Terraforming Religious Consciousness: Race as a Signifier in New World Religious Cosmogony

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see comments provided withing the attached pdf.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you so much for the attention you gave to the ms. I did my best to take all of your comments into account. As a note, I have made the following adjustments to the ms. To a greater extent,  the details you provided in your comments were quite invaluable.

1. signification: I moved my more explicit explanations about signification to the beginning of the piece, clarifying that I mean New World signification as an expression of what I mean by cosmogony.
2. I have rewritten (and hopefully clarified!) my abstract such that it better captures what I am trying to address in the piece
3. Terraforming plays a more prominent role in the article, being introduced at the beginning and used in more explicit ways throughout.
4. Specific feedback: I have made the appropriate adjustments that I hope satisfy the great concerns you bring up.

I greatly appreciate your comments and look forward to any other thoughts you have with this revised version.

Be well and take care,

Malik

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

1. Use the text by Phillip J. Linden, jr., Slavery, Religion and Regime, to bolster the argument used in section one. Linden has made this argument articles for many years and the publication of his book gives wider shape to it. This text also allows the author to situate himself in a tradition of scholarship that supports his views.
2. Section two ends as if attempts to overcome the problems that Jennings and Washington pose have been failing attempts by Cone, Hopkins, Carter etc. and seems to suggest that this is the current state of things. However the work by Rufus Burnett, jr., Decolonizing revelation, actually addresses the issues raised by the author and offers an alternative, and a theological alternative, to Jennings and Washington. I strongly recommend the author includes Burnett's work here as an example of a possible way forward.
3. The use of Jennings' terminology sometimes leads to inconsistencies in the article, such as the use of Native, native, indigenous, Indian, Amerindian and Andean, seemingly interchangeably. Notably, the term "first-born" and the recognition of problems of nomenclature are not indicated. In addition,  in lines 132 and 134, the author, following Jennings I suppose, mentions pre-colonial and Native authority over space, land and cosmos. Perhaps this is about writing style but I am not aware of any indigenous first born peoples claiming authority over the land or space nor of authoritative structures of land and cosmos. This is an inaccurate understanding.
4. Based on the abstract and the body of the text, the main issues seems to be  the lack of "deliberation on how contact with Amerindian and African cosmologies required a reconsideration of the fundamental elements of revelation, eschatology, nature, humanity and creation", lines 55-57. I think the article would be enhanced by a final section that actually presents a basic overview of these Amerindian and African cosmologies and suggests a way forward based on deliberation with them. Resources on this can be found in Coulthard, Baptiste, Simpson, Tinker, Smith, Alfred, Andraos, Veracini, Hernandez and many others.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your patience with this piece. I have done my best to address your concerns by bringing greater clarity to the following

1. signification: I moved my more explicit explanations about signification to the beginning of the piece, clarifying that I mean New World signification as an expression of what I mean by cosmogony.
2. I have rewritten (and hopefully clarified!) my abstract such that it better captures what I am trying to address in the piece
3. Terraforming plays a more prominent role in the article, being introduced at the beginning and used in more explicit ways throughout.
4. Specific feedback: I have made the appropriate adjustments that I hope satisfy the great concerns you bring up.

I greatly appreciate your comments and look forward to any other thoughts you have with this revised version.

Be well and take care,

Malik

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This manuscript makes an important and innovative argument. The writing becomes clear towards the end of the paper. However, before it is published I strongly recommend the following changes. My main suggestions are about clarifying the abstract and introduction to provide a clearer road map of your argument. Clarifying your use of the term signification would also be useful, and this discussion of signification should be discussed more at the end. This is an important argument that will be benefited from these clarifications. The concept of terraforming should also be integrated throughout the essay.

The abstract and introduction need to be clearer about the main contributions of the manuscript. The wording of the abstract in particular should be clearer as it is very convoluted.

How one defines signifiers and signification is different depending on the tradition and discipline. There needs to be far more explanation of how the author is using these terms and which scholarly traditions they are drawing from. Without this clearer discussion at the beginning, the rest of the argument is more difficult to make. Some of this discussion takes place in the footnotes, but at least some of this needs to be in the main body to orient the reader into how the author is using

Specific feedback:

• This needs to be clarified- it is so general and needs some explanation if making such a broad claim
  • “Central to this uniquely Atlantic cosmos is the theological imagination that infiltrates every level of relationship.”
• Willie James Jennings and Joseph Washington, Jr. need to be introduced when first mentioned.
• This sentence needs to be clarified, what is meant by this relationship between religion and culture?
  • The lack of tension between religion and culture indicates a historical praxis 249 initiated in previous centuries that removed tensions between religion and culture.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for your patience with this piece. I have done my best to address your concerns by bringing greater clarity to the following

1. signification: I moved my more explicit explanations about signification to the beginning of the piece, clarifying that I mean New World signification as an expression of what I mean by cosmogony.
2. I have rewritten (and hopefully clarified!) my abstract such that it better captures what I am trying to address in the piece
3. Terraforming plays a more prominent role in the article, being introduced at the beginning and used in more explicit ways throughout.
4. Specific feedback: I have made the appropriate adjustments that I hope satisfy the great concerns you bring up.

I greatly appreciate your comments and look forward to any other thoughts you have with this revised version.

Be well and take care,

Malik

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf