From collaborative research to ‘intellectual friendship’

I observed earlier that there is for this book a particular challenge in ‘writing the researchers on to the page’ in the way proper to practicaltheology and its interdisciplinary conversation partners, given that the research was carried out by a team. As observed in the co-authored book of 2010: “The term ‘team’ is not used lightly in that we are unable to say which of us should be credited with any particular part of what we have developed”.¹⁵ In an academic culture which prizes and rewards the individual researcher, from PhD to the increasingly assessed ‘outputs’ of university academic staff, our commitment to the realities of team research has been difficult to explain and, sometimes, gain respect for - despite the common-place recognition of the power of team research in natural and social sciences. Indeed, whilst the present volume is singly authored, and the thinking and overall argument my own and not always in agreement with other members of the team, it will be clear from the introduction and references through the text that the research on which the volume depends was forged in this unique, long-lasting and particular research team.

Much might be reflected on in this regard. In this early chapter, I want simply to refer to something which is, nonetheless, rather complex: the development of a particular kind of real, deep friendship which made the work possible and fruitful in the ways that it has been. There is a good deal written on friendship in a Christian theological context; in terms of the ARCS team, I want to characterise our relationships as ‘intellectual friendship’. By this, I mean a kind of mutual affection, knowledge of each other, and of ourselves in the light of the others that was always concerned not with relationships per se but with a common purpose of faith and service. Our friendships are ‘intellectual’ not because they were lacking in any warmth or humour - far from it! Rather, the qualifier of ‘intellectual’ serves to remind us of that most human of qualities according to Aquinas: that intellectus which “implies a certain intimate knowing” of things as they really are, a human engagement with realities as given by God. “Intellective knowledge penetrates as far as the essence of a thing, its objective interest being ... what a thing really is”.¹⁶ It was through the committed and shared practice of such intellectual knowing of realities that the particular kind of friendship of the ARCS team members developed.

As commented on in the team’s earlier book,¹ the forging of such friendship, whilst centred on the work in which we were all engaged in similar vocationally committed ways, was shaped by rather more ‘ordinary’ human practices: long gatherings around tables heaped with often muddled papers, notes, tea and coffee cups, and substantial amounts of chocolatebased comestibles. There was weariness and impatience with one another, periods of ill-health, frustrations and tensions over finance and work loads, but there was more often laughter, banter, prayer and meals together, and what I now recognise as unusual levels of trust, honesty and shared ownership. I believe we were modeling an approach to theological, practice-based and participative research that is rare and much needed for the future of theology if it is to be of service to the realities of church and faith-full living.