Rebooting Ecumenism, the Theological Equivalent of the Climate Crisis: The Role of Urgency and Accountability on the Road to Ecclesial Interdependence

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This seems to be a very narrowly focused argument for a specific audience and community, but within that context it is well presented and flows well. It seems more reminiscent of a manifesto than a typical scholarly paper, but it seems like it will fit well within the issue that it's called for. The logical substructure supports the rhetorical flow, also. 

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable feedback.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript offers a nuanced assessment of the current status of ecumenism and the challenges to which it is confronted, if it is to move forward and truly contribute to achieving its presumed aim: foster and bring about Christian unity (across denominational differences and distinctions). The manuscript offers an especially useful account of the stalemate most ecumenical dialogues have reached and the ivory tower (self-enclosed) character of ecumenism, as a specialized form of discourse and interaction to and of which other scholars and the majority of faithful have little access and understanding. The manuscript moreover proposes helpful strategies to move beyond this state of stagnation toward a stance of felt urgency and responsible accountability. The manuscript therefore provides an original and important contribution to the existing body of literature on ecumenism and as such deserves to be published in Religions. To ensure that the argument is most compelling, a few minor changes are however in order: 1) a number of broad claims need to be provided with sufficient supporting evidence; 2) the distinction between divine-human and human-to-human synergy and their possible interaction needs to be further clarified and 3) the involvement of Christianity and the Christian Churches in the current ecological and social crisis should be clearly affirmed. For more detailed comments, please consult the attached manuscript including my electronic annotations (critical remarks and suggested changes).

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The article is well-written, the English flows well, though a number of typographical changes need to be made. The footnotes need to be revised to comply with the Chicago style of academic referencing. A few bibliographical references are missing. For a detailed list of the changes to make, please consult the attached manuscript including my electronic annotations.

Author Response

Thank you for your considerate and immensely valuable feedback. I have incorporated your suggestions and revised the submission. I believe that your comments have helped me improve the article.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

5-6 - The difficulties in ecumenical cooperation mirror those in the climate crisis

Q - is there more than mirroring involved here?
- is the crisis more than a parallel (maybe also an opportunity)?

17-18 - a divine-human coproduction - I suggest avoiding terms with economic connotations

22-26 - relevance of perichoresis

27-33 - excellent weighty observation

41-42 - given the synergic character of ecumenism, does the potential rebooting of ecumenism in crisis require more than 'to identify, own, and call out the flaws that we have introduced in the process' and 'to see anew God’s original design'? like, for instance, discerning where and how is God, in his infinite and gracious providence working today in our world, and joining him in this work as co-labourers?

83-88 - I welcome the call to appreciate ecumenical progress. However, is the image of progress too embellished? Ex. the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity is not joined by many Orthodox churches, and see also the grave disagreement and even intra-church schism concerning Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

90 - 'a tower with a very small base' - indeed, official ecumenism is 'of the few', ecclesially-bureaucratic, rather than a grass roots movement 'of the many'.

94-102 - 'failure of ecumenism to deliver on the promise of unity adds to the wider sinfulness of our world' - indeed, it does, but is there more to it than that, like, for instance, instead of being a prophetic sign of Kingdom hope, the lack of Christian unity adds to the growing despair in our world?

147 -'Dr Kobe’s speech' - change to Dr Kobia's (also in line 159)

163-164 - 'This transition of ‘ownership’ from ecumenical institutions to living ecclesial contexts has been and remains the bottleneck of ecumenism' - if by this is meant the transition from ecumenical institutions to local denominational ecclesial INSTITUTIONS, that not solution at all, in my view - replacing global bureaucracy with local bureaucracy will lead to grass-roots bureaucracy, NOT grass-roots ecumenism

185-186 - 'Ecclesial self-sufficiency treats ecumenical engagement as a process that has to do with ‘witness’ rather than ‘conversion’.' - agreed, yet, witness vs conversion is a false dilemma as if conversion is superior to if not even a replacement of witness - the current weakness of the missional call of the church in Orthodoxy should be a warning against juxtaposing these two - not that the author tries to do this, but the way things are expressed may lend such an undesirable implication for the text. I would rather see these two in succession with conversion as a precondition and foundation of witness.

240-245 - excellent point

260-271 - good treatment of the reason why ecclesial self-sufficiency affects the ability of the church to be prophetic in relation to the world

277-278 - very important point!!!

287-288 - I wonder if it is not somewhat reductionistic to discuss this problem exclusively as one of proclamation/kerygma? even witness, conceived exclusively as conveying a message, and thus non-holistic, may be insufficient from a missional perspective
325-330 - 'hermeneutical crisis' - indeed!!! - this is manifested in different ways in different traditions - in evangelicalism, for instance, it consists of the literalist and biblical docetic temptations and is manifested differently in Catholicism

385-191 - the fear of 'spoiling the peace' - as illusionary as it may be - great deceit, indeed

409-414 - on Receptive Ecumenism - 'to succeed it 410
must break new ground where the original modern ecumenical paradigm failed: it has to engage ‘the many’ not just those already on the inside of the ecumenical endeavour' ---- agreed, but could you elaborate a bit on how could this be accomplished in practical terms?

479-488 - soft ecumenical language as 'newspeak' - very important (and often neglected) point - is the current ecumenical crisis the unavoidable result of the ecumenical process being led by 'church diplomats/bureaucrats', used to saying nothing by using seemingly weighty (but in reality empty) words?

499-501 -'The Orthodox Church has a problem with ecumenical accountability because the dynamic of unity in the Orthodox Church is informed by looking inwardly for the source of accountability' - worse even, may I  suggest, inwardly meaning not even inter-Orthodox, but, in most cases, intra-national/nationalist/philetist context :-(

514 - I suggest replacing the familiar 'Tamara’s assessment' with the more formal 'Grdzelidze's assessment'

516-523 - brilliant!

556-557 - accountability as discernment - this a very fertile idea!

636-642 - 'the ecumenical practice of seeking unity is treated as a kind of extracurricular activity to the internal functioning and decision-making of member Churches'-very good analogy!!!

645-647 - 'The disconnect between ‘the professionals’ and ‘the λαός’ is a major factor of the lukewarm present condition of ecumenism.' - could this also be extended to the dominance of special priesthood/clergy and the insignificant role played by lay people in the day to day life of Orthodox local communities?

Final observation: the idea of the ecumenical crisis mirroring the ecological crisis has, in my opinion, much more potential than that of a mirror. What if ecumenism could be open to learning from what ecologists do well in tackling the environmental crisis while trying to repeat the ecologists' mistakes? And, why not, vice versa?
ecumenism and ecology are two dimensions of the current human crisis. And they may be much more correlated than we tend to think. So, why lose the opportunity for an intersectional solution?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

slight language check would be useful

Author Response

Thank you for your considerate and immensely valuable feedback. I have incorporated your suggestions and revised the submission. I believe that your comments have helped me improve the article.