Remarks and Reflections on the 25^th Anniversary of the IJPT

The following contributions look back at 25 years of the IJPT and venture to glimpse the journal’s future. The four short contributions grew out of a digital anniversary celebration held in June 2021. They have been combined for the purpose of publication, yet each author offers their individual perspective.

„Mapping“ Practical Theology: Reflections on the Beginning of the International Journal of Practical Theology and of the International Academy of Practical Theology in Conversation with Richard Osmer

Friedrich Schweitzer

The first issue of the International Journal of Practical Theology (IJPT) starts out, after an editorial, with an essay by Richard Osmer (Princeton Theological Seminary) which has the title “Rationality in Practical Theology: A Map of the Emerging Discussion”.^[1] This article is especially interesting, not only because of its content but also in terms of its relationship to the first meetings of the International Academy of Practical Theology (IAPT). Osmer’s article goes back to a lecture delivered by him at the second meeting of IAPT in Berne, Switzerland in 1995. Osmer was one of the eight persons who founded IAPT in 1991 at Princeton, following up on ideas which had developed in a number of international conferences in Germany and in the Netherlands in the late 1980 s.^[2] That Osmer’s article was published in IJPT is a reminder of the fact that both, IJPT and IAPT, although not identical in terms of the persons involved, were closely intertwined at that time and that both of them followed parallel interests.

Since I have been invited to pick out one article from IJPT and make it the starting point for my comments and reflections I have chosen this article by Osmer, who also is a long-time friend of mine. We authored a number of books and articles together, some of them for the IJPT. Osmer’s article seems especially apt as an example for what my reflections in the following are about.

The close connection between IJPT and IAPT characteristic of the beginnings of both was no coincidence. Both shared many aims and interests, first of all concerning the international advancement of practical theology as an academic discipline that goes way beyond its traditional understanding as pastoral theology. A number of monographs and widely read volumes with essays on practical theology had paved the way for this new interest.^[3] Both, IJPT with its editorial board as well as with the authors contributing to the journal and IAPT with its international membership brought together similar groups of people. Most of the editors of IJPT were members of the Academy and members of the Academy authored many articles for IJPT.

The interest which brought these people together can be called foundational in that it refers to the foundations of the discipline of practical theology, in terms of its place within theology but also concerning its meaning and scope. On either side of the Atlantic – and this is what the term ‘international’ really implied at that time, since, for example, the Global South was not in view very much – there was a new opening for practical theology to flourish. The University of Chicago maintained a special program for practical theology (which is not in existence anymore). Princeton Theological Seminary had always had a strong interest in the practical fields, for example with major figures like Seward Hiltner, and with Osmer having taken a professorial position at Princeton, there was a renewed interest in this tradition. Many other universities and seminaries in the United States and in Canada had started appreciating practical theology as a substantial part of theology and were willing to support it as well. In Germany and Switzerland as well as in some other European countries the waning influence of Barthian theology, which had not had much interest in an independent practical theology or in empirical views of the church, allowed for new developments in this respect there as well. In retrospect, the situation in the late 1980 s and early 1990 s can be considered a time of unique potentials for both, an international academy as well as for an international journal in the field of practical theology, in other words for IJPT and IAPT. That such potentials could be found in different parts of the world was a new experience at that time (before the internet!), even if the international opening was still limited to the western world.

Osmer’s article should be read with this background of the new developments within practical theology in mind. It is dedicated to “mapping” what Osmer calls the “emerging discussion” (on practical theology). In doing this, Osmer focuses on “rationality in practical Theology” which, 30 years ago, was not as surprising as it might be for today’s readers. The idea that people are following different rationalities was quite common then, which is documented well in Osmer’s rich footnotes concerning this topic. Yet Osmer does not only attempt to bring the concept of rationality and of different rationalities into the discussion within practical theology. Instead, Osmer tries to make use of this concept for a better understanding of the international discussion on practical theology by developing a typology of different rationalities and by stating the reasons behind each type. In his conclusion he says:

“This typology does not pretend to be exhaustive. It is like a first, rough map of the terrain, not a detailed topography. It is offered as a way of helping participants in the emerging international discussion of practical theology better understand their similarities and differences. Like all typologies based on ideal types, its chief value is comparative. It allows comparisons within types, as pointed to in our discussion of the first and third types, as well as between types, as pointed to throughout.”^[4]

As can be seen from this statement, the new international cooperation brought with it not only new potentials, e. g. for mutually stimulating academic cooperation, but also a number of far-reaching challenges. Already at the first meeting of IAPT at Princeton in 1993 it became obvious that there was no shared understanding of what practical theology really means and what it should try to accomplish. Some colleagues were interested in practical theology as a distinct academic discipline and in raising the scientific standards for this field of study, others thought more of theology becoming more practical in general while still others spoke for the need of making political perspectives and issues especially of liberation more prominent in theology. Such differences did not always help to establish a peaceful atmosphere. Most of all, it made the emerging international cooperation within the academy difficult.

Osmer’s closing statement in his article is indicative of this situation and of the reasons why he felt a need to work towards “mutual understanding”:

“No person fits any of these types in a perfect way. Hans van der Ven, Riet Bons-Storm, Don Browning, and Dietrich Rössler [all of them belonged to the group of founders of IAPT; FS] all employ features of rationality that go beyond the type in which they were placed [in Osmer’s article; FS]. This is particularly true if their work as a whole is taken into account. Nonetheless, real differences characterize these persons, differences which can be found in the larger discussion of practical theology today. The transcultural nature of this discussion makes it all the more difficult to understand and appreciate these differences. The typology developed in this article is an attempt to facilitate a better grasp of one significant aspect of this discussion: the model of rationality adopted by different practical theologians. If it has achieved some small measure of mutual understanding within this emerging discussion, it will have accomplished its purpose.”^[5]

Osmer’s hope for having achieved a “small measure of mutual understanding” shows that such understanding could not be taken for granted. He obviously saw a need for working towards this kind of understanding and he was interested in achieving it not only in terms of interpersonal encounters and relationships but also, and more importantly, by developing theoretical interpretations. Such interpretations would have to show the underpinnings of the different understandings of practical theology and also uncover the motives behind them in order to make them understandable even to those who follow different persuasions – or, as Osmer himself puts in the quote above, to help the different colleagues to “better understand their similarities and differences”. Ultimately, such interpretations should be able to facilitate academic conversation across what could otherwise become fences in the sense of borderlines or even battle grounds.

Rereading Osmer’s article 25 years later could be a starting point for reviewing the development of IJPT as well as IAPT. Many of the questions raised in this article as well as in other articles from that time are still of current interest. The understanding of the meaning and purpose of practical theology is still an issue which deserves continued attention, even if finding an answer that can be shared internationally may have to be considered a hopeless endeavor – 25 years ago no less than today. Possibly Osmer’s idea of mapping the field could be taken up again in the future which would allow for interesting comparisons between the situation in the early 1990 s and today. An understanding of practical theology which can be shared internationally could certainly make use of the beginnings made at the time when IJPT and IAPT came into existence, both by building on them but also by learning through comparison how much has really changed over the last 25 years.

Looking back to the time before the beginnings of IJPT and IAPT, however, one thing seems clear in any case. The international world of practical theology has benefitted enormously from both, the Journal as well as the Academy.

On the Launch and Conceptualization of the International Journal of Practical Theology

Wilhelm Gräb

The impetus for a new, international journal for practical theology came from the publishing house de Gruyter. The director of the theology department of de Gruyter at that time, Dr Hasko von Bassi, brought up the idea of this new journal to me. That was very soon after the first meeting of the International Academy of Practical Theology (IAPT) in Princeton in 1993, which I attended. Von Bassi, who had earned his PhD in practical theology, was of the opinion that while there are good reasons for the regionalisation and situational orientation of practical theological research, it also urgently needs global networking.

The initiative for an international journal for practical theology took up motives that had already led to the founding of the IAPT. We were concerned with the internationalisation of practical theology, but we also wanted to advance the consolidation of practical theology as an independent academic discipline that forms the theory of contemporary ecclesiastical religious practice. In theological academic discourse, it was still debatable whether practical theology had its own object of knowledge, which it worked on with scientific methods, or whether it belonged more to the applied sciences, which merely used scientific knowledge to achieve practical purposes. In the German-speaking world, there have long been chairs of practical theology, albeit with specialisations in religious education, homiletics or pastoral care. This was not the case in the USA, for example. Chairs of practical theology had no tradition there. What was called practical theology in the European context was assigned to ethics in the USA or took place as pastoral training in religious education, pastoral care or homiletics.

The founding of the International Journal of Practical Theology (IJPT) was guided by the intention to continue the open discussion about the subject matter and the academic standard of practical theology and to bring the globally different views on the self-understanding and task of this discipline into conversation with each other. Two conceptual drafts on the unity and wholeness of practical theology were of great importance. One came from Dietrich Rössler, professor of practical theology at the Faculty of Theology of the University of Tübingen^[6], the other from Don Browning, professor of religion and psychological studies at the University of Chicago, Divinity School^[7]. For all their differences, both accounts of practical theology argued that the genuine task of practical theology is to describe the given ecclesiastical and religious situation, to identify its critical conditions and developments, and to design theologically informed strategies of ecclesiastical and religious practice.^[8]

The unity of practical theology, Rössler and Browning agreed, is justified in the diversity of its disciplines by the fact that it has church and religious practice in society as its object. Starting from the perception and critical analysis of church and religious practice, practical theology develops action-oriented theories that enable religious leadership. Practical theology cooperates interdisciplinarily with historical and systematic-constructive theology as well as with the human and social sciences.

Dietrich Rössler and Don Browning were already among the initiators of the founding of the IAPT. Their conception of practical theology as a critical theory of church and religious practice in contemporary culture then also inspired the conception of the IJPT. The IJPT was to become a forum of discourse that gathers contributions to a practical theology that analyses ecclesiastical and religious practices in their situational contexts and aims at the formation of a practical knowledge that enables transformative ecclesiastical and religious practices.

The decisive difference that the IJPT made among the academic theological journals lay in the globalisation of the practical-theological discourse. This was intended to take into account the necessary situatedness and contextuality of ecclesiastical and religious practices as well as the opportunity to learn from dealing with other, yet comparable constellations of religious practices and their crises. The practice of lived religion is of its own right. The questions posed by the practice of lived religion cannot be answered with the means of historical, biblical and systematic-constructive theology alone. Practical theology with its situational-contextual orientation is needed. Universal claims to validity are not compatible with practice-oriented knowledge. In a globalised world, however, contextual practical knowledge must be open to a dialogue that transcends regional boundaries. The IJPT wanted to help to create such a global approach in the practical-theological discourses, which open up the regionally focused trends of practical-theological discourses to each other and make cross-border learning processes possible.

At the second meeting of the IAPT in Bern, Switzerland, in 1995, a preliminary editorial board came together. In addition to Hasko von Bassi and myself, Friedrich Schweitzer, Tübingen; Richard R. Osmer, Princeton; Don Browning, Chicago; Johannes A. van der Ven, Nijmegen; and Duncan Forrester, Glasgow, took part in this editors’ meeting. The composition of this initiative group shows that colleagues from Europe and the USA initially supported the international cooperation. This was to change with the publication of the first issue (1997), by which time practical theologians from South Africa and Korea (Hendrik J. Pieterse, Pretoria, and Joon Kwan Un, Seoul) had been recruited for the editorial board. In addition, Rebecca Chopp, Atlanta, and Maureen Juncker-Kenny, Dublin, were on the editorial board from the beginning.

At the first editors’ meeting in Bern, the basic structure of the IAPT was defined. It has remained unchanged to this day. In addition to articles from the entire field of practical theology, each volume was to contain a Research Report and an International Report and offer a section with reviews. It was also decided that the articles could be written in both German and English.

The articles should not be thematically limited. However, the initiative group at the IAPT editors’ meeting in Bern did indicate which topics would be particularly welcome to the IJPT. They were noted in the editorial to the first issue of the IJPT (1997). According to this, the IJPT would particularly welcome articles which take as their task the perception, analysis, criticism and construction of the central pastoral fields of action such as liturgy and preaching, pastoral care, religious education, church leadership and community formation. Special insights should be gained from interdisciplinary cooperation with the human and social sciences. Liturgy, for example, can benefit from ritual studies, homiletics from rhetoric, the practice of pastoral care from psychology and religious education from pedagogy.

However, the IJPT also called for contributions that take practical theology beyond the clerical paradigm and contribute to the analysis, description and critical hermeneutics of the religious situation of the present. From the beginning, the IJPT asked about lived religion as an integral part of people’s everyday world, in distinction from the taught and normatively enforced religious practice in the churches and religious communities. Furthermore, the IJPT stimulated research on the formation of new religious communities and on the fluid forms of spiritual movements. The IJPT wanted to become a global forum where practical theology could engage in the perception, analysis, hermeneutics and critique of the diversity of contemporary religious cultures and communities.

In addition to the thematically open articles, the International Report and the Research Report were to be included in every issue and become the special feature of the IJPT. The managing editors request the reports in order to be able to provide the IJPT with a targeted global overview of the topics of practical theological discourse and the regionally situated research work.

The Research Reports provide information about research on globally and interdisciplinary important topics in practical theology. They also provide an overview of the state of research in the social and cultural sciences to which practical theology is related as well as in religious and cultural studies.

The International Reports provide information on which topics of practical theology are of particular interest in the various countries and regions and determine the practical-theological discussion. They also show how the topics and problems discussed in practical theology reflect the different ecclesiastical and religious conditions and challenges in the various countries and regions. The intention with the International Reports was something like the gradual emergence of a map that gives a global overview of the regionally different topics, problems and strategies of practical theology. If one were to bind together the International Reports of the first 25 volumes of the IJPT, it would now be very rewarding to see that this has indeed been achieved.

At the third meeting of the IAPT in Seoul, Korea, in 1997, Richard Osmer and I, who initially served as the managing editors, were able to present the first issue of the newly founded IJPT. It was an opportunity to explain the intention of the IJPT to the practical theologians who had come from all continents to this meeting in Seoul. We made it clear that this new journal aims to promote global discourse in practical theology at the highest possible academic level.

Looking back over the 25 years in which 50 issues of the IJPT have been published, it is particularly gratifying to see that the initial focus on the transatlantic relationship between practical theological discourses in Europe and North America has largely been overcome. Not only has the editorial board now included practical theologians from all continents. In close connection with the IAPT, which has succeeded in decentralisation, contributions from Africa, Asia and South America are now increasingly contributing to the global practical-theological discourse in the IJPT. In this way, the IJPT will continue to promote a global intercultural and interreligious discourse in practical theology.

An Anniversary Celebration of the IJPT

Mary Elizabeth Moore

In the opening pages of IJPT, vol. 1, 1997, the first editors, Wilhelm Gräb and Richard Osmer, described a “new practical theology” that was based on hermeneutical reflection, the practical character of all theology, and the need for greater interdisciplinary engagement.^[9] They envisioned IJPT as a forum through which practical theology could multiply its contributions. A forum it has been from that day to the present, thanks to the strong support of International Academy of Practical Theology and DeGruyter.

From the beginning, the Journal introduced diverse paradigms and approaches – empirical, hermeneutic, qualitative, descriptive, theoretical, and action research. It also included reflections on the field, as in the publication of presidential addresses, like those of Elaine Graham and Bonnie Miller-McLemore. It has probed wide-ranging issues and pushed the edges of scholarship.

In 2003, James Nieman and I joined as English Co-Editors with Wilhelm Graeb, later Nieman with Elaine Graham. We sought to continue the earlier work, while devoting ourselves to becoming more fully diverse. We sought articles from every continent, diverse fields of practice, and diverse perspectives, working closely with all the authors to develop the contextuality and depth of their work for an international readership. The present editors – Pamela Couture, Bernd Schröder, and the larger team – have carried that work far beyond what our team and earlier teams had done; they have brought IJPT into a new era.

Reflecting changes in the international field of practical theology, IJPT has enjoyed a continuing expansion. In the years between 2003 and 2009, the homelands of contributors expanded considerably. Contributors hailed from Europe (6 countries in Eastern and Western Europe); Asia (4 countries in Middle East and East Asia); Africa (2 countries); South America (2 countries); North America (2 countries); and Australia. Likewise, the range of articles expanded, covering topics from theological, cultural, and spiritual traditions; justice, human rights, and peacemaking; lay and clerical ministries; ecclesial change; distinctive communities (e. g., families, children, people with disabilities); change-oriented practices (e. g., mediatization and community organizing); the nature and practices of practical theology; and issues of theory and practice in homiletics, pedagogy, mental health, pastoral counseling, and mission. The earlier emphases on the nature and methods of practical theology, highlighted by Gräb and Osmer in 1997, continued and expanded to include: international and cultural engagement, public practical theology, ecclesial dynamics and change, and the mission and purposes of practical theology in human lives and theological theory. Between 2010 and 2022, the foci expanded further, including increased attention to theopoetics, de- and post-colonialism, liberation, interreligious practices, and spirituality.

IJPT has been a center for deep reflection. We have more work to do, but the “new practical theology” of 1997 is new again in 2022 and will be new again in 2047. On a personal note, I was unable to travel for international meetings in recent years due to the long illness of my husband. Missing in-person exchanges, I was grateful to maintain close relations with the international work of practical theology, thanks to the Journal and its connective, generative mission.

Looking ahead: Thoughts on the 25 ^th Anniversary of the IJPT

Solange Lefebvre

In my opinion, the 2021 conference of the IAPT revealed how the future of practical theology looks in several ways, and this has always been reflected in its flagship journal, the IJPT. After hearing several presentations during this conference, I realized that academic reflections were centered around five major topics, and this is sure to continue over the next few years:

1 – Deconstructing fixed identities

This topic is central, because the following trends continue to grow: global mixing of populations in various countries; the number of parishes and congregations which have members from several ethnic and linguistic origins; mixed marriages; longer life span; new affirmations of other sexual identities; and the unprecedented mobility of populations. I am sure we are all experiencing the impact of these trends on our universities and religious communities. At one ritual assembly in which I participated, members were asked to state their origin, and no less than 60 countries were represented. We could say the same about the IAPT itself; it has become remarkably diverse.

2 – Digging up the root of abuse in all its forms

This is undeniably a more difficult intellectual and practical challenge, because on this front, the various church denominations are far behind secular movements. Certainly, theologians have been working on this issue for several years, and some national churches have adopted firm policies. However, it is utterly too little and too late, since abuse represents the major cause of the massive loss of credibility of Christianity in several areas of the world. In other countries or regions where the debate is less public and abuse is still largely hidden and ignored, hopefully practical theology and religious groups will be at the forefront of change.

3 – Rethinking post-institutional Christian societies

This theme seems to be gaining a foothold everywhere, even in countries that seem to have been spared the powerful secularization which has caused a considerable institutional weakening of the Christian faith, both in terms of ritual practice, various ministerial vocations and socio-cultural and political commitments rooted in a religious identity. Practical theology must reinvent itself, because it has been so closely linked to these aspects of religious institutional life.

4 – Interreligious thinking and practices

Having a very rich history in terms of practices and doctrines, ecumenism and interreligious dialogue are faced with the enormous challenge of integrating themselves into the life of ordinary communities. We can highlight rich stories from ordinary people who have practiced them from the outset, in an unprecedented way. However, practical theology must find ways of building profound interreligious abilities among people working in pastoral care and religious education. Finally, several religions need structures and frameworks within which to reflect on their practices, with the help of practical theology which has been until recently mostly Christian.

5 – Imagining the future of pastoral care and reflection in a restless world

It seems that the world is confronted by increasingly complex problems, which are connected to major economic, ecological and technological challenges. The interdisciplinarity of theology should extend to several areas of life and academic sciences, in order to reinvent the discourse on human beings, animals, cosmos and nature. This will serve to rebuild their relationships, find common ground, and explore their spiritual depths.

The International Journal of Practical Theology has been doing a wonderful job at publishing articles on these and other topics, and will continue to do so. Interdisciplinary, rigorous, and international in its scope, may it continue to create a thirst for knowledge among people working in pastoral care, as this is necessary to be able to work with relevance in a complex world.