Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Living Beauty: The Art of Liturgy. By Alejandro Garcia-Rivera and Thomas Scirghi. Lanham, MD /Toronto: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008. Pp. 201 . $21.95. Living Beauty was co-written by Alejandro Garcia-Rivera and Thomas Scirghi while both were professors at Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley. The authors alternate writing sections in each chapter, but in very close dialogue. Although I have never met Fr. Scirghi, I was privileged to study briefly under Professor Garcia-Rivera, and, in my experience, such collaboration was typical of him. Many of his classes were team-taught, often bringing interdisciplinary approaches together. For anyone familiar with Garcia-Rivera's work, it is easy to see themes from his classes and prior publications coalesce in Living Beauty, which also points toward his theological cosmology developed in The Garden of God. Liturgical aesthetics, he proposes in introduction, is an approach to understanding and practice of liturgy that cultivates liturgical way of life (6); hence, living Chapter 1 begins to nuance what authors mean by beauty. Scirghi, who writes first in each chapter, makes useful distinction between messy and sloppy liturgy. Messinese, which is inherent in human endeavor, is different from sloppiness that betrays lack of preparation or care. He contrasts messinese with strict adherence to rubrics. Concern for ritual purity has historically led to abuses such as withholding cup from laity; it also reduces mystery of Eucharist to an equation in which real presence of Christ in Eucharist follows necessarily from performing rite correctly. Its goal is efficiency - feeding as many people as possible as quickly as possible - rather than encounter. Garcia-Rivera in turn calls for ressourcement of Often in class he would distinguish between attempt to explain mystery and more appropriate work of rendering it intelligible - developing language to speak about Here he argues that while we may not be able to fully understand it, we do experience Aesthetically speaking, liturgy sharpens our abilities to perceive a sensible mystery. The second and third chapters focus on what Vatican II document Sacrosanctum Concilium identifies as two aims of liturgy: sanctifyinghumanity and glorifying God. These two aims are inextricably related. In chapter two, Scirghi addresses human response of gratitude for God's gifts by asking: What does find beautiful? When ancient Israelites built tabernacle (Exodus 25-40), their artistry was both gift of human freedom (in contrast to their craftsmanship under compulsion in Egypt) and seeing together with God (67) as they followed God's instructions. Further, Scirghi maintains that the worthiness of gift is recognized by its mark of redemption (66), as seen in Gospel story of woman who anointed Jesus' feet. Beautiful liturgy is relational: it provides setting for encounter with God. Garcia-Rivera suggests that praise should be understood not merely as response to 's graciousness, but as mystery proper to humanity. He compares this to bird song, citing scientific research which suggests that birds sing not merely to communicate, but because they enjoy it (75-78). The same is true of Church song. Connecting beauty and holiness, it creates in us habitus of holiness. …
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 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,024 | 0,005 |
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 ».