I was talking to someone over the weekend about some university changes that impact on my research work and through which I am trying to navigate/negotiate a workable route alongside a geopraphical move.

"It all sounds very worthy and very boring," she said "I'd far rather be at the coal face."  When I pointed out I am at the 'coal face' as well and that's the whole point of practical theology she dismissed the whole field as "not proper theology, just a load of unreflected experience."  Her final comment, when I said that Moltmann asserted all good theology is ultimately practical theology was "pah, you'd never see him on a pastoral cycle."  Maybe not, but I was left with a lovely mental image on him on a bicycle!

It's a good job tongue-biting is on my list of competencies.

How does one win, I wondered.  Practical theology does indeed need some sustained theoretical work, which is precisely what I am trying to do - even if it is deemed 'boring' and 'not practical' albeit 'worthy' - but a lot of theorists deem it 'improper.'

As I pondered the comments, and the likely underlying reasons, I concluded that one of the problems of practical theology is that, alas, a lot of stuff is peddled under this banner that perhaps isn't really theology (as one of its advocates, Stephen Pattison would, I suspect, readily concede) and a lot of people who don't 'get it' cheerfully throw out the baby with the bathwater.  All of which makes my 'worthy and boring' foray into the theorectical aspects of a practical field all the more pertinent I guess.

Just maybe this gives me the kick up the backside I need to continue at a point where exit routes appear especially attractive (not least as they offer more letters for less work!!)