Unsettling Theology: The Theological Legacy of the Indian Residential Schools of Canada 1880-1970
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the 1880s to the 1970s certain Canadian Christian Churches and Catholic religious orders were involved in the foundation and operation of the Indian Residential Schools. Funded by the federal government of Canada, these schools were part of an ongoing policy to assimilate and eradicate the Indigenous peoples in Canada. In retrospect these have been declared to be genocidal. At the time the church entities enthusiastically supported these schools, and apart from a few sexual predators, the majority of the workers were “good” people who felt that they were doing God’s work. What were the theologies that justified such involvement? How do “good” Christians get involved in genocide? What kind of theology might enable us today to not do something similar? \n \n \tThe first part of this dissertation reflects on the unsettling character of Levinas’s philosophy and develops his critique of western philosophy into a critical method. The second part surveys theologies that influenced the creation and operation of the residential schools, which is seen as a part of a larger colonial project predicated on the marginalization and assimilation of Indigenous peoples. This involves the consideration of the theological justification of the European settlement of North America, as well as the attitudes towards Indigenous peoples from 1500 to 1910. These theological concepts are subjected to the Levinasian critique, and they are found to contribute towards violence and genocide. The third part looks at kenotic theology especially in the writings of Bulgakov, Coakley, and others, and considers whether it can help Christians resist the totalizing of the earlier theologies, and work to heal and empower (it does).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.051 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".