AUDIO
 |
Archbishop Peter Jensen's Christmas Message 2011 on the centrality of Jesus to human history
|
1. Theological education - meaning 'tertiary level academic theological study' - is under attack, from forces both within and without the church. It is seen by some as too expensive. Other see it as too impractical and too inflexible, in that theological education providers cannot give them the educational setting they would like in an area where online degrees and part-time study is proliferating. It is too academic and therefore too unspiritual in the eyes of some. And it is too slow for impatient young church planters or would-be church leaders who don't want to waste valuable gospelling years in the study.
2. Why do we need theological education?
a) for the spiritual health of churches, and the Christians in them. Knowledge and learning are not the whole of what it means to grow spiritually in the NT, but they are certainly major components of spiritual health and growth. Paul spends three years teaching the Ephesian elders, for example. Jesus gives the apostles 40 days - Peter's Acts 2 sermon didn't come out of nowhere!
b) for effectiveness in mission Once again, being well thought-through and informed is not the be-all and end-all of mission. But it sure helps! Paul is determined to 'take every thought captive' for the sake of the gospel of Christ (for example). And if we believe that the gospel applies across cultures and times then we commit ourselves to the difficult work of contextualization.
c) for the preparation of ministers for a life-long ministry Full-time ministry is a long haul in difficult conditions. People who are called into this task need as much deep-level preparation as they can get. Souls are at stake. Could we demand any less of them?
3. Who needs theological education?
The short answer: all Christians need to see themselves as learners and in the market for some theological education of whatever kind. And this means that church leaders - pastors, bible study group leaders, lay preachers - are in particular need of a more concentrated level of theological study. It is also the case that those who have particular opportunities to witness in their workplaces would benefit enormously from some higher level theological study - especially teachers and academics, but also many others too.
4. What to avoid in a theological education
a) an institution that majors on flexibility - if an institution is determined to give you what you want and to ask nothing of you, don't go there. Education in general has become a market, and students have become consumers. This has been a disastrous change in mentality - because true education actually asks us to become disciples and to submit to a process of learning from authoritative teachers.
b) an institution that makes sure you don't meet other students Online or distance education is what the market wants at the moment. But we need to keep reminding ourselves it is a poor third best.
c) an institution that doesn't have ministry in view as the goal of theological education - not just professional ministry of course, but the ministry that all Christians share in. Theological education exists to serve the church.
d) an institution that doesn't care or cares little about academic standards. If a college has fallen for the current fashion of ‘dumbing it down’, avoid it like the plague. Do not support it.
5. What to look for in a theological education
a) is the whole Scripture central and authoritative in the institution?
You can't claim to be studying the knowledge of God if you aren't taking the Scriptures with utmost seriousness, or if you are prizing other sources above holy Scripture.
b) is it theological?
I object to the term 'bible college' because the purpose of theological education is not to know the Bible better: it is to know God better. The word 'theology' indicates that study of the texts is the means and not the end. It also indicates that there will be a prayerful integration of the curriculum, and that the confessions and creeds of church history will have their place.
c) are the original languages emphasised?
Not every Christian or even every Christian leader needs to learn Greek and Hebrew to have an effective ministry, but I don't think theological study is really serious if it does not ask you to learn at least one of these languages. Given the choice, most people would NOT learn even Greek. Don't take the easy option - because serious study of the Scripture by someone who would teach God's people demands the harder path!
d) are Church History and Ethics and Philosophy a part of the course?
These subjects are all auxiliaries to the study of Theology in a way. But without them the theological task is scarcely complete.
e) is community life emphasised?
The nature of theological knowledge is that it is a shared knowledge - learning it on your own is counter to the kind of knowledge it is.
f) is there regular corporate worship and prayer?
Goes without saying.
g) are the practical ministry subjects taught in a theological way?
You aren't going into theological education to learn secular counselling methods, or bits of pop psychology.
h) is the theological curriculum calibrated for ministry and mission?
I would be asking why a theological curriculum does not address itself to the context in which those who are studying it are going to have to work. These days, it is simply not enough to say 'we teach the theology stuff, you work out how to put it into practice where you are'.
A clue is to ask current or recent students about their studies. If they say 'it was hard, but it was good' - then I think you have found a good place. If they say 'we had a ball' - I'd be worried. Proper theological education ought to be an uncomfortable exercise - it ought to stretch the student and challenge the student in ways that are sometimes unpleasant.
But having said that: there ought to be a joy in theological education. The knowledge of God ought to be joyful because it is the knowledge of God - the God of all mercies. There ought to be many, many glimpses of his glory in the experience of theological education!
Michael Jensen teaches doctrine at Sydney's Moore Theological College
May I add to Michaels' helpful post, let's be sure we continue to grow in our understanding of God and his world; let's keep working on the original languages, let's keep reading to extend ourselves, let's keep discussing theological truths with one another. It's easy to become lazy as the years roll by.
Finally, Michael, I notice that you never miss the opportunity to refer to 'corporate worship' so called. As you know, I disagree with you over this; but that is part of what makes for a good theological education- to be able to discuss and debate these issues in order that we might better understand what the Bible actually teaches.
Moore College, it was hard but it was good. Actually, the study itself wasn't as hard as everyone makes out. Before I went to College there was this kind of awe about its intellectual intensity. I worked in the hospitality industry, with no degree, and I got through ok. (So if you are thinking of Moore College but think you wont be up to it because of the scare stories, just go along anyway) The hardest part was probably being out of the workforce for four years.
All your points seem to focus on what an individual should be looking for in a theological education. Is there a place for thinking about what we should be looking for as a wider church? While not all of us are up to debating the finer points of theology, I sure am glad that there is a College in our diocese where people do.
@Michael, you ask a really great question. One of the pressures at the moment I think is between what lay people expect a theological education to provide (my sense is more hands-on skills, and more leadership training) and what it does actually provide (a robust education in Scripture and theology).
I don't think skills and leadership are bad things to study and indeed I think they are necessary to pastoral work. But is it the job of the theological college to provide these? Aren't these things best learnt in situ?
To declare my colours - I think that on-line methodology should be examined as it is a means to an end - and as all degrees are accredited under the AQF, certain minimum standards have to be met. But this is not formation!
So yes to aspects of community life (but not necessarily all living in) - a definate yes to corporate worship (what I call intentional worship) rather than a mere meeting. Thinking theologically is important.
Skills based compentency is also an important aspect of ministry - but that is not necessarily the main role of Moore, Ridley, St. Mark's et al. But in formation instilling an attitude for both theological hunger and ministry compentency is.
But again, in my view the biggest problem is the failure to make connections between the lecture room and practice. This is a complex issue, and deserves to be discussed at length.
@Kevin, some of us agree with you that thinking theologically is vitally important, but do not believe it is appropriate to use terms like 'corporate' or 'intentional worship' to describe the purpose of church. I do hope you were not implying only those who do use such terms believe that thinking theologically is important.
Now - how you achive that (the methods you use) is always open to both validation and evaluation. But as you indicate, no one is perfect, and resources are not unlimited. So you do the best you can with what you have got. And over the years, your college has done reasonably well in this respect.
But I'd like to hear from others.
I find myself in agreement with your criteria. I achieved my degree over a period of time, in three cities and at three theological insititutions. One was, IMHO, less than adequate, one was good and one excellent.
One concern that I have had is the cultural literacy of some theological students. Its one thing to learn the tradition, its another to connect it to culture and to understand the cultural context, or the dance between faith and culture. I think it is important to have some background in philosophy, anthropology, literature and cultural history.
I think it is also important for students to know the art how to relate to themselves - to recognise their own responses to texts and issues and to enquire what these responses say about themselves such that, through our texts, we become, not just 'knowers' but objects of knowing.
So if it's not studied at college, then where? Do we expect youth ministers to go to uni to study child development? A uni will not approach the topic from a theological point of view. Or is it more likely we just don't consider how development will shape our teaching and pastoring, playing it by ear and stumbling around in the dark?
I could name other youth ministry specific fields of knowledge which could be studied at college(and in my case are being studied, but I'm the only person doing currently doing the Youth Min strand), but that one jumps out at me.
Otherwise I agree with everything you've writen in the article, Michael.
For me, in my circumstances as a young mum hungry to learn more about God, to reflect on His word and plough through Church history, there were few options available that could fit in with the reality of being married, looking after small children, and keeping a home (in relative) order. Most of my theological studies were done by distance (as is my current Masters), taught by reputable teachers, and the courses certainly fulfill most of the criteria you have suggested.
I think it is brilliant that there are now
external and distance courses available to people like me who are unable for whatever reason to go on campus and live-in at college, because we still have ministry roles we need to be equipped for too.
Cheers,
Suz
I agree: it is wonderful that there are part-time, online and distance options. But it is hard to offer these without them becoing the norm.
The tertiary education sector has expanded rapidly over the last 50 years, with a much higher proportion of the Australian population acquiring university-level qualifications. But one of the consequences of this is that most people go to university not to learn how to learn, but to get a qualification that will improve their ability to get a job.
This cultural mindset will impact the way that the average pewsitter, and those seeking theological education, will view theological education. They will have the view that they (or the theological students they or their church are supporting financially) should learn stuff that the student will actually use when they graduate. So all the hours spent on Greek & Hebrew? What's the point of learning dead languages when we already have the Bible in English? Far better to use that time, they'd argue, studying something practical - like understanding financial reports, counselling or how to chair a meeting.
@Roger - this line of thinking concerns me. I think it is condescending to those from 'blue-collar' backgrounds to suggest that they a) aren't up to it and b) don't deserve the kind of ministry that is trained to the very highest level. We don't make that distinction in other professions. And, as it turns out, quite a number of people from blue collar backgrounds (so-called) have been to Moore (and other colleges too) and flourished.
That's another thing, too: an education can be delivered at a very high standard that still manages to work for people with little or no tertiary background. Very few people fail at Moore!
do you think that few people fail at Moore because the vetting process is more stringent in who they allow to study there? I would be curious as to the minimum requirements to attend there.
As to your comment in #15, I struggle to understand why there distance education at Bible Colleges isn't promoted to a greater degree. It is flexible and allows those that are working to learn at a higher level and maybe discern whether full time is a "calling".
Just thoughts
re distance learing: we of course have our Theological Certificate which thousands of people all over the world study by distance, and which has exactly the effect you name.
In part, I was deliberately taking an extreme position. I agree that Moore faculty members often go out of their way to provide support to struggling students.
However, the argument I mounted in #17 was partly based on the experience of a friend from a trade background who has struggled at Moore, and partly based on arguments I've heard from a couple of different people whom I respected at different times and with (to the best of my knowledge) no influence on each other. When that occurs, it raises the possibility that the argument might have some foundation, and I thought that this would be an appropriate place to air their concerns.
The Moore College External studies program is absolutely world class and provides the flexibility and introduction to theological study that many people use as part of the 'discernment' process that you mention.
http://external.moore.edu.au/Pages/Home.aspx
I completed 4 ThC subjects while working as engineer in the back blocks of the Philippines - that was significant for me in seriously thinking about studying full time (which I did). Now I'm teaching ThC subjects in Spanish to students in Latin America!
@michael j - is part of the issue college is wanting to include everyone, but at the same time losing some focus on what its main goal is? So it is a good thing MTC trains lots of independent students, but is that the main reason for having an anglican college in sydney?
At some points in life you need be clear what you are aiming at achieving and structure yourself to meet those goals?
One value (among many) in learning the original languages lies in the notion that we study not to be told the answers but to be given the tools so that we can find the answers and evaluate the answers of others?
I am genuinely interested to know whether Moore is exploring questions of changing learning outcomes needed for 21st century leadership skills, and the education revolution that is shaping the face of 21st century modes of education. Are innovative educationalists part of the conversation in looking to the future?
Having said that, my experience is that many adult students are actually frustrated by of the newer teaching methods, especially those which emphasise group learning at the expense of expert teaching. Group assessment is particularly loathed!
I think if we do not offer courses on a whole range of practical subjects that will equip men and women better for those entering pastoral parish ministry, chaplaincy, etc, we are failing these called people, those within their parishes and dioceses on a daily basis as the second decade of the 21st century moves on...
It's time to celebrate the great things currently being done at places like Moore College, but also to examine, improve upon and reinvigorate ministry training that is relevant to the needs experienced in Parishes and other places now; so we can make a more Unique and Greater Kingdom Difference!
My best college experience was enjoyed in my last 18 months. This was at the Catholic Theological Union in Hunters Hill (Marist Fathers) and Turramurra (Columbans). It was like a breath of fresh air. A major reason this, I think, was that it was focussed on lay education. These people were usually older, already with careers and were under no pressure to conform, and the training clearly emphasised ‘higher order thinking skills’ - learning to think (and act) theologically. I was particularly impressed by the missionaries I met there, connected with the Columbans, who had come in from the mission field on study sabbatical. These were seasoned workers for God’s kingdom: their ability to engage in deep praxis was inspiring. I was left with the impression that there is still a vitality in Christianity where the mission of Jesus is palpably alive and well and where the rubber truly meets the road.
Far from being in crisis, I believe theological education is at the threshold for some significant new approaches that can avoid the elitism of the past. Re. frustrations with group tasks - keep at it! It needs to be a learning outcome in its own right - reflecting one of the most important relational dimensions so urgently needed in team-based ministry in all manner of contexts today.
I take what you say about 'multiple intellgences' and so on, but those things are scarcely new. I remember hearing about them in the early 1990s, when I was teaching high school.
We had a nice discussion in chaplaincy group about the theological education experience today. It revealed quite a divergence of opinion as to what the best way to learn is!
With regards to Australia, I'm curious how the Melbourne College of Divinity's recent promotion to University status will pan-out.
So how are we helping people to reflect well? In Kenneth Pohly's definition of what pastoral supervision is he says
However not many senior ministers are trained to assist their MTS workers in this way. St Marks NTC is introducing a training program for professional pastoral supervision in 2012 in Sydney to meet this gap. So maybe there are some reading this post who have a real heart for growing and developing new ministers who would be interested in doing this training?
For those training in youth ministry this challenge is amplified as standards for theologically grounded youth ministry varies from church to church.
With this in mind, would you be able to share your thoughts on the place of specialised theolgical study (ie youth ministry) within the "Theological education in crisis"?
In my view, this to a significant extent accounts for the growing sense of frustration for those who have experienced more learner-focused education prior to hitting more traditional tertiary modes. The irony is that 'higher education' is in the main conducted by academics with no training in education, and whose default mode is in training the small minority of students who will continue on to become academics themselves. Tertiary educators with a background in education - such as yourself :) - are the exception rather than the norm.
When I was presenting a seminar on this to theological educators here in NZ recently, the group included the education faculty whose feedback was enlightening - they reflected that they had despaired for years at the extent that theological educators generally don't understand common educational paradigms and approaches that achieve much better outcomes in educational terms. Nothing I said was particularly new, but the feedback from the theological faculty varied from enthusiasm to skepticism about academic standards.
IMO, educational innovation is essential, not optional.
Just wondering how much emphasis you think we should put on looking at the "finished product" or the character the students who come out of a particular college? Would this be (part of) a good test in what to look for in a college?
And also, how much emphasis would you put on your objection to the title "Bible college" say, if it had that in it's title for historical reasons, but was as theological as you describe, in nature?