Insulating the Church: Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral v. Aga and the Suppression of Public Law in the Construction of Religious Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral v. Aga, the Supreme Court of Canada undertook to grapple with the question of whether, when, and to what extent courts should get involved in the internal decisions of religious groups where there are allegations of procedural unfairness. This paper approaches Aga with an interest in the issue of state regulation of religion through law. The paper (1) reviews and assesses the Court’s judgment; (2) summarizes and analyzes the 12 intervener submissions, many of which were made by religious groups likely to be affected by the Court’s eventual judgment; and (3) outlines some conclusions that interpret Aga in light of the intervener submissions and the Court’s lead precedent on point, Wall. The paper argues that Wall’s tenuous suppression of public law in the internal matters of religious organizations is affırmed and advanced in Aga. For all the Court’s insistence that the “private law” construction of religious associations does not completely insulate religious groups from judicial oversight, there appears to be no place for public and constitutional law in setting norms for how religious groups should treat their members, including whether and how they offer avenues for grievances and redress.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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".