MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W255241366

God and the Excluded: Visions and Blind Spots in Contemporary Theology

2009· article· en· W255241366 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sam Portaro

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnglican Theological Review · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiquePentecostalism and Christianity Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésContext (archaeology)VisionSociologyPrivilege (computing)TheologyPoliticsWhite (mutation)Religious studiesGender studiesPhilosophyLawHistoryPolitical science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

God and Excluded: Visions and Blind Spots in Contemporary Theology. ByJoergRieger. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 2001. 241 pp. $21.00 (paper). Joerg Rieger, Professor of Systematic at Perkins School of at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, acknowledges that his perspectives are biased by privilege. My position as a tenured theologian at a major theological school, as well as fact that I am male, white, middle class, and from a European background, seems to ensure that I can avoid seeing - let alone being among - excluded. It also seems to entitle me to continue to do theology as (p. ix). But like Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall, Rieger does not do theology as usual and for that we in America can be grateful. Hall and Rieger take very seriously context of their work, situated as they are in relative affluence of North America. That they make frequent and trenchant use of this context as foil and as illustration enhances value of their perspectives to those of us who share this context and are called to minister within it. God and Excluded is ambiguously titled; at first glance it could be mistaken for any number of books addressing theological perspectives of any number of people who count themselves as disenfranchised by reason of race, gender, sexuality, economics, or social or religious politics. Rieger does not disregard these particularities; he transcends them. so doing, he pushes reader into a thoughtful critique of contemporary theological scene. At beginning of twenty-first century, he writes, more so than ever before, it seems that we have managed to render invisible both people at margins and powers that hold them there. Although boom of economy and other recent success stories may have passed many of us by, most mainline theologians and church people are not forced to face recesses of suffering at margins of global economy and in ghettos of our cities (p. ix). And though his reference here is specifically to poverty, I suspect Rieger would accept that even that reference is too narrow, that marginality and power are at heart of his project. Central to that project is Rieger's premise that a blindness to other induces a blindness to The Other, that if one is truly to discern work and will of God, one must engage other. This notion is well illustrated in story of Jesus and Canaanite woman (Matt. 15:21-28), wherein Jesus engages one doubly marginalized by gender and culture, and in that encounter discovers breadth and breath of God in ways that expand and animate Jesus' own mission and ministry. Conditioned by his culture to pay litde attention to women and to shun Canaanites in particular, and actively reinforced in those strictures by his own disciples in story, Jesus is perilously close to Rieger's description of our own cultural milieu: In its eagerness to shape world for better, middle class does not realize that it is perpetuating structures of exclusion which leave out large parts of humanity (p. 36). Ignoring both his cultural conditioning and his disciples' urgings, Jesus engages woman, grants her request for healing of her child, subsequently and subversively transforming woman, her daughter, and himself. Rieger examines three familiar strands of extant theology: a Theology of Identity informed by work of Schleiermacher and preoccupation with self; a Theology of Difference shaped by neo-orthodoxy and Barth in particular, and emphasis upon God as Wholly Other; and a third category genetically identified as Theology and Postmodernity, in which work of Lindbeck illustrates dominance of language and text. each instance, Rieger examines the traditional guideposts of theological thought, such as questions of authority, critical reflection, and matters of doctrine (p. …

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 candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,786
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,799

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

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

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 Opus0,080
Tête enseignante GPT0,301
Écart entre enseignants0,222 · 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.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
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
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAnglican Theological ReviewMême sujetPentecostalism and Christianity StudiesTravaux en français237 207