Sepadi, hi. Thank you for your submission. You have three concepts at play. The ordering suggests to the reader that the main idea is love and that in relation to crossing boundaries, and then particularly so in the mining industry.
As discussed ‘love’ is obviously one of those words that raise tension in research but I also think the idea that its a study situated in practical theology makes a difference here. In other words you are not after an ultimate truth or ontological perspective on love but rather how knowledge is created around what miners and employers understand under love (from perhaps various religious and non-religious contexts). If you would simply phrase it Love and crossing boundaries in the mining industry the reader should know that is involves inquiry into the viability, experiences, stories about (LOVE) in connection with the idea of (CROSSING BOUNDARIES) coupled with the idea that it is somehow different to be doing this study in this industry (MINING), as opposed to general corporate life. We can also speak off line but let’s see how the other take to responding.
Dear Elmo I hear and understand your suggestion and concern. we are not systematic theologians but Practical Theologian. How about ” Love as a means of crossing boundaries in the Mining Industry’ or The Relatioship between mining employers and workers in the Mining Industry.