MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Theological, Sociological and Historical Factors Influencing the Evangelical Turn in Contemporary Catholicism

2009· article· en· W1528626258 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Rymarz

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Blackfriars · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Tourism and Spaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProclamationSociologyEcclesiologyOutreachEvangelismReligious studiesTheologyPhilosophyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Theological, historical and sociological factors help explain the evangelical turn in contemporary Catholicism. Theological factors considered here are an emphasis on evangelization as something of the Church's very nature and not just an activity that it does. This sits well with an ecclesiology that stresses the Church as a communion of disciples of Jesus. Three historical factors are raised all of which result in a more evangelical expression of Catholicism. These are a greater tension between the culture of the Church and wider culture. A renewed emphasis on conversion with a Christological focus and a greater emphasis on scripture in the life of the church. In sociological terms, a more evangelical Catholicism is evident in the movement away from a socialization model of religious affiliation to one which emphasizes choice, the religious consumer and a range of options. In this environment the Church must put more emphasis on evangelical proclamation as a way of pastoral outreach. A more evangelical Catholicism is seen as a general principle without being closed to other types of expression.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations18
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew BlackfriarsSame topicReligious Tourism and SpacesFrench-language works237,207