Journaling for theological educators

Posted March 1, 2020 by Graham Cheesman
Categories: Uncategorized

Journaling for theological educators

I have kept a journal, on and off but mostly on, for many years. Why? Here are a few good reasons;

It becomes a reflection on our calling as a theological educator and how it is being fulfilled. There is nothing more important for us than to see our work as a calling to a particular ministry, a developing understanding of this and a noting its fulfilment in our life.

It can be an affirmation of important parts of our life that are nothing to do with theological education. Hopefully our journal will be full of those pleasures (and sometimes struggles) in our life which have nothing to do with our calling, a rejoicing in family, a recording of beauty and awe, a thoughtful walk.

It will facilitate the creation of happy memories to turn back to such as reading back over the last year and enjoying the happy times again. A short while ago, I even re-read what I wrote 49 years ago, the evening a young lady who was to be my wife indicated her beginning love for me. The ink was still luminous with joy.

It can become a way of talking things over with God, especially for those who sometimes find it easier to write than speak. We all pray in our own way and some often do it in written words. A journal is especially useful for a time of reflection, such as at the end of a year, looking back and forward in the presence of God.

It creates a record of the ways of God in your life. When I was recently writing a short memoir, I had thirty-six journals to guide me dating back to when I was a young man. It was enlightening about myself, but even more about how God had worked in my life, usually through other people, their decisions and encouragements.

And are they to be kept private? Yes, because if you write for others to see you do not write entirely honestly. At the end of his life, lying in bed, the puritan John Howe told his wife to bring all his journals and burn them in front of him before he died. We can all work out any exceptions to this rule, such as a loving spouse who probably knows more about us than we do ourselves.

If you do not yet do so, then let me encourage you to consider keeping a regular journal – or revive the habit that may have fallen by the wayside. It slows you down and makes you more reflective in a busy life, adds richness to that life and helps you live it well.

Babylonian Captivity revisited

Posted February 7, 2020 by Graham Cheesman
Categories: Uncategorized

Babylonian captivity revisited

Thirty years ago, Lesslie Newbigin described the relationship between theological education and higher education as the Babylonian captivity of the first by the second.

Since then, higher education has continued to change and has probably become the most globalised of all man’s activities. This has moved the goalposts and made an assessment of his interpretation urgent. Structures, attitudes, degrees, quality assurance, and how value is apportioned, are now all defined similarly in every country in the world. Theological Education at its higher levels just about everywhere fits within this global HE patterning for better or worse.

There is a contextualisation argument for this to be accepted as wise and useful. Even Jesus contextualised his educational methodology into that of the Rabbi for his time and place, since this was the dominant educational pattern for the society in which he taught. If the HE package is now the dominant educational pattern globally, maybe this is where we should be.

Yet, nowadays, just because of globalisation, there is surely no simple contextualisation left in the world. In theological education we now deal with a dual contextualisation, trying to be relevant and useful for the local situation and to be part of the connected global situation at the same time. It is not so much that we have ignored contextualisation but are dramatically prioritising global contextualisation over local contextualisation when they are in conflict.

What is more, contextualisation, locally or globally, is not a blank cheque, it contains a judgment on the context and even a denial of acceptance of parts of a context in the light of the Word of God and the intentions of the contextualisation.  Jesus was not content to simply contextualise either, but modified the Rabbi pattern to suit his agenda and objectives, in a number of important ways.

What are the consequences of our present Babylonian priority?

Firstly, we have not sufficiently remembered that theological education is to be done by the church for the church and is thus a faith and commitment-based enterprise.  The requirements of the secular university driven academy and the requirements of the Church of God are difficult to reconcile today, as a number of studies have shown, and this tension is rarely sufficiently acknowledged.

Secondly, we have often made the goal of theological education not so much the formation of the student as the conferring on them of status by degrees, so they will have influence in their society and ecclesiastical situation.

Thirdly, we have, in developing countries, generally imposed attitudes and ways of studying truth on our students because that is the way excellence, individual attainment, critical judgment, academic style, research quality and many other issues are defined globally. This, even though these are often alien to the culture and by no means simply the best way to use the mind in any culture.

Fourthly, we have devalued those students who cannot perform well within the patterns of global academia but have a fruitful ministry for God. Rarely are the academic high fliers in our systems the most used by God, rather the most humble and dedicated. This does not contradict the important need of the church for academic high fliers also.

What is the answer? If there is one, it is complicated! It does not mean a denial of either global or local contextualisation but a renewal of our fundamentals. It resides partly in the need for theological education to grow integrated students, alive to the need to be academic, spiritual and ministerial in equal importance as God has gifted them. It will be developed by emphasising, at the highest academic level, those degrees which are heavy on reflective practice for most, and confine the studying for Doctorates and Masters courses of a more purely theoretical nature to those students, immensely valuable but relatively few, who will teach and interact with society in a more dominantly academic way. It will mean listening to wise people in the church who are less concerned with status as with godliness and mission.

The Babylonian captivity did eventually end for Israel. Maybe theological education will one day return to its own land again and be at peace.


Living well in 2020

Posted December 31, 2019 by Graham Cheesman
Categories: Uncategorized

Living well in 2020

In the late autumn of 1871, Sir Marvin Sanders opened a burial site in Alexandria. This proved to be that of a minor lecturer in the Catechetical School of Alexandria, probably the earliest theological education enterprise in the history of the Church. Within the site were found a number of quite well-preserved papyri. These seem to have been written soon after the death of Pantaenus and during the subsequent principalship of Clement of Alexandria, so we can therefore date the documents not long after 190 AD.

One was especially interesting. It seems that this early teacher was concerned about the growing desire for success and influence in the church and tried to counter this trend with an emphasis on the supreme importance of living a good life for God.

Below is my rough translation of the document[1]. It seems to be a list of ten key aspirations and is entitled “Living Well”:

  1. Seek the presence of God always and in everything – in small matters of daily living, in study and teaching, in people, in beauty, in big issues of ministry.
  2. Constantly live in the grace and forgiveness of Christ and in conscious commitment to Him and His cause – to that end take communion/eucharist regularly to renew this in your heart.
  3. Live a full and happy life as a human being in God’s world – and thus fulfil God’s intention of renewing our humanity, while being wary of sin.
  4. In every circumstance, whenever possible, do the most loving thing for others – in leadership or ministry, in relationship, in family, in daily encounter with others.
  5. Fulfil your specific gifting and calling as best you can – in all stages of your life, from starting out in ministry to retirement, even if it means working harder than you wish.
  6. Write a journal daily – so you are able to reflect on the goodness of God, your own efforts to live well, and wrestle with ideas as they come into your life.
  7. Read quality – despite often tired or busy, read not just for relaxation but also books and articles that engage the mind and prompt careful thought.
  8. Take a walk or other exercise alone each day – for the body’s fitness, the mind’s time to think things through and for the spirit to give space to pray.
  9. Be humble enough not to pretend to be, or try to be, what you are not – apart from in exceptional circumstances, God’s strength is not given to allow you to be different from how he made you.
  10. Seek constantly to be at peace – a fruit of the Spirit and a product of constant vigilance, inside yourself and with others.

A useful set of aspirations for us all as we enter a new year. Why not make them your own?


[1] Schnickelgruber Alte Texte, Die Es Nie Gab, vol.14: 541, Berlin, 1896.

Forbid them not

Posted December 2, 2019 by Graham Cheesman
Categories: Uncategorized

Forbid them not

Children are a gift from God and they contribute so much to our lives. So why are our colleges and seminaries such child-free zones?

In keeping children away from the business end of theological education, we create an un-natural feeling in our colleges, make a true family atmosphere un-attainable and manufacture one more divorce from real life for our students. What are the main reasons for this?

The first is historical. Theological education today comes out of a long history of training “the men” for the ministry – and sometimes putting on occasional classes for “their wives” when they are not busy with the children. The Bible college movement broke this mould, following the Faith Missions of the 19th century which they served, and trained men and women equally, but they did not greatly consider the children, who often were sent away to school to give space for service.

The second is attitudinal. I can only quote the great theologian Abelard on sending his new-born child via Heloise, away to his sister “Who intent upon sacred and philosophical reflection could endure the squalling … and constant dirt of little children?” It is one or the other and he knows which he will choose.

The third is hermeneutical. We have so emphasised the “come apart for a while” sayings of Jesus that we have forgotten that, while he was teaching his disciples, he set a little child in their midst, and another time, when the disciples thought along the lines of Abelard, he rebuked them and invited the children to come to him.

No-one can deny that the thoughtless presence of children can harm the concentration required for theological education, but are there areas in which their presence gives more than it takes?

Worship times would be such occasions when the presence of children would be a lovely thing. Meal times would be much more fun, so also the coffee breaks. The residential areas of the campus would benefit from children and so we should build married flats – and run a creche. I have even experimented with prams in the lecture room, with some success, so we can give opportunity to their mothers to be in on the teaching. OK, they take their little one out if he starts to “squall” to use Abelard’s term, and rightly so. That happens also in sermons in church now and then. Children should never of course, enter the library with all the frowning notices requiring “silence”. But why not a children’s section as they have in municipal libraries? It’s just that we haven’t thought through much of this concept until now.

If we are teaching students to be missional, we should remember why Jesus told the disciples to “forbid them not”. It was “for such is the kingdom of heaven”. And if we are into teaching and learning we might just learn something from them.

Working with yourself

Posted October 31, 2019 by Graham Cheesman
Categories: Uncategorized

Working with yourself

When we first married, we had a very old Ford Anglia car. It would get us from A to B (eventually) but you had to understand it and work with it not against it, understanding its strengths and weaknesses. We loved her but she was particularly hard to start in the mornings, needed constant topping up with oil and had a tendency for the windscreen wipers to fail in the middle of a storm.

There are plenty of books about how to work sensibly with others but one of our central tasks as theological educators is to work sensibly with ourselves. Just as our car did the job so long as you treated it carefully, aware of what it could and could not do, so with us. Plenty of us are hard to start in the mornings, need constant topping up with coffee and can’t see very clearly in a storm of stress. We need to know ourselves, work with, not against, us as we are and then the job will get done as best we can. What does this mean?

  1. Understanding our weaknesses and strengths, a fair assessment of our ability or otherwise, with academics, people, planning, management, public speaking.
  2. Recognising our need for a team around us, because we know we will not have all the skills necessary to do the job alone. Building a team with those not like ourselves.
  3. Knowing our stress signals, which could be growing anger, pains in the head or elsewhere, you name it, you have them, they are the body saying slow down or trouble is coming.
  4. The ability to apologise and gain forgiveness – from others and ourselves since we will mess up. A loving relationship with others should ensure forgiveness from them and we need to show as much grace to ourselves as God does to us.
  5. Knowing our time cycles of ability and using them. Early morning or late at night are classic times when we work best or worst, but it is often more complicated than that, we just have to know, and adjust our schedules to work with the cycles.
  6. Understanding when and how best to build in “time out” in relaxation is essential, on our own and with those we love, remembering that we have other relationships than our relationship with theological education!
  7. Realising all these things shift upwards as we mature and downwards as we age. We do not paint the picture of our self-knowledge just once, but need to regularly re-paint it in certain areas as we change.

You have probably noticed that God has hardly been mentioned in this post yet. However, all this is spiritual work. Only true humility will put us in a position to be able to assess ourselves correctly. We need divine wisdom (and wise fellow Christians) to guide our minds as we try for an honest assessment of ourselves. And a true assessment of ourselves will surely lead us to the view that we cannot do the job unless we have the help of God. The end result of working with ourselves then, is a life of prayer.

And what an encouragement when the job is done through us and despite us because God chooses the weak to confound the strong. Now and then, in our little old rattily car, we would pass some nice flashy BMW or Jaguar beside the road broken down and going nowhere. And we would laugh.

A useful reference

Posted October 1, 2019 by Graham Cheesman
Categories: Uncategorized

Dear sir/madam,

Thank you for inviting me to provide a reference for this candidate for a lecturing post in your seminary.  To my mind, there are six fundamental requirements of such a person, which are the very things we hope and pray for in our students;

  1. Competent academics. Excellent in one subject and with a broad knowledge of the whole field of bible and theology.
  2. Real spirituality, committed, in a lively relationship with God leading to a solid moral, loving life.
  3. Ministerial skills. In the case of a theological educator this means good enthusiastic teaching ability.
  4. Integration of life. Their spirituality and academics inform each other, their ministry is shaped by both and, in turn shapes them.
  5. Conviction of call. To prepare men and women for a life of loving and serving God and others.
  6. Relational, community emphasis. People skills, ability to work in a team with a joint sense of calling.

This man certainly has the first five and probably, now with more experience, the sixth also.

You should also know that he possesses excellent biblical language skills. He has plenty of missionary experience and was a pastor for a short while. He writes well, deeply but with practical intent although occasionally it is hard to make out exactly what he is saying and I am not alone in this. Character wise, he is an un-usual mixture of extreme humility and strong assertion of what he thinks is right.

But here is the problem; he is not at all the usual sort of person we employ in theological education today. You ought to know that he is very passionate, over the top at times. He is often in controversy and his language is pretty strong. He did have a disagreement with a fellow worker which split the team a while back, and all signs are it was his fault (which he later realised). He is also a charismatic, and I know that your seminary does not have this as an emphasis. He speaks in tongues, encourages prophesy, practices divine healing and sees visions. A while back, he refused to cut his hair for a while, and then formally cut it – for a religious reason, he said. I was not on his team at the time but it would have been interesting to be led by a long-haired charismatic if only for a few weeks! One other thing, he is not a well man. I will leave him to tell you more about that but it has bothered him greatly in the past.

All this means that if you appoint him you will be taking a real risk. He is very special and any seminary or college which employs him would be greatly blessed but its principal would have a real roller-coaster ride! It’s up to you but personally, I would go for him.

Don’t you think theological education is increasingly bland these days?

Best wishes, Luke

(PS I was his doctor for many years)

A tale of two candidates

Posted August 29, 2019 by Graham Cheesman
Categories: Uncategorized

A tale of two candidates

I have been an examiner for a number of doctoral dissertations and the pattern is pretty standard:

The academic candidate presents an idea, a thesis, that they seek to prove. Your job is to test them as to whether they have employed strict logic throughout, fully understood and interacted with all the key literature on the subject and been respectful and fair to those with whom they disagree. In their original contribution to the area, they must have been careful and accurate in use of evidence after properly assessing its value, accepting its complexity and not claiming an inch more than they can beyond reasonable doubt.

It is also your job to question them closely as to weak points – where they don’t match up to these standards – and the candidate cannot change the subject or try to divert your question but answer fully and truthfully in a carefully nuanced way, not with soundbites or emotion.

I also read the papers, listen to the radio and watch the TV, as political candidates present themselves. Again, the pattern is pretty standard. The political candidate often conducts him or herself as follows:

They present an idea, but rarely seek to prove it. They give a few emotional soundbites, often ignore evidence which is out there and regularly are as economical with the truth as they can get away with. A trick they sometimes employ is to create “enemies” they can unfairly attack. Their sources are occasionally the most scurrilous newspapers or TV channels. Often, they push a small truth too far and deliberately ignore a competing big truth in the presentation of their idea. Sometimes, they appeal to the prejudices of their listeners not their thinking and so re-enforce those prejudices.

Questioning them effectively is not possible since they have been trained in how not to answer questions, but rather deflect them on to ground where they are more comfortable. Of course, there are honest political candidates seeking to be fair and right in their writing and speeches, but, even for them, the system seems to include these practices in their job description. Like you, I guess, I would love to get the worst offenders into a viva voce examination room in the university and question them under proper academic rules!

Now there are also real weaknesses in the academic system, it can become a game, even a support for wrong. Academics are as sinful as everyone else. As Anthony Beevor points out in his recent book on the second World war, at the January 1942 Wannsee conference in Germany called by Heydrich to plan the extermination of the Jews, “just over half of the participants had doctorates” (Beevor 2012, 294).

However, the academic enterprise as a desire to seek fairness and truth rather than simply advantage for self, to use the mind God gave us in a correct, careful and honest way, all this is a fairer reflection of the world as God wants it to be than much of the political debate of today.

Our job as theological educators? To teach to our students right, careful academic method in the study and presentation of ideas as a recognition that God is concerned about truth, fairness, justice, and a correct understanding of reality. And remind them that these can be the starting points for understanding grace.

%d bloggers like this: