Non-liturgic Colloquies in Activities of Parish Priests of Nizhny Novgorod Diocese in the Last Quarter of the 19th Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on archival materials of the Fund the Nizhny Novgorod Theological Consistory the process of formation and development of the practice of non-liturgic colloquies in the Nizhny Novgorod diocese is examined. The subject and methods of colloquies, number of them, number of attendees are considered. The diocesan administration controlled the organization of non-liturgic colloquies in parishes, recommendations for their implementation were developed. The author identifies problems in the organization of colloquies involving the selection of subject and methods for their implementation, the lack of attendees because of the temporal affairs, the spread of old-belief ideas, the lack of motivation, etc. The role of conversations in the sphere of religious and moral education and upbringing of Nizhny Novgorod governorate Orthodox residents is determined. Even the first year of colloquies resulted in the form of more diligent visitation of churches in less than half of the parishes in the diocese. The comparative analysis of data on the number of persons involved in the main sacraments of the Church in the period of Lent before and after the non-liturgic colloquies is made. It indicates a slight increase in the number of communicants of the Orthodox after the implementation of the colloquies into Church life. During 10 years (1887-1897) most of the temples of the Nizhny Novgorod diocese started to practice colloquies. However, they resembled religious readings more by their nature. The author comes to the conclusion that in general readings and colloquies contributed toward religious education, raised the moral level and the returned part of the congregation of the diocese to the official Orthodox 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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".