Christian systematic theology has seen a recent spate of novel defenses for the viability, and even the necessity, of penal substitutionary theories of the atonement (PSA). Long maligned as incoherent, infeasible, or undesirable, PSA’s contemporary advocates have adopted varied approaches to revive the theory which have, in turn, brought on renewed debate surrounding it. This panel participates in that debate by offering four views from across its dialogical spectrum. Jansen draws attention to a fundamental issue in the relationship between divine retributive justice and increasingly common penal consequences interpretations of PSA. Namely, that Christ does not actually satisfy the demands of retributive justice on such accounts. Davis similarly addresses the issue of Christ’s ability to satisfy retributive justice but though the lens of legal analysis via relevant elements of common law (e.g., the felony murder rule), arguing that there are unevaluated ethical implications in penal consequence interpretations. Turning to engage a distinctly Trinitarian question, Peppiatt asks how the, often ignored, role of the Holy Spirit in the crucifixion might shape our understanding of the suffering of the Son specifically in relation to punishment. Finally, Holmes contends that post-Ritschl critiques of PSA fail because their internal logic too often differs from that of its defenders, ultimately resulting in argumentative non-sequiturs.Chair: Hannah James (University of St Andrews) Speakers:Danielle Jansen (University of St Andrews), Retributive Justice and the Penal Substitute: The Failure of Retributive Justice in the Penal Consequence Account of Penal Substitutionary AtonementAaron Davis (University of St Andrews), Upon Him Was the Punishment? A New Legal Consideration for Penal SubstitutionLucy Peppiatt (Westminster Theological Centre), Perspectives on Suffering and Punishment through the Lens of Christ and the SpiritStephen Holmes (University of St Andrews), Three Forms of Union, or, Why Modern Critiques of Penal Substitution (almost) Invariably Fail