Le non-chrétiens,sujets de devoirs et de droits dans le droit canonique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canon law binds only the baptised members of the Catholic Church. However, when dealing with the missionary activity of the Church, it also concerns all other human beings. Ancient concepts, such as pagans or infidels, are no longer used in the law, and hardly ever occur in the writings of the magisterium. Among such former notions, barbarians stands out with the richest history. Analyses of the term by Bartolome de Las Casas and Jose de Acosta in the 16 th century are unavoidable landmarks in the evolution of missionary canon law. Their conclusions are opposite: Las Casas disqualifies any operational use of the term, whereas Acosta's subcategories justify, to a limited extent, the intervention of the secular arm in evangelisation. His line could still be felt in the Church's teaching as late as 1940. Modern canon law has developed as substitutes the negative categories of non-baptised, non-believers, and non-christians. These too are unsatisfactory, but no alternatives have emerged, although the 1917 Code had introduced the notion of homo viator (the wayfarer) (can. 745). While church law generally abstains from imposing any definite obligation on those outside of communion, the 1983 Code does so in can. 748 1: All are bound to seek the truth... when they have found it, then... they are bound... to embrace and keep it. That the Oriental Code omitted the whole paragraph shows how difficult it is for canon law to say something meaningful in this respect without reawakening old controversies about missionary methods. The solution presupposes a truthful dialogue on human rights with systems of law different from the one which underlies canon law in its present form.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".