Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent decisions of its American and Canadian provinces on homosexuality have provoked a tumultuous crisis within the Anglican Communion but also a remarkable opportunity. The proponents hope that significant doctrinal developments are well underway the area of moral theology, but it is a new Anglican Communion ecclesiology that may be the enduring legacy of these times. The Windsor Report raises important questions about the limits of provincial autonomy and the primacy of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and these discussions the defects the ecclesiological self-understanding of the Episcopal Church have become apparent. For some time now various inter-Anglican bodies have called for enhanced role for the Archbishop of Canterbury within the Communion, and the Windsor Report moves this forward. There are striking parallels to the statements on authority by the Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission worthy of further reflection. If General Convention 2006 were to apologize to the rest of the Anglican Communion for its unilateral actions, as called for the Windsor Report and the 2005 Primates' Communique-admittedly unlikely possibility-it could justifiably argue that its culpa was felix. The complex social and moral questions surrounding human sexuality our culture would still remain unresolved our churches. Properly so, we should say, lest the pastoral character of Anglican church life be irretrievably lost, since at every level people will otherwise be forced to choose and divide. The felix the considerable disruptions occurring after General Convention 2003 is that Anglican ecclesiology will have entered a truly fruitful period of development. This is the debate we should engage, for it has implications that go well beyond the internal dynamics of Anglicanism. Within the Episcopal Church there is much catching up to be done. Our constitutional structure retains unmistakably secular shape, influenced as it was by the philosophical outlook of the later eighteenth century, and is proving to be a serious impediment to Christian unity. It worked well enough so long as nothing of real significance happened matters regarding faith and order. But the accelerating pace of social change has overwhelmed it and effectively made it the servant of the culture. It has become provincial the pejorative sense. The General Convention, for all practical purposes, has declared that its autonomy is its first principle. This is intolerable situation for those who would seek to live under the great canon of catholic authenticity, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus. There appears to be expectation that General Convention 2006 will assert that its actions are a legitimate expression of provincial autonomy and that the Anglican Communion's instrumentalities have no right to interfere its internal affairs. But it is by no means clear that the Episcopal Church should draw such a conclusion based on its own title deeds. According to the preamble to its constitution, the Episcopal Church acknowledges that it subsists within the Anglican Communion and communion with the see of Canterbury. One might reasonably infer that should the Episcopal Church ever find itself out of communion with the see of Canterbury, its own constitutional foundation could be jeopardy. Arguments have been offered informally that this would not be so, since the preamble was afterthought added by General Convention 1967 that functions as a mission statement about intentions rather than binding commitments. But the enabling resolution from 1967 declared that the preamble was to be an integral part of the Constitution.1 The definition it adopted about the Anglican identity of the Episcopal Church appears to have been drawn directly from Resolution 49 of the Lambeth Conference of 1930. This Lambeth resolution held that to be Anglican it is necessary to be in communion with the see of Canterbury. …
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.103 | 0.025 |
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".