The Babtism on the Background of Liturgic Reforms of the 16th and 20th Century.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work Liturgical Reforms and Renewal concerning baptism in the 16th and 20th century explores relationship between liturgical reforms of baptismal rites in the 16th century and contemporary liturgical movement. The main theme of the work is the transformation of Christian initiation at the end of 20th and its relation to the reforms of baptismal rites in the reformation period. The first part of the work describes reforms of Lutheran and Anglican baptismal rites. There are two main sources used for comparison: Luther's Taufbüchleins and first two editions of the Book of Common Prayer. The second part of the work is dedicated to contemporary efforts to renew baptismal rites. The rites of Canadian Anglicans and Lutherans serve as prototypes. The investigation of baptismal rites is preceded by the theological examination of any performed changes. The conclusion of the work transcends its aim when it shows the problems of renewal in wider context. It provides with the typology of the opponents of liturgical movement and tries to bring deeper insight into historical connections which form their attitudes. In the conclusion, we can find author's perspective on the contribution of renewal in baptismal theology and liturgy for the broadest ecumena. This work came into being at the Institute of Ecumenical Studies...
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".