The College of Pastoral Supervision & Psychotherapy is a theologically based covenant community, dedicated to "recovery of the soul" and promoting competency in the clinical pastoral field.
« Capturing the Light That's in the Air by Perry Miller | Main | The Chaplain-Patient By Connie Hill »
Curriculum is generally understood as the academic courses or programs offered by a school or other learning institution. The academic structure is divided into different fields, areas, or departments on the basis of the subject matter with which each field deals. Most schools make a genuine attempt to prepare their academic programs across the various disciplines.
Understanding that curriculum is not just a synopsis of the courses offered by a school is paramount to its construction. Curriculum is the articulation of the very purpose and method of doing theology in context. While affirming diversity in perspectives, the curriculum of a school must recognize certain common and basic affirmations. First, that commitment is the first act of doing theology --- commitment meaning the promise to transform one’s self, the church, society, and the earth. Second, that the epistemological privilege of the victims, the traumatized, the dispossessed, and the sick is an act of praxis in solidarity with the underside of history.
The sources for doing theology are yet another important aspect in one’s search to re/define curriculum. The traditional sources such as the scripture and tradition of the church need to be approached anew from the perspective of the sufferers. One needs to broaden his or her understanding of both scripture and tradition. Plurality of the scriptures and the theological authority of oral traditions are quite important. A new understanding of ecclesia must lead one to search for tradition in the so-called “heretical communities,” and also in the emergence of social movements and faith-based communities of the Dominated/Developing World.
Who the author of theology is yet another critical issue that theological curriculum needs to examine closely. Who develops the curriculum? While we reject the “banking” system of education, it is still the educator (professor/teacher) who prepares the curriculum, as though s/he is the repository of all knowledge. An authentic learning community is synonymous with responsible students and professors with humility. Curriculum packages in the classroom or via the internet need to be a collective endeavor of, by, and with the learning community.
Theological education must not be a straightjacket endeavor. It must be flexible so as to give space to the movement of the Spirit in the world today. The objective of a course is not solely to fulfill the requirements and complete the readings and required papers. These are important, but sometimes one must allow the course to act as a journey with conduits to unimaginable horizons of praxis, discovery, and new insights.
The academic programs of the school must also reflect the overall life of the school. The school’s hiring policies, admission policies, scholarship policies, trade-union activities, worship life, student activities, investment policies, cafeteria consumption patterns, community life and living, and even the physical plant of the school must reflect the life of the learning community.
Nowadays, it has become fashionable to incorporate the politics and spiritualities of such theologies. There is danger in commodifying the pathos and struggles of the people by way of turning their moans and groans into “theologies” for the intellectual stimulation of the elite and armchair theologians. Margaret Kassman reminds her readers that, “Where people try to share in the midst of poverty, where solidarity is practiced in the midst of oppression, wherever life is created, we are co-creators of the God of life.” She calls for a Theology of Life – “a theology linked to experience; it emerges from community and aims at community.” Therefore, she concludes, “theology does not belong to the experts anymore. The people of God become the point of reference.” Contextual theologies must be learned by way of praxis. And oftentimes the victims, traumatized, sick, socially dislocated, or dispossessed are the most qualified teachers and mentors for such theologies, whether in the community or at the bedside. The commitment to live with these people must become a basic course requirement for those who teach theology, and more so, for those seeking an ordination, a consecrated life, or ministry.
Schools must invite representatives of “subsistence” or “heretical” communities to teach theology of life-related and affirming topics. For example, a gardener has a better epistemological privilege to speak about nature than a theologian or a congregational minister.
To this end, I envision and propose the following for theological education:
• That the Master of Divinity (M.Div.) level program require one semester with a residential component where the serious student lives with “subsistence” or “heretical” community to become involved in the diverse ministries/programs of such community.
• That the Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) or Doctor of Ministry (D.Min.) level program in different fields of concentration incorporate a component for field education in which the candidate is expected to immerse him/herself in social movements, community organizations, and the like.
• That the colonial or imperialist spirit of the past in theological education be eradicated. For example, an alternative in the required modern language examination in doctoral degree program need not be limited to European or Western languages such as French, German, or Spanish. Such required language examination must broaden its horizon to include the Dominated/Developing World languages. Indeed, this will be a challenge for a theological curriculum and its would-be seekers of the professorial chair and academic endowment.
• That for faculty appointment or tenureAtship, commitment to and involvement with a people’s movement and their struggles, become part and parcel of their curriculum vitae; that in their evaluation and promotion such commitment and involvement be considered carefully along with their publications and scholarship. A theology or any discipline for that matter, without praxis involvement, ethics, social, or prophetic consciousness is impoverished, if not a lie!
• That an Admissions’ Policy to persons from underserved and underrepresented communities with past involvement in social movements and future plans for the same be given close attention. This means that points scored by required testing of any sort must be balanced by the larger picture of richness and diversity that this representative from the underserved and underrepresented will bring to classroom interactions, discussions, studies, and research.
I wonder whether the relevance of re/structuring a theological curriculum from the underside of history in the 21st century is what Brueggemann (1986) in Hopeful Imagination: Prophetic Voices in Exile, calls a “liberated imagination that has the courage and the freedom to act in a different vision and a different perception of reality” (p. 99). I wonder whether we, in our endeavor “to act in a different vision and a different perception of reality,” can offer an alternative paradigm to traditional ways of communicating God, the human person, suffering, the environment, and theological pedagogy. I wonder whether an aimaginative way of theologizing interactively in a less structured academic way without surrendering substance and context, can be seriously implemented. I wonder whether a space where the contributors to and articulators of a liberative theology; namely, pastors, theologians, bishops, students, victims, the well and sick, dispossessed, etc. who are engaged in doing theology, can come together without any resort to power, privileged position, or jargon. Multiple entry points for critical thoughts, analyses, discernments, and consultations need be given room to make theology real, compelling, and nourishing where a theological curriculum is, indeed, food for the mind, heart, and soul!
Theological curriculum needs to endeavor to incorporate various options and perspectives, since a dynamic and robust curriculum calls for a meaningful dialogue with life in context and the world around us, which is not only about God-talk but also God-praxis.
Posted by Perry Miller, Editor at April 6, 2008 4:37 PM
