Divine Warrant and Political Discipline: Preaching on the Groningen <i>Landdag</i> in the Third Quarter of the Seventeenth Century in the City of Groningen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract At the end of the sixteenth century in the (nascent) Dutch Republic, a new balance between government and Church was set as the Reformed Church became the public church. In the public church, the government had the authority to announce special days of prayer without permission from the ecclesiastical authorities. Furthermore, ministers were expected to give religious justification for the government’s policy. This article presents a case study of special days of prayer in the city of Groningen. Every year a special church service was held in Groningen on the so-called Groninger Landdag, the day on which the States distributed the official positions. This paper discusses two sermons delivered by Groningen ministers on such a Groninger Landdag. The first is the 1650 sermon from Johannes Martinus, the second the 1666 sermon from Thomas Alberthoma. I will argue that these sermons show how the ministers operated as civil servants and followed the government, and at the same time operated as servants of the Word of God and therefore could be critical towards the authorities. The regents needed divine warrant for their position.
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 | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".