“Fruit of the Earth”, “Fruit of the Vine”, “Work of Human Hands”: A Logiké Latreía towards a Transformative Response to the Ecological Crisis? Liturgical and Pastoral Implications

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

No comments.The article addresses the important issue of Christians' concern for the environment. This problem is analyzed from the point of view of theology, more specifically, the theology of liturgy and liturgical practice. The author uses an essayistic style rather than a scholarly one, but this is not a mistake, as it makes for a more engaging reading.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.  Much appreciated.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The study takes on a vital subject: liturgical reorientation to the cosmos, materiality, and ecology. Especially from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, their is rich ground to till here (pun intended). But while the subject is vital, it has been addressed in other recent work, some of which is cited extensively in this article (e.g., Cann, Irwin).

This leads to the first of the issues with the piece in its current form: originality. It is not clear at any point what the actual contribution to scholarship the piece is trying to make. This reads much more like an academically-informed meditation on the relevant themes and authors than it does like an argument for a thesis.

It seems that the potential for a contribution is here, though, lurking around the subject matter of "ecological crisis." However, liturgy's relationship to the crisis is not clear in the current form of the article. It seems that the most the current article can say is that liturgy works against "individualism," and thus, maybe, helps people be less likely to degrade the environment? This case, if it is what's intended, needs to be buttressed and argued along more compelling and clear lines throughout. Such a case would need to refer more vividly to literature relation liturgy to personal and corporate psychology, scarcity mindsets, resource allotment, and the role of aesthetic experience in altering the moral imagination.

This additional research and reformatting and (greatly) expanding the argumentation does mean that the piece would need to be rewritten fairly holistically. There are portions in the middle that are wonderfully written and could be re-used in the newly staged piece, but the first 20% and final 20% (at the very least) would need substantial reworking with additional research and argumentation.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Some of the comments here are related to style/clarity, but others cross into more substantive territory as well. I've only taken the first 80 lines are so to draw relevant examples from. The issues do recur with some regularity, so they author is encouraged to edit with these issues in mind:

GRANDIOSE LANGUAGE - tamp this down and use more circumspect, scholarly language

"nothing could be further from the truth" (ln. 31)

"unequivocally true" (ln. 36)

UNESTABLISHED MEANING - weighted phraseology that doesn't have clear meaning and isn't defined

"The otherworldly realm" (ln. 34)

"rugged individualism" (ln. 49)

"worship experience" "mere ritualism" (ln. 59)

[all of the above would also need some appear to sources, since all of the above are referred to as though they are obviously true/real]

UNCLEAR PROSE - several places, but see especially the sentences in lns. 39-40, 78-79, etc.

Author Response

Comment:

The study takes on a vital subject: liturgical reorientation to the cosmos, materiality, and ecology. Especially from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, their is rich ground to till here (pun intended). But while the subject is vital, it has been addressed in other recent work, some of which is cited extensively in this article (e.g., Cann, Irwin).

This leads to the first of the issues with the piece in its current form: originality. It is not clear at any point what the actual contribution to scholarship the piece is trying to make. This reads much more like an academically-informed meditation on the relevant themes and authors than it does like an argument for a thesis.

It seems that the potential for a contribution is here, though, lurking around the subject matter of "ecological crisis." However, liturgy's relationship to the crisis is not clear in the current form of the article. It seems that the most the current article can say is that liturgy works against "individualism," and thus, maybe, helps people be less likely to degrade the environment? This case, if it is what's intended, needs to be buttressed and argued along more compelling and clear lines throughout. Such a case would need to refer more vividly to literature relation liturgy to personal and corporate psychology, scarcity mindsets, resource allotment, and the role of aesthetic experience in altering the moral imagination.

This additional research and reformatting and (greatly) expanding the argumentation does mean that the piece would need to be rewritten fairly holistically. There are portions in the middle that are wonderfully written and could be re-used in the newly staged piece, but the first 20% and final 20% (at the very least) would need substantial reworking with additional research and argumentation.

 

Response:

I have endeavoured to make the changes based on the suggestions.  I wanted to explain that terms such as "rugged individualism" are present in literature related to theology, as shown in the footnotes.  All aspects which are not deemed my work are evidenced in the corresponding footnotes and bibliography.

I have endeavoured to update the document according to the very much-appreciate suggestions.  The only problem is that there is so much I wanted to include but I am conscious of the limits.

Regarding the tone of the English language, I have tried to tone down the grandiose tone and only used the pronoun "we" where absolutely necessary in order to offer an engaging aspect, included in the scholarly material.  

With regard to scarcity mindset and land allotment theories, I felt it was helpful to include some aspects without dealing too much into some of them as I was realising that, for example, land allotment has very ample ramifications.

I have made some changes at the beginning and the very end, and endeavoured to add more material to support my argumentation throughout, even eliminating a number of paragraphs completely, substituting them with others, in order to elucidate and to affirm my argumentation, namely that the catastrophe of environmental degradation can be addressed by liturgical participation but once attention to the suffering and experiences of the individual have been attended too.  Otherwise it would be useless to envision a participation in the pinnacle of the life-changing experience for the faithful: the Eucharist. 

It has been a beautiful learning experience for me, undergoing further research, and for that, I am immensely grateful.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper concerns the connnection between ecological question with the liturgy. In this regard is the article actual and orignal. The author presents one aspect of this connection and pastoral conclusions of it. The articel is well structured and well referenced. The author refers no only to the documents of the Magsiterium of the Church but also to the contemporary elaborations to this topic. So can this ppaer be a contribution to the theological response to the question of ecological crisis and develope the Christian theology of creation.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments.  This is appreciated.