MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005693686

“From Rome to Home” Reception of the Second Vatican Council through the Second Synod of the Diocese of London in Canada

2021· dissertation· en· W7005693686 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCatholicism and Religious Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynodFaithActive listeningBishopsInterpretation (philosophy)Holy SeePrayerChose
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bishop of London in Canada came home from the Second Vatican Council resolved to open up the teachings of the Council. His purpose was to bring the spirit of the Council into his diocese. His determination that the people understand the significance of the Council in their daily lives was a move towards reception. He had a vision of engaging the faithful and listening to them because he took their sense of the faith seriously. In this way his operative theology was inductive. His chosen vehicle for opening up the spirit of the Council was a diocesan synod. It was to be a synod which broke the mould. Everyone in the diocese, clergy and laity, was welcome to participate. The Bishop stipulated that every person in the synod had the right to speak on any subject. Nobody should feel left out. The purpose of the synod was to listen to the people of the diocese as they articulated their interpretation and demonstrated their reception of the Council’s teaching. Bishop Carter said that he was obliged to listen to the people because the Council had talked about the infallibility of the people of God. The Bishop held that the charisms of the people were undeniable and irreplaceable. Together, clergy and laity, they formed the listening people of God. Listening was necessary because the Spirit would speak where the Spirit chose to speak. This dissertation traces the organisation and prosecution of the synod over its lifespan of three and a half years, drawing on the archives of the Diocese of London. It demonstrates that the synod was a fruitful and meaningful procedure for receiving the Second Vatican Council in the diocese. The synod was especially effective because of its inductive methodological approach which allowed Bishop Carter to consult with the people of the diocese and for them to make their voices heard. The result was a new consciousness among the participants allowing them to live as church more effectively. Fifty years later this pioneering synod is now seen in conformity with the call of Pope Francis that synodality is what God expects of the Church.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0330.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicCatholicism and Religious StudiesFrench-language works237,207