Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I did read the submitted artcle with iterest, being myself involved in pilgrimage studies and interested in inter-religious dialogue.

The article offers intersting insights into an ethnic and religious minority based in Sicily, and experiencing ways to express their religious identity in a new context. The description is rich and most innterpretations are fitting.

However I feel less convinced regarding the outcomes from the qualitative analysis: it is clearly insuficient and needs to be improved to offer a more accurate exposition and analysis about the content of the registered texts and testimonies; we need a deeper hermeneutic or perhaps a "thick description". Then, the author(s) take for granted twice (pp. 4 and 7) that Hinduism is open to other religions; but we are witnessing these years a growing hostility and even persecution in India of other religions in the name of Hinduism. Even if India is far away, I would be more cautious regarding such claims.

Literature on pilgrimage studies is aboundant, but such a framework is missing when analysing the meaning of the present case of study.

I would expect much more ethnographic work and less theoretical views on philosophers who propose greater consensus and the like.

Author Response

Thank you for your interest in the article under analysis. The purpose of this article is to raise awareness of the potential, strengths and weaknesses of and in religious dialogue. The information that can be deduced from and in reading the article is helpful in understanding the importance of establishing one or more days dedicated to religious encounter in an area . The purpose of this article is to make known the potential, strengths and weaknesses of and in interreligious dialogue. The information that can be deduced from and in reading of the article in understanding the "significant" importance of the official institution of one or more days dedicated to religious encounter in a territory. This "institutionality" of interreligious dialogue, on  the territory of Palermo, was established in 2016 by Archbishop Lorefice (therefore from the Christian-Catholic religion) that  opened a "window" to the world to  other religions present in the territory itself, thus creating the possibility of study and reflection on the importance of the terminologies of "solidarity", "sharing", "respect for the environment" etc. It isn’t  only a question of encouraging  religious leaders to act as instruments of peace and peacemaking , but above all of considering the concept of dialogue combined with the concept of peace as “necessary” . Therefore, it isn’t  longer a question of terminology but above all of awareness that dialogue builds "bridges" of solidarity to break down the "walls" of indifference. In this case, the possibility of being able to observe, analyse and research results leading to answers of "sharing" of faith help researchers to open more avenues of research hypotheses and scientific sharing. Given these considerations, participant observation is unquestionably the most appropriate – the data collected can be used to show how much the value of sharing and comparison is needed in social research. The possibility of attending dialogue meetings for a long time has allowed me to tiptoe into the belief of others and thus discover the tangible "solidarity" and the sense of shared humanity to scientific “ sharing “ answers . Given these conditions, participant observation is undoubtedly the most appropriate, and the data collected can be used to show how the value of sharing and confrontation is necessary in social research . The possibility of attending dialogue meetings for a long time has allowed me to participate in the belief of others and thus  discover tangible “ solidarity” and  a shared sense of humanity.

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic of the article is interesting.
Research methods are diverse and well-chosen.
I positively assess the selection of the surveyed groups and reaching the respondents.
I encourage the author to clearly indicate what the main purpose of the article is. It is also worth writing which conclusions are the most important.
A few sentences about the theoretical and practical usefulness of the research can be added: Who can use the information contained in the article, especially the research results? How can they be used?

Loving one's religion and respecting others shows the deep value of humanity. It can also be a valuable testimony for people seeking faith.

Author Response

Thank you for your interest in the article under analysis. The purpose of this article is to raise awareness of the potential, strengths and weaknesses of and in religious dialogue. The information that can be deduced from and in reading the article helps in the in understanding of the "significant" importance of the institution of one or more days dedicated to religious encounter a territory. In this case, the possibility of being able to observe, analyze and research results that lead to responses of "sharing" of the faith help researches open more avenues of research hypotheses and scientific sharing. The data collected can be used to show how much necessary the value of sharing and comparison is in social research.  Being able to of attending dialogue meetings for a long time has allowed me to tiptoe into the beliefs of others and thus discover the tangible "solidarity" and the sense of shared humanity.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx