MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W114178052

Confession Obsession?: Core Doctrine and the Anxieties of Anglican Theology

2008· article· en· W114178052 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher Craig Brittain

Bibliographic record

VenueAnglican Theological Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfession (law)DoctrineHeresyEcclesiologyPower (physics)TheologySociologyEucharistLawPhilosophyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay focuses on theological reasons for being suspicious of recent proposals within the Anglican Communion for resolving the conflict over homosexuality, including the suggestion that the Communion introduce novel doctrinal specificity, or more rigid forms of Communion authority. substantial weaknesses of these initiatives are explored particularly through an analysis of the recently introduced concept of doctrine. paper argues that Anglicanism's approach to the authority of Scripture, the power of the Holy Spirit, and the nature of doctrinal confession serve as important speed bumps to place in the path of the present momentum toward ecclesial innovation. Although there are considerable practical and ethical questions to raise about the present crisis within the Anglican tradition, this essay focuses on theological reasons for caution, as many of the current proposed solutions to the crisis represent substantial and problematic modifications to Anglican theology and ecclesiology. uproar within the Anglican Communion over the question of sexual orientation is threatening to alter the very nature of Anglicanism. Many theologians and church leaders have responded to the contemporary crisis by calling for a novel emphasis on doctrinal confession within the churches of the Communion. One symptom of this concern is the emergence of the concept of core doctrine, which some recent church authorities have resorted to in order to respond to the current dispute. Since the heresy trial of Bishop Righter in 1996, the term has been invoked by the Windsor Report issued by the Lambeth Commission in October of 2004, and subsequendy by the St. Michael Report of the Anglican Church of Canada in 2005. Although this desire for greater doctrinal clarity is understandable, such recent innovations are plagued by considerable theological problems. Careful analysis of the limitations of the concept of core doctrine and consideration of proposals for more centralized ecclesial authority within the Communion demonstrate that further theological reflection is required before such proposals are adopted formally by churches of the Communion. Although there are considerable practical and ethical questions to raise about the present crisis within the Anglican tradition,1 this essay focuses on theological reasons for being cautious about the introduction of core doctrine and Communion-wide forms of canon law. Throughout this discussion, I question whether the current obsession with securing more rigid forms of church authority is consistent with the Anglican tradition, particularly its emphases on the authority of Scripture, the power of the Holy Spirit, and the nature of doctrinal confession. Symptoms of Doctrinal Confusion Although the issue of homosexuality serves as the occasion and focus of the current crisis within the Anglican Communion, behind the front lines of the confrontation lurks a tension that has long plagued the Anglican tradition: the question of what is essential to the Christian faith as it is proclaimed and witnessed to by Anglicans. For many, the problem confronting the tradition today is the same one lamented by Stephen Sykes almost thirty years ago: The integrity of the communion is in question, because it appears to be offering the propositions of the Christian gospel as topics for debate and discussion, rather than to be witnessing to the mighty acts of God in Christ.2 Whatever the merits of this accusation, the Anglican Communion is being confronted by deep internal tensions; and it remains to be seen whether the tradition possesses the theological resources, along with the courage and wisdom, to confront the problem effectively. Anglicanism (if one can even use the term3) has always represented a constellation of diverse theological and ecciesial positions, held together by complex interweaving bonds of language, empire, culture, history, and other shared allegiances. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.060
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnglican Theological ReviewSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207