Spirituality in Practice: Paul’s Call Toward a Pastoral Theology of Relationships

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The problem with this text is that it is homiletic. The author is commenting on a theme (not on a letter or pericope) and is using both the Pauline epistolary and the authors to make his discourse.  Expressions such as: “Scot McKnight enthusiastically agrees” confirm.

There is no structure where a hypothesis is presented, arguments are developed and a conclusion is reached. This is shown by the way the manuscript ends: with an invitation, not a conclusion: ‘We would do well to follow his example’.

Moreover, a scientific article does not necessarily have to be based on personal experience. I believe that personal experience is fundamental when it comes to research, but it does not necessarily have to be described in the manuscript.

I invite you to make an analysis of Paul's contribution in the letter to the Romans, as is the initial intention and how it illuminates reality, not the other way around. And consult the theoretical basis of the journal and of scientific articles in general.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

As a linguistic contribution, differentiate Church (Christian or Catholic) from parish or, if preferred, local church, in order to avoid confusion and generalities.

Author Response

Reviewer: The problem with this text is that it is homiletic. The author is commenting on a theme (not on a letter or pericope) and is using both the Pauline epistolary and the authors to make his discourse.  Expressions such as: “Scot McKnight enthusiastically agrees” confirm.

There is no structure where a hypothesis is presented, arguments are developed and a conclusion is reached. This is shown by the way the manuscript ends: with an invitation, not a conclusion: ‘We would do well to follow his example’.

Thank you for your suggestions. By nature of this special edition, my essay is focused more on integration of theology and praxis than it is original research in NT studies. I've worked with my editor to update the language to be less homiletic. I also clarified this with a research-scope paragraph early in the essay as well as a change in title and some subheadings.

Reviewer: I invite you to make an analysis of Paul's contribution in the letter to the Romans, as is the initial intention and how it illuminates reality, not the other way around. And consult the theoretical basis of the journal and of scientific articles in general.

I updated the paragraph explaining Paul's purpose in the letter to better show his intentions as a backdrop for my essay themes.

Reviewer: As a linguistic contribution, differentiate Church (Christian or Catholic) from parish or, if preferred, local church, in order to avoid confusion and generalities.

I updated language to specify both the church whose examples I used, as well as "Christian" Spiritual formation. 

I've uploaded the latest version with edits in RED.

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am well familiar with this discussion zone, as it is central to the Christian life and is a familiar one, at the very least, to evangelicals such as myself.  Its approach to Romans -- distinguishing Ch.1-11 as foundational from 12-13 and then 14-16 -- fits comfortably, and I teach it as well.  One might characterize this as an orthodoxy + orthopraxy exercise, and the authors cited fit well.   A significant question that arose in my mind as I read this was, 'Are there writers who disagree with this?'   And, given the brief excursus into the question of women in ministry, which is overall a relevant question, I yet queried whether in a short article of about five pages whether it was necessary to your particular theme and purpose.  Additionally, I wondered whether there are theologians who differ from your (and my) approach on the overall topic -- i.e. could there not be some critical, even adversarial, material brought in that might sharpen even further what you are presenting here.    I note as well that while the expression and style are crystal clear from the outset, there does seem to be a need for some italicization in the biblio.  I hope these notes are helpful. 

Author Response

Reviewer: A significant question that arose in my mind as I read this was, 'Are there writers who disagree with this?'   

Thank you for your feedback. By nature of this special edition, my essay is intentionally focused more on integration of theology and praxis than it is original NT research. I don't know of any writers who disagree with these findings, but I did add some ideas for further research in the last section.

And, given the brief excursus into the question of women in ministry, which is overall a relevant question, I yet queried whether in a short article of about five pages whether it was necessary to your particular theme and purpose.  Additionally, I wondered whether there are theologians who differ from your (and my) approach on the overall topic -- i.e. could there not be some critical, even adversarial, material brought in that might sharpen even further what you are presenting here. 

I've updated the section heading to clarify my goal with that section. 

  I note as well that while the expression and style are crystal clear from the outset, there does seem to be a need for some italicization in the biblio. 

I updated the bibliography with italics and added a couple of additional sources

I hope these notes are helpful. 

Thank you. The full edits document is uploaded below with changes in RED

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The author included the suggestions and improved the quality of his manuscript.