Still working on the annual “re-decorating” finding the options and possibilities slightly over-whelming, but aside from that there is the very real issue of the visual “face” of the blog says a great deal about the blog. Over the course of the past few years the feel of the blog has (as you would expect) evolved, I hope for the better. I suspect what’s really happening here is that I’ve not sat down to consider the “what now” factor – where is the coming year of theo-blogging going to take us.

I’m in the process of re-decorating. Taking advantage of the fact that I’ve recently had to do some behind the scenes maintenance, and wanting to maximise the fullness of my chosen theme’s potential for the purposes of the site. Thus, over the next week or so you might see things changing colour, being stripped down, plastered with widgets, then stripped down again, scrambled, then re-ordered, etc. etc. until I get it right.

I’m sure there’s a theological lesson to be had here – but I’m too overwhelmed by the possibilities at the moment to find it. You’re welcome to leave your ideas in the comment box (grin).

Oh – and one more thing – Twitter followers please note that in a few days the user name for the blog’s Twitter account will change to match the blog.

We have successfully done some behind the scenes house-maintenance, and moved the blog from “standard” hosting to “cloud hosting” with Laughing Squid our provider (yes this is a plug for Laughing Squid – they offer a fantastic service). It took a bit longer than I anticipated – but that was down to me taking my time and making sure I did not ruin everything through blunder.

Now that the move is done its time to decorate. You may have noticed over the past week that the site has become rather . . . “grey” this was because I had a big clear out of unwanted plugins and unnecessary files, so as to not waste effort and storage space transferring unwanted junk. So hopefully you’ll see some improvements in the house over the next couple of weeks.

I just realised this morning that we’ve been working on this project, we call the “Theo-blog” for four years and . . .one month (well 4 years, 1 month, and 3 days) now. Happy birthday blog!

When I started this experiment back in April 2006 I never imagined that it would have the staying power that it has had. Why? Because blogging is fickle and most blogs are created, and abandoned within the first year or so (at least that’s what I’ve read) – and I did not expect that our effort here would be any different from “the norm” in this regard. Try it, see what happens, learn from it, maybe make some new connections with other interested folk and move on. That was the attitude I had coming into this.

So has it worked?

Well, yes, after a fashion. Through the connections we’ve made we’ve made new contacts in the Indie community. Through the process of writing, reflecting, and engaging with others doing the same thing about the same topics I’ve come to better understand the “why” and the “process” of some elements of theology and the history of the OC/IC movement. It has also occasionally made me think about things in entirely new ways, as well as changing my mind on long held assumptions.

So here’s to another four years, one month and three days . . .

A few weeks ago we had a thread going based on some reading I had done about how Liberal churches were sabatogeing themselves. Chris Tessone posted some thoughts on the thread and I’ve finally responded. You can see the entire thread by clicking here.

Last week I posted on the Pew Forum’s recent survey suggesting that a shockingly high proportion of Christians hold that torture is acceptable. In my post – I stated that this figure suggests that our preachers, teachers, and community organisers are not doing enough to convey the central Christian tenet – that suffering, to cause the suffering of others, is unacceptable.

This morning – while making my rounds – I stumbled across Sarah Sentilles essay: “Are Christians Theologically Prepared to Accept Torture?” over at Religion Dispatches. Sentilles makes the case that Americans have been prepared to approve the use of torture through their theological reference points; namely, the theology of the atonement, and the regular reference to Christ’s own torture. In this way there is a culture of acceptance that this act of torture (and death) is salvific – it saves others.

The doctrine of the atonement is a very Pauline idea (see Hebrews), and  is just one reference point answering the question “why the incarnation” (for another see Athanasius On the Incarnation, or Proklos of Constantinople Homily 4), but it is not one that was particularly popular in the Patristic period, nor is it one that I find I have a great deal of sympathy with (indeed I have real problems with it). My own theological conditioning then – my point of reference – would not have prepared me, indeed it did not prepare me, to assent to, or accept the viability of torture as a tactic to be practiced by Christian military officials, or a government claiming to be grounded in a Judeo-Christian ethic. An interesting idea to be sure – but this leaves us with the question of how the theory of the atonement, as a theological reference point, does condition it’s followers to accept torture. Moreover – how does this conditioning create a filter for other areas of suffering? Sentilles explores possible answers to the former in her essay. I sat and wondered about the latter for this post.

If we believe that Jesus came to end our suffering, and that it is our religious duty to strive to end (or prevent) the suffering of others – how then can we square this belief with an acceptance of torture? Curiously, now that I’m sitting here thinking about this, I am faced with the perplexing, anc commonly held “christian” belief that personal suffering is “good” for the soul; it has been over the centuries promoted as our own individual, mini-atonement. But is this really what Christ had in mind when he taught us to visit the sick, the lonely, and the imprisoned? If personal suffering is as good as we’ve been lead to believe, should we not then let the hungry go hungry, the lonely sit in their empty rooms alone, and the imprisioned be forgotten – so that they can “atone” for themselves, and for others through their “good suffering”?
My questions may not be as refined as Sentilles’ who extends her consideration of “conditioning” to ask a series of questions about the interrelationship of having the doctrine of the atonement as a theological starting point, and torture: “I do not presume to know the answers to these questions, but I hope Christian communities will be brave enough to ask them. I hope the results of the Pew survey will challenge Christians to ask difficult, critical, uncomfortable questions about what happens in churches on Sunday mornings. Despite our intentions, how might the words of our liturgies justify torture? How might the images hanging in our churches justify torture? How might our theology justify torture? How might the very symbols that give comfort also cause harm? What needs to change?”

Is the theory of the atonement as strong a reference point in our OC/IC communities as it is in say the Roman Catholic, or Evangelical community? If so – how does it affect our (normally) progressive theologies of social justice and healing? Have we unconsciously moved to a different theory – one that it might be useful to articulate because it would inspire further positive praxis on our part?

I was curious. I sought an answer. It slipped by and I did not even notice it at first. On 3 April this blog was 3 years old. Here’s the very first post (just in case you’re curious too).

I’ve tried to keep a rythm of blogging – to make it part of my weekly discipline. I think the hardest part of accomplishing that (reasonable?) goal is distraction, and even, occasionally, lack of inspiration. But many of you have been regulars, and patient one’s at that; for that – I thank you.

A few quick statistics about the blog. Over the last three years I’ve written 279 posts, and you’ve responded with 295 comments. Oh and I’ve ruthlessly filtered out over 3000 spams. The site is “visited” about 200 times a day (the “visited” figure is substantially smaller than the “hits” figure so I trust it more).

I’m interested to see what the next three years brings.

You may have noticed I’ve added a new page to the site? I’ve been seeing a number of ministry sources encouraging the use of social networking – especially Twitter. I’m not entirely convinced yet but I’m more than willing to give it a go: though I’m still reading to see if I can fully understand why Twitter is now ministry tool du jeur.

I can see two possible uses for this. First you get to peek behind the curtain to see what I’m thinking and what actually ends up on the site. Second if something you see there inspires you – then you can nudge me to post on it by responding either via Twitter, or the form (which will be inserted shortly).

Right, so here we are at the “theoblog” and testing the WordPress Wordbook plugin. In theory – a post here should also show up on Facebook.

After a few weeks of testing the new system on my personal blog and site; and spending some time thinking about the best method of consolidation and presentation, I’ve finally begun the process of moving the blog, the web pages, and the Indie Voices Archive to its new home. I’m hoping that I’ve given consideration to all the various pieces and parts and that you will see things appearing over the course of the next week or so.

I’ll set up the re-direct from the blogger account today. That appears to need a few days to kick in.

Thanks, everyone for your patience. I’m both excited about the move, and hopeful that it will make this project even more user friendly than before.