1. There was a strong motivation for a colloquium on theological education. In the light of the possibility that continued government subsidy for theological education could be threatened, important work needs to be done in healing the scars that are unresolved relating to closure and serious planning must be done in imagining future permutations of co-operation.
  2. A strong opinion still prevails that the reason closure finally happened, was that the larger, more financially powerful churches took decisions that compromised the smaller, more vulnerable denominations. Power dynamics will have to be on the agenda of reconciliation. Furthermore, an opinion was expressed that at the time of closure FEDSEM was suffering from a pathology of Institutional Psychosis. We need to beware of romanticizing FEDSEM.
  3. It was felt that the Methodists dominated the proceedings in Pietermaritzburg. In future we will need to be sensitive to our insistence on inclusiveness.
  4. A distinction needs to be drawn between seminary training which tends to be insular and university training, which is secular. There are pros and cons in both systems that need further debate.
  5. Resources that are still at our disposal in this discourse are The Joint Board and SACTE.


A huge indebtedness is owed to the Rev Zwai Mthyobile for arranging so extensively the logistics around accommodation, catering and transport for all three events. There are still a few outstanding accounts to be settled and he will produce accounts on these matters before the end of March.


One of the prevailing challenges that remains after all these events, is the challenge to the integrity of our ecumenical relationships. The ruins of FEDSEM in Pietermaritzburg expose our vulnerability and duplicitousness in the journey. May the Lord have mercy upon us.