The power of the church to dissolve the matrimonial bond in favour of the faith
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article se penche sur la question des principes essentiels contenus dans la procedure pour la dissolution des mariages en faveur de la foi. L'A. affirme que l'exercice du pouvoir pontifical dans la dissolution d'un mariage presuppose l'existence d'une juste cause, definie de maniere ultime comme le sains animarum. Dans les causes de privilege de la foi, c'est precisement ce benefice a la foi qui constitue une juste cause requise pour la dissolution valide d'un mariage. De plus, l'article traite de la question du manque possible de sincerite pour les promesses requises des parties dans le cas du mariage d'une personne non baptisee ou baptisee hors de l'Eglise catholique. L'analyse du probleme conduit l'A. a conclure que les cautiones sont directement liees au benefice de la foi de la partie catholique pour qui la faveur est accordee. En consequence, dans certains cas, le manque de sincerite dans les promesses pourrait gravement compromettre l'existence de la juste cause pour la dissolution, remettant en question la validite meme de la faveur.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".