It has been commonplace for over a century to argue that the distinctively Lutheran form of the communicatio idiomatum leads naturally to kenotic christology, divine passibility, or both. Although this argument has been generally accepted as a historical claim, has also been advanced repeatedly as a criticism of ‘classical theism’ and has featured significantly in almost all recent defences of divine passibility, I argue that it does not work: the Lutheran scholastics had ample resources drawn from nothing more than ecumenical trinitarian and christological dogma to defend their denial of the genus tapeinoticum. I argue further that this defence, if right, undermines a remarkably wide series of proposals in contemporary systematic theology.

Many people have argued that God experiences the suffering of the oppressed, but does divine solidarity liberate? This article answers this question with incarnation-focused sketches of the doctrines of salvation, atonement and mission: God gives life and communion with God and neighbour (salvation) by living and communing with us in Jesus Christ (atonement); and God continues to give life and restore communion as the Spirit sent by the Father joins us to God and each other in Jesus Christ (mission). These doctrines are made explicitly liberationist by emphasising the sociopolitical dimensions and imperatives of life and communion with God and neighbour.