Religeopolitics and Evangelical Place-Making: An Interpretative Phenomenological Study of Transnational Mission Partnerships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evangelical churches increasingly engage in transnational partnerships that shape spiritual identity and moral belonging across borders. This study investigates how such partnerships function not simply as organizational strategies but as lived spatial practices grounded in faith. Drawing on Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) of interviews with Canadian and Mexican participants in a long-term church-planting relationship, the article explores how theological commitments, emotional ties, and embodied rituals generate spatial meaning. Participants framed their engagement not through institutional goals, but through metaphors of family, covenant, and companionship, suggesting a grassroots geopolitics rooted in care, hospitality, and spiritual presence. The findings reveal that space is produced not only through ideology or policy, but through practices like shared meals, cross-cultural mentorship, and prayerful presence—acts that reconfigure belonging along theological and affective lines. The article introduces the concept of religeopolitics to describe this phenomenon, arguing that evangelical actors are not merely influenced by global geopolitics but actively create alternative spatial imaginaries through faith. Foregrounding religious subjectivity in spatial production, this article advances scholarship on lived religion and critical geopolitics, highlighting how spiritual communities shape geopolitical belonging through theological imagination, relational duration, and embodied moral practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".