Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a book for people who think they know the Society of Jesus.From the sixteenth century onward, many Catholics found its name presumptuous, its theology suspect, and its methods Machiavellian.Protestants could be freer in their invective, and attacked the Jesuits with relish as the pre-eminent Counter-Reformation force: an order sprung fully armed from the head of the Tridentine Zeus, wielding specious logic and slippery ethics, blindly obedient to the papal antichrist, and all too threateningly successful in its missionary activities .Secular histories offered a reheated protestantism without denominational peculiarities, sure of the bigotry of all religious zealots and happy to demonstrate undiscriminating objectivity by consigning both Ignatius and Calvin to the same ash heap.The Jesuits responded with in-house hagiographies whose uncritical and iiimioderate praise for the Society and its members seemed only to confirm the worst suspicions ofthe critics.The invective has cooled, but the stereotype Ungers.To adopt John Bossy's terminology, the Jesuits are often assumed to be models of the world-oriented, obedience-ordered, clerically-directed "Christianity Translated" that replaces the more conmiunitarian, sacramental, and lay-oriented "Tradi- tional Christianity" of the pre-Reformation period.But are they?John O' Malley does not directly engage the Society ' s historical or current critics, but his analysis of its history to 1565 demonstrates how wrong much of our confident stereotyping is.The first Jesuits were in many ways the exponents of "Traditional Christianity" who were hardly aware of how Christianity was being Translated around and within them.O'Malley's careful explication of the resulting paradoxes and contradictions gives a more nuanced view of the Society and, like William Bouwsma's John Calvin: A Sixteenth-Century Portrait (19SS), forces us to introduce uncertainty, tension, and moderation into our image of sixteenth-century religious reformers.O' Malley aims to understand the first Jesuits as they understood themselves, recapturing their "way of proceeding" from early documents, and determining how
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".