Debating Same-Sex Marriage in Canada: The Contribution of the Canadian Council
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When the Canadian Council of Churches (CCC) was initiated more than sixty years ago, the guiding vision was one of "full structural unity" for Canada's Christian churches. Within the global context, the World Council of Churches (WCC) similarly envisioned a full world communion of Christian traditions. The inaugural meeting of the CCC, held at Yorkminster Park Baptist Church in Toronto in May 1944, brought together ten Canadian church traditions. Four years later, in August 1948, the first meeting of the WCC was convened in Amsterdam with 140 traditions represented. At its 1950 convention in Toronto, the WCC produced The Toronto Statement, "The Church, the Churches, and the World Council of Churches." As the document laid to rest the utopian vision of "full structural unity" and explicitly repudiated the "super-church" model, the ongoing dilemma of the Christian ecumenical movement was identified: by what vision and means would it be possible to simultaneously respect each member tradition's uniqueness and foster ecumenical unity?
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 | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.059 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
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".