Victories can be devastating when they come at bitter cost. Yet both our losses and our costly victories are put into a new perspective when we take refuge in and receive the bread of God.
How can community be grounded, if neither in force nor in love? To find out, we must reckon with Arendt’s reading of Augustine, for whom love and force were intimately intertwined.
Nathan’s courageous condemnation of King David’s sin is a timely example of court prophecy faithfully performed.
If we are to attend to, much less celebrate, the difference between the who and the what – as we hope to do in our work – then love may be more trouble than its worth.
Pope Paul VI’s 1964 encyclical Ecclesiam Suam is largely neglected in contemporary theological discussions, but ought to be an important resource for Catholic political theology.
“Organizing is very hard work. You might not see a result right away. But with enough education and consistency you can move the needle. And it also shows how refugee and immigrant communities, with the right information and with time, they become parts of the community.”
In a world where the market is the foundation, can there be love in politics?
The story of David and Bathsheba is a story of power’s corruption and of the cover-ups of abuse—a story with considerable resonance in our own day.
Many white evangelicals seem not to realize that American democracy has also been good for American Christianity and that too close an association between worldly and spiritual power will ultimately diminish both.
The power of state in both Greco-Roman times as well as today hinges upon a hierarchal power structure. Jesus, however, calls us to compassion in a horizontal social structure.
The Prophet Amos employs the plumb line as a powerful metaphor for justice in society.
Does theology aid or hinder memory work vis-à-vis structural wrongs? What fresh theological framework may political theology employ for assistance in transformative memory work?