MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1497575271 · doi:10.13130/1971-8543/2977

La responsabilità della gerarchia ecclesiastica nel caso degli abusi sessuali commessi dai chierici, fra diritto canonico e diritti statuali

2013· article· it· W1497575271 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pierluigi Consorti

Bibliographic record

VenueCINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheology and Canon Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObligationLawHierarchyEngineeringHumanitiesSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contributo sottoposto a valutazione. SOMMARIO: 1. Connessioni e distinzioni tra responsabilità morale e responsabilità giuridica negli ordinamenti religiosi - 2. Responsabilità morale e responsabilità giuridica della gerarchia ecclesiastica - 3. La responsabilità giuridica della gerarchia nell’ordinamento canonico e sue conseguenze negli ordinamenti statuali - 4. La riparazione del danno ingiusto nel diritto canonico. Responsabilità della gerarchia - 5. La responsabilità penale della gerarchia nel caso di abusi sessuali commessi dai chierici - 6. Responsabilità morale, pastorale e comunionale della gerarchia nel caso di abusi sessuali commessi dai chierici. ABSTRACT Catholic Hierarchy Responsibility in Clerical Sexual Abuse: Between Canon Law and Civil Law This essay aims to demonstrate moral and legal catholic hierarchy responsibility in clerical sexual abuses. Stories about child maltreatment in catholic Church dominated media worldwide. There is no longer any doubt about the need to punish the guilty, both in canon and civil law. It means that they must be punished under criminal law and they must refund victims. However there are divisions about hierarchy responsibility. Some civil courts (eg. in the USA, Canada or Spain) attributed to the diocese the obligation to pay damages. These statements are very criticized by the canonists, who contest the equivalence relationship priest-diocese as a business one. So they claim the legal irresponsibility of hierarchy. At the moment this is the position of the Italian courts. The present essay defends the opposite view. The hierarchy has a primary moral responsibility, which obliges both to defend the victims of the abuses committed by the clergy, both the ecclesial community from abusive priests. This moral responsibility translates into a legal one, which requires the hierarchy to refund the victims on the basis of canon law. Therefore, the civil courts may impose diocesan bishops the obligation to refund victims. Keywords: Catholic Church, Catholic Church sex abuse scandal, sexual abuse, pedophilia, Canon Law, ethics, law & religion, clerical sexual misconduct

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa)Same topicTheology and Canon Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207