MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391608478 · doi:10.1163/9789004682436_009

Orthopistis: Worship as Theologizing Practice

2024· book-chapter· en· W4391608478 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Martina Björkander

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPentecostalism and Christianity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorshipSociologyArtPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orthopistis: Worship as Theologizing PracticeThe ancient principle of lex orandi, lex credendi, reminds us of the centrality of prayer to the formation of faith.Liturgical practice is a theologizing practice, wherein the words and actions included in the liturgy both express and craft theology.This includes songs and music: the singing practice of a church forms its faith in fundamental ways.Roberta King has underlined the importance of song in African Christianity by shifting the maxim to lex canendi, lex credendi,1 a shift that also rings true in pentecostal settings across the globe.Hence, the faith of the church-orthopistis-can be 'read' from its worship-orthodoxa.In this investigation of worship in Mavuno and Woodley, the time has come for a closer look at theology or, more specifically, the doctrinal aspects of their sung corpus.2For, although it can indeed be argued that theology and spirituality are inseparable in Pentecostalism, and that theology is more than doctrine-as I did in Chapter 2-it is nevertheless also doctrine.As a whole, this case study places worship in a concrete liturgical, theological, and cultural context and probes experiential, ritual, and embodied aspects along with doctrinal ones.However, my aim in this particular chapter is to explore lyrics, making a careful exegesis of songs used for worship in the two case churches.Through a close reading of texts and an analysis of names, titles, verbs, and pronoun use, as well as deciphering biblical references, patterns of what is believed to be true about God are uncovered (specifics on the methods used can be found in Chapter 3).The focus of this chapter is thus theology in a more classic sense, the sense of explicit belief.Following Archer and Saliers, I have chosen to call this orthopistis (right believing) to separate it from orthodoxa (right worship).3 1 King, 'Bible: Lex Canendi, Lex Credendi' . 2 Note that I deliberately refer to this as a sung corpus, highlighting the connection to a concrete liturgical practice, unlike Michael Tapper who speaks of his selection as a "song corpus".Tapper, Canadian Pentecostals, the Trinity, and Contemporary Worship Music: The Things We Sing, 133. 3 Archer, The Gospel Revisited: Towards a Pentecostal Theology of Worship and Witness, 11; Saliers, Worship as Theology: Foretaste of Glory Divine, 40.See further discussion in Chapters Two and Eight.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPentecostalism and Christianity StudiesFrench-language works237,207