“Water Brought Us Together”: A Baptismal Ethic from Flint
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a highly relevant contribution to contemporary contextual theology bringing together a renewed liberation theology with insights from practical sacramental theology.
Author Response
Thank you for such high praise, we sincerely appreciate it.
Reviewer 2 Report
Many thanks to the authors for this insightful and creative article. I would
recommend publishing this, so please take the following comments in that
light.
At the outset, it may be helpful for a general theological audience to briefly
explain what environmental racism is, or at least to cite some sources that
name the Flint water crisis as such.
I very much appreciated the "reverse engineering" of the see-judge-act
approach. This methodological choice made perfect sense in the context of
this study, and is a significant strength. This also allowed the authors to plumb
theological depths of actions: "this is not to say that theology was not present
in the actions, but rather that in highlighting the actions first we can then see
what values undergirded those actions" (lines 126-128).
I also appreciated the way the authors recognized that this study invited folks
to theological reflection, rather than implying that it was only observational.
As I read through the parts on baptismal solidarity, the citations of the
literature felt a bit thin. This can be forgiven in an article as focused on primary
research as this one is, but an area of development would be to engage more
broadly and deeply with the liturgical/sacramental theologies and theological
ethics that make a concept like baptismal solidarity thinkable.
Overall, this is a very strong article, and I would recommend publishing it
Author Response
Thank you for your close reading and offering such a thoughtful review. Included in the revision is an additional footnote to provide a definition of environmental racism. To the suggestion of engaging more broadly in the section on baptismal solidarity, while it is a great insight and we agree more could be done, the authors felt that it falls beyond the scope of this particular project. As this piece is intended to be reflective of the collective knowledge of the authors, to engage the literature further would risk the piece no longer being representative of all authors.
