Maximizing crossover appeal was crucial this time around, because the infamous 2007 SCP@AAR panel was still fresh in many AAR-going minds. That session had devolved into uncomfortable methodological
sparring, and concluded with a prominent theologian suggesting that (analytic) philosophers of religion suffer from a kind of willful naïveté or backwardness, as well as an inability to be genuinely inclusive...
Another consideration in favor of the proposal was that Kant scholars in one methodological tradition are often unfamiliar with work by those in other traditions—even when they work on the same texts.
These are quotes from a piece by Andrew Chignell (Cornell) explaining how a "book symposium began its life as a panel at the 2009 meeting of the American Academy of Religion. The panel was organized and sponsored by the Society of Christian Philosophers at AAR (“SCP@AAR” for short) and so it is fitting that the final results would appear in the SCP’s flagship journal." The whole piece is worth reading for an informed look behind the philosophical scene.