Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the relationship between a “wounded” Mennonite identity, theological education, and mission in relation to questions being asked among members of the Mennonite Francophone Network today. From its sixteenth-century beginnings, Anabaptism bore the wounds of rejection, persecution, and marginalization. In some cases this led to a Mennonite mentality of separation and legalism. Nineteenth-century efforts to overcome the “wounds of sectarianism” and “spiritual drought” led to openness to Pietism and Evangelical Protestantism. In France, Switzerland, and North America, nineteenth-century beginnings of theological education were tied to renewal movements and interest in mission as a way of renewing an often ethnic Mennonite identity prone to formalism. This combination, plus the mission movement’s insistence on Protestant unity, led to a downplaying of a more specifically “Anabaptist” theological identity when new churches were born in Congo or Burkina Faso. Another means for renewing Mennonite identity has been through a return to sixteenth-century historical origins, which in the last half century has produced fruits in terms of a more Anabaptist missiology and a world-wide identity promoted by Mennonite World Conference. French-speaking Mennonites in Canada, Europe, and Africa are searching for theological education that will form leaders and congregations in a more positive Anabaptist identity, while at the same time assuming a conscious role in the larger context of a worldwide Christian family still too often divided.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".