Public Theology, if it is to successfully present theological insight to a wide audience outside of the Church, must enter into a genuine
engagement with that audience. In this section, I will outline three facets of the engaged emphasis within Public Theology. Firstly, Public Theology is dialogical in nature, characterised by open conversation and a preparedness to change. Secondly, in order to converse with a wide audience, Public Theology must speak in a language that is widely understood, and thirdly, I identify a role for Public Theology in bringing together diverse sections of society in conversation. This goes beyond the assertion of a theological voice in the public realm, to an emboldening of public life itself.
In the previous chapter, I referred to Kim’s (2011, p.3) description of Public Theology as a dialogue. Public Theology is essentially
conversational; it is not only about talking; it is also in the business of listening. For Kim (2011, p.230), to do theology in public is not literally about where it takes place; it is about its availability for public scrutiny.
Theology should be made accessible to a wide public, in order that it may listen, critique and discuss. This method of public conversation opens theology to response, including both wider understanding and criticism.
Theology is prepared to share its insights to influence and change those with which it is in conversation and, ultimately, to bring about change in society.
However, for true dialogue to take place, not only must theology set out to change others, it must itself be prepared to be changed by its encounters.
Markham (2003, p.1) argues that theology should learn from sources outside of the Church. These sources, rather than being viewed as a distraction from core theology, can be seen as integral to the task of making theology relevant to wider society. Markham (1999, p.139) points out that any contribution made by the Church to public debate should be made with humility and the understanding that only God knows the ideal means of human organisation. The notion of the conversation at the heart of Public Theology is outward looking and open. It represents a striving for genuine engagement with a wide audience outside of the Church.
For theology to speak within an increasingly diverse public arena, it will need to translate the insights of faith into a language more widely understood. As Graham (2013, p.151) states of Public Theology: ‘the discipline inhabits the boundary between the religious and the secular and
its language undertakes an act of “translation” in order to communicate to a non-specialist audience.’ Certainly, in Western Europe, in a context of wide diversity of belief, the majority of the population no longer have a basic grounding in the study of the Bible; its language, narratives, and approaches may appear alien. Although there is some space for Public Theology to reference religious texts in the public arena, without their setting in a context of translation, biblically-based ethical insights are unlikely to be widely understood. This said, Public Theology will need to be fluent in both the language of faith and its translation into a language widely
understood. Following Tracy's (1981) model of accountability to different publics, the accountability of Public Theology to the Church requires that it shares its faith-based insights with that public in the language of the
tradition. Bedford-Strohm (2012, p.283) points out that this introduces an element of the bilingual, whereby the process of Public Theology requires both the language of faith and of secular discourse. In Chapter 7 of the thesis, I will discuss the notion of Fair Trade as the demonstration of a theologically inspired concept, in the form of translation into a language that can be widely understood. The process of translation possesses an engaged emphasis, as it represents the striving of Public Theology to reach out to a wide audience in genuine conversation, utilising a shared language.
Some public theologians identify a role for Public Theology in bringing together diverse sections of society in conversation. Kim (2012, p.269), for example, describes Public Theology as a ‘catalyst in providing a forum for all concerned bodies to engage in critical inquiry and open debate.’ Public Theology as a catalyst represents more than offering contribution to public debate, rather it facilitates and emboldens the debate itself. Storrar (2011, pp.40-3) also identifies a role for Public Theology in encouraging public debate. He is conscious of a public sphere which is under threat by the growing power of the market in global society. Storrar (2011, p.41) argues that Public Theology needs to ‘protect and expand the forums in which a diverse public conversation can take place and public opinion can be formed.’ Public Theology as facilitator of a coming together of different sectors of society has resonance with the outline of the concept
of social capital offered by Putnam (2000). Putnam (2000, pp.65-79) indicates the role of religious citizens and organisations as a considerable repository of social capital, with the potential to contribute to the binding together of communities as a source of societal cohesion. This role stresses the engaged emphasis of Public Theology, as theology’s engagement with a wide public extends beyond contact with that public, to a building up of the public space itself.