Towards a New Understanding of Vocation—Historical Traumas as Catalysts for the Changing Self-Perception of the Lower Clergy in the 20th Century

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study examines the traumatic changes in the self-image of the Catholic lower clergy in Eastern Europe (Hungary). Research into the lower clergy and the impact of their activities on the everyday religious practices of their communities is an important and recently prominent topic in Catholic church history. In addition to the choice of topic, the theoretical framework of the article (Bourdieu's concept of habitus) is also appropriate. Here, I would like to recommend to the author the theoretical works of recent years in Germany as a new approach to the problem raised (FREIST, Dagmar : 2015 Historische Praxeologie als Mikro-Historie. In: Praktiken der Neuzeit. Akteure – Handlungen – Artefakte. Hg. von Arndt Brendecke. Weimar–Köln–Wien, 62–77.; FÜSSEL, Marian: 2022 Praxeologie als Methode. In: Handbuch Methoden der Geschichts-wissenschaft. Hg. von Stefan Haas. Wiesbaden; RECKWITZ, Andreas: 2008 Praktiken und Diskurse. Eine sozialtheoretische und methodologische Relation. In: Theoretische Empirie. Zur Relevanz qualitativer Forschung. Hg. von Herbert Kalthoff – Stefan Hirschauer – Gesa Lindemann. Frankfurt am Main, 188–209.) The academic standards of the paper are high and the references are appropriate. Nevertheless, I consider it necessary to revise the article to make it more understandable to those who are less familiar with the Hungarian church structure and conditions, as many details remain unclear to an "outsider" reader. For example: the Diocese of Pécs, Székelyföld, József Mindszenty, etc.

Author Response

1.

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

Comments 1: [„Here, I would like to recommend to the author the theoretical works of recent years in Germany as a new approach to the problem raised (FREIST, Dagmar : 2015 Historische Praxeologie als Mikro-Historie. In: Praktiken der Neuzeit. Akteure – Handlungen – Artefakte. Hg. von Arndt Brendecke. Weimar–Köln–Wien, 62–77.; FÜSSEL, Marian: 2022 Praxeologie als Methode. In: Handbuch Methoden der Geschichts-wissenschaft. Hg. von Stefan Haas. Wiesbaden; RECKWITZ, Andreas: 2008 Praktiken und Diskurse. Eine sozialtheoretische und methodologische Relation. In: Theoretische Empirie. Zur Relevanz qualitativer Forschung. Hg. von Herbert Kalthoff – Stefan Hirschauer – Gesa Lindemann. Frankfurt am Main, 188–209.)”]

Response 1: Thank you for drawing my attention to the new and inspiring approaches of historical praxeology! In this regard, I have made only minor additions [607–609; note: 23.], as I felt that consistently applying the praxeological perspective would require an entirely new study.

Comments 2: [„I consider it necessary to revise the article to make it more understandable to those who are less familiar with the Hungarian church structure and conditions, as many details remain unclear to an "outsider" reader. For example: the Diocese of Pécs, Székelyföld, József Mindszenty, etc.” ]

Response 2: I consider the request to revise the study only partly justified. I had originally intended to address the necessary background knowledge for understanding the context by recommending the relevant literature. On the other hand, I have already written in detail about, for example, the situation in Romania in other studies of mine, and I did not want to repeat that here [Bánkuti 2018; 2024]. Nevertheless, in accordance with the reviewer’s request, I have made some additions: regarding the Hungarian ecclesiastical context after the Treaty of Trianon, [180–191], which also makes the specific features of the Diocese of Pécs more comprehensible. I have added explanatory footnotes on József Mindszenty, Áron Márton, and Anton Durcovici [note: 24, 28, 29], as the main text would have been significantly disrupted by lengthy additions. I have also elaborated further on the situation in Transylvania/Romania [667–713; note: 25, 26]. All changes have been marked in red in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

An interesting piece that nicely lays out the historical and social contexts for non-specialists. I advise an 8th section (something like "Conclusion" or whatever appropriate) that divides the "Experience" section from the discussion of habitus. I also recommend going more in depth with the habitus discussion, because despite it being the theoretical lynch pin, I did not think it was adequately or clearly explained what it helps us readers see about the Hungarian case. On that note, the title might be misleading, since I do not get a "new understanding of vocation" after reading it.

Besides these points, I think the author(s) has/ve a good, publishable piece. 

Author Response

Comments: [An interesting piece that nicely lays out the historical and social contexts for non-specialists. I advise an 8th section (something like "Conclusion" or whatever appropriate) that divides the "Experience" section from the discussion of habitus. I also recommend going more in depth with the habitus discussion, because despite it being the theoretical lynch pin, I did not think it was adequately or clearly explained what it helps us readers see about the Hungarian case. On that note, the title might be misleading, since I do not get a "new understanding of vocation" after reading it.]

Response: Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

Adding a subtitle is indeed justified. Therefore, before line 527, I have added the subtitle Towards a New Understanding of Vocation – the habitual character of clerical self-conception and practice (8), which guides the reader towards the conclusions that can be drawn from what is dealt with under “Experience.” I trust that this will also give meaning to the title of the study. For the purposes of understanding, I consider the discussion of the adaptability of the habitus model, along with the related questions, to be sufficiently detailed; I have therefore supplemented the section on habitus at lines 130–137; 614-618. In my view, the specific features of the “Hungarian” case become sufficiently apparent through comparison. The distinctive praxis of the Transylvanian clergy (supplemented: 674-720 lines), as opposed to that in Hungary, can be explained by dispositions formed and transmitted under circumstances differing from those of the Hungarian configuration. In this regard, “habitus” offers a model for understanding the self-conception and attitudes of the clergy.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study examines the varied habits of the lower clergy in a Hungarian diocese. The analysis is based on parochial annals (historia domus) from several parishes. The analysis uses Bourdieu's theory of habitus and Miklós Hadas's further development of it as a theoretical framework. The study is logically structured. Its methodology combines a content analysis of historical sources with a sociological interpretation. Exploring this source and applying Bourdieu's theory are original contributions to understanding the self-interpretation of the Hungarian clergy.

However, the study has some shortcomings that, if addressed, would greatly enhance its academic value.

1. The historia domus are valuable, unexplored sources. Analyzing other archival sources would help evaluate the data and insights they contain. In particular, the archives of the State Security Archives and the State Church Office would provide noteworthy nuances.
2. The title indicates that the study covers the 20th century. However, the analysis of the sources covers a shorter period. It would be important to clarify the time frame.
3. The study primarily focuses on the Diocese of Pécs but also briefly mentions the Diocese of Gyulafehérvár. A clearer argument is needed to show how this contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the lower clergy's thinking and behavior in Pécs and Hungary in general.
4. Habitus theory offers great potential for analyzing the self-interpretation of a social stratum or individual. However, the thesis does not prove that Bourdieu's theory is the most suitable. In other words, the thesis does not explain why it considers this theory to be the most significant. It would be important to contrast this theory with other relevant theories: Examples include Jenő Szűcs's three historical regions, István Bibó's hysteria and small states in Eastern Europe, András Máté-Tóth's wounded collective identity and securitization, and Ivan Krastev's theory of Europe.
5. One minor detail is that the year is missing from Vasile's reference in line 648.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

Comments 1. [The historia domus are valuable, unexplored sources. Analyzing other archival sources would help evaluate the data and insights they contain. In particular, the archives of the State Security Archives and the State Church Office would provide noteworthy nuances.]

Response 1. Thank you for the suggestion. My decision not to use sources from the State Security Archives or the State Church Office was intentional. Firstly, my interest lay in the clergy’s self-conception, not in narratives constructed about them. Secondly, in this study I sought to explore what might be called a “blind spot” in church history research: the life-world of the “intermediate 80%” of the clergy - those who generally cannot be neatly classified within the “collaborator” - “resistor” dichotomy - within their local milieus. Concerning this majority, the apparatus’ records contain only a small number of documents, most of which are of limited relevance to my research question.

Comments 2. [The title indicates that the study covers the 20th century. However, the analysis of the sources colasvers a shorter period. It would be important to clarify the time frame.]

Response 2. I am looking for a solution to this issue. In the abstract and introduction (as well as in the title), I indicated that the study focuses on events that caused significant upheaval. At the same time, I wanted to convey that continuous, long-term characteristics offer a valuable perspective for this focus. I am considering removing the time period from the title altogether.

Comments 3. [The study primarily focuses on the Diocese of Pécs but also briefly mentions the Diocese of Gyulafehérvár. A clearer argument is needed to show how this contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the lower clergy's thinking and behavior in Pécs and Hungary in general.]

Response 3. Through the asymmetric comparison with the Diocese of Gyulafehérvár (supplemented:, I sought to highlight the impact of a configuration different from that of Hungary and the significance of the action environment, starting from the differences in practice forms produced by the habitus. In my view, the comparison helps to understand that the habitus of the Hungarian clergy—examined at the meso level using the example of the Diocese of Pécs - displays distinctive characteristics. The section on Transylvania has been supplemented and provided with explanatory notes. (674-720 lines)

Comments 4. [Habitus theory offers great potential for analyzing the self-interpretation of a social stratum or individual. However, the thesis does not prove that Bourdieu's theory is the most suitable. In other words, the thesis does not explain why it considers this theory to be the most significant. It would be important to contrast this theory with other relevant theories: Examples include Jenő Szűcs's three historical regions, István Bibó's hysteria and small states in Eastern Europe, András Máté-Tóth's wounded collective identity and securitization, and Ivan Krastev's theory of Europe.]

Response 4. In the study, drawing on my research experience, I explained how I arrived at Bourdieu’s theory as a model that offers explanatory power for my research question. In this context, I referred to my dilemmas concerning the habitus model and to its further elaboration following the approach of Miklós Hadas. I have therefore supplemented the section on habitus at lines 130–137; 614-618. I believe that praxeology could offer further perspectives in this regard. The works recommended by the reviewer are, in my view, indispensable for a much more extensive work than the present study.

Comments 5. [One minor detail is that the year is missing from Vasile's reference in line 648. ]

Response 5. Added.

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I accept your answers and clarifications.