Editorial: Nurturing spirituality
Anna Rankin

From the[acting] director: New Shoes
Lynda Gould

Wholeness, Holiness & Wholegrain Spirituality
David Campton

Comment: Racehorses and Turtles
Stephen Cave

A Spirituality of Communion: The Benedictine Monks, Rostrevor
Dom Mark-Ephrem M Nolan, OSB

Interview with John Dickinson & Paul Symonds: The Shape of Spirituality
Derek Poole

Prayer 24-7
Gillian Best

In quest of living theology: A conversation piece on theological education and Christian formation
Ian Dickson

A Spirituality of Welcome
Katherine Poulton

Bible Study: Christian Spirituality
Bishop Donal McKeown

Review: How (Not) to Speak of God
Gladys Ganiel

Review: Spirituality and Transformation
Glenn Jordan

Difficult Conversations
Christian Spirituality
Lynda Gould

New Resource
The Theological Grounds for Advocating Forgiveness and Reconciliation in the Socio-political Realm

< Past Issues Archive

IN QUEST OF LIVING THEOLOGY: A conversation piece on theological education and Christian formation

As a teacher in a theological college, I frequently meet students who express a natural and understandable uncertainty about how spiritual development might be impacted by the processes of formal theological education. Firstly, can I stress that theology is not a rigidly cognitive discipline. Reason and academic study are brave companions, but limited in how far they can take us. The mind is not to be trained for knowledge’s sake, but rather the whole person for relationship with God. Knowledge sourced through experience of the Holy is therefore also needed.

THE PLACE OF LEARNING in the church has always been a hot issue, succinctly expressed in the 2nd Century by Tertullian of Carthage, “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is there between the Academy and the Church?”¹

It seems odd to speak of theological education and Christian spirituality as if they were enemies in need of forgiveness and reconciliation. Yet, I often find myself in academic company that perpetuates that ancient dichotomy of theology and spirituality – as if to separate our understanding and talk of God (theology) from our attempts to live in the light of that understanding and talk (spirituality) was the most natural thing in the world. Indeed, one renowned international philosopher and theologian confessed to me recently that he did not understand why I wanted to teach “spiritual theology” at all and that, quite frankly, he failed to understand what it meant anyway.

Perhaps history can help us understand the roots and manifestations of this painful divorce. I highly recommend the writings of Philip Sheldrake as a starting point.² His elucidations on the relationship between history, theology and spirituality are most succinct. Anyway, the theology that almost exclusively developed in the male religious houses of the medieval period (7th-12th centuries) – often viewed as a prolongation of the patristic period – was theology for living in their times and essential to the life of the church (theology in, for, by the church).³ It was never intended to be abstract. Words like Lectio Divina (the intentional art of spiritual reading), veneration, mystery, love, inner experience, faith and contemplation capture the determination to firmly connect theology and the spiritual life. The task was not to explain the mysteries of God but to reflect on them and impregnate all of life with them. It was “a theology of admiration” but always in danger of being reduced to a rational science. The rise of scholasticism (12th-13th centuries) and the new universities, established to train men to run both church and state⁴, provided the impetus for formation of new critical (but arguably complementary) approaches in what became academic theology, throwing into the methodological pot words like scrutiny, analysis, clarity, system, dialogue, technique, problem and solution. As in Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae, theology began to be compartmentalised into different (but now familiar) components.

Do not misunderstand me – scholastic theology did not replace monastic theology and usher in an era of merely rational study for, at the same time, there was a renaissance of affective mysticism and subjective experiences, as in the devotio moderna⁵, a recovery of interest in mystical theology, and the rise of a new literary genre based on these. The development of institutions of theological education and professionalism in this field would span the 16th to the 19th centuries.⁶ Whatever the severity of the separation between theology and spirituality, it is clear that long before the Enlightenment of the 18th century the “couple” often sat at different tables.

To detach theology from “who we are” seems to me a form of the most invidious segregation. “What kind of God do we have, and what difference does it make to us?” are the ageless questions of Christianity. The formation of theological persons, people who live theology as an integrated reality, rather than do it as a detached activity, is the very business of the theological community to which I belong.⁷

Questions about the place of intentional character and spiritual development in the Academy find their fuller expression in asking, “What is theological education for?” For some educators spiritual formation is the goal and purpose of what they do; for others, it has a limited role in theological schools and is best left as a priority of the local church.⁸ Clearly, theological education has the potential to “inform” spiritual development and spiritual formation has the potential to “inform” theological education. So do students come to this academy to be spiritually formed, with formal theological education (classroom) being but one method, the others being field practice (service) and intentional practices to aid spiritual growth (Quiet Days, worship, prayer, journaling, etc.)? Or do they come to receive formal theological education and any spiritual progress made is welcomed but largely unintentional? I find the debate futile and, at best, symptomatic of our desire as humans to label the products, compartmentalise their components and control their expressions.

Another starting point might be to think in more creative terms of vocation and integration. What do those in theological training need to fulfil the vocation they are following?⁹ As they will certainly require a degree of competence, theological education at its best offers them a range of skills, methods, questions and reflective practices. We can train students to understand and use the ancient biblical languages, to probe and exegete Scripture, to read history, to write theological arguments, to reflect on church practice, to preach in post-modern cultures, to appreciate new thinking on mission and to exercise responsible pastoral care. Competence alone, however, is poor preparation for any form of Christian vocation. Character and compassion are the timeless and cultureless imperatives (and the greatest challenges in theological education institutions that want to prepare people for the real world). Otherwise we train merely “priests and Levites” who practice religion with competence but without compassion for “the other” (Luke 10:25-37). Their theological education produced a merciless service. Christian ministry is always about “who we are” with “the other”. The Samaritan saw the indissoluble link between loving God and loving his neighbour and understood love as integration, as something that possesses the whole person – mind, heart and muscle.

How can we learn to integrate theology and life? We learn integration from people who do it. To be a theological educator is to open your life to your students and to encourage your students to open their lives to you and to each other. In effect, the spirituality of the theologian inspires the theology. They learn integration when the teaching community practice it (as a whole faculty vocation¹⁰), crossing boundaries in formal lectures, seminars and tutorials. Our methodology then becomes spiritually potent. They learn integration as they serve the church in the light of new learning. Authentic spirituality in theological education is part and parcel of the spirituality of the whole people of God.¹¹ They learn integration by finding space to personally internalise reading, thoughts and talk about God. Their spiritual formation is rooted in community, experiencing God in our life together, finding a place for living (livingout) theology.

Gordon T Smith’s suggestion that the ideal academic institution should have both classrooms (in which to learn formally) and a retreat centre nearby (in which to “own and resolve things”) is interesting enough, but merely highlights a mindset of exclusion. We should not think of the classroom as a place that excludes spiritual thought and growth.¹² We should not think of the chapel as a place that excludes formal theological input. We should not think of the dining hall as merely a place to eat. We should not think of the library as a place that excludes worship (silent!) and spiritual encounter. We should not think of assignments as merely work to impress others but also documents and items mapping out personal development.

As students come from, and with, their own roots in local cultures and faith communities they find a gentle regime of integration developing here where the paradigms of spiritual, academic and experiential learning are intentionally fused in person-related, holistic approaches.¹³ They must not come for us to train their minds alone, nor equip them in specific ministries alone, but come to us with their own spirituality to invest here amid the diversity of persons gathering from across the world and engage with learning linked to the desire for and trust in God. The dictum, “theology is not good theology until it is lived” gives voice to our intentionality and distinctiveness on campus here in Belfast.

DR IAN DICKSON teaches spiritual theology, history and church ministry studies at Belfast Bible College, part of the Institute of Theology at Queen’s University, where he is currently Director of Postgraduate Studies.

Footnotes

1 Tertullian, “On Prescription against Heretics”, The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to AD 325, Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980, III, 247.

2 Philip Sheldrake, Spirituality and Theology, Dalton, Longman, and Todd, 1998; Spirituality and History, Revised Edition, London: SPCK, 1995.

3 Jean Leclercq, The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture, New York: Fordham University Press, 1982, 192.

4 Colin E Gunton, “Doing Theology in the University Today”, in Colin E Gunton, Stephen R Holmes and Murray A Rae, The Practice of Theology: A Reader, London: SCM, 2001, 441.

5 The Modern Devotion was a movement of spiritual renewal in Germany and the Low Countries (14th Century).

6 Linda Cannell, Theological Education Matters: Leadership Education for the Church, Newburgh, Indiana: Edcot Press, 2006, Part II. David H Kelsey in Between Athens and Berlin: The Theological Education Debate, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993) proposes a typology of “Athens” (paideia, a cultivation of soul or character formation) and “Berlin” (Wissenschaft, a bipolar discipline of critical research and professional education for ministry). Part I of Robert Bank’s Reenvisioning Theological Education, Exploring a Missional Alternative to Current Models (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999) offers a helpful summary of the theological education debate.

7 The purpose of Belfast Bible College is “to create a welcoming community in which God works to form his people by integrating spiritual, academic and experiential learning rooted in his word, for growth in Christian life and service, locally and around the world”.

8 Gordon T Smith, “Spiritual Formation in the Academy: A Unifying Model”, Theological Education, 33.1, (1996), 83.

9 David Heywood, “A New Paradigm for Theological Education?” Anvil, 17, 1, 2000, 19-27. Citing the challenges of ministry, David Heywood calls for a shift away from an academic model to a vocation model.

10 Samuel Amirtham and Robin Pryor, Resources for Spiritual Formation in Theological Education, WCC, 1989, 89.

11 In his essay on “The Vocation of Theological Education in the Life and Leadership of the Church” (Journal of Religious Leadership, 2.1, Spring 2003), Michael Jinkins defines some of the functions of theological scholarship as the church’s memory bank, moderator and provocateur.

12 Parker J Palmer in To Know as we are Known: a Spirituality of Education (Harper: San Francisco, 1983) explores crossing boundaries in the classroom under the ancient idea that “to teach is to create a space in which obedience of truth is practiced”.

13 Graham Cheesman, “Competing Paradigms in Theological Education Today”, Evangelical Review of Theology, 17.4, October 1993, 484-99.

|