MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W195562421

Sermon: Remembrance: A Charge to Keep

2007· article· en· W195562421 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnglican Theological Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPentecostalism and Christianity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSermonCharge (physics)OathPeriod (music)HistoryBishopsTheologyLawSociologyArtPhilosophyAestheticsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beloved sisters and brothers, let us look to the Lord. May only God's word be spoken, May God's work be heard, In the precious name of Jesus, I pray. Amen. My sisters and brothers in Christ Jesus, allow me to say right now: It is good for us to be here in holy place! Once again, as so often in years past, Toronto and its Cathedral Church of St. James have for a passing but significant period of time been the physical and spiritual heart of our beloved Anglican Communion. And those of us blessed with the gifts of ebony grace express our deep and heartfelt thanks and appreciation tor the hospitality extended to us by our sisters and brothers of the Way who labor and flourish in part of God's vineyard, wonderful land of the maple leaf, called Canada. Therefore, I invite you to join me in a standing ovation of thanks to our hosts. It has been truly said that man proposes; only God disposes. From 1981, when conference was first conceived, until very day in 2005 is a considerable period of time: Barbados, 1985; Cambridge, England, 1988; Cape Town, South Africa, 1995; Toronto, 2005; and plans are in the works for even greater things in the task of kingdom building. Who believed in 1981 that we would be strong in 2005? Yet, in truth and in fact-as Bishop Reid of Jamaica says-in each of those venues, we have planted and watered. But whatever success has occurred, we know and affirm that all increase is from God! Why did we come to Toronto? Hear again our words approved in Barbados: We firmly believe that God has called us as Afro-Anglicans to be part of the salt of the earth, and that wee are richly endowed with many gifts of grace and human virtue to persevere in our Christian calling. Above all else, we believe that we have been called to be ourselves and to become what God would have us become in our own cultural and historical contexts. Our endowments of warmth and feeling, of movement and beauty, of truthfulness and wisdom, of holism and familial responsibility, of a spirituality of endurance, survival and hope, are by no means marks of a divine mistake. Cod has entrusted these to us as talents for service in the church and as the equipment for use in meeting the many challenges we recognize in our Afro-Anglicanism.1 What did we hope to achieve in Toronto? Our program identified goal for the twenty-first century: Identify and celebrate our gifts and offer them to the wider church. Our objectives were to: 1. Re-visit the Codrington Consensus and identify what has been achieved 2. Embrace the Afro-Anglican ministry of reconciliation based on the spirit of the Lambeth Conference 3. Affirm the Black Anglican community living in Canada 4. Support and promote the spiritual wellness of Afro-Anglican clergy and laity 5. Engage each other in learning and mutual understanding 6. Co forth with a renewed sense of mission in Christ to our respective parts of the world Have we been successful-faithful in those undertakings? I am bold to say Yes! But I invite yon to walk with me in the word of God to understand my answer, and hopefully it will become yours as well, as we consider the subject for tonight. A Charge To Keep Paul writes these words in the first letter to the Corinthians: For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, this is my body, which is for you; do in remembrance of me. In the same way he took the cup also after supper, saying, This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me. For us often as you cat bread and drink cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. (I Cor. 11:23-26) My sisters and brothers, the key to text is the word remembrance, anamnesis in the Greek, that is, a carrying forward of the gift that God has given. …

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.245 · 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