The Catholic Church and its Orthodox sister churches twenty-five years after Balamand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1993 the Joint International Commission for Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church promulgated what became known as the Balamand Document, 'Uniatism, Method of Union of the Past and the Present Search for Full Communion'. While the first agreed statements of that ecumenical dialogue aroused great enthusiasm and hope for Catholic-Orthodox unity, the Balamand documented interjected a period of instability in Catholic-Orthodox relations that has persisted to this day. 00These sixteen essays by Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Eastern Catholic and independent scholars bring together studies on the quarter century since the Balamand document was first proclaimed. 0The first section of this book presents the historical and theological context of modern Orthodox-Catholic ecumenical dialogue. What is often at stake in movements of reconciliation are the healing of painful memories of the past. 0The second part of the book examines the reception and, in some cases, non-reception of the Balamand Document in Central and Eastern Europe, while the third section engages the reception of the Balamand Document in the Middle East, with chapters on the Oriental Orthodox Churches and the Assyrian Church of the East. 0The various authors reveal the great diversity that exists in the spiritual, theological, historical and liturgical traditions of the Eastern Catholic Churches, especially in their relations with the Orthodox Churches. The studies also examine differing perspectives on both the benefits and problematics of directly engaging Eastern Catholics in ecumenical dialogue, and the role that they might play in a vision of full communion so that reconciliation and unity have a truly authentic and lasting significance.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".