Dyerlogic and dialogical

The academic process!

We have had breakfast lunch and dinner in earlier blogs; they were devotional but with a note to students too. Now we go back to the reason for this blog - academic support for theological students, particularly those of an evangelical persuasion. So how do we write? How do we argue? How do we maintain a position when reading a wide range of sources for a secular if theological, degree?

We are required to write for the global academy. Yet that is distinctly western in its approach. How do we go from a dogmatic, definitive, directive theology of the churches especially in Pentecostal circles to a more dialogical approach? The trail of disillusionment with academia is long among 'churched Pentecostals' [i.e. traditional Pentecostals, but they don't like using the term 'tradition' in case it hearkens back to mainline denominational traditions! They do have traditions though in any denomination. We hand them on without realising; tradere - is the Latin verb meaning 'to hand on'. As for disillusionment with academic study, there are ongoing debates within the college levels of training for ministry to prevent disillusionment and further progress in working within the 'academy'.

We need to write appropriately, objectively and not 'confessionally' without good defence. In Britain, at least, there are parameters for colleges to meet degree standards for the small colleges training people for denominational or non-denominational ministry. The Quality and Assurance Association from the government insists on these standards and rightly so.

We can compete with other denominations in the public square for fair comparison of training in thinking. However, there is a debate on the idea of compromising dogmatic distinctions. This is needless as there are ways of arguing for particular distinctives and ensuring a good apologetic is necessary for the 'tradition'.

Many students I have met find this dogmatic versus dialogic aspect of work difficult to work. See the recent article by John Moxon on the dilemma faced by the university faculty staff for theology when encountering students who become foxed with the demands of academic study of theology vis a vis their church life.[1] The students often want ‘facts’ to write, not to debate with all its need of assessing other authors’ views. It is as if they want to be set in their pre-formed ways and understanding whereas a dialogue seems almost threatening. The older the student starting a degree, the more this 'academic way of working' appears difficult to assimilate into their thinking. The idea of ‘Critical Studies’ seems to give the idea of having to be negative and in opposition to what was taken for ‘normal’ belief. It is almost threatening.

Really CRITIQUE is not critical in a negative sense. It is critical to have critique in the essays. So where does this take us? Judgement? No, more like discernment! What is valid and why? How can X author consider that e.g., the virgin birth never happened as Luke has it. What reasons might there be? Assessing their views does not mean adopting their views; it means working out reasons for their views and reasons for your own views. Looking into your own views is not as easy as you think. Is there a willingness to look and change? Is that producing fear? Is there a fear of accommodating against your real - apparently real - beliefs? Critique can be very positive. The authors may have very good ideas and arguments. This can help your essay. On the other hand, do not just accept what anyone says. Work out ‘what’ they say but more importantly work out ‘why’ they say what they say.

What we think we know might not be quite what a true doctrine might be according to scripture. Authority for many a Pentecostal/Evangelical lies in the interpretation of scripture for what it says point blank, literally. Essay writing cannot assume that. There are many different bases for hermeneutics. If we cannot bring God into an argument dogmatically in academic theology, we can ascertain who says God did what and argue from them- objectively. I suggest you do not make it personal. Do discern and write a good argument for your preferred position. That is some of - Dyerlogic!

[1] John Moxon,’ Biblical studies – troublesome or catastrophic? Strategies in ministerial re-formation’, Practical Theology 13.4 pp 355-371