BLOG 5.31.19. THE ENIGMA OF THEOLOGICAL SEMINARIES

I’m engaging this Blog with a bit of trepidation, but with positive purpose—maybe I’m simply exercising my gadfly proclivity on a sacred tradition of so much of the church. I am, after all, an alumnus of two seminaries, have taught and lectured in several of them, and spend a decade, at the request of an organization within my own (Presbyterian) domination implementing a ministry encouraging and mentoring students and faculty in about fifteen of them. So, it’s not unfamiliar territory to me.

From apostolic days, it was important for the church to have well-informed leadership, which leadership oversaw the life of the community, formed the believers into the image of Christ, modelled the faith, and were accountable to God and to each other for their stewardship of their leadership. They were to be mature in their knowledge and in their character as Christ’s disciples. They were disciple-makers. They were designated as elders (presbyters) and as overseers (bishops). They were the model practitioners of God’s new humanity. They emerged from within the community. They were at the forefront of the church’s missionary obedience. They were part of the community who incarnated the new life in Christ, and equipped others for that same new life.

But, then … along the way this role of leadership came to be looked upon as some kind of sacralized human beings, and to become what we know as clergy and to be given the title of reverend. They were those literate in scriptures and in the church’s mission. As centuries passed, and the cultural enlightenment took root, it became more and more common for these to become trained and given an academic degree, which, ostensibly, equipped them for leadership—trained in universities or theological schools. Ah! but in so doing there was lost their primary role of overseers, disciple-makers, those mature in scriptures and models of true discipleship, … and not necessarily coming to maturity in significant participation with a Christian community. One could decide to become a priest, or a minister, or a clergy-person on his/her own, and so choose to attend a theological school or Bible institute, get a degree, … and assume they were equipped.

A couple of generations ago, James F. Hopewell, director of the Theological Education Fund, humorously described seminaries as “ecclesiastical puberty rites” to which one went before experiencing any significant engagement in Christian communities, given a dose of theological curriculum, and assumed to be well-equipped for leadership.

Here is where the enigma kicks in. In my fairly-significant engagement with numerous seminaries, the faculty are all well-trained academicians, … but few of them emerged out of any significant leadership role in Christian communities, few of them were disciple-makers, and few seminaries even had curricula in disciple-making, how to teach and model life in Christ to church folk.

This being so, on one of my engagements at a major Ivy League seminary, at supper with a dozen bright seniors, there one question to me with my half-century of pastoral engagement was: “Bob: What’s it like in the pastorate? What are we to expect”? My lights went on, and I realized that almost none of their faculty had any significant experience in pastoral leadership before becoming faculty, so unable to translate their academic offerings into pastoral reality. This is the enigma of too many (not all) theological seminaries, and needs serious thought. A poll taken in my own proud Presbyterian denomination discerned that we were “a denomination of Biblical and theologically illiterate laymen” … that with all of our focus and pride of theological institutions.

Those who teach others in church leadership and disciple-making should be superb practitioners. To be continued …