Bibliographic record
Abstract
People of African descent are often surprised by the similarity of their experiences. The three international conferences and the two pre-Lambeth meetings of Afro-Anglican bishops reinforced the reality that we had much in common, so much so that it was easy to build community. For several years now. members of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church, now styled as the Community of Bishops, have gathered twice a year in table groupings in search of the elusive experience of community. I often wonder if our search will prove successful. In 1988 as a new bishop, I attended the pre-Lambeth meeting that followed the First Afro-Anglican Conference held in Barbados. That gathering in Cambridge introduced me to the concept of community on the world stage, and subsequently the world was introduced to the emerging concept of Afro-Anglicanism. At our pre-Lambeth meeting, not only were we schooled on the agenda and protocols, we also were advised that we were expected to be seen and not heard. Onrpre-meeting helped to change all of that, and to all assembled it became evident that we were able to have an impact on the agenda of the Lambeth Conference. Shortly after that Lambeth Conference, I was approached to assume the chair to plan for the next decade. My growing belief in the concept of Afro-Anglicanism led me to accept the responsibility for the Second International Conference. After all, it was almost ten years away. By not being involved in or attending the first conference, I had no idea of the level of commitment for me or for the Diocese of Long Island, but plan we did for the 1995 Cape Town conference and the subsequent second pre-Lambeth meeting of bishops. The Cape Town meeting was a once-in-a-lifetime experience. At the very time the American Church was embroiled in a discussion regarding racism and the proper response to that insidious evil, we were having tea at Bishopscourt, tours of Robbcn Island, celebrations at the City Hall, and worship at St. George's-the People's Cathedral. While others have written about the theological significance of the Cape Town meeting, let me state that our experiences in the emerging Rainbow Nation of South Africa shifted attention away from the broader anti burgeoning problematic issues of the Anglican Communion to a more narrow focus on communion as a place where the gifts of all were becoming more freely accepted. In hindsight, I now believe that the danger signals looming over the Anglican Communions horizon during that decade were just too dressed over by the gossamer euphoria of holding a meeting in Cape Town, where Archbishop Desmond Tutu would welcome all who could afford passage to a Free South Africa. The strains in the fabric of our community could not compete for attention as we celebrated with our brothers and sisters in the Church of the Province of Southern Africa. In my more reflective moments, I should have been more attuned to the signals. Our joy should have been tempered by the reality that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. George Carey, did not take us as seriously as had his predecessor, Dr. Robert Runcie. And we did not notice that our growing concept of a community with shared leadership left little room for shooting stars. In 1998, at the pre-Lambeth meeting of Afro-Anglican bishops, the veneer of our community remained intact while the strains were becoming apparent. The shooting-star effect was becoming quite apparent. Nevertheless, we began planning for the Third International Conference on Afro-Anglicanism shortly upon our return from the University of Kent, the venue of the Lambeth Conference. Once again, and with a better knowledge of the minefields that lay ahead, I committed my diocese and myself. Planning began in earnest shortly before the 2003 General Convention of the Episcopal Church in the USA. Learning from past experiences, we assembled a more international planning team, we moved the venue to Toronto, Canada, we selected a theme, and we began building upon the success of the two previous gatherings. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.105 | 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 teacher head, 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".