Les agents de pastorale dans la structure actuelle des paroisses et quelques propositions pour l'avenir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has now been several years since the laity first responded to a call for an increased involvement in church ministry, whether because of a shortage of priests or in the context of the bishop's or the parish priest's new vision of lay ministry. But this new form of ministry was not meant to be a passing one; on the contrary, it has never stopped increasing throughout the years, regardless of the reasons for its origin, and we now realize that practices and situations for the lay minister vary greatly from parish to parish. The A. starts by defining the proper identity of the priest, the deacon, and the lay ecclesial minister, in order to understand how these ministries may interact in symbiosis and in collaborative unity. Parishes have undergone a considerable transformation in these last decades and this phenomenon must be taken into account when defining the role of lay ministers. After a brief reminder of the canonical norms governing this ministry, the A. looks at the lay ecclesial minister's responsibilities in the present situation and offers a few suggestions for future lay ministry. Adequate parameters of formation and competence, a public commissioning, and thorough mandates and job descriptions must be developed if this ministry is to bear fruit and work collaboratively with other ministries.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".