Program / Course 25: Theological Synthesis / Lesson 6.4
What you will learn
- Draft the synthesis section by section from the outline.
- Test the draft for contradictions, unsupported claims and unfair statements of other views.
- Revise using the criteria of the course, and record what you changed.
- Finish with a dated, signed final version and a plan for returning to it.
The big idea
Writing the synthesis happens in rounds: draft, rest, test, revise. The first draft gets the material down. A pause lets the writer see the draft as a reader would. Testing looks for contradictions between sections, claims without support and unfair accounts of other views. Revision repairs what testing found. Because the aim is an honest account, the finished work should record uncertainty plainly. It is a snapshot of where you stand, to be revisited, not a final verdict on the faith.
Key terms
- Draft
- A version of a piece of writing that is not yet final.
- Revision
- Re-seeing and reworking a draft to improve its content and structure, not merely correcting spelling.
- Charity (in argument)
- Stating an opposing view in the strongest and most reasonable form, as its holders would recognize.
- Internal contradiction
- A conflict between two statements within the same document.
- Unsupported claim
- A statement that is offered as true but has no evidence or reasoning given for it.
- Evaluation criteria
- The standards against which the finished work is judged. This course lists seven in the assignment.
- Review schedule
- A plan to return to the finished work at set times, such as after one day, one week, one month and three months.
Background
Most good writing is rewriting. The practice of writing a draft, leaving it and returning with fresh eyes is widely recommended by writers and teachers. For a worldview synthesis it has a further benefit. A person who writes about their deepest convictions is likely to be too close to the material, and the pause helps to see where claims are weak or where feelings have replaced argument.
The course assessment suggests waiting one week after the first full draft. That is a practical rule. In that week do something else, read widely and let questions arise. When you return, treat the draft as the work of another person whom you wish to treat fairly and from whom you expect honesty.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Draft in order and do not polish
Work from the outline, one section at a time. In the first draft, aim for completeness, not elegance. Write what you think and cite the source as you go, with at least author, work and passage. Do not stop to perfect a sentence. If you lack a source, write a mark such as NEED SOURCE and go on.
Write the tensions section with particular care. For each of the three tensions follow the five steps from the module on tensions, and take care to state the other traditions’ views as their members would. Where you quote the creed, quote it from the library text.
Step 2: Rest
Leave the draft for a week. During that week read something relevant that you have not yet read, such as a section of a source in the library that you cited from a summary, or a critic of a position you take.
Step 3: Test the draft
Make three passes. First, a reverse outline: write one sentence for each paragraph, and look for gaps, repetition and drift. Second, a contradiction check: list the main claims of each section and compare them across sections. Where two conflict, decide which to keep, or whether the conflict is a true tension that should be stated. Third, a support check: mark every claim that has no evidence or reasoning, and either support it, soften it or cut it.
Then apply the fairness check. For each opposing view you describe, ask whether a member of that tradition or position would recognize your description. Replace any strawman with the strongest version. Check also that you have not claimed more agreement with the historic faith than you have shown.
Step 4: Revise and record
Revise the draft by the findings. Make notes, in a separate page, of what you changed and why, since the record is valuable. Rate the result against the course criteria: covers the major areas and links them; supports claims accurately; states opposing views fairly; separates conviction from open question from established doctrine; states tensions precisely; relates itself honestly to the creeds; is internally consistent and its practical consequences are clear. For each criterion mark strong, adequate or weak, and write one sentence on how to improve each weak one.
Also check for the common mistakes the assignment lists: a list of beliefs without connection, smoothing over a tension, treating one tradition as all Christians, claiming agreement with the historic faith without reading it, and leaving out ethics and practice.
Step 5: Finish and return
Write a short note at the front stating the date, the sources used and the main uncertainties. Sign the final version if you wish. Keep it in your own notebook or document, and do not send it anywhere. Then plan to return to it after one day, one week, one month and three months, each time explaining aloud how Scripture, history, doctrine and reason support one central claim and naming one tension you are still working on.
A synthesis is not an end. People change their minds, and an honest document says where its writer stands at one time and invites later correction.
- Where does my draft contradict itself?
- Which claims have I not supported?
- Would a member of each tradition I describe recognize their own view?
- Have I stated each tension without smoothing it over?
- Is the practical effect of my beliefs clear?
- What changed in my mind as I wrote?
Examples
A contradiction found in revision
A writer states in the section on knowledge that Scripture alone is the final authority, and in the section on the historic faith that she holds a doctrine mainly because the early church taught it. She sees that the sections pull apart, and revises: she holds that the doctrine is also supported by Scripture, and says so, or she changes her statement about authority. (A constructed example.)
A strawman repaired
A first draft says that Catholics think they can earn salvation. On rereading the Catechism and Trent, the writer sees that the claim is unfair. She rewrites it to say that Catholic teaching holds that grace begins and completes salvation and that the person cooperates, and notes where Protestants disagree.
An honest closing
The writer ends with five questions she most wants to study, among them how to understand the final judgment, and says that she is not yet sure. The ending does not give a tidy resolution, which makes the document more trustworthy.
Different perspectives
Catholic
The Catholic tradition values lifelong learning in the faith and the guidance of teachers and spiritual directors. A Catholic student might ask a trusted priest, teacher or friend to read the draft, and would see the work as a personal exercise within the teaching of the church.
Orthodox
Orthodox tradition values counsel from a spiritual father or mother and cautions against pride in one’s own conclusions. A student in that tradition might treat the synthesis as a record of questions as much as answers, and might seek advice from someone experienced.
Protestant
Many Protestant traditions encourage personal study and testing of teaching by Scripture, with the help of a congregation. A student might share the draft with a study group or pastor, and would value that the final authority is Scripture and conscience informed by it.
Academic writing practice
Writing teachers advise rest between drafts, reverse outlining, peer review and attention to the strongest objections. They also advise recording the changes made. These habits improve almost any longer piece of reasoning.
Why it matters
The final synthesis is the product of the whole course, and the value of the work depends on whether it has been tested. A document that has been drafted, rested, tested and revised is more honest and more useful, to the writer and to anyone who reads it. The habit of testing one’s beliefs by writing them out and challenging them is one that lasts.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Revision means correcting spelling.
Correction: Revision means re-seeing the content and structure. Spelling is the last step.
Misunderstanding: If my draft has contradictions, my worldview must be wrong.
Correction: Contradictions in a draft may be errors of expression or true tensions that need stating. They are a reason to think, not a verdict.
Misunderstanding: The final version should sound certain.
Correction: It should be as certain as the evidence warrants. A document that marks open questions is more honest than one that claims certainty everywhere.
Misunderstanding: Once written, the synthesis is permanent.
Correction: It is a snapshot. Returning to it later and noting what has changed is part of the practice.
Knowledge check
What are the three testing passes?
A reverse outline to see the structure, a contradiction check comparing the main claims across sections, and a support check marking claims that lack evidence or reasoning. A fairness check follows, asking whether members of other traditions would recognize your description of their views.
Why wait a week between the first draft and revision?
Because a writer is too close to a fresh draft to see its weaknesses. After a pause, the draft can be read more as another person would read it. The week can also be used to read something relevant that was previously known only by summary.
What does it mean to apply the fairness check?
It means asking, of each opposing view that has been described, whether a member of that tradition or position would accept the description as accurate and strong. If not, the account should be rewritten, replacing any strawman with the strongest honest version.
What should the finished synthesis include at the front and what should be done afterwards?
A short note giving the date, the sources used and the main uncertainties, and a signature if the writer wishes. Afterwards the writer returns to it at set intervals, explaining aloud how Scripture, history, doctrine and reason support a central claim and naming one tension still being worked on.
Think it through
- What do you expect to be hardest to revise?
- Who could read your draft honestly and challenge it?
- How will you know that the synthesis is finished enough?
Independent assignment
Draft, test, revise
Using your outline, write the first full draft of your synthesis (about 5,000 to 8,000 words) in your own notebook or document. Wait one week. Then do the three testing passes and the fairness check, revise, and write a one-page record of what you changed. Rate the result against the seven criteria, date and sign it, and set your four review dates. Do not send the synthesis anywhere.
Further study
- Council of Nicaea (325) and Council of Constantinople (381), The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed Quote the creed from this text.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fallacies Check your reasoning for common errors.
- Alister E. McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction Use as a model for stating several views fairly.
- Catholic Church, Catechism of the Catholic Church Check your account of Catholic teaching against its own words.
- Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, vol. 3: The Creeds of the Evangelical Protestant Churches Check your account of Protestant teaching.
- Timothy (Kallistos) Ware, The Orthodox Church Check your account of Orthodox teaching.
- Proverbs 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron.
- Philippians 4:8 Think on whatsoever things are true.