Comments on: Why Theological Education Needs to Be Less Like Saab and More Like Fine Cooking…part four (and the last on this for a while)

By: fwschmidt

fwschmidt — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 04:13:07 +0000

John, if theology is not capable of making such change possible, then that would, indeed, be a problem. But Augustine (in On Teaching Christianity) believed it was and I am convinced that it is as well.

By: John

John — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:53:37 +0000

Hi, I am from Australia.

What if all theological education has nothing whatsoever to do with Real God, and is thus essentially a waste of time. A waste of time because it does not, and can not, provide the means for fundamental whole-body change. It is just brain created mind-games, just like conventional secular philosophy.

Hence:

http://www.dabase.org/tfrbkyml.htm

http://www.dabase.org/noface.htm

http://www.dabase.org/teaching/aletheon/truth-god.aspx

By: Sharon Alexander

Sharon Alexander — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 21:05:34 +0000

As someone with a JD, MBA and soon enough an MDiv (I am now doing an internship before graduation), I can share that the JD and MBA did a better job of preparing me for life in the business and legal worlds than the MDiv program has prepared me for parish life (note that the MDiv program did teach me to think theologically, and my parish provided very good formation – I am fortunate). This should not be taken as a glowing recommendation of JD or MBA programs or a suggestion that they should be used as models – these programs need help as well, but we can learn from them. As others have noted, the problem is multi-layered: denominational self-definition, discordant ideas of mission at all levels (when “mission: is even understood or defined), intergenerational disconnect, etc. I think future clergy want good formation (as do the parishes that will eventually hire us) but whose responsibility the formation is seems to be subject to debate. In a perfect world the parish that raises someone up for possible ordination should provide solid initial formation, followed by Diocesan formation, then seminary, and then more Diocesan formation in the first years of ordained ministry. All too often what I have seen instead, in many Dioceses, is a “check the box” process or, even worse, an arbitrary process, followed by high rates of burnout for newly ordained clergy and surprise at the burnout by those who designed the process. Fred raises the critical point, which is that trying to “save” the current system is not rationally related to either preparing future clergy or helping to make the changes that need to be made in the majority of our churches to reach the people who are seeking, often desperately, the Good News. In a few weeks the Consortium of Endowed Episcopal Parishes will be addressing these issues (among many others) and I hope to gain some new insights and further engage in this continuing discussion (to the extent there is interest in hearing from those who did not attend TEC seminaries, which is yet another issue I have encountered).

By: Matt O

Matt O — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 03:30:47 +0000

Natalie pointed me to this; I enjoyed reading it. This issue of the future of the church is an interesting one. As a younger person, I see special resonance in where you discuss in various ways what churches (and those people you are working to educate) have to offer. One come into a church wanting to “get involved” and then….nothing. Give us money, maybe do some dull work like picking up trash, but otherwise, we really don’t need you for anything that might actually engage your God-given talents. Why then bother coming? It would be interesting to hear more comments on these issues. As Natalie was telling me, our churches are too ready to keep doing the same old things, and yet these things are clearly failing to reach people.