Amazon.com Widgets

Frank Macchia’s Justified in the Spirit, reviewed by John Poirier

| November 20, 2012 | 11 comments

Macchia’s expanding use of the term “justification” could be both good and bad. It is good in the sense that Macchia isn’t forcing pneumatology in where it doesn’t belong (as I think others sometimes do), but it’s bad in that it relies a little on a trick of the light in order to do what the book claims to be doing. It appears that Macchia doesn’t so much find an increased role for the Spirit within the Christian doctrine of justification, but rather that he increases the territory covered by that doctrine until it includes the Spirit. There is one significant exception to this: where many Pentecostal scholars construe the baptism of the Spirit in Acts 2 as an empowerment for mission, Macchia takes a more traditionally Protestant approach by linking the gift of the Spirit in that context more directly with justification. Unfortunately, Macchia does not admit to the reader that he is in this sense being less representative of Pentecostalism. In fact, he hides from view the fact that a debate over Acts 2 even exists.

These quibbles do not detract from what is otherwise a fine book. The reader will learn a lot about the differences between historic theological traditions, as well as the contributions of a number of important theological figures. The reader will have to look elsewhere, however, to find a true “Pentecostal” discussion of Acts 2.

Reviewed by John C. Poirier

Publisher’s page and preview: www.eerdmans.com/Products/3749/justified-in-the-spirit.aspx

Page 2 of 2«12

Tags: creation, Holy Spirit, justification, pneumatology, redemption, salvation, soteriology, trinity

Category: Fall 2012, In Depth

About the Author: John C. Poirier, Th.M. (Duke Divinity), D.H.L. (Jewish Theological Seminary), is an independent scholar who has published numerous articles on a wide range of topics. He is the author of The Invention of the Inspired Text: Philological Windows on the Theopneustia of Scripture (2021).

Bibliata TV says:

June 3, 2014 at 6:31 am

Not quite sure that the critique is offered from a lack of knowledge, but again the author may do a much better job explaining why…

Pneuma Review says:

June 3, 2014 at 6:30 am

Monte Lee Rice wrote: “If I have more immediate time, I would write a more ‘pro-Macchian’ review on Frank Macchia’s book, but nonetheless, John Poirier’s review provides some opportunity to hear and dialogue with a more critical yet thoughtful perspective.”

Pneuma Review says:

June 3, 2014 at 6:30 am

We are pleased to hear from Frank Macchia, who responded to Monte Rice’s comment about the review by John Poirier:

“Thanks for posting this Monte; I wasn’t aware of it. The author asks thoughtful and legitimate questions. His two main concerns seem to be: 1) Do I ‘hide’ from the reader the significance of ‘subsequence’ with regard to Spirit baptism? 2) Do I expand the terrain of justification too broadly? As to the first, I do not gloss over the issue of subsequence; I deal with it. My only point is that an emphasis on this issue often serves to ‘hide’ a deeper distinctive that I myself was somewhat surprised to find in my research, namely, how fundamentally pneumatological pentecostal soteriology was from the beginning (including how Pentecostals tended to write about justification). Spirit baptism ends up casting its light backwards and forwards so as to enlighten how Pentecostals viewed the entire Christian life (as a life turned into a vessel of the Spirit in the world). Second, I do not so much expand justification as resist the compartmentalization of various soteriological categories; they are all overlapping and mutually enlightening. Barth has influenced me to think in such expansive theological categories. But my case is most basically informed exegetically (as the author of the review admits and likes). So I guess if someone disagrees, they will need to do so by dealing with my exegesis. Of course, I am happy to have this conversation.”

It is a real privilege to hear back from authors and PneumaReview.com invites readers to join the conversation.

William Molenaar says:

June 3, 2014 at 6:30 am

Macchia hides nothing. Poirier must not be familiar with Macchia’s earlier work in 2006, Baptized in the Spirit, where Macchia has already written a whole book dedicated to addressing all of Poirier’s concerns (which Macchia points to his earlier work for further clarification in Justified by the Spirit). So, Poirier’s critique is due to his lack of familiarity with Macchia’s previous book.

I find Macchia’s actual arguments in this book, Justified in the Spirit, compelling. Poirier is also wrong about Macchia, when he says, “It appears that Macchia doesn’t so much find an increased role for the Spirit within the Christian doctrine of justification, but rather that he increases the territory covered by that doctrine until it includes the Spirit.” It’s just the opposite (and I don’t see how Poirier missed this), its precisely because Macchia finds an increased role for the Spirit in the doctrine of justification (in Scripture, and some significant theologians in the past have as well–which he demonstrates), that he increases the territory covered by that doctrine (traditional Catholic and traditional Reformed formulations) until it includes the Spirit!

Don Kammer says:

June 3, 2014 at 6:30 am

I posted the below comment on Facebook last month regarding this book review. I don’t believe the reviewer grasps the significance of the Macchia book, especially its subtle role as a refined bridge to ecumenical dialogue, grafting a brilliant pneumatological perspective into the long standing theological debate on justification within Christian churches.

I wrote: The review might have been more positive, especially when one considers comments of scholars, such as….University of Tubingen theologian Jurgen Moltmann who commented, “it is a necessary and new perspective to see the justification of the sinner embraced by the life-giving Spirit. Frank Macchia’s book is a great step forward toward a full Trinitarian concept of salvation….A rich book full of solutions to old theological problems.” Macchia also secured three other systematic theologians to add comments pointing to a bridge and portent of a Spirit oriented theology of justification securing a solution to the old justification problem which divides and defines both Catholic and Protestant doctrine. Pentecostal, Veli-Matti Karkkainen from Fuller and Helsinki, Lutheran, William G Rusch from Yale Divinity, and Catholic, Ralph Del Colle are three systematic theologians who offer very positive reviews too. Honestly, I think this book is one of the best bridges to a Pentecostal theology, which of course means experience, that I’ve seen in decades. So, I am quite taken at the failure of the review to see this.”

Lastly, I strongly urge scholars and thinkers on the fringe of the ever growing and wildly divergent Pentecostal-charismatic universe to give this book a shot. It communicates in an irenic vernacular, which joins the ancient intellectual struggle of the faithful to understand our relationship to the All Mighty. Indeed, Justified in the Spirit will continue to have increasing relevance as these burgeoning movements of the Spirit mature.

Pneuma Review says:

March 1, 2014 at 8:06 pm

Thank you for adding joining the conversation, Don Kammer.

Don Kammer says:

February 26, 2014 at 2:19 am

I posted the below comment on Facebook last month regarding this very limited effort at a book review. I don't believe the reviewer grasps the significance of the Macchia book, especially its subtle role as a refined bridge to ecumenical dialogue, grafting a brilliant pneumatological perspective into the long standing theological debate on justification within Christian churches.

I wrote: The review might have been more positive, especially when one considers comments of scholars, such as….University of Tubingen theologian Jurgen Moltmann who commented, "it is a necessary and new perspective to see the justification of the sinner embraced by the life-giving Spirit. Frank Macchia's book is a great step forward toward a full Trinitarian concept of salvation….A rich book full of solutions to old theological problems." Macchia also secured three other systematic theologians to add comments pointing to a bridge and portent of a Spirit oriented theology of justification securing a solution to the old justification problem which divides and defines both Catholic and Protestant doctrine. Pentecostal, Veli-Matti Karkkainen from Fuller and Helsinki, Lutheran, William G Rusch from Yale Divinity, and Catholic, Ralph Del Colle are three systematic theologians who offer very positive reviews too. Honestly, I think this book is one of the best bridges to a Pentecostal theology, which of course means experience, that I've seen in decades. So, I am quite taken at the failure of the review to see this."

Lastly, I strongly urge scholars and thinkers on the fringe of the ever growing and wildly divergent Pentecostal-charismatic universe to give this book a shot. It communicates in an irenic vernacular, which joins the ancient intellectual struggle of the faithful to understand our relationship to All Mighty. Indeed, Justified in the Spirit will continue to have increasing relevance as these burgeoning movements of the Spirit mature.

Pneuma Review says:

February 16, 2014 at 12:14 am

We are pleased to hear from Frank Macchia, who responded to Monte Rice's comment about the review by John Poirier:

"Thanks for posting this Monte; I wasn't aware of it. The author asks thoughtful and legitimate questions. His two main concerns seem to be: 1) Do I 'hide' from the reader the significance of 'subsequence' with regard to Spirit baptism? 2) Do I expand the terrain of justification too broadly? As to the first, I do not gloss over the issue of subsequence; I deal with it. My only point is that an emphasis on this issue often serves to 'hide' a deeper distinctive that I myself was somewhat surprised to find in my research, namely, how fundamentally pneumatological pentecostal soteriology was from the beginning (including how Pentecostals tended to write about justification). Spirit baptism ends up casting its light backwards and forwards so as to enlighten how Pentecostals viewed the entire Christian life (as a life turned into a vessel of the Spirit in the world). Second, I do not so much expand justification as resist the compartmentalization of various soteriological categories; they are all overlapping and mutually enlightening. Barth has influenced me to think in such expansive theological categories. But my case is most basically informed exegetically (as the author of the review admits and likes). So I guess if someone disagrees, they will need to do so by dealing with my exegesis. Of course, I am happy to have this conversation."

It is a real privilege to hear back from authors and PneumaReview.com invites readers to join the conversation.

Pneuma Review says:

February 16, 2014 at 12:06 am

Monte Lee Rice wrote: "If I have more immediate time, I would write a more 'pro-Macchian' review on Frank Macchia's book, but nonetheless, John Poirier's review provides some opportunity to hear and dialogue with a more critical yet thoughtful perspective."

Bibliata TV says:

February 11, 2014 at 3:21 pm

Not quite sure that the critique is offered from a lack of knowledge, but again the author may do a much better job explaining why…

William Molenaar says:

February 11, 2014 at 1:20 pm

Macchia hides nothing. Poirier must not be familiar with Macchia's earlier work in 2006, Baptized in the Spirit, where Macchia has already written a whole book dedicated to addressing all of Poirier's concerns (which Macchia points to his earlier work for further clarification in Justified by the Spirit). So, Poirier's critique is due to his lack of familiarity with Macchia's previous book.

I find Macchia's actual arguments in this book, Justified in the Spirit, compelling. Poirier is also wrong about Macchia, when he says, "It appears that Macchia doesn’t so much find an increased role for the Spirit within the Christian doctrine of justification, but rather that he increases the territory covered by that doctrine until it includes the Spirit." It's just the opposite (and I don't see how Poirier missed this), its precisely because Macchia finds an increased role for the Spirit in the doctrine of justification (in Scripture, and some significant theologians in the past have as well–which he demonstrates), that he increases the territory covered by that doctrine (traditional Catholic and traditional Reformed formulations) until it includes the Spirit!

Frank Macchia’s Justified in the Spirit, reviewed by John Poirier

Connect with PneumaReview.com

Recent Comments

Featured Authors

Recent Posts

Archives

Frank Macchia’s Justified in the Spirit, reviewed by John Poirier

Related articles:

Connect with PneumaReview.com

Recent Comments

Featured Authors

Recent Posts

Archives