Vol. XXXVIII / 1 - Studia Moralia

54 DENNIS J. BILLY
and moral theology can be free to be themselves, one of the most
fundamental elements of which means to be in relation to other
disciplines – and especially to each other. This emphasis on
collaborative reciprocity provides a new and refreshing
paradigm for discerning an underlying unity for the whole of
theology. What is more, the “democratic” (as opposed to
“hierarchical”) positioning of the relationship is better suited to
the present exigencies of the theological mindset and can
provide a forum in which different traditions of spirituality and
moral theology can benefit from the free exchange of ideas. If
that is not enough, the model also encourages a certain “spirit of
cooperation” which uses critical theological analysis as the basis
for exploring the inner and outer contours of what in the past
was a developing but potentially problematic interaction.
Weaknesses. The model’s weaknesses stem from its lack of a
methodological matrix with which to guide the ongoing
dialogue between the two disciplines. Without a clear sense of
the context the dialogue has grown out of, situates itself, and is
tending toward, the interaction between the two disciplines can
easily degenerate into a series of aimless (and fragmented)
exchanges. As a result, a great deal of energy can be diverted
from many of the legitimate demands of the individual
disciplines themselves. For this reason, much work is needed in
drawing up a methodological program within which the
interface between spirituality and moral theology can be
explored. Since spirituality, moreover, is a relatively recent
academic discipline and is only now exploring the
methodological bases upon which its own identity rest, there is
a potential danger that it will play only a secondary, passive role
in its interaction with moral theology. That is to say, it will allow
the more refined methodological approaches of the older
discipline to control the orientation and movement of the
discussion. For this reason, one of the most pressing areas of
concern for this model is to examine the methodological
parameters within which a sound, collaborative dialogue
between equals can exist. Only then can both disciplines
participate in a genuine relationship of reciprocity.