MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2154323794

BEMs betydelse för gudstjänstlivet i den världsvida kyrkan

2006· article· sv· W2154323794 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lars Eckerdal

Notice bibliographique

RevueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2006
Typearticle
Languesv
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueHistorical and Archaeological Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBaptismLiturgyEucharistConfessionalWorshipFaithTheologyChristian ministryHoly SeeOrder (exchange)ConsecrationEcumenismPeriod (music)HistoryReligious studiesSociologyPhilosophyLawPolitical scienceAestheticsPolitics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The text is based on a lecture given by request at a Swedish ecumenical conference to depict the significance of Faith and Order’s famous Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 1982, BEM, for the liturgical life of the churches. It is stated that the document was elaborated during the decades of intense work on liturgical renewal in churches all over the world and in the phase in which the three thorough-going currents of 20th century church history - the Bible-, the Liturgical and the Ecumenical Movements - were brought together. The Roman-Catholic liturgical renewal based on Vatican II became epoch-making also for many other churches. It is significant that the first two constitutions were those on the liturgy 1963 and on the church 1964 drawn up by contributors, of which some belonged to other churches. The same kind of ecumenical cooperation was practised when the theological views of the constitutions had to be applied to the revision of the liturgical books. During a couple of decades a previously unseen multilateral work was carried through concerning the renewal of the liturgical life of the churches. Straight across confessional borders worship books were shaped in which the similarities are greater than the dissimilarities. During the same period Faith and Order’s ways of working were substantially changed. In Lund 1952 a comparative ecclesiological study was replaced by a Bible-theological investigation of «Christ and his Church» (my italics) as starting point for the evaluation of the traditions of the churches. The first result of the method was One Lord, One Baptism 1960, which also became the first step on the way to the unanimously adopted convergence document BEM 1982. In Montreal 1963 and Aarhus 1964 the study of the apostolic Tradition and the traditions of the churches, was explicitly directed towards baptism, eucharist and ministry, not as theological themes but as entities in the churches’ worship and life in full progress. Attention was to be paid to things hindering or promoting unity. In addition to the new moves came the invitation to the churches to join the process by means of elaborated responses to a preliminary report (1975) and to a continued dialogue which favoured cross-fertilization of the liturgical renewal and the BEM-study and thereby a reception through the liturgical life of the churches. In between Faith and Order’s meetings in Santiago de Compostela 1993 and Kuala Lumpur 2004 work was directed to baptism as gift and obstacle in the process aiming at the visible unity of the church. Very little was heard about this work, and when the final report was presented it was sharply dismissed by the commission as leading to a cul-du-sac. The reasons are discussed, and it is claimed that the decisions in 2004 mean a return to those methods for the process that were launched four decades earlier.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies, Communication savante, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,374
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0030,002
Science ouverte0,0040,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0730,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,295
Tête enseignante GPT0,493
Écart entre enseignants0,198 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2006
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Même sujetHistorical and Archaeological StudiesTravaux en français237 207