The Pathos of Theology as a Pneumatological Derivative or a Poiemata of the Spirit? A Review Essay of Reinhard Hütter's Pneumatological and Ecclesiological Vision of Theology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Reinhard Hütter is a leading theologian who has made important contributions to ecclesiology, pneumatology, and Christian rationality, but his most fundamental one is to the nature of theology and theological method. What makes his work of particular interest to Pentecostals is its attempt to give theology a pneumatological and ecclesiological ground. He suggests that the pathos of theology is doctrina and core church practices; theology receives its character and content from church doctrine and practices. Although successful in respect to his ecclesiological program, his proposal does not give theology a direct pneumatological ground and pathos. Nevertheless, his notion that theology receives its pathos from church doctrine and practices can be adapted to suggest a pneumatological pathos of Christian experience and theology. The result is a proposal that the Holy Spirit conditions the pathos of Christian experience and theology, which provides a theological and explicitly a pneumatological pathos not only for Pentecostal experience and theology but also for the role of Pentecostal experience in developing a uniquely "orthopathic" ecumenical contribution to Christian theology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".