Moving into the field of theology and development: revisiting and

going beyond an initial study

Ignatius SwartResearch Institute for Theology and Religion

University of South Africa

Community Development Workshop & NETACT AGM

Johannesburg, South Africa, 26-30 January 2015

1

`(1) INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS

Approached to give broad orientation of theology and development as

discipline. Where and how it fits in – some of the meta-theories behind

what is being/has been done in the field; current state of the discipline

and the discourses within the discipline.

Mouthful and not an easy challenge, as this is a discipline or rather a

focus or field of study that has over a prolonged period of time become

extremely broad and extensive in terms of its scope and the actors

involved in it.

Hopefully do some justice to this request through my aim to, as my title

suggests, take as point of orientation my own study of some

years ago and, with this as basis, offer a broader orientation of

how the topical interest in development has from a theological

and religious point of view evolved over the years. 2

My own study of some years ago: The Churches and the Development

Debate: Perspectives on a Fourth Generation Approach (SUN Press, 2006).

Why is such an overview important? And why should I thus complement NetACT

on recognising the need for some broad orientation? Because any deliberate

new decision to focus on “theology and development” as a research

and teaching focus – such as by NetACT – should recognise that its

starting point is not an empty page, but one that should build on and

can from an international point of view greatly benefit from a historical

and present rich layer of knowledge, reflection, exploration and

experience.

As such, and even if one is open to learn from “outside” debates, a

theological-ecclesial interest no longer has to display a sense of over-

dependence on the secular field of development studies to learn about

“development”, but can in its own right draw from a rich layer of

knowledge, reflection, exploration and experience from its own ranks.

(NOTE: something I believe a South African theological-ecclesial focus over the

last two decades or so have not sufficiently done).

3

However, a qualification again: Whilst I am making a claim that

a theological-ecclesial focus on development can and should

today drink from its own wells of engagement with

development, I by no means want to claim that this is sufficient.

Instead, I retain a position that an engagement with

development challenges a theological-ecclesial focus on

development towards a new level of social theoretical

competence; i.e. a new level of interdisciplinarity – if not

transdisciplinarity – whereby it learns from, is enriched by

but also participates in and contributes to larger normative

debates on development across disciplines.

4

Indeed, it should be recognised by theological actors that they

are not the only ones committed to a normative cause in

development, to a better world, to social change of a more

radical kind.

One of my favourite definitions of what development studies is:

From Björn Hettne 1995. Development Theory and the Three

Worlds. Halow: Longman.

“Development studies is explicitly normative, as

teachers and researchers attracted to the field tend to

see current reality as sickening, an ‘outrage to

morality’ … They want to change the world, not only

anlyse it ….” (p. 12)5

“It [development studies] is a revival of a general interest in

transformation and change which characterized classical social

science, for instance political economy, but today is based on a

broader, global, and culturally more complex empirical experience.

Development is seen as a holistic issue, and development theory

could pave the way for an integrated historical social science,

thereby making itself dispensable…” (p. 13)

“…development theory really took off only after the discovery that

the problems in the Third World were specific and qualitatively

different from the ‘original transition’. It is my contention that

that this ‘discovery’ (which was necessary for the rather trivial

reason of excessive Eurocentrism) led to a gradual theoretical

enrichment, and that, to take a step further, development theory

will prove to be of relevance also in the industrial countries, where

automatic6

growth can no longer be taken for granted, and

‘development’ now presents itself as a problem to be

tackled. Thus, in spite of the fact that development theory

emerged from tentative attempts at understanding the

problem of ‘underdevelopment’ from the point of view of

the ‘developed’, it gradually acquired an increasingly

universal quality, i.e. an authentic universalism in

contradistinction to the false universalism that

characterized the Eurocentric phase of development

thinking.” (p. 15)

“In the course of its evolution development theory has

consequently become increasingly complex and ‘non-

disciplinary’. It is therefore necessary to elaborate further7

on the problem of definition, although the reader may feel

reluctant to digest another definition of a clearly overdefined

phenomenon. My intention, however, is not to propose new

definitions but merely to stress one important point: There

can be no fixed and final definition of development, only suggestions

of what development should imply in particular contexts...” (p. 15)

“Under the concept of development theory I shall subsume

theories (there exists no single, generally accepted,

development theory) of societal change, which attempts to

integrate different social science approaches to the

development problem. Development theory is more

concerned with change than is typically the case with

conventional social science disciplines, such as economics,

sociology or political science, trapped as they still are in 8

in functionalism and comparative statistics. Development

involves structural transformation which implies cultural,

political, social and economic changes. Development

theory is therefore by definition interdisciplinary, drawing

on, but also questioning, many theoretical and

methodological assumptions in both Marxist and non-

Marxist social science …” (pp. 15-16)

Furthermore, development theory has from the start

closely been related to development strategy, i.e. changes

of economic structures and social institutions, undertaken

in order to find consistent and enduring solutions to

problems facing decision-makers in a society…” (pp.16)

9

(2) REVISITING AN INITIAL STUDY

Background of my initial study: The churches and the development

debate: Perspectives on a fourth generation approach.

A deliberate decision one year after my formal theological studies in

1991 at SU to shift from a specialisation in Old Testament Studies to a

focus on development from a theological and religious interest.

A decision profoundly influenced by the changing South African

context of the early 1990s – I attended the Second Church and

Conference of the EFSA Institute in Johannesburg in Nov 1993.

A decision (despite my theological inclination for the social) for which I

was ill equipped – my theological studies prepared me with little basis

/ knowledge / language for such an undertaking (question of a

theological professor a few years later). 10

A study for which I had no orientation in terms of existing literature in

the realm of theology and the churches and which only gradually led

me to discover a single comprehensive body of literature that existed

at the time: the ecumenical debate on development emanating

from the World Council of Churches and its related settings.

A study that as a result took me eight years to complete, partly due to

a decision to in the process also enrol for a structured masters

programme in development studies (The Politics of Alternative

Development Strategies) at the Institute for Social Studies (ISS) in The

Hague to strengthen my proficiency in the field of development studies

– given my lack of background.

A study that I enrolled for in the Dept. of Religious Studies at SU – it

was only in 1999 that a focus on development was formally introduced

in the Faculty of Theology at SU. 11

A study (DPhil) that I completed in 2000 and that I managed to publish

in 2006 through SUN Press.

My recalling of the background of my study is not to boast or burden you

with unnecessary information, but to illustrate something of my own

toilsome journey into the field of theology and development. As such I

still uphold today, based on my own experience, that there can be no

short cuts into this field, given its inter- and transdisciplinary

nature, and given the complexity of the theological and social

challenges that it seeks to deal with.

More specifically about part of the contents of the study:

It is in the first place a study about the debate about development that

emerged in the realm of the ecumenical movement/WCC during the

mid-1960s and that was sustained as ‘n prominent focus until more or

less the mid-1980s. 12

As such, it is a study that attempted to make sense of a substantial

corpus of published material that emerged from this focus, found in a

number of theological journals but also in study reports, monographs

and anthologies – i.e. by and large the only source on theology and

development at the time.

The Ecumenical Review (Issue 9(4)(1967) as starting-point)

Southeast Asian journals: Religion and Society, Bangalore

Theological Forum, Al-Mushir and East Asian Pastoral Review.

Few example of articles:

Itty, C.I. 1967. Development. The Ecumenical Review 19(4):349-352.

Itty, C.I. 1974. Are we yet awake? The Development Debate within

the ecumenical movement. The Ecumenical Review 26(1):6-20.13

Arce Martinez, S 1978. Development, people’s participation and

theology. The Ecumenical Review 30(3):266-277.

Fernades, A 1970. The role of the church in development. The

Ecumenical Review 22(3):222-250.

Jathanna, O.V. 1987. Theological bases for developmental concern.

Bangalore Theological Forum 19(3):213-234.

Kurien, C.T. 1987. Widening our perspective on development.

Bangalore Theological Forum 19(3):135-142.

Moghal, D. 1993. In search of a human understanding of

development. Al-Mushir 35(2):42-56.

Parmar, S.L. 1970. Goals and process of development. Religion and

Society 17(2):16-33. 14

Few examples of reports, monographs and anthologies:

Dickinson, R.D.N. 1968. Line and Plummet: The Churches and

Development. Geneva: WCC.

Dickinson, R.D.N. 1975. To Set at Liberty the Oppressed: Towards an

Understanding of Christian Responsibilities of Development /

Liberation. Geneva: WCC.

Dickinson, R.D.N. 1983. Poor, Yet Making Many Rich: The Poor as

Agents of Creative Justice. Geneva: WCC.

De Santa Ana, J. (ed.) 1980. Separation without Hope: The Church

and the Poor during the Industrial Revolution and Colonial

Expansion. Maryknoll: Orbis.

Elliot, C. 1971. The Development Debate. London: SCM Press.15

Elliot, C. 1987. Comfortable Compassion? Poverty, Power and

the Church. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Gutierrez Merrino, G. 1969. The meaning of development, in

In Search of a Theology of Development, A Sodepax

Report, 116-179, Geneva: Sodepax.

Rendtorrf, T. 1969. A theology of development? In In Search of

a Theology of Development, A Sodepax Report, 204-215,

Geneva: Sodepax.

Rendtorff, T. 1971. Christian foundation of worldly

commitment, in Land, P (ed.), Theology Meets Progress:

Human Implications of Development, 85-103, Rome:

Gregorian University Press. 16

Returning to the contents, it is a study that cannot claim to have

explored / captured every aspect of the ecumenical debate in detail

(e.g. the earlier social ethical debates on social progress) but it is a

study in which I have essentially over three chapters sought to

capture three distinctive elements from the overall debate:

1. The problematisation of charity as historical mode of ecclesial

social engagement and how such mode had to be juxtaposed by

what was to be understood by an ecclesial involvement through

development. This involved an analysis and synthesis of

perspectives from the various contributions to the book initiated by

the WCC’s Commission on the Churches Participation in

Development: De Santa Ana, J. 1980. Separation without Hope:

The Church and the Poor during the Industrial Revolution

and Colonial Expansion. Maryknoll: Orbis. 17

2. An analysis / exploration of the ecumenical debate about development

as an increasingly progressive social ethical discourse that esp.

around the three interrelated concepts of economic growth, social justice

and self-reliance could be appreciated for posing a critical challenge to a

historical and traditional theological and ecclesiastical involvement and

understanding (charity), but a critical challenge also to mainstream secular

discourse.

3. An analysis / exploration of the sub-debate in the ecumenical development

debate known as the pragmatic debate.

A sub-debate that through its moderate and radical accounts newly

introduced a distinct tension in the larger ecumenical debate

between theory and practice, between theological and ecclesiastical

development discourse as conceptualised in the realm of the WCC /

ecumenical movement, on the one hand, and what the churches and their

related bodies were under the WCC system in actual fact doing in the name

of development.18

A sub-debate as such that newly problematised the churches’

equation of development practice with so-called

development projects, i.e. a project-centred approach and

the inability of such an approach to meet the goals that were

set out in the progressive discourse on development.

A sub-debate as such that came to question whether a

‘development’ engagement through projects in fact

represented a different ideological, operational and relational

framework from the works of charity in which the churches

were historically involved.

See esp. Elliot, C. 1987. Comfortable Compassion? Poverty,

Power and the Church. London: Hodder and Stoughton.19

Ended first part of my book with an ultimate conclusion about an

impasse but also prospect of renewal based on my capturing of the

ecumenical development debate, with the argumentation from the

pragmatic debate at the centre of this conclusion.

Impasse – pragmatic debate and the problematisation highlighted in

this debate remained an unresolved aspect of the ecumenical

development debate & coincided with the overall decline of this

debate

Prospect of renewal – to be found in a conceptualisation that would

overcome the problem of the pragmatic debate, which led me to

relate to a similar search for conceptual renewal in the NGO

development debate in the second part of my study.

READ FROM BOOK, pp. 85-89. 20

Second part of my book introduced by Chapter 4: “Charity and

development in the NGO development debate”.

Identification of a similar charity-development juxtaposition in

this debate led me to especially find promise in the conceptual

framework of David Korten, a foremost theorist of people-centred

development in the NGO development debate, whose conceptual

innovation could from a strategic or praxis point of view be found in

his framework of four generations of NGO strategic action in

development. SEE HAND-OUT.

Led me to the central thesis of my study about the perspective of

a fourth generation strategy or approach as the mode of

development engagement that holds the greatest prospect

for authentic participation by the Christian churches in

development. 21

It is in the unlimited space of the fourth generation strategy that the

churches do not have to be marginalised by the institutional processes of

policy-making. Here they could participate in a larger (transnational) civil

society space, in an ‘idea politics’, a ‘movement politics’ in the most radical

sense of the word that does not let itself be confined to set places, spaces

and institutions. In this sphere they would also find much in common with

the new social movements and their supporting actors (e.g. NGOs), who are

driven by similar ideals, ideas and values on the issues of peace, human

rights, women, environment, democracy, people-centred development, and

so on. In this unlimited space they would be able to perform what they can

in fact do best, namely to appeal to and change the attitudes and

consciousness of people across boundaries and cultures. In this space their

general, but sometimes also specific, ethical teachings would appeal to a

considerable civil society audience that overlaps with their own

constituency. And lastly, in this sphere they would find an emerging new

appraisal of the contribution of religion to development: not only by

someone like David Korten, but in fact by what can be called a broader

‘alternative’ intellectual movement in the field of development and the

social sciences… (p. 8)

22

(3) BEYOND MY INITIAL STUDY

Beyond but with a qualification:

Prevailing relevance of the ecumenical development debate as historical source, despite the changes in context between then and now.

Prevailing relevance of the issues emanating from that debate:

- grappling with charity as a prevailing forceful mental construct and mode of social engagement

- the importance of constructing meaningful and progressive development discourse, involving a distinctive ability to also speak about development as an economic issue – “Development is specifically about “the conscious struggle against mass poverty” (MM Thomas).

- The challenges posed by the pragmatic debate – development practice that will do justice to the progressive discourse on development.

Prevailing relevance of Korten’s fourth generation vision and a related NGO development debate.

Note about my own contributions to the South African theological development debate – the influence of my initial study.

23

However, beyond the historic ecumenical development debate, as well as Korten and the NGO debate there are crucially today also new horizons to be explored from a theology and development interest – a challenge that I am also setting for myself:

Rise of an evangelical development debate

Reversal on my own initial position – a debate to be taken seriously

A truly international debate taking over from the ecumenical movement and reinvigorating the Christian theology and development debate

Proliferation of literature esp. since the 1990s – a leading space for publications the journal of the Oxford Centre for Mission Studies: Transformation: An International Journal of Holistic Mission Studies

But also see Missiology: An International Review and to a lesser extent Mission Studies: Jnl of the International Association for Mission Studies.24

Important recent publications to learn more about the evolution of the evangelical development debate:

Stephen Offutt 2012. New directions in Transformational Development. The Ashbury Journal 67(2): 35-50.

Amy Reynolds & Stephen Offutt 2014. Global poverty and evangelical action, in Steensland, B. & Goff, P. (eds.), The New Evangelical Social Engagement, 242-261, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

- Focus born from the new evangelical social commitment esp. since the 1970s; movement towards the integration of evangelism and social involvement

- Landmarks – Lausanne Conference – Lausanne Covenant (1974); Wheation Conference, Illinois – Wheaton Declaration (1983)

See: Vinay Samuel & Christopher Sugden (eds.)1987. The church in response to human need. Grand Rapids: Regnum Books.

See also: Ronald Sider (eds.) 1981. Evangelicals and Development: Towards a Theology of Social Change. Exeter: Paternoster Press.

25

- an alternative to liberation theology (Offutt 2012:39)

- “transformational development” as dominant paradigm informing the development work of evangelical organisations globally

- Capstone work of transformational development theory: Bryant Myers 1999. Walking with the Poor: Principles and Practices of Transformational Development. Maryknoll: Orbis (Offutt 2012).

- Transformational development builds on a relational understanding – TD = restoration of broken relationships (Offutt 2012:40ff)

- Leading figures – Vinay Samuel, Wayne Bragg, Ronald Sider, Myers (“ecumenical evangelicals” – Bosch)

- Three phases / stages of growth of understanding and engagement – 1. commitment to the poor and attention to relief; 2. emphasis on community and transformational development; 3. engagement in advocacy efforts (Reynolds & Offutt 2014:243)

26

- Recognition of the NGO sector and an affinity for the work of Korten (Reynolds & Offutt)

Important recent work with a pertinent African relevance: Belshaw, D., Calderisi & Sugden, C. 2001. Faith in Development: Partnership between the World Bank and the Churches of Africa. Oxford: Regnum Books.

Possible difference from ecumenical development debate: less social theoretical language and weaker social analysis; stronger explicit theological language informed by an integrated commitment to social action and evangelism

27

Revival of an ecumenical development debate

A tentative observation

But see the Special issue on “New Perspectives in Diakonia”, The Ecumenical Review 66(3) inspired by Conversation 21 at the 10th Assembly of the WCC, Busan, Republic of Korea, 2013 – “Compelled to serve: Diakonia and Development in a Rapidly Changing World”

Convergence of the concepts of “diakonia” and “development”

On-going importance of “sustainability” as concept linked both to “diakonia” and “development”

See esp. the article contribution by Angelique van Zeeland, “The Changing Development context: A Latin American Perspective”, pp. 313-323. 28

Some significant features of Van Zeeland’s article:

- Reference to changing development context under on-going globalisation – and shrinking space of civil society

- New embracement of “transformational development” as concept

- Underlying fourth generation approach (see p. 318)

- Emphasis on economic dimension and economic justice and introduction of the “social” and “solidarity economy” as concepts

- Identifying the “re-engagement of churches as actors in development” as a major challenge (p. 322)

29

A new international diaconia movement in the making

The establishment and growth of an new international society – The International Society for the Research and Study of Diaconia Christian Social Practice (REDI)

Diaconia: Journal for the Study of Christian Social Practice (since 2010)

- Poverty and community-centred Christian ministries strong foci

- U. Schmidt, “Poverty: A challenge to human dignity” (Issue 1, 2010)

2014 anthology: Dietrich, S. et al., Diakonia as Christian Social Practice: An Introduction, Regnum Studies in Mission, regnum Books

30

The evolution of a debate on religion and development in the social sciences and development studies

Referred to in a recent contribution as “the emergence of ‘Religion and Development’ (RaD) as a sub-discipline within the discipline of Development Studies”

Barbara Bompani 2014. Beyond disciplinarity: Reflections on the study of religion in international development. Religion & Theology 21(3-4): 309-333.

My own reference to “the religious turn in the social science interest in development”

From the religious taboo in development studies – a phrase coined by Kurt Alan Ver Beek in his landmark article of 2000 in Development in Practice, “Spirituality: A development taboo” – to an astounding rise in interest and flourishing of literature in the last decade, in the field of development studies in particular but a phenomenon that is also marked by a broader social science interest by scholars from various disciplines.

31

An evolving major contribution to a new social theory about religion posing a significant challenge to secularisation theory

The rise of a bibliography:

- Compilation of 13 page bibliography (2014) reflecting the increased break of Ver Beeks “taboo”

- 21 books

Few examples:

Ter Haar, G. (ed.) 2011. Religion and Development: Ways of Transforming the World. New York: Columbia University Press.

Clarke, M. (ed.) 2013. Handbook of Research on Development and Religion. Edward Elgar Publishing (612 pp)

Tomalin, E. (ed.) 2015. Handbook of Religions and Global Development. London: Routledge (458 pp).

- 82 chapters in books32

- 6 special issues on R & D in Development 46(4) (2003); Exchange 40(2011); Development in Practice 22(5-6) (2012); International Development Policy Series (2013); Canadian Journal of Development Studies (34(2) (2013); International Journal of Religion and Society 4(1-2) (2013)

- 66 journal articles

- 5 reports and working papers

Informative article: Ben Jones & Marie Juul Petersen 2011. Instrumental, narrow, normative? Reviewing recent work on religion and development. Third World Quarterly 2011:1291-1306 – good overview but also critical

Conversation between theology and development debates and R & D debate as a major challenge 33

Postscript: beyond the meta-debates in doing theology and development – doing theology and development from / in particular contexts

Sara White & Romy Tiongco 1997. Doing theology and development: Meeting the challenge of poverty. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press.

- inspired by the erstwhile course in Theology and Development at Edinburgh University

- Doing theology and development means to engage in the cycle of experience, analysis, reflection and action in the context of our relationship to God, and to one another as poor and non-poor … This reflects the conviction that growing in God should make a difference to how we relate to one another, and that how we understand and act towards one another will shape our experience of God (p. 11). 34

A South African theology and development debate

- Promised much but very marginal to and neglected by the centre of theological scholarship

- A scattered debate in need of greater coherence and conceptual depth

- A debate that largely ignores the mega-debates

- A debate in need of stock-taking: where are we and where are we going with it?

- Notable initiatives:

(1) The Stellenbosch initiative of some years ago, in particular the initiative to adopt PAR as method.

See: Swart, I. et al. 2010. Religion and Social Development in Post-apartheid South Africa: Perspectives for Critical Engagement: Stellenbosch: SUN Press.

35

Swart, I. 2008. Meeting the challenge of poverty and exclusion: The emerging field of development research in south African practical theology. International Journal of Practical Theology 12(1):104-149.

(2) De Gruchy, S. et al. 2008. From Our Side: Emerging

Perspectives on Development and Ethics. Amsterdam:

Rozenberg.

36