MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W294011333

Beyond Imagination: Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence in the Body of Christ (1963) and the Reinvention of Canadian Anglicanism

2011· article· en· W294011333 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
William J. Danaher

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnglican Theological Review · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSociologyBody of ChristEthosPoliticsPower (physics)LawReligious studiesGender studiesTheologyPhilosophyPolitical science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This essay explores Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence in the Body of (MRI), an influential document issued in 1963 at the close of the Anglican Congress in Toronto. A foundational statement on mission and communion, MRI inspired both the structures and ethos of contemporary Anglicanism. However, the production of this imagined global community unwittingly contributed to the decline of Anglicanism in Canada, Drawing from Charles Taylor and Benedict Anderson, this essay will trace the reinvention of Anglicanism in Canada from the religious wing of the British Empire to a modern vision of a worldwide communion that nonetheless depended on the very structures and power relations it sought to replace. As such, the decline of Anglicanism in Canada was not the product of outside forces like secularism as much as the result of a theology that failed to engage the issues facing everyday Canadians. Introduction: MRI and the 1963 Anglican Congress Issued at the 1963 Anglican Congress, a gathering of over sixteen thousand Anglicans from seventeen churches worldwide held in Toronto from August 13 to 23, Mutual Responsibuity and Interdependence in the Body of (MRI) articulated a vision for the Anglican that explored three statements: (1) The church's mission is a response to the living God who in his love creates, reveals, judges, redeems, fulfils; (2) the in Christ expressed in our full communion is the most profound bond among us, in all our political and racial and cultural diversity; and (3) this and must find a completely level of expression and corporate obethence.1 To understand the implications of diese statements signaled nothing short of the rebirth of the Anglican Communion and the inauguration of entirely relationships as well as the death of many old things.2 Specifically, MRI called for increased financial support for mission, the establishment of diocesan networks that empowered local leadership, the development of resources for recruitment and training of lay and clergy leaders, the construction of churches in new areas of Christian responsibility, and the creation of structures for regular consultation. Underlying these programmatic initiatives was the commitment on the part of each to study the form of its own obethence to mission and the needs it has to share in the single life and witness of our church everywhere. The commitments MRI made rested on moral authority alone. The Primate of Canada, Archbishop Howard Clark, wrote in his foreword to the proceedings that the Congress provided a forum for prophecy, wisdom, insight, and concern rather than a platform for statements about doctrines, organization, or polity.3 Consequently, the purpose of MRI was to construct a vision for Anglicans Uving and working together in the world. Earlier mission strategies had been focused on establishing self-sufficient national churches that followed the reach of the British Empire and were predicated on racial, ethnic, cultural, and economic hierarchies. In contrast, the mission strategy established by MRI pointed to more fundamental relations that might transcend these asymmetries.4 Since the Anglican Congress, MRI has been considered a pivotal document that established a paradigm not only for mission, but for Anglicanism itself.5 In addition to generating significant financial support ($15 million US), the collaborative spirit of MRI inspired the development of principles promoted by the Partners in Mission Program created in 1973.6 Even more significantly, MRFs vision was cited, discussed, and enhanced by subsequent meetings of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), which was founded in 1968 to carry on MRIs commitment to inter-Anglican structures for communication.7 More recently, MRI has been cited in three reports commissioned by either the ACC or the Archbishop of Canterbury on the structures and unity of the Anglican Communion: The Virginia Report issued in 1997, The Windsor Report issued in 2004, and die Anglican Covenant, which was commissioned in 2006 to develop a set of principles for cooperation and interdependence and is undergoing final revisions. …

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,101
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,622

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0320,095
Communication savante0,0110,004
Science ouverte0,0010,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

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 Opus0,040
Tête enseignante GPT0,314
Écart entre enseignants0,274 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
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

Citations1
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAnglican Theological ReviewMême sujetAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsTravaux en français237 207