MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W13565882

Vingt ans après la promulgation du code de droit canonique : Qu'en est-il du service des laïcs dans l'église?

2004· article· fr· W13565882 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anne Asselin

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia canonica · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheology and Canon Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristian ministryPromulgationHumanitiesRelation (database)SociologyPolitical scienceService (business)LawIdentity (music)TheologyPhilosophyAestheticsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lack of ordained ministers in several parts of the world has brought about the creation of new ministerial practices, requiring an increased implication of the laity in the pastoral life of the Church ad intra. The practice has often greatly surpassed the forecasts of the universal law and one would have expected new magisterial directives. In fact, these have seemed to be restrictive of the implication of the laity rather than encouraging of new forms of collaboration between ordained and non-ordained ministers. The restrictions have appeared to stem from an apparent fear of competition between these two forms of ministry. If a new form of collaborative ministry is to see the light, the identity of both ministries - ordained and non-ordained - must be defined and understood. But this does not mean that lay ministry is to be defined and restricted to a mere suppletive role: lay ministry must be recognized as a gift to the Church and must be acknowledged as such. The article first looks into the laity's mission according to the norms of the 1983 Code in relation to the tria munera, and underlines a few problem areas. It then suggests a theological perception of lay ministry which confers its uniqueness and, with this perception in mind, it proposes new paths to be explored in the development of canonical norms governing the participation of the laity in the life of the Church and the effective consultation of laypeople in the decision-making processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudia canonicaSame topicTheology and Canon Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207