MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319990975 · doi:10.26443/jcreor.v4i1.76

Christological Ecclesiology & Reconciliation

2022· article· en· W4319990975 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Shaun Retallick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Council for Research on Religion · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVietnamese History and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcclesiologyOriginal sinCulpabilityHarmPerspective (graphical)SociologyInstitutionCatholic theologyLawTheologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the Catholic Church’s response to Canada’s Indian Residential School system; namely, how it has chosen to frame and understand its role and responsibility in the harm inflicted upon indigenous persons and communities. The predominant approach has been to spare the Catholic Church itself of culpability while focusing on that of individual Catholics and institutions (e.g., dioceses and religious orders). At the root of this perspective appears to be the distinction between the Church, which is holy, and her members, who are sinners. This article, however, argues that this view is insufficient in light of a christological ecclesiology: Church institutions and members form one body in Christ with two natures, divine and human, which should neither be divided nor confused. With this view in mind, it is argued that reconciliation efforts can and should be made on behalf of not only individual Catholics and institutions, but the Catholic Church as a whole.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.024
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.490
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.031 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Council for Research on ReligionSame topicVietnamese History and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207