Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay explores the importance of dialogue in ecumenical relations in the thought and writing of Gregory Baum. To do so it focusses on three of his writings. The first is an interview he gave in 2005 to A. miller in the Journal of Philosophy and scripture. The second is his discussion of ecumenism in his 2005 book Amazing Church. A Catholic Theologian Remembers a Half Century of Change. The third is one of the last writings of Gregory Baum written in 2016 entitled « Interreligious Dialogue Includes Listening to Secular Voices », in the Toronto Journal of Theology. All three of these writings stem from his earlier writing on the second Vatican Council. The three documents which are referred to are Unitatis redintegratio, Nostra aetate, and Gaudium et spes as well as the 1991 document Dialogue and Proclamation. The essay therefore explores Baum’s appreciation of all three forms of ecumenical dialogue, namely that which exists between Christian denominations, inter faith and dialogue with secular thought. These are not exhaustive commentaries on the previous documents and they are certainly not exhaustive in terms of Baum’s theological perspective on ecumenical dialogue. Rather, they will serve as a springboard when asking if his perspectives are still relevant for the church today.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".