MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412900567 · doi:10.3390/rel16080985

Toward a Theology of Living: Embedded, Deliberative and Embodied Theology

2025· article· en· W4412900567 on OpenAlex

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

VenueReligions · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTheological Perspectives and Practices
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionAestheticsTheologySociologyPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a theological framework of a Theology of Living, which seeks to reimagine the task of theology as a lived, communal and practical enterprise. Departing from purely systematic or disembodied approaches, this theology emphasises the relational and contextual dimensions of Christian faith. The embedded nature of theology acknowledges that theological reflection is always situated within particular histories, cultures and communities. The deliberative dimension foregrounds the necessity of intentional, dialogical discernment in response to complex moral and spiritual challenges. The embodied aspect affirms that theology is not merely spoken or written, but enacted through the rhythms of everyday life, worship and service. Drawing upon pastoral experience, biblical reflection and theological discourse, this article proposes that such an integrated approach to theology not only bridges the gap between doctrine and practice but also reclaims theology’s vocational role in forming individuals and communities shaped by love, justice and hope.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.324 · 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