Bibliographic record
Abstract
hen the late Frank H. Epp first ran for political office in the 1970s, John A. Toews of the Mennonite Brethren Bible College in Winnipeg advised his friend not to become involved in politics.Toews said to me, "Frank can do more good as an educator and minister of the Gospel than in federal government."Epp was not elected to the halls of power-no doubt, for Toews, a blessing in disguise.Frank Epp represented a Russian-Mennonite tradition whose members favoured political involvement, whereas Toews still held to the view that Mennonites should not seek governmental office.As members of separate religious communities, Anabaptist-Mennonites were to model a Christian faith and life in a predominantly godless society.According to the earliest Anabaptist confession of faith, drawn up at Schleitheim in 1527, believers were to separate themselves from the world, including sinful pleasures, all forms of violence, and the holding of political office.While until fairly recently the principle of separation from the world remained an ideal for many Mennonites, from the very beginning of their history, Mennonites still acted politically.Persecuted for their beliefs and forced to flee from place to place, Mennonites negotiated settlement terms and "privileges" with regional rulers in order to exercise their faith, achieve social stability, and prosper economically.The very survival of Mennonites as a people was largely due to this ability to come to
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.789 | 0.786 |
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".