Bonnie J. Miller-McLemore

The “Clerical Paradigm”: A Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness?

Abstract Perception of the “clerical paradigm” as the main problem of practical theology and theological education has perpetuated a “fallacy of misplaced concreteness,” as philosopher Alfred North Whitehead might say, or the mistaking of a helpful generalization for concrete reality. Does the concept of the clerical paradigm adequately comprehend the problems, or does it contain hidden prejudice against practice and doubts about the church itself? This article argues that the idea of the “clerical paradigm” has so dominated the discourse of practical theology that it has distorted understanding of the needs of pastoral practitioners, misdirected blame, and hence left other problems unattended, particularly the rise of an equally challenging problem, which might be called the “academic paradigm.” In relying so heavily on the construct of clerical paradigm, theologians eager to revitalize practical theology inadvertently denigrate congregational and pastoral “know-how.” The article begins with an analysis of Edward Farleys proposal, but the challenge lies less here than with its subsequent use and misuse. The article therefore turns from this analysis to an exploration of problems raised by the academic paradigm and alternative ways to redeem the value of practical know-how so readily dismissed under the reign of the clerical paradigm. Zusammenfasssung Die Wahrnehmung des „klerikalen Paradigmas“ als Hauptproblem der Praktischen Theologie und der theologischen Ausbildung hat den „Trugschluss der unzutreffenden Konkretheit“ , wie der Philosoph Alfred North Whitehead sagen dürfte, oder das Fehlen einer hilfreichen Verallgemeinerung für die konkrete Realität immer wieder verfestigt. Versteht das Konzept des „klerikalen Paradigmas“ die Probleme angemessen, oder enthält es verborgene Vorurteile gegen die Praxis und zweifelt an der Kirche selbst? In diesem Artikel wird argumentiert, dass die Idee des „klerikalen Paradigmas“ den Diskurs in der Praktischen Theologie so dominiert hat, dass es das Verstehen der Bedürfnisse der pastoral Tätigen verzerrt, Verantwortung fehl adressiert und folglich andere Probleme unberücksichtig gelassen hat, insbesondere das Aufkommen eines ebenso herausfordernden Problems, welches das „akademische Paradigma“ genannt werden kann. Indem sie sich so sehr auf das Konstrukt des „klerikalen Paradigmas“ verlassen haben, werteten Theologen, die danach eiferten, die Praktische Theologie zu revitalisieren, unbeabsichtigt gemeindliches und pastorales „know-how“ ab. Der Artikel beginnt mit einer Analyse von Edward Farleys Ansatz, aber die Herausforderung liegt weniger hier als in dem daraus folgenden Gebrauch und Missbrauch. Deshalb wendet sich der Artikel weg von dieser Analyse hin zu der Erforschung von Problemen, die durch das „akademische Paradigma“ hervorgerufen werden, und zu Alternativen, um den Wert praktischen Wissens wiederzuentdecken, welcher unter der Herrschaft des „klerikalen Paradigmas“ so bereitwillig vernachlässigt wurde.

Teaching Practical Theology: Introducing Six Perspectives

Abstract In April 2006, the Association of Practical Theology (APT) in the United States hosted its biennial meeting at Vanderbilt University under the title, “Practical Theology and Its Sub-Disciplines: Pedagogies and Their Implications for Practical Theology.” Panel presentations from six areas (education, worship, pastoral care, homiletics, leadership, and social mission) explored the distinctive character of teaching in each sub-discipline, what they hold in common with other fields, and broader connections to practical theology as a whole. Those six presentations are the central essays of this article. A brief, jointly-authored essay introduces the situation and themes of the APT meeting, while a concluding essay by the same group of authors names the commonalities and differences among the sub-disciplines, as well as questions for further teaching and research raised by this collection of essays. Zusammenfassung Im April 2006 fand an der Vanderbilt University der im Abstand von zwei Jahren regelmäßig stattfindende Kongress der US-amerikanischen Association of Practical Theology (APT) unter dem Thema „Praktische Theologie und ihre Subdisziplinen: Pädagogik und ihre Folgen für die Praktische Theologie“ statt. Plenumsvorträge aus sechs Disziplinen (Religionspädagogik, Liturgik, Poimenik, Homiletik, Pastoraltheologie/Kybernetik sowie Diakonie) ergründeten den spezifischen Charakter der Lehre in jeder dieser Disziplinen, die Gemeinsamkeiten mit anderen Bereichen ebenso wie die grundsätzlichen Verbindungen zur Praktischen Theologie als Ganzer. Diese sechs Vorträge stellen den zentralen Teil dieses Beitrags dar. Ein kurzer, gemeinsam verfasster Abschnitt führt in die Situation und die Themen des APT-Kongresses ein, während ein abschließender Abschnitt derselben Autorengemeinschaft die Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede innerhalb der Subdisziplinen benennt und Perspektiven für die zukünftige Lehre und Forschung herausarbeitet, die durch diese Aufsätze eröffnet werden.

Whither the Children? Childhood in Religious Education

Several years ago I turned my attention to the study of childhood in theology. Colleagues with whom I spoke as I took up this research often naturally assumed that I would find the literature of religious education helpful. But for the most part I did not. This article arose out of curiosity about this impasse. Since its inception, Western theology has largely cast the mature adult Caucasian male as primary actor. While questions about the need for greater inclusivity have led to fresh consideration of gender, race, ethnicity, and class, the adult-centered proclivity of theology has become even more entrenched in the last few centuries. Whereas many premodern theologians took seriously the nature of childhood and the education and formation of children as an important subject matter, until recently modern theologians have not—except those in religious

COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE AND THE QUESTION OF THEOLOGICAL METHOD

Abstract I dedicate this article to Don S. Browning whose funeral occurred June 10, 2010, a week prior to its delivery at the Society for Pastoral Theology in Chicago. He wraps up its thesis in one sentence when he says to Christian ethics about its use of psychology what I have tried to say to theology about engaging neuroscience: “Christian ethics must critique these psychologies at the same time that it learns from them” (2006, p. 3).

Marital Therapy Caught Between Person and Public: Christian Traditions on Marriage

This article addresses a crisis in marital therapy caught between concern for individual well-being and marriage as a social institution. Marital therapy would be enriched by conversation with three models of marriage: Roman Catholic subsidiarity theory, Protestant covenant view, and liberation theology and corresponding languages of social goods, covenant, and mutual responsibility. The authors urge therapists to see marriage as private and social at the same time and to help couples explore the meaning of marital commitment, the connection between personal well-being and marriages wider social goods, and the dynamics of shared power and radical mutuality in marriage.

The Sting of Death

“Although we no longer live in a world constructed around imagery of heaven, purgatory, and hell, a look at past attempts to comprehend the ‘great riddle’ of death, as Augustine remarked, might help us. Listening first-hand to the words of Augustine, Calvin, or Kierkegaard vividly illustrates the tenor of the changes that have occurred over the sweep of more than nineteen centuries—but also the constancy of human experience beneath the changes. … [T]hey depict a reality we know, and in a way that can help us think about it more clearly.”

Practising What We Preach: The Case of Women in Ministry

Abstract This essay celebrates the fortieth anniversary of womens ordination in the Church of Scotland as an occasion to consider the tension between proclamation and practice. Starting with stories of womens ministry as illustrative, it then explores a case within this case—self-sacrifice in womens lives. This examination reveals how deeply embedded Christian theology is within common life. To make changes in the family (e.g., share care of children) or congregation (e.g., include women in leadership) involves one immediately in the thicket of Christian doctrine. The essay concludes by arguing that dealing with this slippage between preaching and practice or word and deed lies at the heart of practical theology.

The Theory-Practice Binary and the Politics of Practical Knowledge

A few years ago I co-taught a course for firstand second-year doctoral students from different academic areas in our graduate department of religion. As they rotated responsibility for presenting, I noticed a subtle but clear posturing, running just below the surface, written into body postures, gestures, and speaking habits. More credibility and status surrounded those in certain disciplines. For those familiar with theological education, I hardly need say: the more theoretically-focused areas garnered more esteem. Why did those closer to practice (e.g., homiletics, pastoral theology) question their knowledge, while those who foreground theory (e.g., historical studies, systematic theology) assume an air of greater confidence? Since I served on the committee that oversaw their matriculation, I knew that on paper there was little discrepancy in their credentials. Their behavior was evenmore peculiar because these students had entered a funded program designed precisely around teaching for the practice of ministry. By the program’s standards at least, those closer to pastoral and religious practice should even have had an advantage. What most surprised me was how early in the students’ careers such patterns set in and became established. How did people fresh to the academy so readily absorb its unspoken values about theory’s dominance? This moment in time encapsulates a conundrum in relating theory and practice that persists within the theological academy and its constituencies despite ourselves. Despite all that practical theologians have accomplished in advancing the cause of practice—and one of my central points in a 2011 presidential address to the International Academy of Practical Theology stressed the need to quit lamenting our sorry state—the very categories we seek to unsettle, those of theory and practice, continue to entrap us.2 The terms

TEACHING PASTORAL THEOLOGY: THE IMPLICATIONS OF POSTMODERNITY FOR GRADUATE PROGRAMS

Postmodernity brings with it particular emphases that inform the practice and teaching of Pastoral Theology. Typically these emphases include heightened appreciation for subjectivity in experience, ethical pluralism, a recognition of the relativity among metanarratives operative in culture, and the ethical and sociopolitical realities of difference. What are the implications of these paradigm shifts for graduate education in Pastoral Theology? For this symposium, Joretta Marshall, Bonnie Miller-McLemore, and Edward P. Wimberly contribute brief essays reflecting on the values, goals, and auricular strategies they believe our graduate programs need to reflect.

And the “Hall Was Burned to the Ground”: Mothers and Theological Body Knowledge

Do mothers know anything distinctive through bodily practices of acute care for another, particularly as it relates to theology? In this chapter, I explore how theology is shaped by human habitation of temporal physical bodies, arguing that mothers have a greater role in constructing theology than history has accorded them. I develop this claim through an examination of the life of Antoinette Brown Blackwell—known as the first ordained woman but seldom recognized as a scholar and mother—and then through an exploration of the occlusion and reclamation of maternal knowledge in theology. In both instances, I hope to spark imagination about what we have missed by constructing theology in static, disembodied terms as an elite exercise whose presumed subject is the unchanging adult.