MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4255453729 · doi:10.5325/weslmethstud.12.2.0214

Nathan Bangs and the Methodist Episcopal Church: The Spread of Scriptural Holiness in Nineteenth-Century America

2020· article· en· W4255453729 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Martin Wellings

Notice bibliographique

RevueWesley and Methodist Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueReligion, Gender, and Enlightenment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPulpitProtestantismFlourishingPublishingAudience measurementNewspaperHeresyReligious studiesHistorySanctificationLawClassicsSociologyTheologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyPsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Nathan Bangs (1778–1862) was a towering figure in the Methodist Episcopal Church (MEC) in the generation after Francis Asbury. As a prolific and vigorous polemicist, Bangs defended evangelical Arminianism against New England Calvinists and upheld Methodist episcopacy against Anglicans and Presbyterians. As a publisher and organizer, Bangs transformed the debt-ridden Methodist Book Concern into a flourishing publishing house, adding intellectual depth to the Connexion's literature through the Methodist Magazine and Quarterly Review and creating a successful weekly newspaper, the Christian Advocate and Journal, with a readership of 120,000. He was chosen to promote the work of the MEC's Missionary Society; he served on numerous General Conference committees; he was briefly president of Wesleyan University, and was urged several times to accept nomination to the episcopate; and he chaired the Committee of Nine, which crafted a plan for separating the MEC's warring northern and southern sections as tensions over slavery ran high at the General Conference of 1844. Alongside these multifarious activities, Bangs was also a highly effective preacher, pastor, and presiding elder, instrumental in seasons of revival in New York and elsewhere, while his commitment to Wesleyan teaching on entire sanctification made him a sympathetic, if not uncritical, attender at Phoebe Palmer's Tuesday Meetings for the Promotion of Holiness in the latter years of his long life.Bangs was a controversial as well as an influential leader in the antebellum MEC. Here attention has focused partly on his attitudes toward slavery and separation, partly on his turn away from initial support for constitutional reform in the MEC, and partly on his appraisal of Asbury's legacy. Bangs held that there were two ‘blemishes’ on Asbury's record: his resistance to ministerial training and his failure to acknowledge the financial pressures, particularly on married itinerants, of meagre stipends and inadequate housing. Bangs worked to remedy these perceived deficiencies, promoting the Course of Study for preachers, and arguing for enhanced stipends and the provision of housing for ministers. For some contemporaries, and some later historians, this represented a move away from the primitive simplicity of early Methodism in a quest for respectability, status, and influence in the rapidly developing United States.In this well-researched and very readable biography Jared Maddox provides a chronological account of Nathan Bangs's long life and ministry, and also addresses the historiographical debate around respectability, engaging in particular with the work of Nathan Hatch and John Wigger. For Maddox, the MEC might have become more respectable, but this was not Bangs's aim: his overriding purpose was to promote the mission of Methodism in spreading scriptural holiness, and he sought to make the MEC as effective as possible in achieving that goal. Maddox makes his case, through a detailed study of Bangs's prodigious literary output—an appendix listing Bangs's articles runs to a dozen pages—and through a careful engagement with the history and historiography of American Methodism. Bangs's personal and family life do not feature very much in this biography—the focus is very much on Bangs's ministry and especially on his role in the wider life of the MEC—but this is a very welcome analysis of an important and representative figure in a crucial period of Methodist history.

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)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
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: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,043
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,086

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0070,010
Communication savante0,0040,003
Science ouverte0,0000,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

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 Opus0,113
Tête enseignante GPT0,313
Écart entre enseignants0,200 · 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

Citations10
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueWesley and Methodist StudiesMême sujetReligion, Gender, and EnlightenmentTravaux en français237 207