Abstract
What is meant by spirituality and spiritual development in the context of theological formation, and why is it important to incorporate spirituality in theological formation? This article addresses these questions by reviewing scholarly literature and applying the results to the context of Christian academic faculties of theology. The author argues the interdependence of theological and spiritual formation. Also presented are examples of unsound argumentation as to why spirituality would be important in the context of academic theology. The article concludes with the presentation of seven critical considerations for incorporating spirituality in theology in practices within academic faculties of theology. The article argues that paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation is an intrinsic part of striving toward both academic and professional excellence. Theology, including academic theology, gains in expressiveness and relevance when it contributes to the development of personal and communal spirituality.
Introduction
Spirituality and theological formation: What is the problem?
Some time ago, I was sitting at a table with some relations.
1
One of my interlocutors said, “People today, young people in particular, seem to lack an orientation point outside themselves, something that creates order and gives direction to life.” This comment contains not only an interpretation of the times we live in, at least according to this person, but also a reference to the central topic of this article: finding a point of orientation that sheds light on life and the world and creates order and gives direction. This is an important phenomenon to which the term spirituality refers. The great search, or even hunger, for spirituality that we observe in society today is, viewed this way, highly connected with the search for meaning in life and in the world. Whether the point of orientation lies outside yourself is the question. There are those who connect spirituality precisely with finding an orientation to ‘the self’, within yourself. One example is the way Inez van Oord recently explained the concept of spirituality. Van Oord is founder and first editor-in-chief of the Dutch magazine Happinez,
2
which was celebrating its 20th anniversary in 2023. Happinez covers in depth such topics as spirituality and meaning. Van Oord was a guest on a broadcast of the Dutch radio program “Het Nieuwsweekend” in early September this year, where she said the following about spirituality: There is no single definition for it; it is also difficult to describe because it is something invisible, not tangible, not measurable, it is more personal experience [.... ], it’s personal perception of what you experience when you put aside personal thinking for a moment, it then seems like you end up in a kind of space, and some call that self-awareness, and others say ‘it’s my higher self,’ but I’ll just call it space for now, and if you can act or live from that space, instead of continuously reacting through your thinking, then that gives a very pleasant, and stable and neutral feeling and you’re just more comfortable in life [translated from the Dutch original].
3
Problem statement
Spirituality is the central topic of this article; not in its generality, but more specifically in the context of theological formation. Even more precisely, the discussion of spirituality in this article is colored by my own position at a very particular Christian academic theological faculty: the Evangelische Theologische Faculteit (ETF), Leuven. 4 Theological formation, as takes place at academic theological faculties like ETF Leuven, can be understood as a special form of religious education. It is an understanding of religious education that is taken from The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Practical Theology, edited by Miller-McLemore, in which Hess describes religious education as “the re-asking and reengagement of the depth questions a religious tradition has asked. The term religious… refers to that which asks the depth questions of life. The term education, correspondingly, indicates the process of remembering and reasking the questions that are central to a particular religious tradition.” 5 The vast collection of questions about meaning and purpose, the interpretation of life and the world, is nothing other than deep questions posed by religious traditions. From this perspective, attention for spirituality at a Christian theological faculty like ETF Leuven would be entirely appropriate. And the attention to personal and communal spirituality at theological faculties in Flanders and the Netherlands in general seems to be increasing in recent years.
But is this combination of spirituality and academic theology actually so obvious? What do people think of when they hear the word “spirituality”? Perhaps something floaty, something vague and elusive, or something that has to do with turning into yourself, with meditation, feelings of harmony, sunsets, and a sense of freedom? How to connect these perspectives on spirituality with the context of theological formation? When I discuss spirituality in this article, however, the meaning of spirituality and spiritual formation will be elaborated in other directions. But even then, for some people it might not be evident to link spirituality with theology and (organized) religion in a constructive way.
The latter becomes clear, for example, in contributions on the internet where spirituality is pitted against religion: “Simply put, spirituality has no rules, whereas religion is wholly based upon pre-established beliefs and practices, rituals, and dogma.” 6 It also becomes clear when you take a closer look at the many self-help books on spirituality in bookstores. Recently, Pessi and Salonen studied a selection of self-help literature. 7 The authors observed that “religion is cast in a negative light and as a threat to both individuals and social relations, while spirituality is seen as having potential for—what is considered by the authors—positive intersubjectivity and personal development.” 8 It was found that self-help books portray spirituality as superior to religion in three ways: “Firstly, spirituality is considered superior to religion because of its ability universally to bind people together (…) Secondly, many of the authors suggest that religious authority and organized religion ruin spirituality (…) Thirdly, the authors see organized religion as having lost its relation to experienced and embodied dimensions of spirituality.” 9 Furthermore, the authors observe in the selected self-help books that “spirituality is connected to ideal intersubjectivity, such as free will, love, and warmth, and organized religion is associated with negative forms of intersubjectivity, such as authority, power structures, and formality.” 10
Although theological education at academic theology faculties is certainly not only at the service of organized religion, the framing of spirituality in this case of self-help books does raise the question of how spirituality and theology can and should relate to each other.
Main question
The thesis I want to set forth at the outset is that good academic theology is academic theology that does not put personal and communal spiritual development within brackets, but, on the contrary, incorporates it. The question, however, is what is meant by spirituality and spiritual development in that case, and why it is important in the context of academic theology. This article aims to answer these two questions by reviewing scholarly literature, in particular recent sources discussing spirituality and spiritual development in relation to theological formation and/or religious development. Moreover, from these answers, this contribution will culminate in the formulation of important focal points for incorporating spirituality in academic theology. The article will close with the drawing of a conclusion.
Before reflecting more in-depth on the question of what is meant by spirituality, the next subsection will present one more observation which forms an important background for addressing the issue of spirituality in the context of theological formation in this article.
An observation on the relevance of theology
ETF Leuven, the theological faculty with which I am privileged to be affiliated, considers attention to individual and communal spirituality a distinguishing feature. ETF Leuven claims to differentiate itself in the Low Countries by, among other things, its focus on a good combination of quality academic work with attention to community building and spirituality.
11
On celebrating its 40th anniversary as an academic institution, ETF Leuven in 2022 published the volume The Vitality of Evangelical Theology: Celebrating ETF Leuven at 40.
12
In the foreword to the volume, Miraslov Volf evaluates the current state of theology, writing: Contemporary theology is fumbling its way into irrelevance. For me, that is a painful state of affairs. I have been studying theology for almost half of a century with undiminished enthusiasm. I haven’t regretted even for a single hour that theology became my vocation. A more important reason to bemoan this sorry state of theology than my sentiments is the fact—I, at least, consider it a fact—that in the present cultural moment, the main contribution theology has to make is more important than ever. For in the course of modernity, we have forgotten how to ask, and have no clue how to answer, the most important question of our lives, which is, “What kind of life and what kind of a world is worthy of our humanity?” Given exponential advances in technology, we are in a dangerous situation: we can achieve almost anything, but, not knowing what kind of life is worthy of our humanity, we don’t know how to determine what’s worth achieving.
13
At this point in the current article, it is not the question whether we should feel as sorry as Volf feels about the state of affairs of contemporary theology or whether we even share his evaluation of it. This quote helps to see that theology has its (potential) relevance in asking, showing how to ask, and answering the double question of what is a worthful life and what is a worthful world, or to summarize in a single question: What is worth achieving? This relevance of theology corresponds to the approach to theological education as the engagement in ‘the re-asking and reengagement of the depth questions a religious tradition has asked’. 14 And it refers to what the Introduction started with: a broadly felt search in today’s society for a landmark outside or inside yourself that shines light on life and the world and creates order and gives direction. In other words, the relevance of theology in Volf’s terms is very close to an important component of what I will describe as spirituality in this article: a search for, or a way of giving meaning to, one’s (own) life and to the world around you. What Miroslav Volf articulates in this preface is that it is a loss if this relevance is missed in the theological endeavor. Put positively, theology, including academic theology, gains in expressiveness and relevance if it contributes to the development of personal and communal spirituality by searching and researching landmarks outside or inside oneself that shine light on life and the world and create order and give direction.
Spirituality: What do we mean?
So far, the concept of spirituality has been associated with having or searching for a landmark outside or inside of yourself that shines light on your personal life and the world around you and which creates order and gives direction. But what can be learned from the literature with regard to spirituality and spiritual development? This section takes a closer look at different meanings that can be given to the concept of spirituality.
Observations from scholarly literature
The concept of “spirituality” itself is ambiguous and multivalent, which partially explains why well over a hundred definitions of the term have been offered in recent scholarly literature. Each of these definitions is shaped by the context, tradition, and concerns of those who are doing the defining.
15
What can be learned from the literature with regard to the concept of spirituality is, in the specific context of the current article, drawn from recent sources discussing spirituality and spiritual development in relation to theological formation and/or religious development. The quote above clarifies many of the available definitions. Incidentally, my observation is twofold: not only are there many definitions of, or approaches to, the term spirituality, but more than once the term is used without making it clear what exactly is meant by it. Sometimes this happens more or less consciously. De Souza (2012), for example, argues that researchers reject a definition of spirituality because “they feel that it may reduce the concept to only a part of what it is.” 16 The author lists a range of words that are used to capture the term spirituality: “connectedness, experiences of joy, wonder and awe, compassion, search for the sacred, freedom and self-transcendence, relationship with God, prayer and ritual, responses to nature and the arts.” 17
Relationality
In trying to grasp the essence of human spirituality, De Souza argues that the essence of spirituality is human relationality: “one lives one’s life with an awareness of one’s connectedness to everything other than self. This is what it means to live one’s life as a relational Being.” 18 Furthermore, according to De Souza, spirituality has both a positive and a negative side. The positive side of spirituality is about nurturing well-being and finding meaning in life. The dark side has to do with embracing the shadow side of life in order to be whole. We thus observe that relationality and wholeness are important concepts related to the understanding of spirituality.
With regard to relationality, the work of Balswick et al. (2016) divulges many insights. They take a relational development systems perspective in understanding spirituality and spiritual development: “Relational developmental systems […] emphasize the reciprocity of interactions between individuals and their world, highlighting that spiritual development is an active process and involves relating and responding.” 19
Wholeness
Wholeness is mentioned many times in definitions of spirituality. Geikina and Balode (2019), for example, sum up how modern literature on spirituality often includes some or all of the following approaches, and wholeness is one of them
20
: “1) Spirituality focuses on what is holistic—it is a fully integrated approach to life (…) 2) In contemporary understanding, spirituality is related to the issue of holiness (…) 3) Spirituality is sometimes understood as the search for meaning, including the search for the meaning of life or the sense of life’s direction (…) 4) Definitions of modern spirituality are often related to the questions of absolute values as opposed to instrumentalization and purely materialistic ways of life. 5) Thus, spirituality implies not only a self-reflective life (instead of a non-assessed life), but also covers ethics and morality (Shaldrake, 2013, pp. 2-3)”
Niemandt and Niemandt (2021) even describe the very goal of spirituality as “holiness.” 21 In other words, a spiritually mature person experiences and embodies, in one way or another, “holiness.”
Status and search process
Furthermore, two important characteristics of spirituality can be observed in the literature. First, spirituality has to do with connectedness to some point of reference or landmark that functions as an orientation for giving meaning to your own (inner) life and for understanding and giving meaning to the world around you. Thus, this phenomenon of searching for a landmark outside or inside yourself that shines light on your personal life and the world around you, which was touched on in the Introduction, is underlined in different approaches to spirituality in the literature. Second, spirituality cannot be understood merely as something static, but is itself an active development process.
This view of spirituality as shedding light on life and the world, containing both stability and an active process, is all nicely summarized in a 1988 reflection by George Lindback. In an essay in Theological Education entitled Spiritual Formation and Theological Education, Lindback envisions a spiritually mature person as follows: Looked at non-theologically, spiritual formation may be described as the deep and personally committed appropriation of a comprehensive and coherent outlook on life and the world. From this perspective, those who are maturely humanistic or maturely Marxist, for example, are in their own way spiritually well-formed. The spiritually mature are not simply socialized into behaving under standard conditions as is expected of members of their group, but they have to a significant degree developed the capacities and dispositions to think, feel, and act in accordance with their world view no matter what the circumstances. They have, in Aristotelian language, the habits or virtues distinctively emphasized by the encompassing vision which is theirs. In the Christian case, these are traditionally named faith, hope and love, but other religions when internalized may involve quite a different set of virtues.
22
Spirituality, religion, and the sacred
Lindbeck’s reflection also makes clear that he conceives spirituality as something shaped within particular worldviews or religions. This is one of the possible approaches to how spirituality is related to religion. Besides the view that spirituality is an integral part of religiosity, one can observe two other approaches among researchers: “those who view spirituality as separate from religiosity; and those who view spirituality as synonymous with religiosity.” 23 The approach in this article is to view religion as one possible sphere that can function as this landmark that helps to give meaning to your personal life and the world around you. Spirituality, thus, can be integral part of religiosity but it can also exist as separate from religiosity.
In this regard, some authors refer more particularly to “the sacred” or a “higher power.” Based on a review of the literature, Sterk Barrett (2016), for example, conceptualizes spirituality as including the following dimensions: “(a) being engaged in a dynamic process of inner reflection to better understand oneself and the meaning and purpose of one’s life; (b) belief in the interconnectedness of humanity and a related desire to be of service to others; (c) living one’s personal philosophy of life with authenticity and integrity; and (d) seeking a connection/relationship with a higher power (Astin et al., 2011b; Braskamp, Trautvetter, & Ward, 2006; Love & Talbot, 1999; Roehlkepartain, Benson, Scales, Kimball, & Ebstyne-King, 2008).” 24 Based on another literature review, Harris, Howell and Spurgeon (2018) conceive of spirituality as a search for or relationship with the sacred: “Spirituality is a faith concept referring to a search for the sacred involving a relationship with an ultimate concern that is in some way meaningful.” 25
Christian spirituality
Conceiving spirituality as a faith concept, like Harris, Howell and Spurgeon (2018) do, is at the core of what can be found in reflections on so-called “Christian spirituality.” Many examples could be given of approaches to Christian spirituality. One definition of particularly Christian spirituality is, for example, provided by Claire Wolfteich (2000), whose preliminary working definition of spirituality is “the lived experience of faith, a seeking after self-transcendence, an openness to a comforting, challenging, and transforming Other. (…) I offer a working description of Christian spirituality as life centered in God, who is both transcendent and immanent. Christian spirituality entails openness to and growth in this life, so that we are led into a deeper intimacy with God through Jesus Christ and sustained by the continuing grace of the Holy Spirit in loving community.” 26
Another example of a conceptualization of Christian spirituality is found in Augustyn et al. (2017), who define spirituality via an emic (internal) approach grounded in Evangelical Protestant Christian theology. 27 The authors suggest that (Christian) spirituality consists of the following components: “the process of becoming fully human by transcending one’s self in the context of relationship with God and Christian community.” 28 Yet another example is from Balswick et al. (2016), referred to above, who state: “We are created to live in reciprocating relationships with God and others as we become more like Christ. As Christians this is the goal of all of human development, and it guides our understanding of spiritual and religious development. […] The development of reciprocating spirituality involves the growing capacity to relate to God (as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) and fellow believers in such a way that provides meaning and guidance for one’s life and that yields a life lived according to the Christian ethic. […] Reciprocating spirituality calls us into a loving relationship with God our Creator—to be more who we were created to be, and to live as God’s beloved servants in this world.” 29
But even within the boundaries of the Christian faith tradition, it is not easy to come up with a clear one-size-fits-all conceptualization of spirituality. There are diverse approaches and definitions in different denominational traditions, something clearly presented by Porter et al. (2014), who discuss the traditions of African-American spirituality, Anglican spirituality, Benedictine spirituality, Pentecostal spirituality, and Reformed spirituality. 30 This brings us back to where we started in this section: there are many approaches to, and definitions of, spirituality.
Spirituality: Three components
Based on previous discussion of the literature, and for the aim of this article, which discusses spirituality in the context of theological formation, three components of the concept of spirituality can be distinguished: spirituality refers to (a) an orientation towards a landmark, (b) shedding light on your own life and the world around you by means of this landmark, and (c) a response to everyday experiences as a result of relating the landmark with life and world. Regarding (a), a landmark can be positioned more inside yourself (e.g., own experiences) or more outside yourself (e.g., a community, a [religious] tradition, God, or transcendence), and the orientation might be experienced or expressed in terms of a belief in something bigger than yourself. Regarding (b), this light shedding can be understood as a more or less stable status or as a search process. Regarding (c), the response can be of various kinds, such as an experience, an emotion, an action, a thought, an applied ethical principle, or a (self) perception. 31
What I call a ‘landmark’ here in this conceptualization of spirituality is often implicit there in the literature reviewed but not often explicitly named. I think it is important to name it explicitly as a component to better understand diversity in spirituality and spirituality development.
Spirituality, human development, and the Christian faith
A theme not broached explicitly till now is how spirituality and spiritual development relate to human development in general. This is the more important because the context of this article is spirituality in the context of theological formation at Christian theological faculties, where the aim is a direct contribution to the academic, personal, and societal development of students. For this purpose, this section makes use of a recent review study on the idea of spiritual maturity and desired outcomes in youth ministry practices.
32
Already in the introduction to this review study, two approaches to the position of spiritual development as a dimension of human development in general are introduced: “One position is that it is just one dimension next to many others, such as social or emotional development and, indeed, religious development, although all these dimensions are somehow interrelated. The other position approaches spiritual development as the most integrative dimension of human development….”
33
Explaining the last-mentioned approach, the study quotes Roehlkepartain (2006): It is the spiritual dimension that is most involved in a person’s effort to integrate the many aspects of development. As a core process of development involving the creation of a life narrative (in which the self is connected to larger constructs of values, tradition, space, and/or time), spiritual development cannot be reduced to merely human need or desire. The narrative-building and self-transcending tasks of spiritual development can, but do not necessarily have to, be about the divine or the sacred.
34
This is a first lesson we can learn from this review study: the spiritual development process can be approached as a holistic “umbrella” or integrating process of human development in general, or as a more or less distinguishable dimension within the development of individuals and groups. Understanding the difference between these two approaches is significant for the main theme of this article: the meaning of spirituality in the context of theological formation in Christian academic theological faculties. Is spiritual development a particular distinguishable part of the development of students one hopes to see, a part that is linked up with explicit Christian faith “jargon,” such as following Jesus, being in Christ, and living the faith? Or is spiritual development as human development in the broad sense, meaning that personal and social development, and academic development of course, are also given direction and meaning under the “landmark” of God or Christ, often in words not bound up in Christian jargon like integrity, effort, discipline, ethical thinking, capacity to care, or reconciliation?
A second lesson we can take from this review study of youth ministry literature is that spiritual development can be directed toward both human development as individual development and human development as communal development. This distinction has direct consequences for how holiness as a goal of spirituality (see Niemandt and Niemandt, 2021) 35 is interpreted: is this integrated approach to life (see Geikina and Balode, 2019) 36 an individual project or a communal project?
A third lesson is that spiritual development is not restricted to the enhancement of one’s own well-being, individual experiences, or capacity to give meaning to one’s own life and world surrounding. Spirituality has, or can have, a dimension that goes far beyond oneself and beyond one’s own community, in the direction of the other, which can be the totally different other: categories such as justice and social connectedness reflect something already quoted by Barrett (2016), who distinguishes it as an important element in her conceptualization of spirituality: “belief in the interconnectedness of humanity and a related desire to be of service to others.” 37
Why? The importance of spirituality in theological formation
In the last few decades, evangelical theologians and philosophers have increasingly argued that spiritual formation is integral to the Christian life and that the study of spirituality is integral to Christian theology. 38
The above quote from Shults and Sandage (2006) suggests that evangelical theologians and philosophers in particular have come to recognize the importance of spirituality in the practice of theology. My impression is that this is somewhat broader and is now recognized in all kinds of theological traditions. Moreover, I would add that not only the study of spirituality but also the “practice of” spirituality in theological education is important. Exactly this is the focus of this section. Why would it be important to give spirituality attention in academic theological formation?
The interdependence of theological and spiritual formation
The former section distinguished three components of the concept of spirituality: it refers to (a) an orientation towards a landmark, (b) shedding light on your own life and the world around you by means of this landmark, and (c) a response to everyday experiences as a result of relating the landmark with life and world. The next question is why it is important to pay attention to spirituality specifically in a Christian theological faculty.
Scientific approaches in general, and also academic theology in particular, are characterized by maintaining a certain distance from the subject of study. Maintaining that distance is an important part of good academic work. At the same time, it can be argued that if you want to arrive at a good distanced reflection on reality, life, and the world in academic theology, an inner engagement with all kinds of existential questions that involve yourself, others, and the world around you is of significant help. Good quality academic theology is served by what we might call an interdependence of theological and spiritual formation. The relevance of theology in the words of Miroslav Volf (see Introduction) comes close to what is expressed in the three components of spirituality above: shedding light on life and the world and giving direction: what is worth achieving? Theology, including academic theology, gains in expressiveness and relevance if it contributes to the development of personal and communal spirituality by searching for and researching landmarks outside or inside oneself that shine light on life and the world and create order and give direction. This interdependence between spirituality and theology can be observed with different authors.
Against the background of theological education in the Dutch Reformed Church (DCR) in South Africa, Niemandt and Niemandt (2021) plead for the formation of a missional spirituality in theological education in general. 39 According to the authors, theology and spirituality are “irrevocably connected and interdependent.” 40 Spirituality concerns different aspects of human life, and theology is to be understood as the intellectual articulation of spirituality. Spirituality “is more than an inward movement of contemplation and meditation, it is an outward movement concerning all aspects of life and it is about life itself.” 41 The authors argue that in recent years both spirituality and theology have included more and more inductive approaches, starting from lived experience, in addition to more deductive approaches: “[S]pirituality without theological reflection and theology not grounded in real life experience is not only inadequate but also feeble (…) Spirituality exempts theology from the constraints of mere academics.” 42
A comparable argument can be found in a publication of Geikina and Balode (2019), who see theology and spirituality as interconnected nowadays, much more than during and just after the formation of universities, where the “Christian discourse moved from exegetic contemplation of biblical texts to rational arguments of logical approaches. This was an important milestone in the division between theology and spirituality.” 43 Some authors connect this division between theology and spirituality with a perceived “crisis” in current theological education practices. Van den Blink (1999), for example, states, “It is no exaggeration to say that theological education in our time is in a state of crisis. The widespread lack of grounding of theological curricula in any authentic spirituality, especially in seminaries in the liberal Protestant tradition, is, as I have already suggested, a major contributing factor to this state of affairs.” 44 Twenty years later, in 2019, Kirsten Birkett (2019) refers to Van den Blink’s article when inquiring as to why an increased call for spirituality in theological training can be observed in the current context of Christian seminary education, where a focus on character, moral education, and spirituality has been lost 45 : “To some extent it appears to have been driven by a backlash against theological liberalism, as theological educators are realizing how much is lost in this approach; therefore there is a felt need to reclaim spirituality.” 46
From these voices by various authors the following claim comes to the surface: theology is about real and whole life, and for a proper understanding of that, spirituality must be incorporated in theological training. At the root of this claim, the relevance of theology is at stake: if (academic) theology is to be eloquent, real-life experiences must be involved in theologizing, because they make the theologian see what is at stake when considering (your own) life and the world around you. This inner engagement with existential questions is interdependently connected to a more distanced reflection on life and the world in theology.
Geikina and Balode (2019) add a more time-bound argument to this, reflecting on how attention for spirituality can be methodologically integrated in theology to promote spiritual growth and sustainable interreligious dialogue. 47 The authors ask why this is necessary at all. The most important part of the answer is: “In general, modern interest in the study of theology arises from the interest in religion as a phenomenon, or even more, from the desire to perfect one’s own spirituality. A similar observation can be seen in educational institutions tied to specific religious organizations: relatively few students intend to assume a specific position. The number of students in seminaries is relatively small across Europe. The time when theology studies were understood as leadership training for churches is gone, at least in its exclusive sense (Schleiermacher, 1830, pp. 243-446). Developing theology studies in a way that consciously integrates the promotion of spirituality would mean recognizing this reality and deliberately focusing on how theology studies could be shaped and transformed. That means intentionally serving the goal that is already there—responding to the spiritual quest.” 48
Why not? Some unsound argumentation
Besides sound argumentation for the incorporation of spirituality in the context of theological formation, discourses on the particular topic sometimes show what might be called unsound argumentation.
The above quote from Niemandt and Niemandt (2021), for example, reads, “Spirituality exempts theology from the constraints of mere academics.” 49 It is problematic to talk about the limitations of academics versus the contributions of attention to spirituality. The point is precisely, at least from the perspective of the argument in this article, that good quality academic theological work inherently pays attention to spirituality. There is this interdependency, which is much more than just a mix and balance of two distinct approaches. This argument of “compensation of a mere academic approach” is an example of what might be called a misplaced argument for attention for spirituality in theological formation. And there are more critical notes to make about the approaches of participants in the debate on spirituality and theological formation who enthusiastically plead for the interdependence of theological and spiritual formation.
Two examples of critical notes can be made on the basis of reading the same article from Niemandt and Niemandt (2021). While pleading for theological education that is inherently spiritual, the authors argue: “The lack of intentional spiritual formation produces ‘professionals’.” 50 This is another example of an unsound argument for spirituality. Spirituality is not a compensation for too much professionalism. There can never be too much professionalism. Instead, a high degree of professionalism presupposes sufficient attention to spirituality, and attention to spirituality inherently means wanting to be professional.
Furthermore, according to Niemandt and Niemandt (2021), the integration of academic learning and spiritual learning (see Birkett, 2019) 51 asks for a re-evaluation of the methodology of theological education. They propose an approach in which there is dedicated time, place, and guidelines for intentional spiritual learning: a spiritual formation program: “In this space, the main guideline is an openness towards the spirit for guidance. Being vulnerable, letting go of the need to be in control and giving power over to God.” 52 The critical note to be made here does not regard the proposal of a separate intentional spiritual formation program. To embrace spirituality in theological formation, it can certainly help to mark special moments and parts in the curriculum. The problem here is this distinction between the need to be in control versus giving power over to God. In such a discourse, spirituality becomes the arena of God and the rest is an arena where you are in control, and not God. Such an approach conflicts with the holistic approach to spirituality advocated in this article. Moreover, it shows a limited way of thinking about God when you “confine” His efficacy only in the realm of secluded moments of spirituality.
To conclude this section on unsound argumentation, we should address a sometimes-suggested claim in (Christian) higher education that more attention to spirituality would reduce the mental problems among young people. On a superficial reading of the literature on spirituality, religious development, and mental health, one might wrongly draw that conclusion. Augustyn et al. (2017) and Miles and Naumann (2023), for example, point at the positive relationship that research shows between religion and spirituality on the one hand and mental health on the other. 53 Higher levels of spirituality are associated with, for example, an increase in subjective well-being, life satisfaction, positive stress coping methods, experienced meaning or purpose in life, healthy relationships, and resilience. But at the same time, we should be very careful about making explanatory links between spirituality on the one hand and mental health on the other. One important reason already lies in the various views and approaches that exist with regard to spirituality. Different studies are based on different approaches, and that alone makes it very challenging to put found links together, let alone distil practical recommendations from them. In addition, much research on this topic can be criticized because these studies involved very specific research groups, appear not to be replicable, or involved very small research groups. For these and other reservations, we refer to Shults and Sandage (2006). 54
All in all, the point this article does want to make is this: if (academic) theology is to be eloquent, real-life experiences must be involved in theologizing, because they make the theologian see what is at stake when considering (your own) life and the world around you. This inner engagement with existential questions is interdependently connected to a more distanced reflection on life and the world in theology.
How? Critical considerations on spirituality in theological formation
The former sections addressed what is meant by spirituality and spiritual development and why these are important in the context of theological formation, particularly in the context of academic theology. Against that background, the current section formulates seven key focal points for paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation in academic faculties of theology. This section will not so much describe concrete practices that constitute examples of incorporating spirituality, rather, the concerns that will be raised in this section are meant as critical considerations to be taken into account in all of those concrete practices. For example, the practice of including spirituality in curriculum objectives; or thematizing spirituality in separate course units. Furthermore, one can think of giving shape to spirituality by holding regular chapel services; one can also think of providing space for prayer at meetings and other gatherings in the life of the faculty. The layout of a building can also contribute to fostering the connection between academic theology and spirituality. This section, thus, raises concerns for critical consideration in these kinds of practices and these arise directly from the explorations in former sections.
Spirituality: Individual development and communal development
Spiritual development is often connected with a form of individual human development or an individual meaning-making process of one’s own individual life. Spiritual development as understood in this article, however, should be considered as both an individual development process and a communal development process. As a consequence, paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation needs an eye for the individual development of students and for the communal processes within the faculty. For this reason, Shults and Sandage (2006), for example, underline the importance of “being in community”: the authors conceptualize Christian spirituality in terms of desiring truth, goodness, and beauty.
55
It makes sense […] to distinguish between the desires for truth, goodness, and beauty in order to help us reflect on the general ways in which people search for God. Although each spiritual journey is unique, we may still observe broad tendencies amidst the diversity. The way in which we find ourselves attracted to God will shape our journeys of spiritual transformation. Some of us are prone to search for God by our orientation toward truth; others, toward goodness; still others, toward beauty. I have become increasingly convinced that an integrated spirituality requires pursuing all three, and this is why being in community (with others who desire differently) plays such an important role in the transformation of our longing to know, act, and be in redemptive relation to the Spirit of God.
56
Christian spirituality: Narrow ‘faith jargon’ approach and broad ‘human development’ approach
Approaches to Christian spirituality in particular are often expressed in terms of explicit Christian faith “jargon,” such as following Jesus, being in Christ, and living the faith. This vocabulary is even more present in the context of Christian theological formation and Christian theological faculties. Although this particular articulation of the connection between, on the one hand, the sources of the Christian faith, and on the other hand spirituality, is worthwhile, this wording can at the same time hinder our ability to see the broad human development which is central to both the Christian faith and spirituality. For this reason, and as a consequence, if “faith jargon” is used in the context of spirituality in theological formation it helps to explicitly link it up with a holistic approach in which spiritual development is understood as, and expressed in terms of, different areas of human development, such as personal and social development and, of course, academic development. We already mentioned examples of this, such as striving for integrity, effort, discipline, ethical thinking, capacity to care, and reconciliation.
Spirituality: Eye on own life and community and eye on public life and social issues
It was already observed that spiritual development is often connected with a form of individual human development and that, in contrast, attention for spirituality in theological formation should be approached as both an individual development process and a communal development process. But spirituality also has a dimension that not only goes beyond oneself but also beyond one’s own community or network, in the direction of the other, which can be the totally different other.
In this regard, Greenman and Siew’s (2001) study on Master of Divinity students’ understanding of spirituality is interesting. The authors observe a tendency to what they call an “affective-relational” understanding of spirituality: “Students consistently emphasize relational categories, inner qualities, the fruit of the Spirit, and inter-personal conducts as the locus of spirituality (….) many students do not naturally associate ‘spirituality’ with public life or social issues.”
57
Furthermore, the authors conclude that: … many current seminarians are, to a considerable degree, missing connections between Christian spirituality and public life. In addition, we believe that seminary education can and should play a vital part in transforming the attitudes and values of students toward social concerns, both through curricular and co-curricular measures that reinforce the active expression of Christian faith as a necessarily public life or discipleship.
58
As a consequence, paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation needs both an eye on the individual life of students and their own communities, including the faculty’s community, and an eye on public life and pressing social issues.
Spirituality as status and quest
Spirituality, including the spirituality discussed in this article, is often associated with a reflection on one’s (own) life and the world around one. Sometimes, in the context of theological education, this is envisioned as something static: it quickly seems that through theological education you change, you develop, and that spirituality is something that provides you with a stable foundation, something you can always fall back on, something that lets you stay on course in all the turbulence of academic education. This would be a misconception, for we have already seen that spirituality cannot be understood merely as something static, but is in itself an active development process in which connections are constantly being made—connections that give meaning to life and the world around you. A quest, in other words. As a consequence, paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation needs an orientation on both status or stability and, at the same time, a quest.
Embracing both the light and the dark side of spirituality
We already referred to the work of De Souza, who argues that spirituality has both a positive, or light side and a negative, or dark side. The positive side of spirituality is about nurturing well-being and finding meaning in life. The dark side has to do with embracing the shadow side of life in order to be whole. This is a very important observation: spirituality is not all about positivity and light: “If ignored, in time, the non-conscious mind starts projecting elements of the shadow so that it impacts on the individual or his/her life in some shape or form.” 59 De Souza argues that to be whole, one should embrace both the light and dark sides of (personal) life. It is all about balancing gifts and limitations.
As a consequence, paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation needs this eye on both the light and dark sides of spirituality. Sufficient attention to the dark side of spirituality is the more important in a world where, for example, positive stories and narratives of success are dominant in media and social media. In particular, Christian spirituality should pay sufficient attention to suffering in life and how to live with that, with integrity. For a more elaborate reflection on spiritual darkness or the dark side of spirituality, we refer to Chapter 8, Spirituality and Darkness, in Shults and Sadage (2006). 60
Spirituality: The familiar and the otherness
In his reflection on the dark side of spirituality, we saw that De Souza (2012) pointed at the importance of overcoming something that is the more important in today’s pluralistic context: the fear of the otherness of the other. 61 In this regard, in the third critical consideration described above we pointed at the dimension of spirituality that goes beyond oneself and one’s own community or network, in the direction of the other, which can be the totally different other. This directedness towards the other and otherness is an important dimension next to the dimension of familiarity. It is especially important in contexts where spirituality is formed and expressed in a community of like-minded people, where it is important to pay sufficient attention to people and the world beyond what is familiar. This is the more important in a time of polarization. This focus on the other, who is other and who challenges your familiarities, is an essential element of theological formation and of spirituality within the context of theological formation.
And professional, and academic, and mindful of spirituality
The main argument in this article addresses how spirituality and theological formation come together and are essentially connected to each other. This argument contrasts in a certain way with what sometimes seems to be suggested in discourses on spirituality in the context of theological formation; namely, that attention for spirituality balances academic approaches of theology. In contrast, this article pleads for an approach of interdependency, which is much more than just a mix and balance of two distinct approaches. To put it concisely, this approach means the following: Engagement in academic theology means having attention for spirituality. And part of attention for spirituality is to embrace academic theology.
A similar observation was already made when it comes to the suggested distinction between spirituality and professionalism. Here, in contrast, the current article suggests a similar approach: To be formed as a professional means having attention for spirituality. And part of attention for spirituality is to strive towards the highest levels of professionalism. Paying attention to spirituality is by no means a balancing act where spirituality is a counterweight to academic and professional standards. The consequence for paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation is, thus, that it is intrinsically part of striving towards both academic and professional excellence.
Conclusion
The last sentence of the former section can be considered an expression of the main conclusion of the current article’s argument: Paying attention to spirituality in the context of theological formation is intrinsically part of striving towards both academic and professional excellence.
The main question of current article is what is meant by spirituality and spiritual development in the context of theological education, why it is important to pay attention to spirituality, and what critical considerations there are in incorporating spirituality in theological formation at academic faculties of theology. The article argued that theology is about real and whole life, and a proper understanding of that requires that spirituality be incorporated in theological training. At the root of this claim, the relevance of theology is at stake: if (academic) theology is to be eloquent, theologizing must incorporate real-life experiences, because these experiences make the theologian see what is at stake when considering (your own) life and the world around you. This inner engagement with existential questions is interdependently connected to a more distanced reflection on life and the world in theology.
The article argued that spirituality refers to (a) an orientation towards a landmark, (b) shedding light on your own life and the world around you by means of this landmark, and (c) a response to everyday experiences as a result of relating the landmark with life and world. Regarding (a), a landmark can be positioned more inside yourself (e.g., own experiences) or more outside yourself (e.g., a community, a [religious] tradition, God, or transcendence), and the orientation might be experienced or expressed in terms of a belief in something bigger than yourself. Regarding (b), this light shedding can be understood as a more or less stable status or as a search process. Regarding (c), the response can be of various kinds, such as an experience, an emotion, an action, a thought, an applied ethical principle, or a (self) perception.
The approach of Shults and Sandage (2006), who conceptualize Christian spirituality in terms of desiring truth, goodness, and beauty, is a stimulating approach for faculties of academic theology. 62 It reflects a holistic approach, not only of spirituality but also of the academic endeavor. Attention for spirituality is not only a stimulating element in the Christian theological faculty, it is also a responsibility. In the Introduction, we sketched out how self-help books portray spirituality as superior to religion. This article tried to show how spirituality and religion, and how spirituality and Christian theology, should not be in a situation of combat. It would be good if faculties of theology could find ways (a) to realize a spirituality that binds people together, (b) to prepare theologians who will serve religious institutes and communities that do not ruin but feed spirituality, and (c) to pursue academic theology in connection with embodied dimensions of spirituality. The current article showed seven critical considerations that should be borne in mind when striving toward such a practice of theological formation.
At the beginning of the former section some examples of concrecte practices were already summed up, referring to chapel services, moments of prayers and the layout of a building. One pressing question in nowadays theological education is how spirituality and theology can be integrated in contexts of online theology courses, i.e., without a physical community of learning. Online education often facilitates a form of blended learning, in which the concrete and local practice that surrounds the student is actively used in the learning process. In these situations, the incorporation of spirituality into theological formation will mean that, in addition to online forms of spirituality experience, concrete and private practices of spirituality in the students’ own locality will also be actively involved. And also for this approach is true that the seven critical considerations discussed should be borne in mind when striving toward attention for spirituality in theological formation.
This article made clear that there are many approaches, conceptualizations, and definitions of spirituality. Regarding spirituality in the context of theological formation, there is a whole field of inquiry in which all kinds of research questions could be raised. Against the background of the current article, two particular questions for further enquiries are suggested. The first is a general question: How do faculties of theology envision spirituality and spiritual formation in their own context of theological formation, and how can practices of attention for spirituality in their own context of theological formation be understood from a human developmental and a theological point of view? 63 A second question relates to the concern about the mental health of students in higher education and, related to this, the various feelings of insecurity of young people that seem to be the cause of this. Against that background, it is suggested that more research be conducted concerning the relationship between attention for spirituality and feelings of uncertainty among students in higher education and how this can be better understood from a human developmental and a theological point of view.
Footnotes
Author Note
A. (Jos) de Kock (1978) currently serves as Rector and Administrative Director of ETF Leuven, Professor and Department Chair of Practical Theology, coordinator of the Master of Teaching in Religion, and coordinator of ISREYM, the Institute for the Study of Religious Education and Youth Ministry. He obtained master’s degrees in education science (Radboud University Nijmegen) and religion and theology (Utrecht University). In 2005, he obtained his PhD (in social sciences) with a dissertation entitled, “Arranging learning environments for new learning. Educational theory, practical knowledge, and everyday practice” (Radboud University Nijmegen). In 2023, he obtained a master’s in business administration from Vlerick Business School (Brussel/Gent/Leuven). As a practical theologian, he previously worked as an assistant professor at the Protestant Theological University, Amsterdam, and its Research Center for Youth, Church and Culture. As an education expert, he worked as a teacher, consultant, and senior policy advisor in higher education and as a researcher for Radboud University in Nijmegen and the University of Amsterdam. He supervised different doctoral dissertations and serves in different international academic networks either as board member or journal editor. His specializations are in the areas of empirical practical theology, research methodology, higher education, religious education, youth ministry, religious identity development, catechesis, and youth and theology.
