Online quizes and theological self-disclosure

So I found this theology quix online that will tell you wht theologian you are. What was most surprising to me was not that it told me I was Moltmann with a close Tillich second, but that I got 0% of Augustine. I have always thought that as a Protestant Augustine would always be in the back of my mind ruining my theological imagination, but apparently this survey has revealed that I may have escaped Augustine's clutches.

btw, there were no Trinity questions on the quiz and if you are a theolophile see if you can guess who the possible theologians are by the questions.

You scored as Jürgen Moltmann, The problem of evil is central to your thought, and only a crucified God can show that God is not indifferent to human suffering. Christian discipleship means identifying with suffering but also anticipating the new creation of all things that God will bring about. Jürgen Moltmann 100% Paul Tillich 73% Friedrich Schleiermacher 67% John Calvin 53% Charles Finney 53% Anselm 47% Martin Luther 40% Karl Barth 33% Jonathan Edwards 20% Augustine 0% Which theologian are you? created with QuizFarm.com

The Baptist Covenant and Exclusion

I was surprised to hear that the new Baptist Covenant decided that in the interest of unity they would excluded the participation of two 'pro-gay' groups. (Story Here) The Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (AWAB) and the Baptist Peace Fellowship of North America were told that they could not participate as groups, but that they could be present as individuals. This is surprisingly similar to the reasoning and language used to describe the participation of individual Southern Baptist churches and individuals, but not the convention as a whole. The difference being the Southern Baptist Convention doesn't want to be a part of it as a group and these two 'pro-gay' groups want to. Now I am not sure why I should be surprised, but I always hear the non-SBC Baptists talk about how they really believe in church autonomy and the beauty of our ability to participate with each other where we can, while respecting difference when necessary. If this is true why can't two 'pro-gay' groups think Jesus was on target when he preached his first sermon in Luke 4 (the theme for the whole event)? No 'pro-gay' group would come expecting that everyone there would agree with them, but that everyone present wants to cooperate in diversity to seriously follow the vision Jesus casts in Luke 4. Why can't groups who are not 'pro-gay' be as Baptist as the 'pro-gay' groups and come to celebrate and cooperate around the message of Jesus?

The New Baptist Covenant has posted the themes of the plenary sessions:
Unity in Seeking Peace with Justice
Unity in Bringing Good News to the Poor
Unity in Respecting Diversity
Unity in Welcoming the Stranger
Unity in Setting the Captive Free

Does anything stick out as odd if both our more conservative and 'pro gay' sisters and brothers in Christ can't be present as the groups they represent?

The Photographic Prophet and the Will-to-Heal

I love my church here in Winston. Over the last three years I have come across a number of prophets in the community. There were those who came to visit like James Forbes, “Buzz” Thomas, Paul Fiddes, and John Cobb. Then there are a bunch who serve, share, and worship with me each week. My favorite are the single women at least 40 years older than me, which is something I would not think I would ever say. This past week we had a new prophet in residence and it was one of the most refreshing and hope-filled moments I have had in a building with a steeple in a long time. Stewart Gerarad, a 24-yearold artist of the photographic variety, showed up with a sampling of the photos from his most recent collection on display here in Winston titled “Augmented Reality.” There was bit of news surrounding his exhibit after two photos with nudity in them were found in a closet. Apparently in the ‘Christian city of Winston, here in the Bible belt’ that kind of stuff shouldn’t be around. Aside from engaging in a debate of what classifies as art or the religiously imperialistic tone of the wanna-be ‘critic,’ I was struck by the insight of a number of comments Stewart made in a 30 minute interview with our Education minister Ken Myers. (Since its been a week I am not sure if he said what I am reporting during the public forum or afterwards in a conversation, but here we go. Plus other than what I wrote on 3x5 card the quotes are paraphrases)

Stewart, while not a church-goer since youth group, is not foreign to religion or the Christian faith. In fact he mentioned being ‘sword drill champion’ at his church growing up. In church speak that means he memorized a bunch of bible verses and knew the Protestant ordering of the two testaments. Point being, at some point he was heavily involved in his faith community. Ken asked him couple different ways why he wasn’t compelled to stay in a church to which he said, “When I got older I came to see that religion, at least how I had experienced growing up, wasn’t attached to the reality I was living in. Plus I did the whole Christian thing enough to have Jesus on tap.” Something that stuck out to me was his use of the word “pure.” He didn’t use it with a good protestant guilt complex, but as something treasured, valued, and even messily honest. In a response to a question about postmodernity and ‘why photography,’ he made a rather profound even prophetic observation about postmodern purity. There are a bunch of forms of art, most of which have a form of technical perfection. There are things like painting with a bunch of styles that you perfect the technique to do and then new digital based art that with the mastery of more technology there are more possibilities. Photography is simply the image. It is limited by what was actually present in history at the moment of the shot, it is limited by vision of a single lens, and is limited to the power present of a single sense, sight. The photo is pure in the postmodern sense. Stewart said, “technical perfection doesn’t mean a thing if you don’t get the image right.” Images are revelatory beyond the confines of technique and system, they reveal reality that is true but often ignored for the sterile, clean, edited, socialized, and manufactured existence we know. The stark difference Stewart saw between religion and reality was a prophetic judgment of our faith-imaging, not our religious speak that ‘sounds’ religion to the center of our life, but the substance in the religious images of our community. Where are the images of reality in religion? Is the religious reality imaginable? Bearable? Simply speakable?

When pressed by questions on how to get his postmodern people to church Stewart said, “I would think you should create a recovery zone that anyone can come to and those with the will-to-heal can find partners.” A pure community with postmodern sensitivity is one where the reality of life can find an open space to be as messily honest as need be and a community that encourages the will-to-heal. I imagine that this community is one where it is ok for the cross present and dirty or should I say pure.