The Role of Black Christian Beliefs in the Civil Rights Movement: A Paradigm for a Better Understanding of Religious Freedom

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is interesting and the thesis that the CRM benefited from the previous free exercise court decisions is strong. The thesis is supported by thorough knowledge of law and (Supreme) court cases.

There are several serious technical issues, though, as well as some academic concerns.

First, although I do not detect plagiarism, I have certain concerns. The Author uses several times the expression “dissertation” instead of “article.” There is no footnote, however, indicating that the article is based on a dissertation. Not doing so might lead to accusations of self-plagiarism.

Second, the structure of the article is not clear. The text is too long and not carefully adjusted to the standards of the journal article format. It is quite obvious that it used to be a different piece of writing. The article should be much more concise. The structure should be clearer: e.g. we have a subsection I – twice in the article

I.                     THE ROLE OF THE BLACK CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS PROTEST IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT

I.                     Religious Freedom Expanded Through Free Exercise Cases and Important Principles

Additionally, the title of the first subsection I.THE ROLE OF THE BLACK CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS PROTEST IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT – does not really denote what is described in the following text.

Among technical issues it is also important to note that the article is not carefully edited. Footnotes need editing and a consistent style (italics in proper places etc.), especially when including the page numbers (various styles, e.g. footnote 3 –“99”, footnote 5 – lack of italics etc.). Footnote 109 is definitely too long. Too many details (not necessary for the subject matter). Parts of the text included in footnote 109 seem to be copied from different texts/parts of texts - which make the references in the footnote mixed up and confusing. Parts of this footnote are in different font than other ones. On page 22  “ibid.” seems to be referring to Exodus, while it certainly is not. It makes the text and information within less reliable. It needs editing.

The first subsections of the article are never commented or referred to thereafter, even in the conclusion which makes them look artificially added to the text and not consistent with the rest of narration.

The court cases are described in too much detail. Long descriptions do not contribute to knowledge, neither do they help the narration, nor the thesis. They should be shortened and presented as concise summaries.

Due to too much information, details and digressions the main topic is sometimes blurred. The conclusion does not cover/order/summarize all the provided information/sections but comments only on the few threads of thought.

These technical issues are most likely a result of not carefully adjusting a bigger piece of writing to the format of a journal article. They need to be corrected.

As to the content and merit – there are also some problems:

Generally, the view of the CRM as a religiously motivated movement is one-sided. The movement was definitely religiously-justified by the leaders such Martin Luther King Jr. and by the pastors that took part in the movement. Recent research, however, suggests that although many pastors and churches joined the movement they were not its frontrunners or initiators. Justice Marshall’s opinion on p. 28 is important but it is not based on academic research and does not mean that all Black churches and all Black pastors were involved in CRM or that they were the initiators of the protests. Many scholars stress that it was never the majority of Black churches that joined the CRM (although many congregants and pastors did). Those Black pastors who joined it, however, did use religious motivations and justifications and definitely profited from what the Author describes as the free exercise legal climate. According to many authors, while the movement fought for ethnic minority rights, not all of its leaders and initiators considered them in religious terms, although the use of religious rhetoric definitely helped the cause (as did numerous Black churches at that time and before). MLK’s Bible-based argument about an unjust law, however, should not be attributed to the reasoning of all CRM activists. Research shows that many of the early leaders referred more to the Gandhian and secular principles.

The Author might not agree with these statements but for the reliability of the article, He/She/They should take such opinions into consideration or acknowledge them  – especially that they might slightly affect the thesis. It is not to say the thesis is wrong or that the CRM did not profit from the described cases, but it might have profited regardless of the fact if it was a religiously- or non-religiously-motivated movement or a movement that was religiously-justified by some of the leaders (including the most famous ones).

I am listing the works that the Authors should take into consideration when describing the role of religion and Black churches in the CRM:

Payne, Charles: I’ve Got the Light of Freedom: The Organizing Tradition and the Mississippi Freedom Struggle. University of California Press: Berkeley 1995.

Harvey, Paul: Freedom’s Coming: Religious Culture and the Shaping of the South from the Civil War Through the Civil Rights Era. University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill 2005.

Chong, Dennis: Collective Action and the Civil Rights Movement. University of Chicago Press: Chicago 1991.

Best, Wallace D.: “The Right Achieved and the Wrong Way Conquered: J.H. Jackson, Martin Luther King,

Jr., and the Conflict over Civil Rights.” Religion and American Culture 16 (2), 2006,pp. 195–226;

Marable, Manning: “The Role of the African American Church in the Civil Rights Movement.” NBC Learn. NBC Universal Media 2015, https://archives.nbclearn.com/portal/site/k-12/browse/?cuecard=5041;

Martin, Lerone: “Bureau Clergyman: How the FBI Colluded with an African American Televangelist to Destroy Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.” Religion and American Culture: A Journal of Interpretation 28 (1), 2018, pp. 1–51.

Johnson, Stephen D.: “The Role of the Black Church in Black Civil Rights Movement.” In: Johnson Stephen D./Tamney Joseph B. (eds.): The Political Role of Religion in the United States. Westview: Boulder 1986, pp. 307–324.

McDaniel, Eric C.: Politics in the Pews. The Political Mobilization of Black Churches. University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor 2008.

Pinn, Anthony B.:  The Black Church in the Post-Civil Rights Era. Orbis Books:  Maryknoll, NY 2002.

Reed, Adolph Jr.: The Jessie Jackson Phenomenon:  The Crisis of Purpose in AfroAmerican Politics. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT 1986.

Savage, Barbara D.: Your Spirits Walk Beside Us. The Politics of Black Religion. The Belknap Press: Cambridge MA 2008.

Of course the debate concerning the ‘opiate or inspiration’ role of Black churches is much longer and starts with DuBois, Frazier and Myrdal etc., who in fact pointed to the ‘opiate view’. In the 1950s and 1960s, however, a number of churches became more active and the ‘inspiration’ perspective became dominant among scholars. But research has shown that not all churches were involved. Nowadays scholars usually admit that the nature of the Black Church is complicated and the roles they choose depend on many factors (McDaniel). To omit such an important part of the Black Church research and to present the CRM only as a religious movement based in churches makes the article (an thesis) incomplete.

The topic of the role of the American form of the separation of church and state for the existence and activism of Black churches – has also been analyzed previously both in English- and non-English literature.

There is another inconsistency or rather a simplification – in footnote 11. In fact Rawls’ model comprises many levels of public spheres and religion is not eliminated from all of them. Please, check.

In the section on Religion as a unifying force there are no reference to most basic sociological theories of religion, including Weber’s and Durkheim’s.

In order for the article to qualify for publication the form should be amended. Thanks to including the missing information and correcting some parts of the article, it will become more objective and complete.

Author Response

Responses to Reviewer:

1. The author refers to dissertation but there is no footnote. The author added a footnote disclosing that the article is based upon my dissertation
2. The structure of the article is unclear. The author incorporated the standards of the journal article format. 
3. The article is not carefully edited. Footnotes have been changed to endnotes, superfluous footnotes have been deleted, and references have been edited with careful attention to journal standards. The conclusion better incorporates the major sections of the article and descriptions of court cases are more succinct.
4. The view that the CRM is religiously inspired and motivated is one-sided.  The author is grateful for the list of sources to consider when describing the role of Black Churches in the CRM, has reviewed suggested sources and added others to the paper where relevant. The author does not agree that the view that the movement was religiously inspired is one-sided. This view has been supported by past and current scholarship on the CRM. To suggest that the early CRM was energized by religious sensibilities does not meant that other influences did not share and inspire that movement. In several places throughout the paper, the author mentions some of these other factors which included secular constitutional principles, Gandhian principles of nonviolence, and the Black Power Movement. However, Marsh, Pinn, West, Crawford, Rouse, Woods and others argue that although faith played a prominent role in the CRM this does not mean that all churches and pastors participated in the movement. In response to feedback, the author added a footnote that incorporates relevant research by Charles Marsh and Anthony Pinn.  In addition, while the author agrees that religious terms, secular terms and Gandhian principles inspired protests, the author does not believe it is possible to isolate each source as important at different times in the movement as they all interacted and interrelated with religious principles and values to shape the movement. The author has already discussed how secular principles animated nonviolent protest. He or she can also add a section to discuss how Gandhian principles guided protest strategies. Furthermore, the author agrees with the reviewer that the CRM may have profited from the First Amendment cases even if was not a movement animated by religious sensibilities. However, it is precisely the fact that the larger movement, according to Marsh, was "anchored in the language, imagery, and energies of the church" that shows why it is important to highlight the impact of the expansion of religious rights on the larger struggle for civil rights. 
5. Rawls' model compromises many levels of public spheres and religion is not eliminated from all of them. The author checked and edited the footnote. 
6. Section on Religion as a unifying force should incorporate sociological theories of religion. This section was edited and the author decided not to add additional sources so as to shorten the article.

The author thanks the reviewer for his/her comments and looks forward to submitting the revised manuscript with the necessary corrections. 

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript is well written and clearly argued on the important connection between the Civil Rights Movement and legal arguments for religious freedom. This is a clear connection with little religious research field. This reviewer is unable to assess whether legal scholarship has explored this connection but believes that this article could also make a significant contribution in the legal field. The article is written in a clear prose and contains sufficient background information to contextualize the significance of the argument. I would recommend including "religious freedom" in the title of the article as it will give potential readers a better sense of the content. The current mention of "Church and State Relations" means very different things to different readers. 

Author Response

The author is grateful for the reviewer's feedback to the article. In response to the reviewer's suggestion, the author changed the title to read "The Role of Religious Beliefs in the Civil Rights Movement: "The Role of Christian Beliefs in the Civil Rights Movement: A Paradigm for Better Understanding Religious Freedom. The author hopes that this revised title more clearly conveys the topic, scope and goals of the article. 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The text looks much better now. Thank you for introducing amendments. I have just a few comments. On the technical side: in the last sentences of the first paragraph of the introduction - there are some spelling mistakes. It would be useful to check the whole text - there might be more. I am not sure if you need double brackets everywhere. In part two, first paragraph, line 7, I think you need a comma or 'to' before 'think' (While individuals are free think and...). There are several places in some paragraphs where there's double spacing while the rest of the text in single-spaced. It should be corrected.

On the content: the way you framed the first part of the text indeed helps omit the sociological theories of the role of religion in societies in general. It looks fine now. One thing to consider is that although you are generally right about the purposes that were important for the Founding Fathers, for Jefferson the protection of the state from religion was also important. He took the argument of Roger Williams, who focused on the protection of religion from the state, and showed the other side of it, too. Also, in this respect, the non-believers or non-theists can actually be seen as a minority than need protection from the state (or/and the dominant religious views), too. Nonetheless, the text looks very professional, objective and balanced at the moment and the main arguments of the text are clearly stated and compelling.

I apologize for my late review caused by my hospitalization.

The text looks much better now. Thank you for introducing amendments. I have just a few comments. On the technical side: in the last sentences of the first paragraph of the introduction - there are some spelling mistakes. It would be useful to check the whole text - there might be more. I am not sure if you need double brackets everywhere. In part two, first paragraph, line 7, I think you need a comma or 'to' before 'think' (While individuals are free think and...). There are several places in some paragraphs where there's double spacing while the rest of the text in single-spaced. It should be corrected.

On the content: the way you framed the first part of the text indeed helps omit the sociological theories of the role of religion in societies in general. It looks fine now. One thing to consider is that although you are generally right about the purposes that were important for the Founding Fathers, for Jefferson the protection of the state from religion was also important. He took the argument of Roger Williams, who focused on the protection of religion from the state, and showed the other side of it, too. Also, in this respect, the non-believers or non-theists can also be seen as a minority than need protection from the state (or/and the dominant religious views). Nonetheless, the text looks very professional, objective and balanced at the moment and the main arguments of the text are clearly stated and compelling.