Resources

© BIAPT 2010
Page last updated: 25 Mar 10

What prevents Theological Reflection?

Groping towards a definition

Stephen Pattison (Cardiff University)

For the purposes of this paper, I understand TR to be the habitual, conscious, methodical and purposeful correlation of some of the insights and resources of theological tradition with contemporary situations and practice. Some TR may indeed use associational methods, be ad hoc, inward, spontaneous and perhaps mainly emotionally significant. However, to attract the designation TR it must in principle be public and articulable in terms of its methods, processes and outcomes. Inspiration, association and strong personal conviction are not enough (though they may be an important motivator and starting point). We are in the world of routine transmissible knowledge here, not just in the realm of personal meaning and knowledge which may or may not be communicable to others.

So what are some of the factors that may prevent TR?

People

  1. Don't understand what TR is (need for education)
  2. Don't have a congenial method that fits their own personality and situation and allows them to undertake it (need for education and training that allows people to identify appropriate methods)
  3. Think TR is an esoteric mystery (need for cultic experts to de-mystify themselves and others)
  4. Don't have clear purposes and goals in their work, so don't understand which aspect of their activity they should reflect upon (need for clarity about the nature of the role and task that is being undertaken)
  5. Don't feel that they have an obligation to undertake regular reflection (because they don't see themselves as having professional obligations?) (need for clarification about the nature of role obligations and possibilities)
  6. Don't believe and have not seen that TR can make any creative and positive difference to the way they do their work (need for people to see worked examples embodied in other practitioners)
  7. See TR as an alien demand, 'another damn thing', not as life and ministry enhancing (need to demonstrate what difference TR really can make, if any)
  8. Suspect the academic (understood pejoratively as abstract and complex) roots of TR (need to break down barriers between over-intellectual and abstract 'theological educators' and anti-intellectual pastoral practitioners)
  9. Have not actually had the experience of seeing how TR can be creative for themselves or others (need to see significant worked examples and understand their process and outcomes in theoretical and practical works)
  10. Are often too tired and internally noisy to undertake this activity - they need days off or a holiday before they can engage with it (need for more quality leisure time to ruminate and muse)
  11. Need to ventilate their feelings and frustrations before they can undertake any kind of systematic process (need for emotional support and care)
  12. Are often left to undertake it if they undertake it at all on their own (need for more pastoral support groups)
  13. Are not supported by supervision and other means within ecclesiastical culture to think it is important and to undertake it - ecclesiastical culture is only semi-professional and arbitrary in the extent to which it is and is not professional and even now few people have positive experiences of pastoral supervision that feels positive and contributes to growth (need for ecclesiastical overseers to recognise and clarify the unhelpfully unclear aspects of semi-professional working environment to value education, supervision and support)
  14. Think it is a species of unhealthy introversion which gets in the way of doing immediate, real and urgent things (temptation to mindless activism) (need to clarify the nature and purpose of TR)
  15. Think they already do enough reflection by praying and preparing for worship (need to differentiate systematic TR from other kinds of reflective activity and where possible identify overlaps, correlations and differences)
  16. Think they will be shamed or embarrassed if they are either not good at the process or if the results are not creditable (particularly a problem if group reflection is contemplated) (need to build up trust in management and peer structures and give people positive experiences of peer and other kinds of supervision).

This list is very much what occurs to me off the top of my head. I suspect that if most of the issues identified above are not addressed, then it will be a very long time before TR becomes a systematic and routine part of pastoral practice. I believe this will be to the personal and professional privation of practitioners and it will also have negative connotations for the people they work with insofar as they fail critically and creatively to review and renew their practice. The challenge to theological educators is therefore how to engage with and overcome the obstacles mentioned.

26.iv.04

Return to top

Page printed from www.biapt.org.uk