Recognizing our own abiding sinfulness and fallibility, and acknowledging the genuine evangelical standing of many who do not agree with all of our convictions, nevertheless, moved by the preceding observations and by the hope that the noble Biblical vision of sexual complementarity may yet win the mind and heart of Christ’s church, we engage to pursue the following purposes:

the church cares for the abused

church and ministry leaders have a special obligation to report abuse to civil authorities.

March 12, 2018

The good news echoes Chesterton’s assertion that the “Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult, and left untried.” Early in the book, Du Mez calls our attention to the oft-obscured reality that white American evangelicalism is not “the only possible interpretation of the historic Christian faith; the history of American Christianity itself is filled with voices of resistance and signs of paths not taken.”Reading between Du Mez’s lines means believing a more generous, balanced American Christianity is possible. A collective expression of faith that rejects patriarchy and shows of force has been left untried by too many white evangelicals. They have either been content to swim in this stream or felt afraid of what leaving the water might mean.Let those who have eyes to see and ears to hear understand what Du Mez—and our moment—tells us. The church will tell and live a better story when we move strongmen out of the frame to focus on the man of sorrows.

Researching and writing this book was in many ways a profoundly discouraging project. The corruption of the faith seemed so entrenched, so endemic to American evangelicalism, that I was left with little hope for change. After finishing the manuscript, my editor asked if I could leave readers with just a bit of hope. I thought about it for a bit, but concluded that no, I didn’t think that I could. A few days later the request came again: “Can you give us something?” It was then that I came up with the last sentence of the book. It felt too feeble at the time. But maybe it isn’t. Where do you find hope in this story?

As an older white southern male, weaned on evangelical Bible studies and teaching, it’s possible I’m part of the problem and that I have little ground from which to critique Du Mez’s argument. Hierarchy has its upsides, as I’ve enjoyed genuine privilege. And as one popular adage has it, when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

At the same time, Du Mez seems guilty of a bit of confirmation bias. If you’re hunting for white privilege and fragility, it’s not hard to find. Having announced her thesis about militant Christian-nationalist, male-patriarchal supremacy, she mines American history for classic deplorables

Potentially, there are two wrong responses. One is to double down on the hardcore militant masculinity that misuses power to silence people. Du Mez does a thorough job of showing the problems and damage that can result from this. The other mistake would be to roll over like a puppy and give up on what the Bible teaches about the different roles of men and women within marriage and within our churches.

Christians must be especially vigilant against preventing such evils since effective witness often depends on an honorable reputation.

if we insist upon emphasizing male authority, then we should realize that we can unintentionally enable abuse (often sexual abuse). Certainly, there is ample empirical evidence that religious authorities (male ones, mostly) have committed acts of sexual abuse. Such abuse is a danger inherent in any authoritative role. If a person is in a position of authority, there is a good chance it will be abused.

I question the prevailing assumption throughout the book that “patriarchy” somehow belongs to evangelical Christianity.

One of the reasons evangelical Christians insist so strongly on male headship is because they believe it is clearly taught in scripture. This scriptural interpretation is not some kind of newly invented construct designed to oppress women, but rather deference to an organic, long-standing authority.

Du Mez argues that Protestants’ initial positive reaction—or lack of any reaction—to the Roe v. Wade decision means that the more recent pro-life movement is just “white Christian patriarchy” asserting itself anew. A better treatment would dwell upon the hard work of Christians such as theologian Francis Schaeffer and future Surgeon General C. Everett Koop. These men worked tirelessly to convince evangelicals that it was morally imperative to protect the unborn

Du Mez’s book ignores the fact that icons of masculinity and strength served a very important cultural function for men who faced or could have faced combat.

She treats several mid- to late-twentieth-century evangelical figures unfairly.

But, in Du Mez’s book, the overt political agenda overwhelms its scholarly agenda.

Du Mez’s book belongs to a relatively new and evolving genre. This genre attempts to unmask the twentieth century evangelical Christian experience as more pernicious than it might appear to ordinary eyes.

Difference

Name Image Rating Definition Rating of the image by its user or supplier Implementation Note(s) The value shall be -1 or in the range 0..5. -1 indicates "rejected" and 0 "unrated". If an explicit value is missing the implicit default value is 0 should be assumed. Label Rating

Name Title Definition A shorthand reference for the digital image. Title provides a short human readable name which can be a text and/or numeric reference. It is not the same as Headline. Help Text Enter a short verbal and human readable name for the image, this may be the file name User Note(s) Many use the Title field to store the filename of the image, though the field may be used in many ways. Formal identifiers are provided by the Digital Image Id, or the Registry Entry property of the IPTC Extension.

Name Creator Definition Contains the name of the photographer, but in cases where the photographer should not be identified the name of a company or organisation may be appropriate. Help Text Enter the name of the person that created this image User Note(s) The creator can be expressed in a more controlled way using the "Image Creator" of PLUS in the IPTC Extension additionally. It is the user’s responsibility to keep the values of the IPTC Core and the PLUS fields in sync. Implementation Note(s) Note 1: Synchronising this Creator property with PLUS' Image Creator Name should be supported by software.

Name Copyright Notice Definition Contains any necessary copyright notice for claiming the intellectual property for this photograph and should identify the current owner of the copyright for the photograph. Other entities like the creator of the photograph may be added in the corresponding field. Notes on usage rights should be provided in "Rights usage terms". Help Text Enter a Notice on the current owner of the Copyright for this image, such as ©2008 Jane Doe User Note(s) Copyright ownership can be expressed in a more controlled way using the PLUS fields "Copyright Owner", "Copyright Owner ID", "Copyright Owner Name" of the IPTC Extension. It is the user’s responsibility to keep the values of the four fields in sync.

Name Headline Definition A brief synopsis of the caption. Headline is not the same as Title. Help Text Enter a brief publishable synopsis or summary of the contents of the image

Name Keywords Definition Keywords to express the subject of the image. Keywords may be free text and don’t have to be taken from a controlled vocabulary. Codes from the controlled vocabulary IPTC Subject NewsCodes must go to the "Subject Code" field. Help Text Enter any number of keywords, terms or phrases used to express the subject matter in the image. Implementation Note(s) Note 1: Single values of this field should not be restricted to single words but must allow for phrases as well.

Name Description Definition A textual description, including captions, of the image. Help Text Enter a "caption" describing the who, what, and why of what is happening in this image, this might include names of people, and/or their role in the action that is taking place within the image

Globalism, along with massive migrations, interethnic and racial conflict, and rapid growth in secularism/atheism all contribute to polarization and heightened levels of conflict

What Moltmann does not do justice to, however, is the anomalousness of the divine pain. ‘The self-sacrifice of love’, he writes, ‘is God’s eternal nature’.38 This gives the divine pain a degree of inevitability and normality which does not do justice to the perspectives of grace or to the discretionary nature of mercy. Nor does it take proper account of the reasons behind our instinctive aversion to the idea of divine passibility. Our instinct is that it is inconceivable that ‘the blessed God’ should suffer stress, disturbance or commotion. It is unthinkable that a frown should cross his face or a furrow wrinkle his brow. We know that in a normal universe God would be impassible. But the universe is not normal. It has been disrupted by sin; and sin is anomia (1 John), Once that anomia enters history it carries a thousand other anomalies in its train. It involves the whole creation in suffering. It involves God in the alien, distasteful work of condemnation. It involves God in pain. Any theodicy which relieves this tension is ipso facto discredited. Sin is that which absolutely ought not to be: and pain in God is that which absolutely ought not to be. The Crucified God is unthinkable. Sin (anomia) makes it possible, but nothing makes it logical, far less self-evident.

The Crucified God was published in 1972. ‘I wrote it’, said Moltmann later, ‘with my lifeblood.’24 More than any other of his works it reflects his personal vision of the theological task: ‘For me theology springs from a divine passion—it is the open wound of God in one’s own life and in the tormented men, women and children of this world’.25 Like the earlier work. Theology of Hope, it sees the whole of theology from a focal point: ‘For me the cross of Christ became the “foundation and critique of Christian theology’ ”.26 In particular, Moltmann wished to change from what he saw as the traditional preoccupation with what the cross meant for Jesus to what he saw as a revolutionary preoccupation with what it means for God: ‘Does an impassible God keep silent in heaven untouched by the suffering and death of his child on Golgotha, or does God himself suffer these pains and this death?’27 At the same time. Moltmann remained committed to his quest for a theodicy. ‘The Crucified God’, he wrote, ‘was also my attempt to find an answer for a life in Germany after Auschwitz’.28 At the heart of The Crucified God lies an emphatic rejection of the idea of divine impassibility

Moltmann finds that the rationale of the incarnation is not in sin, but in creation. At one level, it is the perfected self-communication of the triune God to his world.20 At another, it is a step taken ‘for the sake of perfecting creation’.21 This is linked to some dubious exegesis of the reference in Genesis 1:26–27 to humans being made in the image of God. Moltmann takes this as a promise: in Christ ‘we have the fulfilment of the promise made to man that he will be “the image of the invisible God” ’. It follows from this, according to Moltmann, that Christ is the true man and ‘it is therefore in union with him that believers discover the truth of human existence’.22

This central emphasis on messianic Christology is profoundly satisfying. At its edges, however, there are several questions.

Moltmann’s passion for theodicy betrays him into being obsessed with suffering almost to the exclusion of sin. It is God who has the problem, not humanity. Why did he permit Auschwitz or Hiroshima? The sense of guilt and the classic Lutheran preoccupation with forgiveness and justification are almost entirely absent. The quest is for answers, not for forgiveness; for hope, not for acquittal.18 Even the cross is an affirmation of God’s solidarity with us in pain, rather than a divine act of atonement for sin.

But the main reason for the reader’s difficulty is that Moltmann never allows us to relax.

The two means of verification normally open to Christians are Scripture and tradition. Neither of these seems particularly important to Moltmann. He has a decidedly smorgasbord approach to the canon; and his respect for fathers and reformers is scant, to say the least. His real criteria lie elsewhere. In order to be true, a doctrine must offer a viable theodicy (it must shed light on Auschwitz); it must advance Jewish-Christian dialogue, bearing in mind that Jews were ‘sufferers’ and Christians ‘perpetrators’: it must meet the ecological concerns of humankind; it must give a platform for Christian political activism; and it must both illuminate and be illuminated by the preoccupations of feminism. Above all, theological statements must be validated by experience.5

all his works are involved simultaneously in several different discourses. Feminism, ecology, anti-semitism, theodicy, the peace movement and political activism are never far out of sight even when he is discussing Christology. These peripheral conversations are always fascinating, but they are also distracting, especially since the reader faces the further difficulty that Moltmann’s work does not run in the tram-lines of conventional theological debate.

The Crucified God (1972; ET 1974) The cross of the risen Christ is the other side of the raising of the crucified Christ as the theological foundation for Christian hope (ix). In this sense for Moltmann Theology of Hope requires as a complement the remembrance of the crucified Christ—The Crucified God. Thus the cross of the risen Christ in The Crucified God is understood from the perspective of the theodicy problem and interpreted by the themes of dialectical love, suffering, and solidarity, that is, God’s loving solidarity with the world in its suffering. In the context of a theologia crucis Moltmann develops the thesis that real Christianity must hold on to both ends of the various alternatives that are often presented for an understanding of Christianity—evangelization and humanization, the "vertical dimension" of faith and the "horizontal dimension" of love of neighbor, the humanity and the divinity of Jesus. For Moltmann all these dimensions coincide most effectively in the cross of Jesus. In connection with the theism versus atheism controversy, he develops a theory of the "suffering God." The cross of Christ represents not merely the death of Jesus but God’s identification with the suffering of the world in the suffering of Christ. Thus for Moltmann the crucified Christ calls for a revolution in the concept of God. For Moltmann "God and suffering are no longer contradictions," but "God’s being is in suffering and the suffering is in God’s being itself, because God is love" (227). This is why human beings "can open himself to suffering and to love" in "sympatheia with the pathos of God" (303).

I. Systematic Contributions to Theology (1978- ) Different from that in his early trilogy, Moltmann’s aim here is to present a series of systematic contribution to theology by considering the context and correlations of important concepts and doctrines of Christian theology in a particular systematic sequence (Moltmann 1981, xi). This means that he has followed up particular lines. In this series he intends to avoid the seductions of the theological systems and the coercion of the dogmatic thesis (Moltmann 1981, xii). By the phrase ‘contributions to theology’ thus he means his intention to avoid a tacit presupposition: the absolute nature of one’s own standpoint in one’s own context.

Moltmann’s Method of Theology Moltmann is primarily interested in "the content of theology, in its revision in the light of its biblical origin, and in its innovation given the challenges of the present" rather than in the questions of theological method (Meeks 1996, 103). In addition, his development as a theologian has been marked by a restless imagination. Exploration is also one of Moltmann’s methods in doing theology. According to Moltmann he has never done theology in the form of a defense of ancient doctrines or ecclesiastical dogmas. In other words, his way of thinking is experimental—an adventure of ideas. Moreover, he emphasizes the dialogue; therefore, his theological approach to the truth of God is dialogical. That is because Moltmann thinks that truth is to be found in unhindered dialogue rather than in theological systems and assertive dogmatics. (Moltmann 1981, xiii).Thus for him theology is a "common task, and theologians belong also to the communio sanctorum, in which justified sinners and accepted skeptics are gathered" (Meeks 1996, 103). Moreover, Moltmann thinks that Christian theology should be developed in ecumenical fellowship; but, this fellowship always reaches beyond our own present denominational, cultural and political limitations. Therefore, Moltmann has been involved in ecumenical dialogue with Catholics, Orthodox Christians and Jews. For Moltmann theology is imagination for the Kingdom of God in the world and for the world in the Kingdom of God. Imagination for the kingdom of God arises from the passion for the kingdom of God and this passion develops in the community with its Messiah Jesus. In this sense Moltmann is an innovator in theology.

Theology of Hope (1964; ET 1967) Moltmann understands Christian faith as essentially hope for the future of human beings and this world promised by the God of exodus and the resurrection of the crucified Jesus. Thus for him eschatology expresses the attitude of expectancy that underlies all of faith. For him, however, Christian eschatology does not mean "the future as such"; it sets out from a "reality in history" and announces "the future of that reality, its future possibilities and its power over the future" (17). Moltmann presents Christian eschatology as an active doctrine of hope in order to give hope for an alternative future to the oppressed and suffering of our present time. This hope for him acts as the motivating force behind liberation in the world. In re-examining the sources of eschatological thought, Moltmann finds that Christian eschatology looks toward the revolutionizing and transformation of the present. This is why for him "[t]he theologian is not concerned merely to supply a different interpretation of the world, of history and of human nature, but to transform them in expectation of a divine transformation"(84). Therefore, for Moltmann history is the reality instituted by the promise of God in God’s presence and experienced by human beings as the moving horizon of promise in anticipation. In this sense his eschatology in Theology of Hope is different from the traditional theological eschatologies of the ‘hereafter.’

I. The Early Trilogy (1964-1977) Moltmann’s early trilogy—Theology of Hope, The Crucified God, and The Church in the Power of the Spirit—represent three complementary perspectives on Christian theology. These are programmatic in style and content: in each of them the aim is to look at theology as a whole from one particular perspective (Moltmann 1981, xi).

Since his marriage Moltmann has received help from his wife in doing theology.

Moltmann’s later concern with the phenomenon of hope is initially rooted in his personal experiences as a prisoner-of-war (POW).

Download the Standard 2021.1 Reference Image file (see also the IPTC Photo Metadata Standard page).Load, import, ingest this file into the to-be-tested software.Activate the photo metadata panel(s) of the to-be-tested software. Select, if required, the IPTC fields.Compare for each field: does the field’s label tell the same, or at least something very similar, as the shown value of the field, this is the name of the field defined by IPTC.

To check if IPTC metadata are embedded into an image we suggest to use IPTC’s Get IPTC Photo Metadata site: you can apply the URL of an image published on any website or upload your local image and the IPTC site will show you all embedded metadata. After clicking the green button look for these fields in the shown result: IIM section: Creator (IIM), Credit (IIM) and Copyright Notice (IIM) XMP section: Creator (XMP), Credit Line (XMP), Copyright Notice (XMP), Web Statement of Rights (XMP), Web URL within Licensor (XMP)

For example, here is where to edit the Licensor URL information in Adobe Lightroom:

Google Images also displays the Copyright Notice field (XMP dc:rights or IIM 2:116 Copyright Notice).

Licensor URL (in use since 31 August 2020) This field – labelled as URL or Web URL – is often included in metadata editing software as one of the sub-fields of the Licensor panel. Use of this field triggers the display of Get this image on: Supplier Company Name in Google Images search results. In this Google image view the name of the supplier (company)  will provide a link to a web page enabling the user to acquire a license for the shown photo.

The Web Statement of Rights field should hold a full valid URL (starting with https:// or http://) referring to an existing web page showing a license applied to the image or generic information about licensing this image and optionally also other copyright information.

For displaying the creator of the image, the Creator field is read and shown with the label Creator.

The Credit Line field (XMP photoshop:Credit or IIM 2:110 Credit) is used as “the credit to person(s) and/or organisation(s) required by the supplier of the image to be used when published.” Generally this would be a line of text that the supplier expects users of the image (such as Google Images) to display to users alongside the image. 

Web Statement of Rights (in use since 31 August 2020) Be aware that software for editing metadata uses alternative labels such as “Copyright Info” or “Copyright Info URL” for this field.

In Autumn 2018, Google Images introduced some new features to their image search results. Next to a selected photo the image’s creator, credit line and a copyright notice are shown instantly. It works by reading the corresponding embedded IPTC photo metadata fields from the image file. On 31 August 2020 extended this feature to also display across an image a Licensable badge and a link to its licence information – using the Web Statement of Rights field – under defined conditions in the results of all image searches. Google may also show a text linked to a web page where a licence to re-use the image can be obtained – using the Licensor URL field. As these fields are defined by the IPTC Photo Metadata Standard, we are taking the opportunity to show you the best way that each metadata field can be filled in based on the definitions in the standard.

Get IPTC Photo Metadata ('21)

XMP stands for Extensible Metadata Platform. Created by Adobe Systems Inc. in 2001 as data format for metadata fields. The data can be embedded into binary files or be saved as external sidecar files. XMP as such does not define any metadata properties/fields, they are defined by special schemas which make use of XMP. Some of these schemas are maintained by Adobe, many others by other standardisation bodies like the IPTC. Find more about XMP at http://www.adobe.com/products/xmp/

The value of a photo metadata field can be selected and applied in two basic ways: Free (text) value The person editing a field can type in anything appropriate, no formal limitations or limitations in available values apply. Typical examples are the Description, the Headline or the Copyright Notice fields. Already defined value The person editing a field can only select one or more out of many already defined values. Such a set of values is called a value list or in the case of a specific authority managing this list a controlled vocabulary. Typical examples are the Country Code, the Subject Code, or the Digital Source Type fields. Actually also date fields can be considered as picking a value from a predefined list.

Data about an image - the metadata - can be expressed in a single field, or in a field structure.

The CIPA Standard DC-008 Exif and the IPTC Photo Metadata Standard are widely used specification for metadata embedded into image files. Exif sets a focus on facts about and technical details of a picture taken by a camera while IPTC sets a focus on descriptive, administrative and rights related metadata of an image edited in a next step of the workflow. Even with these different scopes of metadata four metadata fields of both standards have highly similar semantics since many years: The date and time when the picture was taken The name of the person taking the photo A description of what the photo shows A statement about copyright A mapping of these Exif metadata and IPTC metadata fields is implemented by software vendors since about 20 years.

Title field should not be confused with the Headline field which is a short descriptive field about the content of an image, or with the AO Title field which contains the title of the artwork or object in the the image.

Date Created

Copyright Owner

Creator

General Image Content

Image Rating

Headline

Description/Caption

This section groups metadata fields according to information type.

A key use of metadata is to describe the content of an image. This can be done in two basic ways: Using standard terms from value lists or controlled vocabularies. Choosing terms from a standard list of values enables easier and more consistent search within a single collection or across collections. Controlled vocabularies are one form of value list. Using free-text (natural language)

Be aware that IPTC Core and IPTC Extension fields can be saved as XMP “sidecar files” for camera Raw files and those file formats which do not support embedded metadata.

The diagram shows the flow of metadata values from an input panel on your computer screen into an image file and the way back from an image file to their display on the panel.

IPTC Photo Metadata can be embedded in the following ways: IPTC Core fields can be embedded in the IIM format and/or in the XMP format. A key challenge for metadata embedded in parallel in IIM and XMP is that the values are synchronised - this should be taken care of by the image management software. IPTC Extension fields can be embedded only in XMP format.

In the early 2000s, a new technology for embedding metadata into image files was invented. It is called XMP

IPTC’s older standard for metadata, the Information Interchange Model (IIM), was issued in 1991

Discussion of IPTC Core raised the need for additional metadata properties not covered by the IIM standard. IPTC created the IPTC Extension schema in 2008. IPTC Extension has been updated twice

In the early nineties a subset of this IIM was adopted as the well-known “IPTC Fields” by Adobe Photoshop and can be embedded into JPEG, TIFF and PSD files

The IPTC - www.iptc.org - is a body of content providers and system vendors from the news industry and has defined standards for metadata about news since 1979. Since the mid 1990’s IPTC metadata are have been quite popular for photos as they were adopted by Adobe Photoshop at this time.

This document is designed to familiarise photographers, photo editors and metadata managers with the use of the IPTC Photo Metadata Standard. It provides a short guideline on the use and semantics of each IPTC field (also called metadata property).

seven decades

WordPress

5s (CDMA/VZ) A1533 850, 900, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz 800, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 13, 17, 19, 20, 25

5c (CDMA/VZ) A1532 850, 900, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz 800, 1700/2100, 1900, 2100 MHz 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 13, 17, 19, 20, 25

Hall has distilled this, too, into a slogan: “Anchor left, pivot right.” It means that “weaponizing” a story onto the front page of the New York Times (“the Left”) is infinitely more valuable than publishing it on Breitbart.com. “We don’t look at the mainstream media as enemies because we don’t want our work to be trapped in the conservative ecosystem,” says Hall.

Hall’s job is to transform dry think-tank research into vivid, viral-ready political dramas that can be unleashed on a set schedule, like summer blockbusters. “We work very long and hard to build a narrative, storyboarding it out months in advance,” he says. “I’m big on this: We’re not going public until we have something so tantalizing that any editor at a serious publication would be an idiot to pass it up and give a competitor the scoop. ”

“The Deep Web,” he explains, “consists of a lot of useless or depreciated information, stuff in foreign languages, and so on. But a whole bunch of it is very useful, if you can find it.”

It soon became clear that the Breitbart News video was misleadingly edited—that Sherrod’s point was the opposite of what was portrayed Fox News, which aggressively promoted the video, banned Andrew Breitbart as an on-air guest.

In a blogpost, Mr Aitel listed the reasons he said made it "almost certain" that the malware leak was related to the hacks perpetrated on the US Democratic party that resulted in the resignation of some of the party's senior leadership figures.