Trapped in Economic Vulnerability? Pastoral Theological Reflections on Poverty

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article starts out with a strong description of the complexities of poverty and an intriguing statement about pore receivers of pastoral care changing the church. However, it does not convince in the form it has now.

Theologically, the article is less strong (par. 3). The theological importance of poverty could be explained better by going deeper into Gutierrez instead of giving general statements on the identity of the church ('not a building') (p. 6, first paragraph). The author gives a rather idealized view of the church.
The status of the section on the biblical words on poverty is unclear: is it an exegesis (no); is it biblical theology (not really, only one commentary is cited and only one text is looked at, the vital story of exodus is left out, the whole impression is that the texts are randomly chosen), the texts in the New Testament are mentioned, but not addressed, so it is not clear how the author reaches the conclusion about poverty. Both regarding OT and NT,  conclusions are drawn too easily. and are not reached in a convincing way. It is strange, that using Gutierrez as a vital source, the conclusion is that responsibility FOR the poor and care FOR  less privileged is needed. Here, the poor are still objects. What about the poor as subjects? Is God not in solidarity WITH the poor (God's option for the poor) ?
I propose to shorten the third paragraph and concentrate on Gutierrez line of thinking and how he connects church. theology and poverty.

Another reason for this is that we then arrive faster at the central topic of this article: pastoral care. This only comes up at p. 9 of 13. That is really too late.

Paragraph 4 - the DIPP could be introduced much earlier in the article and related to paragraph 2 and 3. Develop the strength of DIPP in pastoral care FROM the complexities of poverty and the theology of Gutierrez. Now, there seems to be almost no connection, except by the use of key words like vulnerability (how does this relate to Gutierrez?) The concept of 'talking back' could be stronger emphasized in this respect a a pastoral principle.

The thought of the poor changing the pastoral ways of the church is very compelling, but I do not really see how the author sees and understands  this and what is needed to create spaces for change. The author could be a lot more concrete in this respect.

The style of the article could be better and the line of the argument clearer. It needs editing. The language is sometimes confusing and the way the argument is build, is not clear (see details in the article, when it is underlined without comment, it is a language or style issue). A lot of these passages could be simply deleted. All the sentences that state what Christians or the Church SHOULD do, are not making the article stronger, but rather weaken the argument when they are not related to the developed argument.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

see the uploaded pdf.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.

I have added my reply to your comments in the file attached.

greetings

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article refers primarily to poverty in the African context and only briefly engages with the category of vulnerability.

The title appears to equate economic vulnerability with poverty, which, in my view, constitutes a conceptual error. The scholarly contribution of this article has already been extensively covered by theologies closely related to liberation theology.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English is clear and, for the most part, appropriate and precise.

Author Response

Thank you for the comment.

I have attended to the major comment you made as best I could in the new version.

greetings 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is quite interesting and deals substantially with the poverty in the African continent and the  link between poverty and religion; it presents some important points to reflect on, i will list below the positive and the negative-pros and cons if you like- i have detected within the article:

Pros:

- the are some original points as for instance at page 3 when it is said: 'For the poor to change pastoral theology' implying that the relationship between the church-religion- and society can be a two ways road;

-at page 9 the concept of theology from below which seems to imply an idea of a theology being shared with the people and not simply imposed from above, although this point should be investigated a bit further.

Cons

- the word/concept ubuntu must be explained  for all the readers who are not familiar with it

- page 2; it is said that 'Christian church should be a prominent actor', it should be explained in what way?

- more explanations should be given to these two terms, vulnerability and vulnerance, given their importance in the article,

- 'Pentecostalism in itself appeals to African Christians', it would  be  interesting to know why is that and also the author needs some data to demonstrate it;

- the line at page 7 quoting that 'Jobs sees the poor  as victims' must be explained as Job in his lamentations addressed his situation in different ways at different times;

- again at page 7 'the Old Testament describes the poor as the needy', yes and no, because the Old Testament also considered misfortunes or sickness in life as the punishment of God for previous sins, so I think this part should be added or at least considered;

- at page 10 'deeper sense of care for the poor' this part needs a bit more explanation; we need to understand how in concrete terms the theology. from below can help the poor;

 

please see my comment on the paper attached.

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The language throughout the article is fine, i have placed a couple of points when i think a different wording is needed but personally i think it is ok; it could be useful for the author to submit his/her article to a professional English native speaker reader just to have a second opinion but all in all the language is ok

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your comments.

I have attended to the comments you have made. please file attached. 

greetings

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is a good paper. I just think it needs some small revisions. The first phase of the abstract is not accurate because I don't see that the article is trying to poof it. What the author says in the first paragraph of the introduction – "poverty is most probably one of the root causes of many challenges people must face daily" – is the author's view in this text.  But I think the author must clarify that poverty is the cause of many challenges, but it is also a consequence of other challenges if she/he says on page 04, where she/he says that one of the causes of poverty is "cultural belief systems". This is very interesting and the author does not show it well. What follows is not clear. I think she/her must develop it and show clear examples of African cultural belief systems that are among the causes of poverty. 

I also think the author must clarify which church she/her is talking about. The author only says the church. Throughout the text, I thought it was the evangelical or protestant churches. In the end, the author quoted Pope Francis and Benedict, then I thought it was the Catholic Church. As it is a text targeting pastoral theology and church ministry for the poor, the author must be clear if his/her proposal is for the pastoral ministry of any Christian Church or for a specific tradition. 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English seems appropriate with some minor edits. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for the comments you have made.

I have attended to your comments. Please file attached.

greetings

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear author, Thank you for the revised version of your article. It hink you have bettered the structure and argument of your paper a lot and it is know a fine contribution to the theological engagement with poverty by churches in which Gutierrez plays an important part (and rightly so, thank you for engaging with this important theologian, who could be discussed more).

One minor issue: you cite 'Bouwers du Toit', but her name is Bowers Du Toit.   

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I have no comments

Author Response

Thank you for pointing this out. I have corrected it.

Much appreciation 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article is highly improved after the corrections

Author Response

Thank you very much.

It is really appreciated