Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to recent demographic changes in Europe, the Christian Churches of Europe have come to recognise the importance of guiding their members in their encounter with Muslims living in their midst.The Conference of European Churches in cooperation with the (Roman Catholic) Council of European Bishops' Conferences have created an "Islam in Europe Committee" that published, in 2003, a Study Paper entitled "Meeting Muslims."*The Churches are fully aware that their discourse in regard to outsiders-to non-Christianshas cultural and social consequences.They remember with humility that faith in absolute truth sometimes produces arrogance and goes hand in hand with contempt for and hatred of dissidents.Since the wave of fascist anti-Semitism and the end of World War II, the Churches have struggled to revise their discourse in regard to Jews and Judaism.They now ask themselves the question how Christians should approach the Muslims living in Europe. Can Christians Respect Religious Pluralism?Are Christians faithful to their creed able to respect otherness?Can people who believe that Jesus Christ is the one mediator between God and humans honour members of non-Christian religions?The religious pluralism of today's society makes this an urgent questionfor Christians as well as for followers of other religions.Jonathan Sachs, a Jewish scholar and Orthodox rabbi, argues in his The Dignity of Difference (London: Continuum, 2002) that respect for religious pluralism is in accord with Jewish teaching, and Tariq Ramadan, a Muslim scholar and religious leader, argues in his Western Muslims and * Information about the "Islam in Europe Committee" can be found on the website, www.ccee.ch,maintained by the Council of European Bishops' Conferences, and on the website, www.cec-kek.org,maintained by the Conference of European Churches.
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 | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.025 |
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".