This paper draws on the findings of a small-scale research study based on interviews with twenty serving Catholic headteachers from the primary and secondary phases and from the maintained and independent sectors. The focus of the study was to explore the concept of ‘spiritual capital’ among the headteachers and to evaluate the impact of two major new initiatives in England and Wales: the National Retreat for Catholic Headteachers and the National School of Formation. Gerald Grace and others have raised concerns about the depletion of spiritual capital among Catholic headteachers as more lay people take on the responsibility and the Catholic culture which sustained such capital continues to decline. My initial conclusions are that Catholic headteachers are still drawing on spiritual capital from their own resources and the wider community, but these resources are maintaining rather than developing or deepening their spiritual lives. The new initiatives have had a significantly positive effect on the spiritual resources they draw upon in their role as Catholic headteachers.

Keywords: leadership formation; spiritual capital; vocation; mission; transformation; renewing spiritual capital

The decline of spiritual capital in Catholic education

Grace (2010) has identified the decline in spiritual capital among headteachers as perhaps the most acute challenge facing Catholic schools. In his landmark research study, Grace interviewed 60 Catholic school leaders and concluded that they were ‘clearly drawing upon a spiritual and religious resource that empowered them and gave them a sustained sense of mission’. He referred to this resource as ‘spiritual capital’, which he defined as ‘a form of spirituality in which the whole of human life is viewed in terms of a conscious relationship with God, in Jesus Christ’. If this resource was gained, as his interviews suggested, in strongly Catholic communities and often under the influence of religious orders, how would this resource be sustained in the future in the face of the decline of each of these? He posed the key question: ‘Are the reserves of spiritual capital in the Catholic school system being renewed or is the system in contemporary conditions living on a declining asset?’ Grace (2002, 211) acknowledges that spiritual capital resides in other members of staff in a Catholic school, not just the headteacher, but he observes what many Catholic headteachers know intuitively, namely that they are ‘the stewards of the spiritual and Catholic development of their students’  and a key influence on preserving what he calls ‘ mission integrity’ . Any suggestion, therefore, that the spiritual capital of this key group in Catholic education is in decline is worthy of serious attention. Archbishop Miller, the former Secretary of the Congregation for Catholic Education, has also addressed this issue, but with a wider reference to lay people who teach in Catholic schools, not just leaders. Reflecting on the shift from religious to lay educators in American Catholic schools –  a pattern repeated across the developed world –  he states that, ‘ To be effective bearers of the Church’ s educational tradition, laypersons who teach in Catholic schools need a religious formation that is equal to their professional formation’ (Miller 2006 , 5). The Archbishop states that the formation of those in religious orders was rich and deep, sustained by daily immersion in a religious community, and implies that lay people are far short of this level of formation.

So is this deficit being addressed? Lydon (2009 ) reports on the programmes of formation for lay people being undertaken by a number of religious orders, including the Salesians, the Jesuits and De La Salle, but their impact in England andWales is limited to the relatively small number of schools they run and not all of their courses focus on leadership.Many dioceses in England andWales have developed programmes for aspiring heads, but again there is little evidence of sustained and developed programmes for the spiritual formation of serving  Catholic headteachers, beyond an annual retreat in some dioceses. Research by Hanvey (2009 ) concluded that ‘ a clear area for further work and research is in determining the best ways of sustaining and deepening the spiritual resources of leadership and schools’  (Hanvey 2009 , 19). A strong need for ‘additional support from diocesan and Catholic Education Service of England and Wales structures (88% and 80% respectively)’  was identified by the headteachers who took part in the study. Grace (2010 ) concluded that ‘ What we lack is any sense of a co-ordinated policy in this crucial area or any extensive research and evaluation studies to draw together the outcomes of such programmes’  (Hanvey 2009 , 124). Grace exhorts bishops’  conferences internationally to ‘ place the renewal of spiritual capital in Catholic education high on their priority agendas’  (Hanvey 2009 , 124) and encourages the creation of co-ordinated formation programmes. He refers to the document Lay Catholics in Schools  (1982 ) which affirmed the vocational and apostolic dimensions of the role of a Catholic teacher and called for processes of ‘ permanent formation’ –  professional, spiritual and religious –  for Catholic educators, without specific reference to school leaders. The concerns about the formation of Catholic leaders in education referred to above suggest that this call has not been fully answered.

The context of the 1982 document was a recognition of the declining number of priests and religious teaching in Catholic schools. The intention was to encourage and inspire lay Catholics in their various roles in Catholic schools, especially teachers. The leadership of Catholic schools was not the main issue since this was still assumed to be, globally speaking, in the hands of priests and religious. The role of the Catholic lay teacher was seen very much in the light of Vatican II as a manifestation of the ‘ personal call to holiness and to apostolic mission’  of all believers. The focus of this formation was to be ‘ solid doctrinal instruction… in theology, ethics and philosophy’ as well as ‘ adequate formation in the social teaching of the Church’ . The need for the religious knowledge to be guaranteed by accreditation was also stressed. The spiritual, as opposed to religious, formation of the Catholic teacher was to some extent taken for granted: ‘Lay Catholics will find support in their own faith’ . The assumption was that lay Catholic teachers are practising Catholics and as such the ‘ sacramental life will give them the strength they need to live this career’. Grace’s research suggested  that this was indeed the case up to the late 1990s but pointed to a future in which this could no longer be taken for granted.

The next document from the Congregation for Catholic Education, The Religious Dimension of Education in a Catholic School  (1988 ), was largely concerned with religious instruction in Catholic schools and the comments on teacher formation were in this context. Since more and more teachers of religion were lay people and lacked the formation which priests and religious ‘ automatically acquire’ , the document proposed the ‘ establishment of formation centres for these teachers’  (n. 97). Beyond the involvement of ecclesiastical universities, there was very little detail on the content of what these formation centres would deliver and no specific reference to leadership. The next document, Educating Together in Catholic Schools  (2007 ) focused on the co-operation between lay and consecrated persons in Catholic schools and provided a new perspective on the nature of the formation required:

Catholic educators need a ‘formation of the heart’: they need to be led to that encounter with God in Christ which awakens their love and opens their spirits to others, so that their educational commitment becomes a consequence deriving from their faith, a faith which becomes active through love. (cf. Gal 5:6)

This is a significant shift from the programmes in doctrine and social teaching outlined in the 1982 document. It is a tacit acknowledgement that the formation resources provided by the life of the Church are not alone sufficient for the spiritual formation of the Catholic educator, whose motivational energy must come from his or her personal faith and encounter with God in Christ. Again, there is no subsequent detail about what such a formation programme might involve. The only practical suggestion is that consecrated persons should be ‘ invited to share the fruits of their formation with the laity’ . In the context of England and Wales, with such a limited presence of religious orders in Catholic school, this is not a particularly helpful suggestion. Again the focus is on Catholic educators, with no concerns expressed about the need for formation programmes specifically for leaders.

The 2012 Synod of Bishops turned its attention to the issue of adult formation in education. Franchi (2014 ) reported that the Synod ‘ re-affirmed the need for teachers to receive ‘ on-going formation in carrying out their responsibilities’  (Franchi 2014 , 103). He provides some practical suggestions, with an emphasis very much on ‘ study’  and accreditation, as proposed in Lay Catholic in Schools , with a focus on ‘ the search for wisdom and understanding’  but still without any specific reference to the formation of leaders. Perhaps the first explicit reference to the formation of Catholic school leaders comes in the instrumentum laboris , Educating Today and Tomorrow: A Renewing Passion  (2014 ). That document outlines the challenges to Catholic schools, including ‘rampant individualism’  and a ‘ merely functional view of education’ . The importance of the role of lay Catholics or ‘ teachers who are believers’  is considered to be the key to preserving the Catholic school as a community ‘ animated by the Holy Spirit’ . But now, for the first time, the role of headteachers in that process is acknowledged, since ‘ school heads must be leaders who make sure that education is a shared and living mission, who support and organise teachers’  (III, 1b). The responsibility for the formation of Catholic teachers is seen less now with the religious orders and more with the (lay) headteachers. In order for headteachers to be able to fulfil this role, ‘ particular attention must be devoted to the formation and selection of school heads’  (III, 1b). The document does not go into any further details of the nature of International Studies in Catholic Education  83 this formation, which leaves the model proposed in Lay Catholics in Schools  as the dominant paradigm for approaches to formation, along with the tantalising vision for personal formation offered in Educating Together in Catholic Schools.

Pope Francis (2014 ) in his address to the plenary session of the Congregation for Catholic Education does give specific advice on the nature of the formation of teachers and leaders. He acknowledges the need for professional development, as the Church has done since Vatican II, stating that ‘ it is a beautiful thing to offer courses on the subject, but it is also necessary to offer spiritual exercises and retreats focused on prayer’  (quoted in Franchi 2014 , 177). This implies that the ‘ life of the Church’  is not enough to sustain Catholic teachers and leaders and points more to the ‘ formation of the heart’  model.1  The leaders of Catholic schools and others in reserved posts2  should be practising Catholics, but the emerging concern is that the type of practice associated with the Catholic culture of the past may no longer be enough to sustain them. Stock (2012 ) provides a comprehensive definition of a practising Catholic, partly as a response to the increasing complexity of life situations of teachers and headteachers. A practising Catholic is one who strives ‘ to model in their lives the values of the Gospel and to adhere, in the substantive life choices that they make, to the teaching of the Catholic Church’  (Stock 2012 , 27). The document defines the role of a Catholic headteacher as an ‘ ecclesial ministry’  at the service of the bishop’ s mission ‘ to govern, teach and sanctify’ . However, there is no reference in the document to the formation of Catholic headteachers for this demanding ecclesial role. Throughout the sequence of documents from the Congregation for Catholic Education from1977 onwards, the importance of formation for Catholic educators and latterly headteachers has received fitful attention, with little detail on the content or pedagogy of such formation programmes.

The Bishops of England and Wales (2017 ) have now responded to this growing need. At their Spring Plenary, they issued the following statement:

Catholic school leaders and governors play a central role in the spiritual and academic life of their schools. The formation of Catholic school leaders and the exercise of good governance are strategic priorities for Catholic education. We ask the Catholic Education Service to develop strategies for leadership and governance that will provide Diocesan Schools’ Commissions with innovative options for responding to this challenge. (statement sent by email to author from CESEW)

 The implication of this statement is that the bishops consider that the current state of the formation of Catholic school leaders is not fi t for the challenges of the current time. Although it is not acknowledged as such, it could be read as agreement with Grace’s thesis that the renewal of the spiritual capital of our leaders is a priority. What will come of this has yet to be seen. There is an opportunity to examine the model of formation set out in Lay Catholics in Schools  and hinted at in Educating Together in Catholic Schools  and determine, in consultation with school leaders, whether or not it answers the needs of their spiritual and religious formation. In the meantime, lay Catholic leaders have been getting on with developing resources for the renewal of spiritual capital at a national level.

The Nottingham group colloquium

In 2010, a number of Catholic educators, including serving headteachers, academics, representatives of educational charities and diocesan school commissioners, were invited to Archbishop’ s House in Nottingham for a colloquium on the issue of the spiritual formation of Catholic headteachers. The invitation was issued by a small group of Catholic headteachers who had been advocating for a number of years for more attention to be paid to the formation of school leaders. The perception had been growing among serving heads that the spiritual resources upon which the current generation of leaders drew were depreciating, very much what Grace concluded in his research. There was a need for a more systematic and co-ordinated approach to spiritual formation. The serving heads at the gathering, of whom I was one, made it clear that the need was not for improved ‘ religious literacy’  or more knowledge of Church teaching, as suggested by Lay Catholics in Schools,  but rather the ‘ formation of the heart’  as stated in the 2007 document. The need was for more spiritual resources to support Catholic headteachers in the ministry of leadership, to help them grow in holiness. Richardson (2014 ) in his research into the theological dispositions of Catholic headteachers concluded that their dominant disposition was ‘relational’, very much in line with Grace’ s (2010 ) expanded definition of spiritual capital. They have a relationship with God and other people. One of the main traits associated with this disposition was ‘ less concern with being faithful to a set of beliefs and more concern with living faithfully in the light of the teaching of Jesus Christ under the guidance of the Church’  (Richardson 2014 , 69). This was certainly my experience during fourteen years of Catholic headship. The many headteachers I encountered were by no means expert in the complex range of Church teaching but they were in a conscious relationship with God in Jesus Christ and it was this relationship which sustained them in the sometimes challenging interactions in schools. They were not necessarily looking for more theology, but support and guidance on how to deepen their relationship with Jesus Christ, the source of their life and educational ministry.

A number of work streams came out of the first meeting of the ‘ Nottingham group’ and were developed in subsequent meetings. Some of the work streams faded on the vine, but the one which thrived was on formation for mission. The outcome of that work stream was the first National Retreat for Catholic Headteachers (hereafter NR) which took place at The Hayes Conference Centre in Derbyshire in June 2011. Every year since, the numbers signing up for the retreat have grown to the point where it is now over-subscribed. However, the evaluations from the retreats, while overwhelmingly positive, suggested that there was a need for more than an annual event. Although the annual retreat was regarded as a personal spiritual resource – with outstanding speakers, services of reconciliation, opportunities for personal confession and adoration of the blessed sacrament –  it was not seen as the developmental  resource which was required. EducareM, the Catholic educational charity which took the lead in the organisation of the retreat, worked in conjunction with the Society of Jesus to form spiritual guides for serving Catholic headteachers. This new resource was offered to delegates at the National Retreat. The National School of Formation (hereafter NSF) was then created to offer a year-long programme of spiritual development to enrich the formation of headteachers and deepen their understanding of themselves as faith leaders or ecclesial ministers of the Gospel.

Small-scale research study: a report

The intention of my small-scale research study was to understand in more depth the influence and impact of the National Retreat and the National School of Formation International Studies in Catholic Education  85

on delegates and to determine the value of the initiatives. Were the delegates ‘ running on empty’  in terms of spiritual capital, or were these opportunities simply to ‘ top up’  a healthy reserve. Were these programmes, in other words, something of a luxury, or a replication of the programmes, such as they were, which existed in piecemeal fashion across the country? Fincham (2010 ) acknowledges the increase in research in Catholic education in the last 30 years, but states that, Grace (2002 ), Fincham (2010 ), Wilkin (2014 ) and Richardson (2014 ) notwithstanding, ‘ There have been few studies… from the perspective of leaders in Catholic schools’  (Fincham 2010, 65). It is therefore important to continue to build the evidence base from this perspective, especially as the Catholic educational community in England and Wales, for the first time at an official national level, addresses the formation of lay leadership in education. To determine the models of formation which are most effective it is vital to consult with the headteachers and to evaluate the impact of those programmes of formation, such as the NSF, which are already operational.

With that in mind, between March and June 2017, I organised interviews with 20 serving Catholic headteachers who were delegates on the NR or NSF, or both (17 were delegates on both). The interviews were conducted by email, with respondents providing written answers to 12 questions, ranging from their own Catholic background and influences, to their biggest challenges in headship, their understanding of spiritual formation and the influence on them of the NR and/or NSF. A full list of the questions can be found in Appendix 1. Since I was also a delegate at the NR and the first cohort of the NSF, I was able to brief the participants on the email interview in informal conversations, stressing the need to be as detailed and spontaneous as possible, discouraging any ‘ reading up’  to help answer the questions. The next stage in the research process will be detailed telephone interviews with 10 of the NSF participants, including 7 who are taking part in an immersion visit to the Philippines in October 2017, to evaluate the ongoing impact of the programmes on their headship.

Of the 20 participants, 8 were males and 12 females; 11 were primary heads and 9 secondary heads. There was also, for the first time in research conducted in England, representatives from Catholic independent schools, with 4 heads from independent schools and 16 from state-funded schools (maintained and academies). The average age of the participants was 52 and the average length of service in headship was 8.5 years. In following ethical guidelines, each participant was told that their responses would be treated with the strictest confidentiality (the names of their schools have been changed). They were assured that no information which could identify them would be disclosed. The list of participants in the NR and NSF is not in the public domain. The survey was designed for qualitative analysis and a process of discourse analysis, or constant comparative method4  was employed to identify what Grace (2002 , 120) refers to as ‘ central meanings and discourse categories’  which are ‘ those aspects of their discourse to which they devoted most time and to which they returned as a point of reference’ . Notwithstanding that the interviews were conducted by email, it was still possible to apply Grace’ s methodology, since the participants spent longer on some questions than others and developed in their own responses major discourse categories. Four were identified from this process as follows.

Formation in a Catholic culture

The heads spent considerable time developing responses on the extent to which their upbringing had shaped their spiritual life, the sense of vocation and their personal understanding of the Catholic educational mission.When Grace (2010 ) asked a larger sample of sixty Catholic headteachers similar questions between 1997 and 2000, he found that many ‘ had come from family backgrounds of prayer and regular attendance at Mass’  and had ‘ a strong sense of vocation’ . Reflecting on their personal construct of the Catholic educational mission, over half of Grace’ s sample referred to faith leadership and the centrality of the spiritual aspect of the life of the school. Twenty years on, my smaller sample revealed that Catholic headteachers were still drawing on reserves of spiritual capital derived from a Catholic upbringing. All twenty participants were cradle Catholics who had a positive experience of initial formation in the 1970s and 1980s. There were many comments about the all pervasiveness of Catholic culture, or as one headteacher said, ‘ I assumed the whole world was Catholic’ (St. Oswald’ s).

Jamison (2013 , 226) refers to this period in the history of Catholicism as a ‘ total Catholic culture’ . He observes the decline of this culture from the 1960s and its ‘ disappearance in most places by the end of the 1980s’ . This would place my sample in the same cultural world as Grace’ s, but what is noteworthy is that in the younger generation there is a more prominent discourse of local and global social actions. Grace (2002 , 121– 123) identified five main patterns of discourse5  from his interviews, but social action was not among them. One pattern of discourse was the option for the poor, but this was ‘ realised in a distinct sense of solidarity with poor communities’  and did not use the language of Catholic social teaching. This new focus from my participants could be a reflection of what Richardson (2014 ) calls a ‘ mission’  perspective, initiated by the Second Vatican Council, working its way through to a wider consciousness in the Catholic Church. Gaudium et Spes  (1965 ) re-oriented the Church towards the world and its needs. It described the Christian message not as discouraging the faithful from ‘ building the world, or as leading them to neglect the wellbeing of their fellows, but as strictly obliging them to this as their duty’  (1965 , 34). This duty found its way into the Catholic culture of the 1970s and 80s, when ‘ social justice was discussed over supper every night’  (St. Matthew’ s) and the Church was described as ‘ a place of friendship and social action’  (St. Faith’ s).

A spiritual formation at this particular phase in the life of the Church is reflected in the headteachers’  constructs of Catholic educational mission. In general terms, all but one could be said to belong to the type of theological disposition known as ‘ pluralist’  (Richardson 2014 ). They emphasise the immanence of God in nature and the life experience of human beings and dialogue with those outside the tradition. Their faith has a strong emphasis on praxis, rather than theory. There was little reference to Church documents on education but a clear sense of mission arising from their own spiritual formation. They saw themselves as ‘ the face of Christ to others’ (St. Andrew’ s) with a central focus on ‘ Jesus Christ, relationships and encountering God in all created things’  (St. Andrew’ s). Their task was to ‘ bring every child and every person closer to Christ’  (St. Hugh’ s). A mediated discourse of social action and transformation from the Second Vatican Council was much in evidence. One head said of his pupils that ‘ as they are transformed they are able to go on to transform the world for the better’  (St. Gerard’ s). The purpose of Catholic education said another was to produce ‘ good citizens who would make the world more peaceful’  (St. Ignatius’ ). The intention to form good citizens has been an aspiration of Catholic education since Spectata Fides, the papal encyclical on Catholic education sent by Leo XII to the Bishops of England in 1892. However, it is only since Vatican II that the discourse of social action as a definition of the good citizen has become widespread, marking something of a transition, as Richardson (2014 ) notes, from Catholic education as ‘ communion’  to ‘ mission’ .

Sustaining resources in the face of challenges

Gleeson (2015 ) has identified the source of many of the challenges currently faced in Catholic education as ‘the hegemony of scientific-technical reason and market driven neo-liberal values, a hegemony that militates against gospel values’  (Gleeson 2015 ,145). The participants were acutely aware that this hegemony reduced education to a measurable commodity which was designed to serve the economy; as one said, ‘ The challenge for all Catholic schools is to maintain the integrity of their mission within a system that seems to privilege certain aspects of learning and a narrow way of measuring success’  (St. Leo’ s). The list of other challenges facing Catholic headteachers included finance and budget pressures, personnel issues, time constraints, recruitment of staff, Catholicity (or not) of staff, the pace of communication, curriculum changes, accountability measures, the inspection regimes,  tension between the expectations of government and Church, lack of support or obstruction from clergy or governors (although just as many commented favourably on support from both). A strong theme was the growing secularisation of society and the decline of faith among families, or as one participant commented, ‘ The chasm between individuals and the Church appears to be growing wider’  (St. Elizabeth’ s). The effects of secularisation were felt keenly in the independent sector –  which has a much lower percentage of Catholic pupils and staff –  with one headmaster commenting that one of his biggest challenges was ‘ the sense that the Christian message is being resisted when proposed to our students. Also, it is very hard to recruit Catholic staff who can help in really living out the school’ s ethos’  (St. James’ ). Another head of an independent school echoed this when he described his biggest challenge as ‘ Staffing and having a shared and solid foundation of faith within the staffroom’  (St. Kentigern’ s).

At the other end of the socioeconomic scale, some headteachers working in deprived areas commented on the challenges of some in their own school community feeling beyond the reach of the Church, as one said:

I have families who seek a relationship with God yet cannot jump through the hoops the parish priest hangs out for them, yet he states that he is following the rules and canon law properly. I serve a challenging area with 65% pupil premium.8 Most children have one parent or a family setting with a ‘current father’ who is not their biological father. These arrangements place them immediately outside the church. They do not feel welcomed at the church so it is virtually empty. (St. Peter’s)

The experience of the independent heads reflected on the challenges of other types of poverty, such as spiritual and emotional deprivation, with one commenting that she saw ‘ people crippled by anxiety who live in great affluence and we need to be bold about Catholic beliefs in the transcendent as well as being a strong advocate for social justice’  (St. Matthew’ s).

The resources the headteachers called upon to sustain them in the face of these challenges were to a large extent relational. The supportive presence of family, religious and professional networks played a key role. Just as many who said that their diocese or parish priest was a problem said that they were a source of support. All of the headteachers drew upon their personal faith as a sustaining resource, with many referring to prayer and the sacraments, although more referred to prayer than  the sacraments, with one saying, ‘ even in my darkest 3 o’ clock in the morning moments, I know I am not alone. I pray for guidance, I know that the difficult challenges will pass’  (St. Elizabeth’ s). Only a minority of the heads made reference to doctrinal instruction or Church documents on education as a sustaining resource. This suggests that the model of formation outlined in Lay Catholics in Schools  is not the most appropriate model to meet the needs of this generation of Catholic leaders. As has been noted above, they are sustained by the resources of spiritual capital they had developed over a lifetime in Catholic communities. What became clear, however, is that while the relational and personal spiritual resources of the heads supported them in their roles, they did not always deepen them or help them to grow as adult Christians, Catholic headteachers and ministers of the Gospel. There was also a strong sense that the challenges outlined above and the concomitant ‘ theft of time’  involved in headship could quickly undermine the spiritual life. They all commented favourably on the NR and NSF as a new spiritual resource in their personal and professional lives. This may not be entirely surprising since all of the participants in the study had chosen to invest (their) time and (their school’ s) money in attending these events. What became clear from the responses was that these programmes have opened new horizons and deepened the possibilities for exercising the ministry of headship.

Recent experience of formation: responses of headteachers to the National Retreat for Catholic Headteachers and the National School of Formation UK

One headteacher summed up the need for NR and NSF programmes over and above her current spiritual resources: ‘ The biggest influence it has had on me is that it has allowed me to re-assess and re-align my spiritual and faith commitments, which while weekly Mass attendance does offer some support, is not enough sustenance’ (St. Chad’ s).  There was a strong sense of spiritual sustenance or a ‘ topping up’  of the kind of spiritual capital which we have referred to as the fruits of a Catholic culture, so there was a discourse of refreshment and renewal, of ‘ unstrapping some of the external pressures of my leadership’  (St. Thomas’ ), with another describing the NR as ‘ an oasis in a very busy year’  (St. James’ ). One headteacher appreciated the ‘ time out from the busyness of school with the opportunity to be still, reflect and pray’  (St. Ignatius’ ). The sense of personal renewal among delegates at the NS was strong with one headteacher saying, ‘ The biggest impact was my desire to take up the opportunity for reconciliation at the event –  something I had not done for some time’  (St. Ignatius’ ). There was a discourse of re-focusing on the key elements of the role of Catholic headship and gaining a ‘ clearer view of what is happening locally and nationally’  (St. Dominic’ s).

What is striking about the comments from headteachers who took part in the NSF is that the impact has been at times dramatic on their spiritual formation and the impact has also extended to their school communities. The biggest impact has been from those elements of the programme which are experiential, or immersive, in other words do not follow the content for formation programmes suggested by Lay Catholics in Schools  (1982). The pedagogy  of Lay Catholics in Schools , on the other hand, has been the inspiration for the NSF. In that document the teacher was described as more than one who ‘ systematically transmits a body of knowledge’. The pedagogy most suitable for Catholic schools was one which ‘ gives special emphasis to direct and personal contact with students’  to encourage ‘ openness and dialogue’ in order to facilitate ‘ an understanding of the witness to faith revealed through the behaviour of the teacher’ . The document stressed the importance of the personal holiness of pupils and staff leading to a ‘ social commitment which will enable them to work for the improvement of social structures’  to make them more conformed to the Gospel’. Pupils in Catholic schools were ‘ called to be positive agents of change in a society that is undergoing continuous transformation’  (n. 30).

This was the experiential or relational pedagogy adopted by the NSF. The purpose was not systematic instruction in doctrine, ethics or philosophy, guaranteed by accreditation (the NSF has no higher education accreditation). The purpose was to encounter the witness of faith in those who serve the Church on the margins of society as well as hearing from experienced and compelling advocates for social justice. The input of scripture scholars across three residentials provided the basis for mission, while the input from Catholic social activists provided models for the application of Catholic social teaching, but perhaps the most transformative element of the programme were the visits to projects in the UK which are working with the marginalised. One headteacher commented that, ‘ the visit to the refugees was an incredibly moving and transformational experience which has already borne fruit in our school’ (St. Andrew’ s). The impact on the wider school community was a common element of their discourse:

After a course you usually come back to school positive, but that may leave you after 5 minutes in reality. However, after the NSF I am buzzing with ideas which I can implement straight away and which have a profound impact on the school community. (St. Faith’s)

One headteacher spoke of the ‘ profound impact’  of her visit to the Lalley Centre for destitute people in Salford. She subsequently re-designed her CPD programme to allow her staff to visit the centre: ‘ I have since sent every member of my school staff including office and site manager. The CPD feedback forms from this experience are remarkable’  (St. Peter’ s). The discourse of transformation was a feature of some of the headteachers and an acknowledgement that their usual sustaining resources did not lead them into this discourse. One headteacher re-framed his understanding of the mission of his school as follows: ‘ To enable children and staff to know who Jesus is by experiencing the whole curriculum as a pilgrimage. As they are transformed, they are able to go on to transform the world, in many small ways, for the better, with our mission for the marginalised’  (St. Gerard’ s). It is no exaggeration to say that the impact of the programme on the delegates was transformational. As one headteacher said, ‘ Real education is not possible without the light of truth – the National School of Formation has switched the light back on’  (St. Chad’ s). Stuart-Buttle (2017 ) refers to Sullivan’ s (McKinney and Sullivan 2013 ) formulation that ‘ active and reflective participation by learners is required if real ownership and appropriation of knowledge, skills and understanding is to occur’  (Stuart-Buttle 2017 , 92). It is the experiential dimension of the NSF which has had the most profound impact on the participants.

A new type of accompaniment: spiritual guidance for headteachers

A key feature of the NR and the NSF is the parallel development of the Emmaus Programme, an opportunity for participant headteachers to benefit from the support of a spiritual guide. There is a long tradition of spiritual accompaniment in the Church, arguably modelled by the risen Christ on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24), but in recent times this has been the preserve of the clergy, pre- and post-ordination. When I was 14 years old attending junior seminary in the north-east of Scotland, I had a spiritual director. In my 14 years in Catholic headship I had no such offer of support until the advent of the National Retreat towards the end of my time in headship. Pope Francis, in his first encyclical, Evanangelii Gaudium , declares that ‘ the Church will have to initiate everyone –  priests, religious and laity –  into this “ art of accompaniment”  which teaches us to remove our sandals before the sacred ground of the other’  (2013 , 169). He goes on to say that ‘ spiritual accompaniment must lead others ever closer to God’  (2013 , 170) and is not to be confused with ‘ a sort of therapy supporting… self-absorption’  (2013 , 170). In this, he is very close to the definition of Christian spiritual accompaniment used by the Jesuit Institute, as ‘ help given by one believer to another that enables the latter to pay attention to God’s personal communication to him or her’  (Barry and Connolly 2009 , 8). This attention to universal accompaniment in the Church (which begs the question of the Church’ s capacity to answer the need) can be seen as another fruit of The Second Vatican Council’ s focus on the role of the laity in the Church.

Spiritual accompaniment is not catechesis or the development of what Weeks and Grace (Grace 2010 ) called, ‘ theological literacy’ , which they define as ‘a command of theological knowledge’  (Grace 2010 , 120). It is growing in an understanding of God’ s communication in one’ s life, growing by encounter. Of the 20 headteachers who took part in the study, 8 had availed themselves of a spiritual guide.While they did not have a consistent language to define the process, they were very clear about the importance of a guide: ‘ I find it hard to imagine any head in one of our schools being able to successfully function without one’  (St. Leo’ s). There was a sense of self-discovery from some of the heads, including one who realised in the course of her sessions that she was a contemplative. There was a strong sense of deficit in formation being made good, or as one head expressed it, ‘ I hadn’t even thought about my own spiritual formation until these sessions began’  (St. Ninian’ s). This sense of what had never been articulated coming to the fore implies a Catholic culture almost totally lacking in ongoing adult formation. Another head described how she had ‘ never previously verbalised or described my spiritual journey before’  (St. Peter’ s). This liberating expression of inner spirituality and maturation of a relationship with God helped many of the heads to grow as adult Christians, with ‘ so much to share and “ empty out”  for discernment’  (St. Andrew’ s).

Not all the headteachers were entirely comfortable with this option, as the numbers taking up the opportunity implies. There was a sense of nervousness and fear among some heads, with one describing a feeling of ‘ not being up to scratch, of being inadequate’  (St. Elizabeth’ s). For another, there was real concern that the problems she had had with her parish priest would somehow cloud the process of accompaniment since ‘ the Catholic world is a small place’  (St. Oswald’ s). These reactions are perhaps not surprising in the early stages of lay spiritual accompaniment. The practice is far from widespread and with the decline of sacramental confession there are no paradigms for open sharing of personal spiritual matters in the Church. Aside from those concerns, the experience of spiritual accompaniment was seen by all the participants as a significant deepening of their spiritual lives. In total, since the programme was launched in 2012, 110 headteachers have been allocated a spiritual guide.9  As such, the programme is a signifi cant contribution to the renewal of spiritual capital among Catholic headteachers.

Conclusion: an expanded definition of spiritual capital

In conclusion, I would argue that the National Retreat and especially the National School of Formation have provided a new type of formation programme which has had a significantly positive impact on the personal faith and professional practice of Catholic headteachers who have taken part. Grace’ s (2010 ) exhortation ‘ to all relevant agencies in Catholic faith and culture to provide the formation programmes which are necessary’  (Grace 2010 , 125) has begun to be answered. What is telling and no doubt a sign of the times is that the initiative for these programmes did not come from any ‘ official’  agency of the Church but lay Catholic educators, emboldened and inspired by the vision of Vatican II. The definition of spiritual capital provided by Grace (2010 ) may need to be expanded further beyond the terms of ‘ vocational empowerment’ ‘ conscious relationship to God’  and ‘ witness’  to embrace the language of personal and social transformation first used at Vatican II, spelled out with missionary force in Lay Catholics in Schools  and adopted with enthusiasm by the participants in the study.  This new generation of Catholic headteachers, inspired by a new type of formation programme, see themselves as ministers of the Gospel providing an education for young people which encourages them to be ‘agents of change’  and to use the qualities and skills they develop in a rich curriculum in Catholic schools for the transformational service of the world, especially of the marginalised and poor.

What will need attention is the level of commentary provided by the NSF to articulate its approach. The focus was very much on getting the programme started and while there was an understanding of the pedagogical approach and intended impact among the organisers, this was not set out in any detail with suitable references to key Church documents. Some consideration should also be given to the decision not to feature any systematic engagement with Church documents on education or doctrine. While this approach seems to suit the theological disposition of the participants, the question needs to be asked if this approach will result in a depletion of a full and informed understanding of the Church’ s mission in education. If this approach to the formation of Catholic leaders at the national level becomes established as the dominant model, then it should be open to evaluative scrutiny and ongoing evaluation of the impact on the participants. One evident risk in the ‘ formation of the heart’ model is that a generation of Catholic leaders could emerge who are inspired and motivated by deep personal faith but have significant lacunae in their understanding of Catholic doctrine and the Church’ s mission in education. The most recent full teaching document from the Congregation for Catholic Education, Educating to Intercultural Dialogue in Catholic Schools  (2013 ) states that Catholic leaders in schools ‘must serve in coherence with the faith they profess’ . What that means in practice will go a long way to determining the approach to formation programmes in the future.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. The ‘formation of the heart’ model of spiritual formation for teachers has only been suggested in outline in the 1988 document, The Religious Dimension of Education in a Catholic School. There has been no subsequent detail from the Congregation for Catholic Education about the contents of such a programme.

2. Marcus Stock, in Christ at the Centre, states that

the Catholic Bishops of England andWales have collectively mandated that in Catholic schools certain key posts carry a requirement that they are held by ‘practising Catholics’. These are the posts of Headteacher or Principal, Deputy Headteacher or Vice-Principal, and Head or Co-ordinator or Religious Education. Additionally, there are other key leadership posts which directly affect the Catholic mission of a school. These too may be required to be filled by ‘practising Catholics’ with the requisite professional skills.

3. The pedagogy of the National School of Formation is derived from the 1982 document from the Congregation for Catholic Education, Lay Catholic in Schools: Witnesses to the Faith. There is tension within this document between the pedagogy it proposes for Catholic schools and the content of formation programmes it proposes for Catholic educators. The proposed pedagogy for pupils emphasises personal contact, openness to dialogue, and above all the witness to the faith seen in the teacher. The proposed content of formation programmes for teachers, on the other hand, emphasises the transmission of knowledge, which the document says is not the main purpose of Catholic education. The National School of Formation took its inspiration from the pedagogy of Lay Catholics in Education, which in turn drew its inspiration from Vatican II, especially the documents on the laity in the modern world. Hence, the programme featured a non-systematic exposure to scripture scholars and Catholic thinkers and social activists. A key feature of the programme was the opportunity for ‘immersion visits’ to projects of transformation on the margins of society. Visits included Fatima House in Birmingham, a residential centre for destitute female asylum seekers; the Lalley Centre in Birmingham, a day centre for destitute people; and the Corrymeela Centre in Northern Ireland, a residential centre dedicated to peace and reconciliation since the mid-1960s. Delegates from the NSF visited these places and encountered the witness and praxis of the staff and volunteers as well as the exposed needs of the marginalised who came for help. This had a much deeper impact on the delegates than textual study. In October 2017, a group of eight delegates from the NSF will visit Manila in the Philippines and see at first hand projects of transformation in a developing country.

4. The reading and rereading of written survey responses ‘to allow themes to emerge from the material, rather than rigidly imposing a structure on them from the outset’ (Stuart-Buttle 2017, 175).

5. The five patterns of discourse identified by Grace (2002) were: a discourse of the sacred and of faith leadership; a discourse of morality; a discourse of the option for the poor; a discourse of school effectiveness; a discourse of management and markets.

6. State schools in England are inspected by Ofsted, the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills. Ofsted is a non-ministerial department of government. Independent schools are mostly inspected by The Independent Schools Inspectorate or ISI, a body approved for the purposes of inspection under the Education Act 2002. Both state and independent Catholic schools are subject to canonical inspections by the diocese, sometimes referred to as Section 48 inspections, after the relevant section of the Education Act 2005.

7. According to the Digest of 2016 Census Data for Schools and Colleges in England published by the Catholic Education Service, 68.2% of pupils in maintained schools and colleges in England were Catholic, compared to 36.1% in the independent sector; and 62.3% and 41.9% of teachers in primary and secondary schools respectively were Catholic, compared to 35.4% in independent schools.

8. The pupil premium is additional funding for publicly funded schools in England to raise the attainment of disadvantaged pupils of all abilities and to close the gaps between them and their peers.

9. Adverts were placed in the Catholic press in the UK for the spiritual guides. There was then a selection process supervised by the Society of Jesus and EducareM, the Catholic educational charity. Those who were chosen were trained by the Society of Jesus at St. Beuno’s College in Wales. As well as this new cohort of spiritual guides, experienced spiritual guides were also used.

Notes on contributor

Raymond Friel is the General Secretary of the Catholic Independent Schools’ Conference based in the UK. He was a headteacher in Catholic state secondary schools in England from 2002 to 2016. He is the author of a number of books on Catholic leadership and spirituality, including The Revolution of Tenderness: Being a Catholic in Today’s Church (Redemptorist Publications, 2016).

References

Barry, W., and W. Connolly. 2009. The Practice of Spiritual Direction. New York: Harper One.

Catholic Bishops of England and Wales. 2017. Statement from Spring Plenary.

Congregation for Catholic Education. 1982. Lay Catholics in Schools: Witnesses to Faith.

Congregation for Catholic Education. 1988. The Religious Dimension of Education in a Catholic School: A Shared Mission between Consecrated Persons and the Lay faithful.

Congregation for Catholic Education. 2007. Educating Together in Catholic Schools.

Congregation for Catholic Education. 2013. Educating in Intercultural Dialogue in Catholic

Schools: Living in Harmony for a Civilization of Love.

Congregation for Catholic Education. 2014. Educating Today and Tomorrow: A Renewing Passion.

Fincham, D. 2010. “Headteachers in Catholic Schools: Challenges of Leadership.” International Studies in Catholic Education 2 (1): 64–79.

Franchi, L. 2014. Reclaiming the Piazza. Leominster: Gracewing.

Gleeson, J. 2015. “Critical Challenges and Dilemmas for Catholic Education Leadership Internationally.” International Studies in Catholic Education 7 (2): 145–161.

Grace, G. 2002. Catholic Schools: Mission, Markets and Morality. Abingdon: Routledge.

Grace, G. 2010. “Renewing Spiritual Capital: An Urgent Priority for the Future of Catholic Education Internationally.” International Studies in Catholic Education 2 (2): 117–128.

Hanvey, J. 2009. Visions for Leadership. London: Heythrop Institute for Religion, Ethics & Public Life.

Jamison, C., ed. 2013. The Disciples’ Call. London: Bloomsbury.

Lydon, J. 2009. “Transmission of the Charism: A Major Challenge for Catholic Education.” International Studies in Catholic Education 1 (1): 42–48.

McKinney, S., and J. Sullivan. 2013. Education in a Catholic Perspective. Farnham: Ashgate.

Miller, M. 2006. The Holy See’s Teaching on Catholic Schools. Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press.

Pope Francis. 2013. Evangelii Gaudium (The Joy of the Gospel). London: Catholic Truth Society.

Pope Francis. Accessed August 10, 2017. https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/ 2014/february/documents/papa-francesco_20140213_congregazione-educazione-cattolica.html.

Richardson, C. 2014. “The Theological Disposition of Lay Catholic Headteachers.” International Studies in Catholic Education 6 (1): 60–74.

Second Vatican Council. 1965. Guadium et Spes.

Stock, M. 2012. Christ at the Centre. London: Catholic Truth Society.

Stuart-Buttle, R. 2017. “Vatican II and Catholic Education.” In Vatican II and New Thinking about Catholic Education, edited by S. Whittle, 92. London: Routledge.

Wilkin, R. 2014. ““Interpreting the Tradition”: A Research Report.” International Studies in Catholic Education 6 (2): 164–177.

Appendix 1

Questions for participants

1. Can you please describe the influences in your background and upbringing which helped to shape your spiritual life (e.g. family, schooling, religious orders….)?

2. Can you describe some of the key milestones in your journey towards leadership in Catholic education?

3. To what extent would you describe your current position in Catholic education as a vocation?

4. What is your personal understanding of the Catholic educational mission (as opposed to any ‘official’ understanding which you may find in Church documents)?

5. How would you describe the balance in your current role between being a professional and being a witness to Christ?

6. What are the biggest challenges you face in your current role?

7. What would you describe as the ‘sustaining resources’ in your current role in Catholic educational leadership?

8. What is your understanding of spiritual formation and how would you describe your spiritual formation at this time?

9. To what extent has your spiritual formation influenced your leadership style?

10. What has been your experience of formation programmes to date?

11. What influence has the National Retreat/National School of Formation had on you?

12. Have you received the support of a spiritual director? If yes, how has this helped your spiritual formation? If not, how do you think such support might help you?

Any additional comments regarding spiritual formation of Catholic leaders in education.

Appendix 2

Spiritual Capital Research Project Participants

• M/F

• Age

• Headship (years)

• School code

• State/independent Phase

• NR and/or NSF

1 F 51 10 St. Andrew’s State Primary NS/NSF

2 F 51 12 St. Bernard’s State Secondary NS/NSF

3 F 62 11 St. Chad’s State Secondary NS/NSF

4 M 58 20 St. Dominic’s State Primary NS/NSF

5 F 51 9 St. Elizabeth’s State Primary NS/NSF

6 F 43 2 St. Faith’s State Secondary NS/NSF

7 M 46 11 St. Gerard’s State Primary NS/NSF

8 M 61 20 St. Hugh’s State Primary NS/NSF

9 M 52 6 St. Ignatius’ State Secondary NS/NSF

10 M 54 5 St. James’ Independent Secondary Retreat Only

11 M 46 3 St. Kentigern’s Independent Secondary NS/NSF

12 F 54 10 St. Leo’s State Primary NS/NSF

13 F 48 5 St. Matthew’s Independent Secondary Retreat Only

14 F 62 14 St. Ninian’s State Primary NS/NSF

15 F 43 8 St. Oswald’s State Primary NS/NSF

16 F 46 3 St. Peter’s State Primary NSNSF

17 F 60 12 Queenship of Mary’s State Primary NS/NSF

18 M 48 3 St. Rose’s Independent Secondary Retreat Only

19 F 52 19 St. Stephen’s State Primary NS/NSF

20 M 53 7 St. Thomas’ State Secondary NS/NSF