How are Christian philosophy journals perceived?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread a reader asks:

How are Christian philosophy journals received by the broader community? As examples, The Heythrop Journal, American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, Faith and Philosophy, Philosophia Christi, Angelicum, Gregoriaum, Res Philosophica, Review of Metaphysics, Review of Politics, etc.?

I have no idea, and wasn't aware that some of these are Christian philosophy journals.

Are any readers able to weigh in?

Comments

[academic migrant]

I don't know what "broader community" means, but for me as a social and political philosopher, I generally ignore them in the sense that they feel like a of completely different discipline.

[Christian Philosopher]

I'm a Christian philosopher, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think Faith and Philosophy is an excellent journal. Non-Christian philosophers are unlikely to have opinions about it, simply because they are unlikely to be interested in the topics it addresses. So in that sense, it isn't widely perceived as a good journal. But neither is it widely perceived as a bad journal, from what I understand. (And among those who specialize in philosophy of religion, it is considered one of the best specialist journals, if not the best.)

I don't know much about the other journals on the list, except for Philosophia Christi, with which I had a terrible experience as a master's student. I can't recall ever having seen a Philosophia Christi article cited in a well-regarded journal (though I'm sure this happens very occasionally), and I wouldn't send anything there. (But again, given my bad experience with the journal, take this with a grain of salt.)

[anon]

Does OP mean non-Christian philosophers by "the broader community"?

I also thought RP was a generalist journal, even if it is hosted out of SLU. It's phil. religion friendly, but I don't think it's a phil religion journal.

I can at least comment on the general rankings of these journals (sorry, i know rankings are a sore topic on this forum) from other Christian philosophers I know. Generally, and with some fudging (!!!) here and there...

1. 1. Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion
2. Faith & Philosophy
3. Religious Studies
4. Journal of Analytic Theology
5. International Journal of Philosophy of Religion
6. TheoLogica
7. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly
8. Philosophia Christi
9. All others

[Bioethics Joe Shmoe]

IMO this likely depends on one's subfield. I tend to see more Christian journal pieces referenced and written in bioethics than I do in standard philosophy, for example. But also, I think you are more likely to see references to Christian journals and articles in certain debates rather than others (e.g., free will).

[what do I know]

The question is a bit strange. As someone who works in philosophy of science none of these journals are on my radar. But when I have been on search committees I would have been non-plussed by candidates who only have publications in these journals. Not because they are Christian philosophy journals (some of them are not, I think). But because they are certainly not second tier journals, and they may even be below the third tier. The searches I have been involved in at a state college and a research university, get a sufficient number of applicants with papers published in widely recognized journals (and certainly second tier journals). So publications in such journals would not make one competitive, at least from my experience.

[Take these journals seriously]

Bad idea to ignore them. They might be central to human thought during an anomalous time of regression that is widely thought, mistakenly, to be intellectual progress. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, Faith and Philosophy, and others are strong journals!

[uninterested in Christian things]

The journals that are primarily safe spaces for Christians to talk with other Christians about Christian things are obviously going to be ignored by those of us uninterested in Christian things.

I don't know most of the journals on OP's list, but that description surely doesn't fit Res Philosophica, which is a good generalist journal. Wikipedia tells me that it was founded as a Thomistic journal under a different name? Is that enough to warrant the classification "Christian journal"?

[wait what]

I don't know about others, but The Review of Politics is one of the most highly regarded journal in political philosophy, and is definitely NOT a Christian journal...

[Michel]

My understanding is that Res Philosophica is a generalist journal, though founded by Jesuits. My sense is that it's perfectly respectable. In the periodic ranking polls it gets somewhere in the thirties. Review of Metaphysics seems similar to me.

I haven't heard of most of the rest. I wouldn't really know what to think of them. If that was pretty much the only place a candidate was publishing, I guess I might have some concerns. Are any of them the top outlet for philosophy of religion?

[My Two Cents]

My two cents for what its worth:

The Heythrop Journal: heard of it. Not worth much on a CV
American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly: Never heard of it.
Faith and Philosophy: Heard of it. Would only consider it a positive in jobs specifically asking for philosophy of religion expertise.
Philosophia Christi: Never heard of it.
Angelicum: Never heard of it.
Gregoriaum: Never heard of it.
Res Philosophica: Heard of it. Would not value a publication in it on a CV.
Review of Metaphysics: Heard of it. Would not value a publication in it on a CV.
Review of Politics: : Never heard of it.

The ones I've never heard of I would by default think were not worth anything on a CV, unless a colleague tells me that the journal is actually good. The others are also defeasible too if a colleague tells me they are in fact good in certain areas, except Res Philosophica and Review of Metaphysics, both of which I know myself are fourth tier journals at the very best. I would advise my PhD students not to bother with either of these last two.

[Jamin]

I have never thought of Res Philosophica and Review of Metaphysics as Christian journals. "On What There Is" is from Review of Metaphysics. Many excellent philosophers publish in Faith and Philosophy, and I gather it's a top place to publish in philosophy of religion. The others aren't on my radar.

[Sam Duncan]

My impression was that while "Res Philosophica" and "The Review of Metaphysics" were in some recognizable sense Catholic journals they were also respectable generalist journals. Both seem to publish a lot of stuff that isn't directly connected with Catholicism or even religion more generally. I know Paul's essay on transformative experience that later became the book of the same title was originally published in "Res Philosophica" as were a lot of replies to it.

[Surprised and confused]

Generally, I am not a Christian or anything close, have published in two of these journals (three counting a book review), and couldn’t imagine judging anyone negatively for publishing in any of these.

@My two cents, what you say about ‘Review of Metaphysics’ blows my mind. I thought this was a fairly prestigious journal. Would you care to say more about why you assess it so negatively?

[Laurence B McCullough]

The Review of Metaphysics is a non-sectarian journal and has been since its founding by Paul Weiss.

[outsider w a bit of knowledge]

my impression of these journals as an outsider to phil religion but who considered dabbling in it (I am an atheist), and who also works in some of the areas that Review of Metaphysics and Res Philosophica publish in a fair amount:

Review of Metaphysics is probably a fourth tier journal (and, while generalist, I think of it as more phil-religion leaning, and more continental-leaning, than Res P), and it's the bottom/edge of what I would think my own grad students should publish in if they were only interested in more teaching-focused/less research-focused jobs. If they wanted to be competitive at research-focused jobs (like my own) I would suggest against it.

Res Philosophica I think of as third tier generalist journal. My students would be fine publishing in it for most of the jobs that they tend to get (mixed research/teaching focus and sometimes mainly teaching focused). I think someone would be fine aiming at research-focused jobs with a publication in it if they also had fancier publications, but I think it would harm them if not.

Faith and Philosophy and Oxford Studies are top-ish tier philosophy of religion journals, but from my perspective philosophy of religion journals are WAY too easy to publish in (similar to bioethics, feminist philosophy journals, philosophy of science journals, and maybe some other subfields) so e.g. if I were hiring I would be extremely wary of someone who had only published in them, but if they otherwise had a good profile I would want to actually just read the papers and see for myself, because I think they publish lots of good stuff (just also lots of crap). I've never heard of these other journals except American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly which I think of as a lesser and more narrow version of these other two journals (but, if someone is aiming at a job at a Catholic University, so long as it's not, like, Notre Dame or somewhere really fancy, it would probably help them to have a publication in it (and I don't think it would hurt at ND with some other much fancier pubs).

[Tim]

I work in phil religion, but am not a Christian. Some of these journals are not Christian/phil religion journals (e.g. Res Philosophica, Review of Metaphysics). I do read and publish in Faith and Philosophy, which is an excellent phil religion journal. But I don't read material in several of the others mostly because their intended audience is Christians. I tend to think their quality is lower than phil religion journals. But my own reason for thinking that is because material for those journals is so rarely cited in other kinds of journals. For instance, Faith and Philosophy has an H-index of 26, whereas ACPQ and Heythrop Journal have H-indexes of 14 and 13 respectively.

[Prof L]

This is an almost random list of journals, the only (?) common point among them is that they are hosted at institutions that are religious. Review of Metaphysics, ResPhil, and Review of Politics are not "Christian" in any relevant sense. ACPQ is a good venue for medieval philosophy, sometimes phenomenology, and also contemporary medieval-analytic phil mash-ups---I would call it a Catholic journal with some hesitation only because some people think that means you could only publish there if Catholic, or that it publishes philosophy only relevant to Catholics, neither of which is true. I don't know some of the others enough to comment ... but the only one here that I would call a Christian journal is Philosophia Christi.

[My Two Cents]

@Surprised and confused

I think there was a time where Review of Metaphysics might have had some standing, but that was a long time ago. I certainly don't view it as a generalist journal as others have suggested in these comments. It is a continental metaphysics journal, and (in my view) not a particularly notable one. Maybe I've missed some things, but I can't remember a single major contribution in recent years. I never see it cited, and I don't see major figures publishing there. Perhaps put a bit bluntly: I don't see a publication in Review of Metaphysics (or Res Philosophica for that matter) helping you get a job/get tenure/get promoted.

[Hermias]

I don’t think it’s possible, or constructive, to make statements about how the philosophical community views this or that journal, or this or that paper. Some philosophers dedicate their lives to Hegel, others think that his work is flatulence in a trance.

Or again, take a flick through a top journal of the 1920s and see how many names you recognize or how much of that work is read today. Very little. None of us have any idea what will “stick”, so keep throwing what you have got wherever you can throw it.

[anon faculty at pluralistic program]

What "My Two Cents" says seems way too strong--I looked through a bunch of issues of RoM and there are faculty from both mixed research/teaching schools and research schools (e.g. Riverside, Boston College, USC)--and not just senior faculty--publishing there. I teach at a PGR ranked PhD program and while it would be bad if I only had publications in a journal like this going up for tenure, it certainly could have contributed as part of my tenure case. Also most research schools don't just count publications with some metric of fanciness attached--at least at my university, the most important thing is our external letters, and external letter writers actually READ the papers you write--while of course it helps with their perception of the candidate if some of them are in fancy journals, they aren't just going to write their letters based entirely on where you published. (Perhaps there is a bit of anti-continental bias going on here. I don't think RoM is a great journal, and I wouldn't personally bother publishing in it, but it's a publication that, together with other publications (in some cases where some of these need to be more prestigious) people's tenure prospects at the vast, vast majority of jobs.

[Marcus Arvan]

@MyTwoCents: publications in any of these journals would absolutely help in tenure and promotion at my university—and if we were hiring in Religion or Philosophy of Religion, they would definitely help there too.

[M]

I work and have published in philosophy of religion (but more so in M&E), and have published in a couple of those. But as others have said: Res Philosophica and Review of Metaphysics are not religious or Christian, though Res (housed at SLU) sometimes publishes in phil of religion (including an occasional special issue). I hadn't heard of several other journals from the OP's list, but the general consensus is: Faith & Philosophy is the top philosophy of religion journal, and many agnostics and atheists publish in it too. (Religious Studies and Oxford Studies in Phil of Religion are widely considered to be the other two strong journals in these areas.) But as for how publishing even in those is viewed by the rest of the philosophy world: it usually doesn't help you much, and probably needs to be balanced off by publishing in other top journals for it not to hurt one's reputation, particularly if we're talking about job applications, particularly at research-intensive depts. Case in point: hardly anyone in recent memory who was hired or tenured at a highly ranked PGR dept (except for Notre Dame) has published in those (strong-for-PoR) journals I mention above (it's also extremely rare for anyone to move laterally mid-career into such jobs who has published in PoR). I think this is because publishing in PoR at all, and especially in such journals, is not valued, and marks one as "probably religious/ conservative." And there is a strong bias against hiring such at R1 schools, particularly at the prestige-obsessive top schools. Thus any senior people from such schools that come to mind that do publish in topics in, or related to, PoR tend to publish them in like PPR or Nous or Mind etc. instead.

[puzzled]

I think we have given too much air time to the ramblings "My Two Cents" -- a dollar's worth, I would say. It should probably be a condition on their being able to post that they do not disparage only to provide dubious or demonstrably false grounds.

[Angus McCulloch]

A little bit of shade getting thrown at these journals, because atheists are getting routed in phil religion right now.

I publish some phil religion, as it relates to my larger project, but honestly I still try for some of the phil religion-friendly generalist journals, because the honest truth is there is, as many of these comments show, there is a bias against journals considered 'religious'.