Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study concerning the history of the sacrament of penance and its pastoral practice is always an interesting issue. This kind of knowledge can be useful to understand the very sacrament and, especially, the way of its celebration in the ecclesial community along the centuries both from the point of view of the pastors and the faithful. The rereading of the liturgical practice presented in Castellani’s Liber Sacerdotalis, constitutes an interesting and useful contribution to better understanding of how the celebration of penance was performed in the days immediately preceding the Council of Trent. It also helps to verify the content and form of the celebration which appeared in the rituals after the Council. The article shows the context of the penance in the light of Missale (first edition in 1474) and at the background of the great rituals typical of the entire sixteenth century. Access to the original text allows us to grasp numerous details that appear in the 26 chapters of the whole work. Browsing the pages of Sacerdotale is like immersing in the ecclesiastical practice that is permeated by the canonical care for the integrity of confession.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".