Queer spirituality: a grounded theopoiesis on human 'Becoming' as a journey of 'freedom-for-love'
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores the phenomenon of human spirituality as human ‘Becoming’, in persons who embrace their identity as LGBTQ. The thesis argues that the personal narratives of these non-heteronormative individuals attest to signs of Divinity, through ‘movements’ of spirituality in their quotidian lives. These ‘movements’ epitomize a theme of ‘freedom-for- love’, a Way of living in kenotic assurance leading to ‘re-creation’. This ethnography employs a qualitative grounded theory methodology with residents of rural and urban British Columbia, Canada, and introduces a novel, poetic interview method of mystagogic accompaniment. Narrative data from eighteen mystagogic interviews with six non-binary persons, and eleven supplementary interviews with family members and allies, reveal spirituality as a phenomenon involving ten ‘movements’, evident in three groupings of categories: 1) beginning; 2) homesteading; and 3) re-creation. Grounded theopoiesis is the term which coins the constructed theory. This research makes three distinct, and original contributions. It: 1) expands the field of constructive theology into the realm of human ‘Becoming’, based on non-heteronormative lives; 2) employs mystagogic accompaniment as a poetic qualitative interview method; and 3) applies Catherine Keller’s process theology regarding tehom (chaos), as a framework to model theopoetic interdisciplinary epistemological collaborations in a project of theological construction which features these subjects: mystagogy; theopoetics; Queer and ‘indecent’ theology; process theology; metaphoric theology; Lacanian psychoanalysis; psychology; and the philosophy of religion. Finally, the conclusions of this study challenge the religious rhetoric which denies the spirituality of persons identifying as LGBTQ.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".