MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1499435498 · doi:10.5952/51-3-97

Reconciliation: The theological challenge

2010· article· nl· W1499435498 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDutch Reformed Theological Journal = Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif · 2010
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicChristian Theology and Mission
Canadian institutionsKing's University College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiturgyWorshipNarrativeCommissionTheologySociologyPhilosophyLawReligious studiesAestheticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper argues that reconciliation is the Christian theological response to the challenge presented by a world of atrocities. While commonly articulated as adoctrine, reconciliation is primarily a narrative enacted through liturgy within Christian worship. This liturgy shapes a Christian response to a broken world, but is also provoked and challenged by that world. Within this movement, the church confesses that its practices of reconciliation are both incomplete and anticipatory. And yet these practices participate in the fullness of reconciliation made visible at the coming of the Kingdom. Anticipating this fullness allows Christian theology to articulate parables of reconciliation, and one example of this is South Africa’s own Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The paper concludes with a reflection on what “the parable of the TRC” says back to the church.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0910.005

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.231 · 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