A Study on the Possibility of Religious Governance of New Religions in Korea: Focusing on the Ecological Worldview of Donghak and Won Buddhism

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript does not include a strict scientific rigor in many instances. I highlighted many sentences / ideas / thoughts in the text that must be supported by citing other scientists' works: e. g. "Many discussions in sociology define modern society as a risk society" (who are these many); "While disputed by some" (who are these some).

In text citations and the references' list are not prepared in a rigorious manner. They include many errors (in text and also in the list of references, and crossreferencing is not applied in a correct manner) that are highlighted in the text.

In some instances the paper lacks some analysis like the differences and similarities of Christianity and Donghak.

The attached PDF file is commented until page nr. 7.

Sorry to say, but based on these assertions, I suggest rejecting the paper as it is not adequate to be published in a Q1 journal. The above mentioned errors are basic errors on which I suggest the authors rewriting the paper and resubmit it to a less prestigious journal. I am very sorry about it, I do not want to hurt the authors. I wish them the best for their work.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The author’s research on the various doctrinal and institutional elements of religious governance found in two new representative religions of Korea, viz. Donghak and Won Buddhism, seems to be systematically prepared, and as such, the his/her main arguments drawn from it are also sound. As for the overall the structure and content of the manuscript there seems no much more specific points that should be revised or rewritten for publication. It is indeed difficult to say that this manuscript is unique, novel piece of work, carrying a high originality; but it looks enough to be published with a few emanations listed below. 

 

p. 8: Unlike the traditional Buddhism focusing on meditation? What does “traditional Buddhism” mean here? The statement is also too bold, and the motto that “for everyday life for ordinary people in the contemporary world” is indeed shared in many Buddhist traditions, particularly East Asian Mahāyāna Buddhism. 

 

I hope this article and its follow-up research will stimulate scholarly dialogue among religious leaders and the lay public in Korea.

 

Typos: 

 

p. 6: is consistent with a phrase inodongpo murodongpo > is consistent with the phrase inodongpo murodongpo 

 

p. 5, 7: Such view … > Such a view …

 

p. 8: Unlike the traditional Buddhism > Unlike traditional Buddhism 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

 

Review

This thesis explores the deep ecological meaning contained in samgyeong, the Threefold Respect in Donghak religion and saeun, the Fourfold Grace in Won Buddhism, and proposes the establishment of a new religious governance based on this ecological perspective. It faithfully explains the important concepts of the two religious traditions.

Review

This thesis explores the deep ecological meaning contained in samgyeong, the Threefold Respect in Donghak religion and saeun, the Fourfold Grace in Won Buddhism, and proposes the establishment of a new religious governance based on this ecological perspective. It faithfully explains the important concepts of the two religious traditions.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Reviewer 3 did not suggest any changes for the paper.