Fra studienummer til hyrde for en menighed

Q4 Arts and Humanities
B. G. Hjort, Jonas Midtgaard Hedelund
{"title":"Fra studienummer til hyrde for en menighed","authors":"B. G. Hjort, Jonas Midtgaard Hedelund","doi":"10.7146/dtt.v87i2.145337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to Danish legislation theological candidates need to be examined by a bishop prior to ordination. The bishop’s examination in the Evangelical-Lutheran Church in Denmark is part of the episcopal oversight. The article analyses the bishops’ theological reflections and practical experiences with episcopal examinations based on interviews. According to our Aristotelian analysis of interviews the bishops operate with a distinction between different forms of knowledge that reflects the Aristotelian epistêmê, technê and phronêsis. While candidates may not pass, instances are rare; typically, guidance or resubmission is offered if the bishop hesitates to give collats. In addition to our Aristotelian analysis, we consider a management theoretical perspective on the interviews, and this perspective shows that the bishops align closely with Lotte S. Lüscher’s definition of a postmodern paradigm of management. Further, we argue that Jürgen Habermas’ focus on a potential shift in a conversation might elucidate dynamics in the conversation between bishop and candidate. The power relationship is camouflaged in the form of conversation, and Habermas’ theory helps us to understand when the power relationship manifests itself.","PeriodicalId":38473,"journal":{"name":"Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift","volume":"13 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/dtt.v87i2.145337","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to Danish legislation theological candidates need to be examined by a bishop prior to ordination. The bishop’s examination in the Evangelical-Lutheran Church in Denmark is part of the episcopal oversight. The article analyses the bishops’ theological reflections and practical experiences with episcopal examinations based on interviews. According to our Aristotelian analysis of interviews the bishops operate with a distinction between different forms of knowledge that reflects the Aristotelian epistêmê, technê and phronêsis. While candidates may not pass, instances are rare; typically, guidance or resubmission is offered if the bishop hesitates to give collats. In addition to our Aristotelian analysis, we consider a management theoretical perspective on the interviews, and this perspective shows that the bishops align closely with Lotte S. Lüscher’s definition of a postmodern paradigm of management. Further, we argue that Jürgen Habermas’ focus on a potential shift in a conversation might elucidate dynamics in the conversation between bishop and candidate. The power relationship is camouflaged in the form of conversation, and Habermas’ theory helps us to understand when the power relationship manifests itself.
从学生到会众的牧者
根据丹麦法律,神学候选人在授予圣职之前需要接受主教的审查。丹麦福音路德教会的主教考试是主教监督的一部分。文章根据访谈分析了主教们对主教考试的神学思考和实践经验。根据我们对面试的亚里士多德式分析,主教们对不同形式的知识进行了区分,这反映了亚里士多德式的epistêmê、technê和phronêsis。虽然候选人可能无法通过面试,但这种情况极少发生;如果主教犹豫不决,通常会提供指导或重新提交材料。除了亚里士多德式的分析之外,我们还从管理理论的角度对访谈进行了研究,结果表明,主教们与洛特-S-吕舍尔(Lotte S. Lüscher)对后现代管理范式的定义十分吻合。此外,我们还认为,于尔根-哈贝马斯(Jürgen Habermas)对对话中潜在转变的关注可能会阐明主教与候选人之间对话的动态。哈贝马斯的理论有助于我们理解权力关系何时显现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift
Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信