Interrogating and Constructing the ‘Authentic’ Roman Catholic Church: Feminist Perspectives Among Canadian Women Religious
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on qualitative interview and questionnaire data among 32 current and former women religious, this article explores the alternative constructions of the church by Canadian women religious and the corresponding practices they have engendered. It reviews the insights of feminist women religious with respect to their understandings and experiences of patriarchal structures and practices within the Roman Catholic Church, their resistance to, and dismissal of these structures and practices, and the construction of understandings and practices which, for the women religious in our study, more closely correspond to their vision of the ‘authentic’ church than to the hierarchical and patriarchal practices with which they are institutionally familiar. In so doing, we highlight examples of the sisters’ divergence from the patriarchal church, including their promotion and practice of feminist spirituality and activism. Our theoretical discussion of the constructions of the ‘authentic’ church within and alongside the hierarchical Catholic Church, as well as of the significance and challenges of these, are integrated throughout the recounting of the experiences of feminist women religious as they navigate the spaces they create in their relationship to the Church.
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 | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".