Expanding Patristic perspectives: Thinking with 50 years of the Canadian Society of Patristic Studies/Association Canadienne des Études Patristiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Why would anyone wish to found a new society dedicated to Patristics in the 1970s? In conventional historiographies of Religious Studies, the late 20th century is typically characterized as an era of “progress” away from Theology, the centering of authoritative corpora, and older concerns with doctrine, men, and elites. Even among specialists in Christian antiquity, this era tends to be associated with the recovery of “lost books,” interest in “heretical” and “marginal” perspectives, the amplification of voices “from below,” and newer concerns with bodies, women, and practice. Honoring 50 years of the Canadian Society of Patristic Studies/Association Canadienne des Études Patristiques (CSPS/ACÉP)—founded in 1975—this essay asks what such narratives of scholarly “progress” erase about the past and present alike. It uses the archives of the CSPS/ACÉP as a lens onto the multivocality of Patristic literature and its modern study, as richly realized within bilingual contexts in Canada in particular.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".