MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W255241366

God and the Excluded: Visions and Blind Spots in Contemporary Theology

2009· article· en· W255241366 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sam Portaro

Bibliographic record

VenueAnglican Theological Review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPentecostalism and Christianity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)VisionSociologyPrivilege (computing)TheologyPoliticsWhite (mutation)Religious studiesGender studiesPhilosophyLawHistoryPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

God and Excluded: Visions and Blind Spots in Contemporary Theology. ByJoergRieger. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 2001. 241 pp. $21.00 (paper). Joerg Rieger, Professor of Systematic at Perkins School of at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, acknowledges that his perspectives are biased by privilege. My position as a tenured theologian at a major theological school, as well as fact that I am male, white, middle class, and from a European background, seems to ensure that I can avoid seeing - let alone being among - excluded. It also seems to entitle me to continue to do theology as (p. ix). But like Canadian theologian Douglas John Hall, Rieger does not do theology as usual and for that we in America can be grateful. Hall and Rieger take very seriously context of their work, situated as they are in relative affluence of North America. That they make frequent and trenchant use of this context as foil and as illustration enhances value of their perspectives to those of us who share this context and are called to minister within it. God and Excluded is ambiguously titled; at first glance it could be mistaken for any number of books addressing theological perspectives of any number of people who count themselves as disenfranchised by reason of race, gender, sexuality, economics, or social or religious politics. Rieger does not disregard these particularities; he transcends them. so doing, he pushes reader into a thoughtful critique of contemporary theological scene. At beginning of twenty-first century, he writes, more so than ever before, it seems that we have managed to render invisible both people at margins and powers that hold them there. Although boom of economy and other recent success stories may have passed many of us by, most mainline theologians and church people are not forced to face recesses of suffering at margins of global economy and in ghettos of our cities (p. ix). And though his reference here is specifically to poverty, I suspect Rieger would accept that even that reference is too narrow, that marginality and power are at heart of his project. Central to that project is Rieger's premise that a blindness to other induces a blindness to The Other, that if one is truly to discern work and will of God, one must engage other. This notion is well illustrated in story of Jesus and Canaanite woman (Matt. 15:21-28), wherein Jesus engages one doubly marginalized by gender and culture, and in that encounter discovers breadth and breath of God in ways that expand and animate Jesus' own mission and ministry. Conditioned by his culture to pay litde attention to women and to shun Canaanites in particular, and actively reinforced in those strictures by his own disciples in story, Jesus is perilously close to Rieger's description of our own cultural milieu: In its eagerness to shape world for better, middle class does not realize that it is perpetuating structures of exclusion which leave out large parts of humanity (p. 36). Ignoring both his cultural conditioning and his disciples' urgings, Jesus engages woman, grants her request for healing of her child, subsequently and subversively transforming woman, her daughter, and himself. Rieger examines three familiar strands of extant theology: a Theology of Identity informed by work of Schleiermacher and preoccupation with self; a Theology of Difference shaped by neo-orthodoxy and Barth in particular, and emphasis upon God as Wholly Other; and a third category genetically identified as Theology and Postmodernity, in which work of Lindbeck illustrates dominance of language and text. each instance, Rieger examines the traditional guideposts of theological thought, such as questions of authority, critical reflection, and matters of doctrine (p. …

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnglican Theological ReviewSame topicPentecostalism and Christianity StudiesFrench-language works237,207