MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2301821068

Le Code de Droit Canonique de 1983, en raison du phénomène de l'inculturation, est-il adapté au Japon?

2002· article· fr· W2301821068 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jean-Paul Labelle

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia canonica · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanon lawCivil codeDemocracyOrder (exchange)Code (set theory)LawPolitical scienceSociologyHumanitiesReligious studiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In his address to the Roman Rota on February 4, 1977, Pope Paul VI insisted that the new Code of Canon Law was meant Inc the Catholic Church throughout the world and, hence, the values of various civil cultures had to be better acknowledged and accepted. In a similar spirit of inculturation, the new 1948 Japanese civil code had incorporated numerous Western democratic principles; hence, marriages ratified according to customs now had to be registered according to civil regulations in order to be recognized as valid. In 1958, the A. Succeeded in having these civil requirements accepted by the local Church in Japan. The article explains how the 1983 Code has allowed lot different cultures and particular situations in local churches. For example, the presbyteral council and the diocesan pastoral council are canonical institutions created to facilitate dialogue in the Church; this corresponds to the Japanese mentality of sodan which encourages the sharing of opinions and ideas at ah soneto1 levels. Canon 529, §2 encourages the faithful to develop a concern for the community; similarly, harmonious family ties are very important in Japanese culture. Canons 1118, §2 and 1127, §2 permits the celebration of a marriage outside of a church or an oratory, and for the dispensation from canonical form; in Japan, where Catholics make up but 0.5 of 1% of the total population, the celebration of a marriage in a neutral place or according to another public form is often the only acceptable solution. It is by making such allowances fur the various cultures of the world that the Code is truly a service in 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudia canonicaSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207