Stewarding the Mysteries of Faith: Preaching the Gospel in Twenty-First-Century Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The article argues that in stewarding the mysteries of faith, preaching the gospel matters. It also claims that only when the biblical context and the context of the listeners are held in tension is the gospel preached. In the 1960s the new homiletic burst on the scene in the seminaries and mainline churches of North America. With its turn to the listener, its questions about the authority of the preacher, and an emphasis on the form of the sermon, the result, perhaps unconsciously, has been a decreased emphasis on the context of the biblical text in sermons that are preached week by week. In some ways this is not surprising, in that a discipline-based understanding of learning had already separated the study of the Bible from homiletics. The former, centred in a biblical department, focuses primarily on the academic study of the Bible, while the latter, subsumed under pastoral or practical theology, focuses on the “how to” of preaching a sermon. The shift from traditional homiletics to the new homiletic merely exacerbated the divide by privileging the experience of the listener as the primary focus of the sermon. This article describes this divide and offers an approach that seeks to ensure greater integrity between text and sermon by paying equal attention to the context of the biblical text and that of the twenty-first-century century listener.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".