MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309926447 · doi:10.1177/00393207221138980

Celebration Beyond (Un-)Belief: The Potential of Negative Hermeneutics for a Liturgical Apophaticism

2022· article· en· W4309926447 on OpenAlex
Edda Wolff

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia Liturgica · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicChristian Theology and Mission
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiturgyHermeneuticsEpistemologyAmbiguityContext (archaeology)FaithPhilosophySociologyTheologyLinguisticsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay demonstrates how the engagement with specific liturgical traditions and the ambiguity of their celebration allows for an understanding of liturgy beyond the dichotomy of belief and unbelief. It analyses the potential of a “negative hermeneutics” of liturgical studies in the context of what is perceived as “cultural unbelief.” Taking Lieven Boeve's concept of a “cultural apophaticism” as a basis, it explores the reach of a negative hermeneutical approach, highlighting the paradoxical and apophatic character of the liturgical celebration and its necessary failure and developing the idea of a “liturgical apophaticism.” It shows how the liturgical celebration does not simply counteract the dynamic of unbelief but exceeds it. In a final step, this essay explores the potential that liturgy has to recreate and transform “unbelief” and the implications of negative aspects of faith and belief for the broader theological discourse.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.214 · 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