Edinburgh 2010: Mission Today and Tomorrow/The Church Going Glocal: Mission and Globalisation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Edinburgh 2010: Mission Today and Tomorrow. Edited by Kirsteen Kim and Andrew Anderson. (Oxford: Regnum Books International, 2011, Pp. vii, 450. £33.99.); The Church Going Glocal: Mission and Globalisation. Edited by Tormod Engelsviken, Erling Lundeby and Dagfinn Solheim. (Oxford : Regnum Books International, 2011, Pp. xiii, 262. £24.99.)These volumes are fifth and sixth to be published by Regnum Books International, imprint of Oxford Centre for Mission Studies, in connection with commemoration of one hundredth anniversary of 1910 Edinburgh Missionary Conference. The volumes previously reviewed made available an enormously broad collection of materials generated in preparation for, or in tandem with, 2010 Edinburgh Conference. The first of volumes reviewed here is in fact of that conference.Anyone who has ever participated in a large assembly which broke into small-group discussions and then re-assembled for feedback from each of groups has experienced exactly what reading this volume is like. There is inevitably much repetition, and readers may well find themselves with their eyes glazing over, only to be startled awake by an unexpected moment of disagreement or conflict, or by a surprising insight that changes course of conversation.It is not surprising that major concerns and perspectives already encountered in previous volumes related to Edinburgh 2010 play a significant role in proceedings of conference itself. Perhaps most significant of these is broad commitment to theological concept of missio Dei-the awareness that mission is not fully comprehended if it is limited to church's mission; rather, all Christian mission is response to, and cooperation with, God who has always been in a relationship of mission with creation. While its organizers would have rejected idea that Edinburgh 2010 was correcting shortcomings of 1910 conference, its agenda and especially roster of participants demonstrate intention to go beyond narrow conceptions of 1910, when all participants were Protestants or Anglicans, and overwhelming majority were white, male, and Englishspeaking. Edinburgh 2010 included voices of Roman Catholics (among them cardinal archbishop of Edinburgh); Eastern Orthodox, including Romanian, Greek, Russian, and Malakara Syrian Churches; and from Coptic Church of Egypt, as well as contributions from Anglican, Reformed, Lutheran, Evangelical, Pentecostal, and ecumenical churches and organizations drawn from every continent. The conference had three official languages (English, French, and Spanish); worship included music sung in eleven languages.Though many contributions stressed positive changes in understanding and practice of mission since 1910, cautionary words came from several directions. Tinyiko Maluleke of South Africa observed that African continent continued to experience dehumanization and disregard at hands of rest of world (74), and four participants from Canada, Australia, and Bolivia submitted a statement observing that Edinburgh 2010 failed to emphasize element of diversity implicit in Christian unity, by shortchanging participation of indigenous persons and those from Global South (349). Observers noted that the place of experience in formation of mission was one of most contested aspects of conference's preparatory materials: Some argued that how we experience God is prior to formation of doctrine and language of speaking about God, and is source of new discernment of God at work by Holy Spirit. Others argued that theology as articulated by church is prior to experience of God as individuals or communities (121).As voices of Edinburgh 2010 say clearly, world and church, have changed. This volume is a necessary one, if for no other reason than to preserve record of what many Christians from around world thought about mission in early years of this century. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,084 | 0,023 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».