The Ecumenical Legacy of the Second Vatican Council: A Disciples Perspective
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I. Introduction It was a real honor to be asked by the planning committee of the North American Academy of Ecumenists to offer a presentation during the 2012 Conference in Halifax on the ecumenical legacy of the Second Vatican Council from my perspective as a member of the Disciples of Christ. I wish to dedicate this address to the memory of our colleague and friend, Dr. Margaret O'Gara, who served since 1983 as a member of the International Commission for Dialogue between the Disciples of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church. She was a great scholar and contributor to our dialogue; indeed, she represented the best of Vatican II in opening a window to God's spirit in the pursuit of unity in truth and love. Over the past year as I prepared for this presentation, I have read a library shelf of books and documents about Vatican II (1962-65). I discovered a wealth of material written and published by Disciples, as we were included in Vatican II in that special category of delegated observers. One of the most helpful resources was an early issue of Mid-Stream, a journal produced by the Council on Christian Unity (where I now serve as President), that was published in the summer of 1966 (just a year-and-a-half after the close of Vatican II), which brought together a series of articles addressing the overall topic, Estimates of Vatican It was interesting to read these articles, beginning with statements by three Catholics (including J. G. M. Willebrands), then by two Protestant observers (Albert C. Outler and Douglas Horton), then estimates by the official observers of the Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ), and, finally, statements by leaders in conciliar ecumenism, including Nikos Nissiotis from the Orthodox perspective, Lukas Vischer (Swiss Reformed Church) on behalf of the World Council of Churches, and an Appraisal from the perspective of the National Council of Churches and its Faith and Order Commission by William Norgren of the Episcopal Church, U.S.A. As my first reflection on Vatican II's ecumenical legacy, I believe it established a benchmark on the way we would (or should!) do our ecumenical work, that is, including and engaging Christians of other traditions and churches to be part of the discussion and conversation, even in our internal work and deliberations. And, we should invite persons to share from the point of view of those most intimately involved--in this case, beginning with assessments by Catholics--and to listen first for understanding of others' positions before moving to express our own experiences, positions, or interpretations. I was tempted to synthesize these rich articles from Mid-Stream into a summary of common themes, issues, or topics. However, in going back through the statements, I found that approach to be unsatisfactory, because it would wash out some of the soaring language and images and stories in the articles, and it would not do justice to differences embedded in the diversity of perspectives represented. So, briefly, I want to share highlights from some of these different voices as they reflected on their experiences of Vatican II and as they projected those hopes and expectations into an ecumenical future. Then, I will draw together a series of reflections from the perspective of the Disciples of Christ on the legacy of Vatican II seen now from the vantage point of fifty years later. II. Highlights from My Reading. 1. In his reflections on the results of Vatican II, then-Bishop Willebrands, who at that time was the secretary of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity at the Vatican, stressed that [i]t may be interesting, and important, to study the development of theology between the announcement of the Council and its closure; or to evaluate the theological content of the conciliar discussions; but what the Roman Catholic must do, above all, is to accept gratefully and carry out courageously the task laid upon us by the Council. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».