ’s preexistence (ch. 3), Matera provides succinct but clear exegetical analyses of the relevant poetic texts while connecting each to its own rhetorical and pastoral contexts. Similarly, he does an excellent job of showing how various Pauline texts about the human condition apart from Christ (ch. 4) and about eschatology (ch. 7) correspond to the differing pastoral contexts that needed to be addressed. Yet in each chapter, Matera helpfully identifies several consistent themes within the texts that give Pauline anthropology or eschatology (or whatever topic) its coherence and theological significance. Implicit in this approach, I think, is a summons to preachers and teachers of the Pauline letters both to appreciate and to imitate this pastoral way of doing theology without forsaking the gospel’s central convictions.
The book’s chapters cover the standard topics in Pauline theology, yet with more attention than normal on the foundational but oft-neglected topic of God (ch. 8). This discussion is particularly welcome, and particularly rich. With respect to the traditions of Israel concerning God, Matera finds both continuity and discontinuity within the Pauline corpus, since Paul’s experience of Christ has reconfigured his understanding of God, especially as the God revealed in suffering and weakness. And because of Christ and the Spirit, Paul’s God is implicitly Trinitarian.
Matera’s treatment of Christology (ch. 3) is focused on three areas: christological titles, preexistence, and Christ as a corporate figure. In this chapter he unfortunately suggests that christos is more like a name for Paul than a strongly Jewish title (though Matera does argue that it means God’s eschatological agent of redemption). This claim is common, as Matera notes, but has now been vigorously and convincingly rebutted by N. T. Wright in Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Fortress, 2013). On the other hand, Matera argues persuasively for a “high Christology” that includes Christ’s preexistence and his post-resurrection status as kyrios, which means his possession of the name of YHWH. The full theological implications of Jesus as kyrios are underdeveloped, however, and the potential political significance is not addressed at all.
This inattention to the theopolitical dimension of Pauline theology is perhaps the book’s one major disappointment. While there have certainly been some recent extreme interpretations that have overly politicized Paul to the detriment of his theological concerns, in reality politics was too intermingled with theology in Paul’s world to be neglected in a theological treatment of the Pauline correspondence. This neglect surfaces in the treatment not only of kyrios, but also of “Messiah” and “gospel.”
Matera’s treatment of Pauline soteriology (ch. 4), especially justification, combines aspects of both older and newer perspectives: justification is primarily a juridical term meaning “acquittal,” but it also implies transformation; Paul refers to Christ’s death as “the faith(fulness) of Christ”; and “works of the law” include not only boundary markers like circumcision but also all attempts at law-keeping. This chapter attempts, with some success, to indicate the inseparable connection between justification and sanctification in Paul, but clinging to the juridical model of justification will always impede a satisfactory interpretation of Pauline soteriology.
The theme of grace is as powerful in this treatment of the Pauline letters as in any I know (e.g., “From start to finish, all is grace,” p. 10). And yet this is not a cheap grace, but one in which grace received and grace embodied—in Spirit-filled, Christlike living—are inseparable. Matera artfully demonstrates the richness of Pauline ethical thinking (ch. 7) in his consideration of five different perspectives that inform Pauline ethics: soteriology, pneumatology, the sacraments, the love command, and eschatology. Christology permeates all five perspectives, Christ’s self-giving love as the fundamental pattern of the Pauline ethic. Matera also perceptively notes that the Pauline corpus maintains a balance between individual responsibility for ethics and the ecclesial context in which believing existence is actualized (ch. 6, on the church as people of God and body of Christ).
My primary disagreement with Matera’s treatment of Pauline ethics is that he over-estimates the value of the language of “indicative and imperative” for describing the structure of Pauline ethics. It is better understood, I would propose, in terms of narrative and participation—that is, as ongoing participation in the community shaped by the story of the crucified Messiah who lives within the community and in whom the community lives. This theme is present in Matera’s work, but it does not constitute for him the primary structure of Pauline ethics.
Others will likely flag another issue in the chapter on ethics: Matera does not deal with the apparent discrepancies between the undisputed Pauline letters and, say, the household codes of Colossians and Ephesians or certain admonitions in the Pastorals. These kinds of texts are precisely what gives readers pause at one of Matera’s basic claims: that the disputed letters “are essentially faithful to the thought and theology” of Paul himself (p. 13). Without denying the significance of this lacuna in the book, we should nonetheless be grateful for Matera’s overall masterly attempt at a very challenging task: to respect diversity in the search for coherence in the theology of the Pauline letters, and to articulate that dynamic relationship with insight—and grace.