Ekklesia: Three Inquiries in Church and State. By Paul Christopher Johnson, Pamela E. Klassen, and Winnifred Fallers Sullivan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Popularly and academically, westerners often view the relationship between church and state as a story of striving toward separation and freedom. Ekklesia: Three Inquiries in Church and State works through three case studies in the Americas to provide a counter-narrative. It is not nearly that simple, says the book. Drawing on illustrations from Brazil, Canada, and the United States, authors Paul Christopher Johnson, Pamela E. Klassen, and Winnifred Fallers Sullivan argue that the “settler states” of North and South America offer “alternative patterns of conjoined religious and political power” (p. 12). Church and state may sometimes throw punches at each other. They might declare themselves independent. But they are in fact “joined at the hip” or “symbiotically joined twins” (pp. 4, 6). Each depends in some form or fashion on the other for its legitimation, its direction, and, most crucially, for the making and unmaking of a people. This “people” the authors call an ekklesia, a term whose history contains both political (the voting assemblies of ancient Greece) and religious (translated by the English New Testament as “churches”) antecedents. In that sense, it is an unexpectedly good term to capture the collusion of church and state.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".