Cathy Ross on Women and Missiology; learning from three girls in the Bible; and what do colleges do about AI?
Welcome to my newsletter, ‘Bible, Mission, and More’, where I share what’s on my mind as I teach, research, and write on the Bible and mission, children-at-risk in the Bible and contemporary society, Psalms and Wisdom Literature, and a range of other topics. I teach at All Nations Christian College in the UK, though views are my own. You may also like to check out my Bible and Mission website.
Each Tuesday I’ll share something I’ve read, something I’ve written or recorded, something on learning and teaching, and a quote to reflect on.
Something read – Cathy Ross on women and missiology
‘If women do indeed form the majority of active participants in the world church, what might women’s perspectives contribute to the discipline of missiology? Would the practice of the discipline be very different? Would the issues and ideas under consideration be new? How might the approach be fresh? Might there be an element of surprise as unexpected approaches may emerge?’ (p. 3)
Canon Dr Cathy Ross leads CMS Pioneer Mission Leadership Training, and lectures in mission at Regent’s Park College, Oxford. She asks the above questions in a 2021 paper, ‘“Without Faces”: Women’s Perspectives on Context’ published on the When Women Speak website. (there is also a video of the lecture here).
Ross’s starting point is the contextual nature of theology and missiology. And because missiology is always contextual, ‘There can be no grand theories, no totalising statements’ (p. 4). She also highlights a definition of Ivan Illich (quoted in Bosch’s Transforming Mission) that ‘Missiology therefore is the study of the Church as surprise.’ (p. 4)
The article then works through a number of different ways of framing missiology; crucially Ross acknowledges the input of many women who helped her shape these ways of thinking about mission. Most of the rest of the article is then given over to these reframings:
A Missiology of Emptiness and Hiddenness
A Missiology of Comforting, Consolation and Healing
A Missiology of Hospitality and Relationship
A Missiology of Sight, Embrace and Flourishing
As well as the rich insights from each of these themes in and of themselves, what I particularly appreciated about Ross’s article was the way she showed that, because of the contextual nature of missiology, a theme may work well and be liberating in one context but may be problematic in another.
She concludes:
‘It is not possible or appropriate to think of a single, dominating missiology. There is no overarching theory, no controlling metaphor, no final word. As I said at the beginning, missiology as a discipline is contingent, tentative, incomplete. Contexts vary, situations change and so our missiology needs constant refining and nuancing. There is no definitive missiology. Women have different perspectives from those which have been commonly on offer, perspectives worth heeding but which have been marginalised or not heard. Women’s missiology is based on a real resistance to a male dominated mission practice that can emphasize power, dominating control as well as endless activity and programmes. So it is out of contexts such as this that women begin to reflect and imagine a new way of witnessing to the gospel.’ (pp. 26-27)
The whole open access article is available on the When Women Speak website.
Something written – learning from three girls in the Bible
I was recently at the annual Mission Studies day organised by the Churches Together in England Mission Research Network (of which I’m a member) and the British and Irish Association of Practical Theology. The theme of the day was ‘Towards Hope: Children, Climate Change and Justice’. You can read a report of the day by Ben Aldous on the CTE website: Towards Hope: Mission Studies Day 2025.
My particular contribution was to give a response to Katie Kraft’s main paper, ‘Towards Hope: Children in relation to self, God, Others and Creation.’ I did this by drawing on the insights she brought about signs of hope in children and using those as a lens through which to read the stories of three children in the Bible: Miriam in Exodus 2, the unnamed girl in 2 Kings 5, and Rhoda in Acts 12.
Although in very different circumstances all three girls were slaves and all three played a part in what God was doing at that particular moment, sometimes despite of the adults around them. All three showed signs of hope, and all three have things to teach us.
I will write up these reflections at some point but I enjoyed using this very particular lens to see connections between these three biblical characters.
Learning and teaching – How to decide what to do with AI
What does an academic institution do in response to the incredibly rapid advances in the capabilities and use of AI? Whether we are happy about it or not, AI represents paradigm-shifting changes in how people operate in the world, not least in education. There are a multitude of ethical issues and complexities that means we have to be proactive in how we address these.
The need to be proactive is a key point in this recent, very helpful article I came across (HT Perry Shaw), Crafting Thoughtful AI Policy in Higher Education: A Guide for Institutional Leaders. The authors, Raffi DerSimonian and Christine Montagnino, advocate for a mission-aligned, valued driven approach to AI. So, they say,
‘Central to our discussion is the assertion that a “one-size-fits-all” approach to AI adoption is inadequate for educational institutions, whose missions and values differ significantly. We propose a multi-faceted strategy for establishing an AI policy that is both mission-reflective and adaptable to the needs of each audience group within the institution. This strategy encompasses identifying core values, assessing stakeholder needs, integrating ethical considerations, and defining leadership’s role in championing AI initiatives.’
So as an institution reflects on the possibilities, complexities, and dangers presented by AI we need to begin by asking, ‘Who are we as an institution? What are our values?’
I appreciate this as a starting point. In such a complex and fast-changing situation we need principles to guide our interventions. How we implement policies on AI are bound to change due to rapid advances in its technology and use; but core values should be cherished and used as a lens through which to view the debate and decisions.
If you are a student why don’t you ask your University how they are going about deciding matters to do with AI?
Quote – Annie Dillard: ‘The creator loves pizzazz’
‘Of all know forms of life, only about ten percent are still living today… Why so many forms? Why not just that one hydrogen atom? The creator goes off on one wild, specific tangent after another, or millions simultaneously, with an exuberance that would seem to be unwarranted, and with an abandoned energy sprung from an unfathomable font. What is going on here? The point of the dragonfly’s terrible lip, the giant water bug, birdsong, or the beautiful dazzle and flash of sunlighted minnows, is not that it all fits together like clockwork—for it doesn’t, particularly, not even inside the goldfish bowl—but that it all flows so freely wild, like the creek, that it all surges in such a free, fringed tangle. Freedom is the world’s water and weather, the world’s nourishment freely given, its soil and sap: and the creator loves pizzazz.’
Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek, third edition (Canterbury Press, 2011), pp. 138–139
Thanks for joining the journey and see you next week,
Tim