MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594079289 · doi:10.17771/pucrio.ateo.29277

O PODER PASTORAL COMO DIACONIA CARITATIS: UM OLHAR HISTÓRICO-TEOLÓGICO DO DIACONADO EM SUA TESSITURA NO TEMPO

2017· article· pt· W2594079289 on OpenAlexaff
Luciano Rocha Pinto

Bibliographic record

VenueAtualidade Teológica · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious and Theological Studies
Canadian institutionsDiacon (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A experiência do povo hebreu de um Deus-Pastor, que caminha, protege e conduz às fontes de alimento, adquire visibilidade na concepção cristã do Bom Pastor. As noções de cuidado e de doação atravessam a relação pastor rebanho e ganham sentido a partir da diaconia. A missão da Igreja está atravessada pela exigência do serviço oblativo de si em função do outro. Assim, o objetivo específico deste trabalho é analisar a diaconia da Igreja a partir de um estudo de caso: o diaconado. O Diácono, sacramento do Cristo-Servo, tem seu pastorado, por vezes, reduzido ao assistencialismo e à beneficência, em detrimento de seu caráter missionário e ministerial, restringindo, assim, o real significado de sua diaconia caritatis. A caridade ilumina sua ação pastoral que não está restrita à mera beneficência. Sua ação amorosa tem em vista o bem do rebanho. Rebanho que não é seu, mas de Cristo. Rebanho que não reúne, pois, não é pastor como o sacerdote, mas que pastoreia na comunhão com o Epíscopo e o Presbítero. Seu ministério é, pois, transversal. Seu pastorado relaciona e media altar e assembleia, servindo a Cristo na mesa da Palavra, da Liturgia e da Caridade.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.016
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtualidade TeológicaSame topicReligious and Theological StudiesFrench-language works237,207