The 1962 Instruction Crimen sollicitationis: Caught Red-Handed or Handed a Red Herring?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La lettre apostolique de Jean-Paul II Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela, publiee en 2001, revelait pour la premiere fois l'existence d'un document disciplinaire secret de la Sacree Congregation du Saint-Office remontant a 1962, soit l'Instruction Crimen sollicitationis. Etant donne le contexte, soit la crise resultant d'accusations d'abus sexuel lancees contre des pretres et les accusations de complicite qui n'ont pas manque de fuser dans les medias apres la divulgation de ces normes de 1962, il semble qu'elles meritent de faire l'objet d'un examen plus attentif. L'A. commence par rendre compte de la nature et de la portee de l'Instruction, decrivant le crime de sollicitation et le distinguant de ce qu'il est convenu d'appeler le crimen pessimum. Puis il decrit tres en detail les procedures requises par les normes lorsqu'il s'agit de juger de causes penales impliquant de tels crimes. Enfin, il procede a une evaluation des normes elles-memes et, a la lumiere de modifications des procedures qui ont resulte de la lettre apostolique de 2001, il formule certaines critiques de la notion actuelle de secret pontifical.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.014 |
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".