Has Vatican II been <i>Hermeneutered</i> ? Recovering and Developing its Theological Achievements following Rahner and Lonergan
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 50th anniversary of Vatican II (1962–65) provides a good opportunity to reflect on its theological significance. The ongoing debates surrounding the hermeneutics of the council, the plethora of historical-critical studies, and ecclesiastical resistance to its broader implementation raise the question: Has the creative Spirit and the original enthusiasm for the council been neutralized by such resistance, scholarly reluctance, and the seeming endless hermeneutic speculation? Pope Francis speaks about the resistance to Vatican II: There are those who resist it outright and those who resist it by building a monument to it. With this critique as a starting point, this paper revisits Rahner’s concise hermeneutics of the council because it presents an historical analysis but with a theological trajectory. In this context, this article articulates some of the permanent theological achievements of Vatican II taking the thought of Bernard Lonergan as a lead and speculates about two future developments.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it