MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556580609 · doi:10.3138/tjt.4202a

Sacred Scripture at Vatican <scp>ii</scp>

2016· article· en· W2556580609 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francis J. Moloney

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheology and Canon Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevelationLiturgyMagisteriumVernacularTheologyEucharistCatholic theologyPhilosophyHoly SeeChristianityBishopsReligious studiesLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The documents of the Second Vatican Council are shot through with the language of the Bible, Christian liturgical traditions, and the fathers of the church. The church's historical journey away from its earlier focus upon these sources was reversed at Vatican ii. Two documents deal specifically with the use of the Word of God: Sacrosanctum Concilium (On the Liturgy) and Dei Verbum (On Revelation). sc, the first document to appear (1963), insisted upon a broader and deeper use of the Word of God in the liturgical texts, and in a renewal of the lectionary. Vernacular celebration initiated a regular exposure to sacred Scripture and called for biblically based preaching. Promulgated toward the close of the council (1965), dv was an epoch-making statement on the function of revelation in the love affair between God and humankind. Crucial teachings upon the role and mutuality of Scripture, tradition, and the magisterium broke new ground in the history of Catholic thought. Not new, but freshly stated, Vatican ii insisted upon the unique reception of Jesus Christ at the one table of the Eucharist and the Word. The decades since the council have struggled to respond to the council's insistence upon the role of the Word of God at the heart of the Catholic Church. The challenge remains. It still remains to be faced in a Catholic world very different from the one that produced sc and dv.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToronto Journal of TheologySame topicTheology and Canon Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207