LES PARRAINS: NOTE CANONIQUE SUR UN PROBLÈME PASTORAL DANS CANONS 873 ET 874, §2 DU CIC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some of the canonical norms for baptismal are verv specific and have occasioned disagreements between parents and priests, deacons, pastoral ministers, and chancellors. In this article, the author reviews the previous and current legislation in order to understand the rationale of canons 873 and 874, §2. Canon 873 requires only one sponsor but also allows both a male and female sponsor. More and more often though, parents present two sponsors of the same gender, and one of them is admitted as a This article examines the provisions of canons 873 and 874, §2 in light of the 1917 Code, the Council of Trent, and the evolution of the 1983 Code. It is proposed that canon 873 no longer has a raison d'etre. This canon is based on spiritual affinity arising from baptism and its accompanying impediment for marriage, established in the previous legislation. Both reasons no longer exist in the 1983 Code. However, canon 873 continues to be the ius vigens until this legislation is abolished. The author also demonstrates, concerning canon 874, §2, that a baptized Catholic cannot be admitted as a witness.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".