Epistemology of Bodies as Closets: Queer Theologies and the Resurrection of Martyrized Christo-Morphic Bodies

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article presents a substantial amount of theoretical sources that are abundantly quoted in some sessions of the article. There is also a session presenting the case of sexual and gender based violence in Latin America from statistics and examples and a final session seeking to bring the discussion to reflect on Jesus and the first Christian communities. Overall there seems to be too much information that is not well connected and articulated. The general impression is that the article was a wider paper that was cut for the publication in the form of an article and, because of that, there seem to be information and connections missing. There is undoubtedly merit in what is presented. But a reworking of the text in a more clear path and objective could benefit the article greatly. Especially the theoretical parts (on Rita Segato and Paul Preciado) can be shortened, presenting less direct quotations and making the argument more precise and articulated with the other parts of the article. The last part (on Jesus and the first Christian communities) is not well introduced and is somewhat disconnected from the rest.

Some more specific issues to pay attention:

- There are many (chapter) subdivisions; taking them out and making the text more organic migh help the reader with the flow of the argument

-        - The abstract states that it presents “the evolution of queer theologies in Latin America”, but actually very little is said about this field. It is only mentioned generally without actually giving a more solid idea of what the author understands as “queer theologies in Latin America”.

-        -  The article mentions throughout the text “organism-pueblo”, but never really explains the concept, where it comes from and how it is used to correlate to the experience of queer communities or movements or the Christian first communities

-          The very idea of queer communities or movements (specifically in Latin America) is complicated since it is not possible to see what the author is referring to. How are the queer communities and/or movements in Latin America? Where can one see them and how they function and produce meaning?

-    -      There is an emphasis on theory and theology as important for people’s lives and the creation of new understanding, meanings and practices. And although there is a strong emphasis on the body, such theories and theologies seem too abstract and disconnected from the reality and experience. Do theory and theology change reality or do the concrete experiences of peoples and communities?

-     -     The dependence on the historical Jesus and the experience of the first communities is kind of generalist, and presented as the key or fundamental issue for queer theologies. There are several issues to take into account here: the idea of a historical Jesus and what this means and is appropriated by different groups is very disputed (even Marcella Althaus-Reid will question this dependence on something “historical”); the suffering and the cross as a way to connect Jesus, the first communities and the experience of queer people today should not presented as the only possibility, since there are other elements of the queer experience that can evoke other theological issues and, even, Christologies; also, queer theologies, especially in Latin America, have long been crossing the boundaries of a Jesuscentric or Christocentric religious experience, particularly considering popular religiosity and how it is constructed in the experience of queer people. The suggestion is not necessarily to change the approach, but to make it more explicit that this is one particular approach and does not intend to frame everything that could be queer theology in Latin America.

Author Response

Dear editors of the Special Issue on Queer Theologies:

I want to express my sincere gratitude to you as editors as well as to the external reviewers for reviewing my article titled “Epistemology of Bodies’ Closets: Queer Theologies and the Becoming of Martyrized Christo-morphic Bodies.” I appreciate the constructive feedback and insightful comments that they provided. The suggestions have significantly improved the quality and clarity of the manuscript, and I am grateful for the expertise and guidance throughout this process.

I have carefully considered each of your comments and made the necessary 
revisions to address the concerns raised. In the revised version of the article, I 
have provided additional evidence to support my arguments, clarified 
ambiguous statements, and expanded upon certain sections to enhance the 
overall comprehensibility and coherence of the manuscript.

Specifically, I have made the following changes in response to the feedback 
received:

1. Revised the theoretical framework section to provide a more concise and 
logical flow of ideas, addressing the issues that reviewers highlighted as gaps 
and limitations.

2. Strengthened the analysis by addressing the concerns raised regarding the use of scholar Rita Laura Segato, reducing the necessary contribution to the 
article’s scope.

3. Improved the organization and structure of the article, ensuring a 
smoother transition between sections and subsections, eliminating some headings, and merging sections.

4. Incorporated relevant citations and references as suggested, which have 
enhanced the scholarly rigor and relevance of the work.

I believe these revisions have significantly improved the article and addressed 
the concerns raised during the review process. The revised version will 
contribute significantly to the existing literature and will be of interest to the 
readership of Religions Journal.

Once again, I sincerely appreciate the valuable feedback and constructive 
comments offered by the reviewers, which have undoubtedly strengthened the overall quality of the manuscript. I am grateful for the opportunity to revise and resubmit the article, and I look forward to the final evaluation.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Reviewer 2 Report

The first part of the paper follows Segato's work very closely and a lot of space is given over to the direct quotations - I wonder whether some of this material might have been paraphrased so that the paper author's critical voice was not squeezed out. It is notable that the author goes all the way back to Jagose (1996) and De Lauretis (1987) for their definition of queer theory and that engagement with more recent work (and especially shifts and developments on the field) is a little patchy.

Later, too, there are a lot of extended direct quotations and I wonder if this indicates a lack of confidence on the author's part to develop their own constructive argument. The christological discussion does not begin until p. 13 (more than two-thirds of the way through the paper) and this feels a little late.

I would like to recommend a rebalancing of the paper with the direct quotations reduced and abbreviated, to be replaced by more paraphrasing where appropriate, and certainly more development of the author's own account (still building on this scholarly material but giving more space to go beyond others' arguments).

The text gives (on p.7) a citation to Althaus-Reid 2019, but Althaus-Reid died in 2009 so I am not sure what this refers to. The only Althaus-Reid text listed in the bibliography is "Marx in a Gay Bar" from 2008.

In rebalancing the paper the author might like to refer to the following recent works to help them amplify their arguments:

Lisa Isherwood and Hugo Cordova Quero (eds.) (2021), The Indecent Theologies of Marcella Althaus-Reid: Voices from Asia and Latin America, Routledge

David Tombs (2022), The Crucifixion of Jesus: Torture, Sexual Abuse, and the Scandal of the Cross, Routledge

Jayme Reaves, David Tombs and Rocio Figueroa (eds.) (2021), When Did We See You Naked? Jesus as a Victim of Sexual Abuse, SCM Press

Special issue of Concilium on Queer Theologies, 2019.5, ed. Stefanie Knauss and Carlo Mendoza Alvarez (Spanish version at https://verbodivino.es/Libro/5043/teologias-queer-devenir-el-cuerpo-queer-de-cristo)

Anderson Fabian Santos Meza (2023), "Walking Indecently with Marcella Althaus-Reid: Doing Dissident and Liberative Theologies from the South", Religions 14.2

Author Response

Dear editors of the Special Issue on Queer Theologies:

I want to express my sincere gratitude to you as editors as well as to the external reviewers for reviewing my article titled “Epistemology of Bodies’ Closets: Queer Theologies and the Becoming of Martyrized Christo-morphic Bodies.” I appreciate the constructive feedback and insightful comments that they provided. The suggestions have significantly improved the quality and clarity of the manuscript, and I am grateful for the expertise and guidance throughout this process.

I have carefully considered each of your comments and made the necessary 
revisions to address the concerns raised. In the revised version of the article, I 
have provided additional evidence to support my arguments, clarified 
ambiguous statements, and expanded upon certain sections to enhance the 
overall comprehensibility and coherence of the manuscript.

Specifically, I have made the following changes in response to the feedback 
received:

1. Revised the theoretical framework section to provide a more concise and 
logical flow of ideas, addressing the issues that reviewers highlighted as gaps 
and limitations.

2. Strengthened the analysis by addressing the concerns raised regarding the use of scholar Rita Laura Segato, reducing the necessary contribution to the 
article’s scope.

3. Improved the organization and structure of the article, ensuring a 
smoother transition between sections and subsections, eliminating some headings, and merging sections.

4. Incorporated relevant citations and references as suggested, which have 
enhanced the scholarly rigor and relevance of the work.

I believe these revisions have significantly improved the article and addressed 
the concerns raised during the review process. The revised version will 
contribute significantly to the existing literature and will be of interest to the 
readership of Religions Journal.

Once again, I sincerely appreciate the valuable feedback and constructive 
comments offered by the reviewers, which have undoubtedly strengthened the overall quality of the manuscript. I am grateful for the opportunity to revise and resubmit the article, and I look forward to the final evaluation.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The author has reduced the use of extended direct quotations, which makes their own voice more clearly evident. 

However, despite the author's statement in response to the first reviews, they have not in fact drawn on any of the more recent literature I recommended, and so the paper still does not demonstrate adequate engagement with recent scholarship. Neither has the author strengthened the analysis.

Author Response

Please find paper revised attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

The major issues I detected in the first rounds of submission were the lack of engagement with recent scholarship in this area and the over-reliance on one scholar int he early part of the paper. In this new submission, both these problems have been rectified. The paper has been rebalanced and the author now shows appropriate familiarity and critical engagement with recent key literature in the area.