Theology Today

Dr. Jonathan Lee Walton's inaugural address as President of Princeton Theological Seminary presents a critical engagement with the narratives of religious decline, particularly in the context of American Protestantism. Challenging the cultural and class-based origins of “mainline” Protestant identity, Walton critiques the limitations of meritocratic structures that dominate both religious and societal frameworks. Drawing from the parable of the banquet in Luke 14, Walton argues for a reimagined theological and educational mission—one that expands the “table of possibility” by inviting those marginalized by traditional hierarchies. This address situates Princeton Seminary as a vital force in shaping a more inclusive, accessible theological education. Walton articulates the urgency of bridging the gap between historical privilege and contemporary spiritual hunger, highlighting the Seminary's role in cultivating moral imagination, advancing hybrid and flexible educational models, and addressing global challenges of justice and faith. Through this, he advocates for a Seminary that remains grounded in its mission while boldly adapting to serve a diverse and evolving world. This work contributes to ongoing theological discourse on institutional adaptation, ecclesiastical inclusivity, and the redefinition of religious leadership in the twenty-first century.

This address explores the nature of biblical metaphor for the divine, both in broad terms and specifically in terms of the Sodom and Gomorrah story in Genesis 18–19. Drawing some threads from this exploration, the piece concludes with reflections on the current conflict in Gaza.

Dr. Smith argues admirably for complex, non-binary thinking. In analyzing current attacks on Gaza, though, he fails to exhibit that complexity. He caricatures US pro-Palestinian movements and masks Israel's wildly disproportionate retaliation to Hamas's October 7 attack. Smith oversimplifies, first, with his own binary: “Israel, the United States and their supporters” versus “Hamas and its Palestinian allies” (including “Hezbollah and the Houthis”). Palestinian allies are rendered indistinct from those waging “terrible violence.” This misrepresents Palestinian allies as simply pro-Hamas, not as resisters to US-backed Israeli genocide. Smith's binary also forecloses seeing positive roles played by Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. In a second oversimplification, Smith pleas for remembering “the suffering of all parties,” but fails to see that doing so requires our giving an asymmetrical preference to Gazans suffering genocidal assault. Third, Smith sees “some of the animus” leading to encampments for Palestine as being antisemitic. Without acknowledging any virtue to the encampments, Smith's mention here of antisemitism reinforces reactive attacks on them as “antisemitic.” Fourth, Smith's concluding questions chastise encampments for neglecting other struggles, for Syria, the Sudan, Blacks, and LGBTQ + persons. This neglects the ways these struggles have been, in fact, vital to Palestinian activism.

This piece is a response to Mark Taylor's response to my Convocation address at the opening of this academic year this past September.

The complex and multifaceted emotion of anger is a prevalently observed and appropriate response from those recovering from the trauma of sexual violence. However, despite the prevalence, anger has traditionally been perceived and rendered as a negative emotion or maladaptive symptom which needs to be denied, suppressed, or avoided. Hindrances to a timely and healthy communication of anger can lead to debilitating effects on the well-being of the survivors complicating the already treacherous journey of their recovery. Historically, women are subjected to more socially limiting constraints to suppress anger and this constrictive pressure is equally, if not more acutely, experienced by Christian women from the traditional theological rendering of the emotion. This is unfortunate, as church communities can be an especially powerful healing resource for Christian women survivors in their arduous journey of recovery. In this article, I will first examine the role of anger in the recovery from sexual trauma before turning to focus on the theological understanding of the emotion. Having clarified the theological understanding by reflecting on how anger has been portrayed and understood within the biblical texts, I will then explore how faith communities can become more hospitable and faithful places in supporting those struggling along the complex and challenging journey towards hope and healing.

Expert reports and studies have left the victims of church sexual abuse, in particular, but also church communities and the surrounding political and social entities dissatisfied. There is therefore a need to introduce a broader range of forms of reappraisal. In this context, adopting an ethical perspective can make a decisive contribution to addressing the problem of the prioritization of external perspectives, by introducing a programmatic approach to the subject that can be justified from the perspective of theological ethics. The unavoidability of the subject as a criterion for the so-called processing of sexual violence in ecclesiastical contexts will be justified here methodologically through an appeal to Reformed theology rooted in Zwingli. In this way, a broader theological consensus should be reached, as strong conceptions of the subject, as in liberal theology, are confronted with the problem of an excessively strong and not vulnerable position of the subject. A new, subject-oriented focus on individuals who have been the target of sexualized violence in church contexts entails a reversal of the previous way of looking at the vulnerability of sexual abuse and how a reappraisal might happen (if at all). The dominant practice so far has been for churches, investigating authorities, and researchers to address questions to victims of sexualized violence. However, there are specifically ethical reasons for adopting another, more subject-based perspective to at least the same extent. However, this has rarely been the case in practice.

This article examines Reinhold Niebuhr’s understanding of tolerance as a response, in significant part, to the epistemic distortions that inhibit the self’s comprehension of truth. His concept of tolerance emphasizes its subjective dimension, and involves a recognition of tendencies of the self to favor its own preferences and perspectives. Acknowledgment of one’s preferential perspectives requires self-critical scrutiny in light of what Niebuhr sees as the paradoxical character of truth. While he proposes a provocative basis for tolerance that deserves renewed attention, he does not address some of its practical challenges, such as distinguishing the tolerable from the intolerable. Nevertheless, Niebuhr’s notion of tolerance contributes to a deepened understanding of its grounding in the capabilities and constraints of selfhood.

The aim of this article is to first investigate the history of the English usage of “atonement” as a theological term and the confusion caused by it, uncovering the cause of this confusion. Secondly, it examines how the original interpersonal concept of the term was lost and explores the recovery of the original concept and its influence. Finally, it introduces the fact that the concept of personality was lost in Japanese translation and highlights its contemporary issues. The term “atonement,” originally created as a translation of the Latin word “reconciliation,” lost its connection to its original concept. This article demonstrates that the cause lies in the history of English Bible translation. Firstly, it confirms the understanding of the term as translated by William Tyndale. Tyndale originally used atonement to mean “recovery of a relationship between people” in the New Testament, but the Old Testament uses the same word to mean “expiation.” However, the Bible translators after him starting with translation of the Old Testament, were likely not aware of the theological intent in its Old Testament use, and automatically limited its use to “expiation”. Then, it acknowledges that due to the limited use of atonement in the King James Version and the Geneva Bible, which adopted only the passages used by Tyndale in the Old Testament, the personal concept of reconciliation was lost from atonement and was replaced with the word “expiation.” Furthermore, it confirms that this understanding of atonement has persisted in Bible translations to this day. However, it points out that since F. D. Maurice, related concepts have been reintroduced, leading to a flourishing of theological studies on atonement. Finally, it reports that a similar process has occurred in Japanese translation. This study offers a valuable contribution to modern theology of the atonement.

A twofold sensitivity characterizes Christianity. One is sensitivity to its inner core and the other is sensitivity to its surrounding culture in which it lives and communicates its message. The inner core is the person of Jesus Christ whom his followers experienced as utterly human and completely divine. This is the heart of Christian spirituality. It found its creedal expression in terms of one person having two natures. Although the different creedal statements responded to various Christological controversies and remained faithful to its inner core, neither understanding nor communicating one person having two natures has been easy. Matters came to a head with the anthropocentric turn of the modern period. Friedrich Schleiermacher showed his sensitivity to the changed culture, only to be castigated by Karl Barth for not being sensitive to the inner core. This article argues that studies in nature-mysticism found in the contemporary world enable us to understand the ancient metaphysical terminology of one-person two-natures and also maintain the twofold sensitivity. I do this by using the category of “person-mysticism.” “Person-mysticism” is about encountering God in another human person, understood as an extension of “nature-mysticism” that involves encountering the divine in nature.

In a postmodern world marked by diverse perspectives and skepticism, preaching can be enriched by embracing the Bible’s “grand narrative” of creation, fall, and redemption. This metanarrative provides a unifying framework that connects individual passages, revealing their coherence and relevance within the broader biblical story. By highlighting these connections, preachers help postmodern listeners see the bigger picture, making isolated passages more meaningful. Postmodernism often breeds skepticism about absolute truth. However, by presenting the Bible as a coherent story that addresses humanity’s fundamental questions, preachers can engage with doubt while pointing to a greater narrative that offers meaning and purpose. In a context where stories are valued, the grand narrative offers an effective structure for preaching. Preachers can use biblical narratives to illustrate and embody the larger story, making their message relatable and engaging. Ultimately, the Bible’s grand narrative provides a compelling foundation for preaching in a postmodern world. By weaving together themes of creation, fall, and redemption, preachers can offer a coherent, relevant, and hopeful message that speaks to the deepest longings and questions of postmodern listeners.

Feasts and festivals enliven the Christian life. Given Easter, Christmas and Pentecost cluster around the nineteen weeks of Christmastide and Eastertide, the thirty-three weeks of ordinary time are disconnected from these celebrations. The theological impact is considered in light of Amy Plantinga Pauw's wisdom ecclesiology. For Pauw, the church has largely neglected the ordinary-time dimension of the Christian life. The result is a Christian life disconnected from creaturely existence and God's ongoing work of creation. This article explores the possibility of ordinary-time festivals as a way to embody Pauw's wisdom ecclesiology. A harvest festival in Scotland, a spin and fibre festival in Australia and a local community festival in Aotearoa New Zealand are analysed. These festivals are argued to embody Pauw's themes of making new, longing, giving, suffering, rejoicing and joining hands. Hence, ordinary-time festivals offer ecclesiologically formed ways for the church to embody wisdom ecclesiology. They enable a theological, formed way of joining hands with God's ongoing work in creation during ordinary time.