From Professor Elaine Graham
Sir, - I fear that the Revd Dr Heywood (
Letters, 2 April) is allowing his experience of one
university's attitudes to theological training for ministry to
affect his reading of the situation overall.
Many of us who have been teaching practical and contextual
theology in higher education do not recognise ourselves as
propagating "decontextualised technical rationality" as the
benchmark of theological excellence, either in our own practice or
that of our stu-dents.
Admittedly, the theological curriculum often suffers from lack
of integration between its sub-disciplines or specialisms, but to
suggest, as he does, that all "academic" theology is an arid
"decontextualised body of theory" is to disregard the work of many
of us who insist that theology begins and ends in practical
engagement, in both Church and society.
As a Director of Pastoral Studies, Dr Heywood must surely be
well aware of the significant body of literature to have emerged in
this area over the past generation, much of it originating from
British departments of theology and religious studies, and which
often forms the basis of many ministerial students' core
reading.
Similarly, in representing the interests of those training for
ministry and those in academic positions as seemingly
irreconcilable, he overlooks the significant body of
higher-education institutions - not least the cathedral
universities - who would talk of their validation relationships
with theological colleges and courses as one of "partnership", and
are committed to sharing best practice across the boundary of
Church and Academy.
Furthermore, many of us, especially those in the post-1992
universities, have found great support at the highest level of our
institutions for exactly the kind of integ-ration of academic
excellence and professional or vocational formation which Dr
Heywood commends - perhaps best exemplified by the emergence in
recent years of several highly innovative professional doctorate
programmes in ministry and practical theology.
Such initiatives are often characterised by fruitful
interdisciplinary exchange between theology and other professional
disciplines such as education, health care, law, psychotherapy, and
social work, something that would be impossible in a
single-discipline institution such as a theological college.
I might also comment that it is not the universities which are
promoting the centralisation of the theological curriculum. Rather,
our independence from centralised control and our links with wider
communities enable us to reflect our local contexts and respond to
the diverse needs of students across a broad ecumenical
spectrum.
Elaine Graham
Grosvenor Research Professor of Practical Theology and
Canon Theologian, Chester Cathedral Department of
Theology and Religious Studies, University of Chester CH1
4BJ
From the Principal of the South West Ministry Training
Course
Sir, - It is an interesting feature of the current work on
Resourcing Ministerial Education that, as far as I can judge, all
practitioners in theological education seem to feel the recent
report is in some way bad news (
Letters, 27 March). I, therefore, fell to wondering to whom the
report would be good news.
Certainly to the 23-year-old ex- plorer of vocation, who will
clearly receive much support and encouragement. After six years in
university chaplaincy, I can only welcome this, though also
recognising the challenge it can be to foster and discern young
vocations appropriately.
Perhaps to the 46-year-old who realises that by delaying his or
her exploration by a year he or she could escape the rigour of
national selection. Having been a Bishop's Adviser in the BAP
process for 20 years, I can only regret the Church's proposal to
pull back from this very important and necessary part of the
process of discernment, especially for candidates who may have more
than 20 years' active ordained ministry ahead of them.
Perhaps to those relatively few who (like me) find themselves
"lay professionals" within church structures. I only hope that the
desire to use para-clerical processes for their training and
recognition will not distort the distinctively lay character of
such vocations.
I was fascinated both by Dr Morris's letter, signed by a very
distinguished group concerned about the future of full-time
theological education, and by the resignation of Dr Coakley from
the RME Working Party. As a member of the highly ranked theology
department at Exeter, I share their concern at the damage already
being done to relationships between the Church and academic
departments.
But I am puzzled by readings of the report which suggest that
the main threat in its proposals is to full-time college training.
The remarkable thing to me in the report is that, although the
background research found that part-time training and full-time
training were equally effective, Proposal 8 places in jeopardy the
viability of any programme of traditional part-time course
training.
Candidates aged over 50 at ordination constitute 70 per cent of
the intake of a course such as ours. If that training falls within
diocesan budgets, as is proposed, it will inevitably tend to be
shortened to save money. That will compromise both the financial
and the formational integrity of part-time courses. So the training
mode that is most under threat is the one that the research behind
the RME report found to be the most cost-effective, namely Course
training.
Christopher Southgate
South West Ministry Training Course
Amory Building, University of Exeter, Rennes
Drive, Exeter EX4 4RJ
From the Rt Revd Dr Laurie Green
Sir, - As a life-long champion of contextual theology, I am
appalled to see how the arguments over the Resourcing
Ministerial Education report are leading some to play off
academic theology against contextual theology - as if we should
resource only one or the other.
Surely, the job of any good theologian is to delve into our
experience of God in the world so that we can better understand it
and respond to it - and, to help us all to do that, we need
theologians who are expert in analysing our experi-ence in context
and reflecting upon it through the lens of the great traditions of
our Christian faith - traditions that will include biblical and
doctrinal theology, church history, and so on.
Locked away in the library, academic theology can become no more
than a self-gratifying word-game, just as contextual theologians
who have not been steeped in Bible and theology will be unable to
appreciate the value of what they mine from their situation. But,
if the two disciplines are brought together into a dynamic whole,
then we strike gold.
Some are backing the universities on the specious grounds that
our teachers of tomorrow must all be academics, while others
maintain that we thrive as a Church if we invest only in missional
activity, forgetting that all Christian action should be informed
by reflection. But "doing theology" requires, surely, a spirited
interplay of quality academic theology and committed contextual
engagement.
The outcome is often extremely challenging; for it confronts us
with new perceptions. But it also thereby energises us for the
excitement of Kingdom living.
LAURIE GREEN
86 Belle Hill, Bexhill-on-Sea, East Sussex TN40
2AP