Toward a Theology of Care and Disability: Some Preliminary Considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Issues of disability and mental health are of increasing social importance, challenging Christian communities to reform widespread but problematic conceptions and practices of "care".Traditional models of care as charity or service have been critiqued as potentially paternalistic and exploitative.Newer approaches struggle under the pressures of beuracractic professionalization and neo-liberal commodification, where often discussions about quality of life and human bodily differences are marked by ableism and serve to enforce marginalizing social and economic power relations.Interdisciplinary insights from disability studies, feminist ethics of care and political economy of care offer resources for critiquing current care imaginaries and envisioning alternative possibilities of care based in a relational anthropology, opening up generative prospects for theological reflection.This article seeks to outline a vision for a theology of care, proposing that care is itself a theological practice.Care an incarnational emblem of divine energy in the world that resonates with connective and lifegiving power, gesturing toward wholeness, healing and peace in vitalizing ways, reflecting the image of God.Such a theological framework can provide a basis for transforming ableist and exclusionary practices and postures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".