159 The Methodology of Theological Action Research 4 is, ‘people working in universities writing books about aspects of the Christian tradition’—because they can be seen as ‘experts on the Christian tradition able to offer insights to the work of theology that goes on in the Church and among practitioners’ (Cameron et al., 2010, p. 77). But within the team and during the conversations, ‘their participation is not as experts but as participant in the conversation’ (Cameron et al., 2010, p. 77). TAR teams refer to them as nonexpert experts—persons with expertise but not behaving as such. The reason for this downplaying of expertise is that ‘no one voice should drown out the others even though the search is for a renewed espoused theology that makes the best use of normative and formal sources’ (Cameron et al., 2010, p. 78). Apart from the above-mentioned key qualities of team members, it is helpful for TAR ‘if the teams contain someone who is good at suggesting connections between what people say’ (Cameron et al., 2010, p. 75). 4. TAR as formative transformation of practice Central to the convictions behind the TAR methodology is that, ‘by naming and recognizing theological connections across the four voices, the theological embodiment at the operant level in particular will be renewed as its own authentic message comes to light and is more clearly understood by those living it out’ (Cameron et al., 2010, p. 61). Conversations within a TAR project in which the four voices are brought together can and must lead to renewed theology. Brouard (2018) spoke of a ‘theology of disclosure’ (p. 27), resulting directly from ‘TAR’s moments of revelation’ (p. 153) through faithful conversations. New theological insights, first and foremost, pertain to the practice of the faithful practitioners (operant theology), but also to their espoused theology. 5. Method allowing practice to contribute to the transformation of theology When TAR really results in renewed practice and renewed espoused theology, the possibility should not be excluded that it could renew formal theology and the interpretation of normative theology. On the contrary, this is actually deemed a clear intention of TAR. This intention departs from the conviction that theology (speaking about God) entails more than merely interpreting what the Bible says in a systematic way with the help of logical reasoning. A theology of disclosure, which is based on a less private, more common and multifaceted understanding of the Word, enriches Biblical understanding and theological insights for the present time and cultural context. The employment of TAR implies a ‘commitment to enable embodied theology to contribute and shape formal, and even normative, theologies’ (Cameron et al., 2010, p. 62). Notwithstanding, it is clear that the TAR methodology recognises the special
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw