MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168755433 · doi:10.1558/rrr.v10i3.343

Robert Singleton's Sermon at Paul's Cross in 1535: The ‘True Church’ and the Royal Supremacy

2008· article· en· W2168755433 on OpenAlexaff
Torrance Kirby

Bibliographic record

VenueReformation and Renaissance Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSermonParliamentEcclesiologyQueen (butterfly)TheologySingletonAllegoryArtPhilosophyLawArt historyPoliticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 2 April 1535, Robert Singleton, chaplain to Queen Anne Boleyn, preached a sermon at Paul's Cross. The unique, surviving printed copy of the sermon is housed in the Wren Library of Lincoln Cathedral. From 1533, Singleton had been a member of the circle of avant-garde evangelicals gathered at the margins of the Tudor court under the patronage of Thomas Cromwell. His sermon at Paul's Cross contributed to an orchestrated campaign in support of Cromwell's legislative programme, then proceding through Parliament, to sever all links of ecclesiastical jurisdiction with Rome and to confirm Henry's headship of the Church of England. The sermon interprets Paul's allegory of the earthly and the heavenly Jerusalem in the Epistle to the Galatians as a model for thinking about the distinction between the invisible and visible Church. Singleton harnesses Pauline ecclesiology in an apology for the royal supremacy. Presented here is a transcribed copy of the original printed version.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReformation and Renaissance ReviewSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207