Particular Churches and the Authority Established In Them: Commentary on Canons 368-430 by John A. Renken (review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Particular Churches and the Authority Established In Them: Commentary on Canons 368-430 by John A. Renken Siobhan M. Verbeek Particular Churches and the Authority Established In Them: Commentary on Canons 368-430, by John A. Renken. Ottawa: Faculty of Canon Law, Saint Paul University, 2011. Pp. 9-411. This recently published addition to the series of commentaries on the 1983 Code of Canon Law published by the Faculty of Canon Law at Saint Paul University offers a juridical and theological commentary on canons 368- 430, treating particular churches, bishops, the impeded see, and the vacant see respectively. Imitating the style of earlier volumes in the series by Rev. William H. Woestman, O.M.I., the author's commentary consists primarily of summaries of the law, followed by pertinent, but at times lengthy and repetitive, quotations from conciliar and post-conciliar texts. The quotations have the effect of illustrating the doctrinal foundations of the Church's legislation, as well as subsequent clarifications from the Holy See following the promulgation of the Code. Modern readers will especially appreciate the provision of internet addresses for the cited documentation. While the commentary is attentive to cite, where applicable, the parallel references from the 1917 Code of Canon Law, unlike other works by the same author it does not always retrieve the rich canonical tradition associated with distinct juridical concepts. This is the case, for example, with the [End Page 691] foundational principle for the governance of a diocese during a vacant see, "Sede vacante, nihil innovetur" (c. 428, §1). For this reason, the volume should not be viewed as a stand-alone text; rather, it should be read in conjunction with other available scholarly commentaries. Readers would be impoverished were they to overlook the footnotes that accompany the main commentaries, since it is there that one finds important explanations not contained in the main text. The footnotes, moreover, provide a wealth of information for researchers who have a special interest in the legislative history undergirding the 1983 norms, and it is there where the author offers occasional musings for future emendations to the law based upon his extensive experience implementing it on the local level. Characteristic of other volumes in the series, the appendices and bibliography within this commentary provide extensive documentation that will be of interest to both scholars of the law and practitioners in the identified areas. In some instances, documents are being made readily available in English translation for the first time, e.g., the formula of the oath of fidelity that is approved by the Apostolic See for the installation of a bishop. Regrettably, the volume was published just prior to the erection of the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter in the United States, a structure that will likely be scrutinized in a future edition to complement the commentary's extensive treatment of the apostolic constitution Anglicanorum coetibus, and its complementary norms. If the text can be faulted it would be because of the unevenness, in both length and depth, of the various commentaries for the individual canons. One hopes, moreover, that a second edition will remedy the frequent and distracting editorial oversights. A revised edition will also provide an occasion to integrate the reflections found in the 2009 study of the Congregation for Bishops, Il Vescovo Emerito, and the 2011 modifications instituted by Pope Benedict XVI to the format to be observed during the mandated ad limina visits. [End Page 692] Siobhan M. Verbeek United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Secretariat of Doctrine and Canonical Affairs Washington, DC Copyright © 2012 The Catholic University of America Press
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 | 0.009 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.006 |
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".