A Theology of Grace in Six Controversies by the late American Jesuit Edward Oakes, SJ (1948–2013), proves a daunting book to review because of the breadth of learning and erudition of its author, a prodigious theologian who wrote approximately 500 indexed pieces of writing in twenty-five years. Equally daunting is the task Oakes sets out for himself in this, his last and posthumous book from Eerdmans Interventions (a series dedicated to countering contemporary nihilism, reductionism, and the “accommodationist impulse” in theology). That task is to analyze and solve the major problems in theological anthropology. Yet, given Oakes’ talent and expertise, one could argue that he may be perhaps one of the very few theologians in the English-speaking world who could pull off such an endeavor.

As the title indicates, the monograph divides the topic of theological anthropology into six distinct yet related controversies, each with its respective chapter. In each chapter, save chapter 5, Oakes put forth his own “champion” to help solve what he calls the “antinomies” of each controversy.

Chapter 1 lays out the protracted nature-grace debates between the extrinsicists (i.e., neo-Thomistic manualists) and the intrinsicists (DeLubac) Here Oakes relies upon the nineteenth-century German theologian Matthias Joseph Scheeben and his theology of “nuptial union” to bring nature and grace together. Oakes believes that the debate can be resolved if one replaces the image of “architecture” with that of “love and marriage” (44). After delving into some of the more difficult passages in Paul's letter to the Romans and the debate that has raged since the time of the Reformation, that of justification in chapter 2, Oakes calls to light Saint Thérèse of Lisieux's own utterances of renunciation and abandonment to the loving mercy of Christ. Quoting the “Little Flower”: “I haven't any works! He will not be able to reward me ‘according to my works.’ Well then, He will reward me according to His works” (89). On the issue of original sin in chapter 3, after a thorough dismantling of Augustine's theory of “seminal transmission,” largely courtesy of N. P. Williams’ 1927 treatment of the subject, Oakes looks to various forms of magisterial teaching, from papal encyclicals to the Catechism, to argue for an understanding of original sin rooted not in Augustine's but in Christ's solidarity with humanity in both sin and salvation. Oakes then dives into the rather sticky issues of free will and predestination in chapter 4, problems especially perplexing to the Reformed tradition. Thus Oakes calls upon the preeminent Reformation theologian of the twentieth century, Karl Barth, and his well-known Christocentrism that puts forth Jesus Christ as the “ultimate Predestined One” who is both judged and judge, reprobate and elect. Chapter 5, as stated previously, has no champion. Instead Oakes here attempts a rapprochement between the West (Thomas) and the East (Palamas) regarding the nature of authentic theosis. Finally, Oakes takes up the question of Mary's Immaculate Conception by not only endorsing the classic Scotistic position but ingeniously appealing to the Reformation's insistence upon sola gratia.

Though Oakes utilizes a vast array of material and has his champions, the “real” champion one suspects undergirding these analyses and solutions is Hans Urs Von Balthasar. If there had been an index to the book, I have no doubt his name would appear more than any other. This makes eminently good sense, as Oakes has been, from the beginning to the end of his academic life, a chief expositor and translator of Von Balthasar, garnering him the title “the American Balthasar.” The chief shortcoming of the book concerns what might be called errors of omission. First, the title stands as a bit of a misnomer in that the book is largely a historical survey of the controversies, opting out of supplying a constructive or systematic theology of grace. Second, conspicuously absent from Oakes’ presentation is any consideration of Rahner's theology of grace—or any other post–Vatican II theology. Yet despite these criticisms, it remains a well-written and masterful book that deserves its place in the canon of modern texts in theological anthropology. Thus, professionals and perhaps graduate students will find it useful.