Why Pastors Need a Seminary Education

[Christusregnat]

Adam: I don't understand you. What difference are these and why would baptists and Presbyterians differ here?

Pergamum, you're not alone.....

I used to be a staunch sovereign grace baptist, and (in general) the more "baptist" someone becomes, the less they are willing to believe in a catholic/universal church. The church is defined as local only. In such a mode of thought, there is no place for any body beyond the local congregation, thus making a Presbytery or G.A. controlled seminary a "Romish" hangover.

Prebies believe in a catholic church, which includes the unity of the whole body. This has historically meant no lone-ranger or unconnected churches. Synods, councils, G.A.s and presbyteries are seen to have authoritative decision making power, as per Acts 15. Pure baptist theology does not allow for anything beyond the local church's power, and will therefore deny the legitimacy of anyone outside of the local church training pastors. For more on this, you may want to look up my old pastor, Dr. William R. Downing. A staunch baptist who does not believe in a catholic church.

Cheers,

Adam

 

[Pergamum]

Adam:

Yes, I come from Sovereign Grace Baptist circles and many of my supporting churches are SGB churches. Ironically, they bash parachurches and yet find it in their hearts to support me, on odd duck I guess, who partnered with a mission society.

The flavor of some of the Sovereign Grace Baptists almost seems Landmarkish does it not?

I do think a greater sense of cooperation and also connectionalism (if I understand this word correctly) needs to be fostered. I also think that missionary societies and seminaries for that matter - which are outside the direct oversight of a local church - are permissible means of meeting needs in evangelism and education.



So....in short...your statement clicked for me and I agree totally with your observation - many Baptists mistake a doctrine of independency for a doctrine of isolationism. That is a good observation.

I see no problems with local churches working together for the greater good - even across denominational lines.




Now, I want to ask you - just how many little sects, schisms and spasms are among prebyterians?

They don't seem to be much better by way of unity than the baptists do. And the unified groups have largely uniformly slid into apostasy. So, I will take my calvinistic soteriology and my baptistic ecclesiology any day.

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

Now, I want to ask you - just how many little sects, schisms and spasms are among prebyterians?

Quite a few, but they are very unified within themselves...

 

[Pergamum]

Now, I want to ask you - just how many little sects, schisms and spasms are among prebyterians?

Quite a few, but they are very unified within themselves...

What does that mean?

 

[DMcFadden]

I have been sitting out this thread because of my respect for Dr. Clark and desire not to be too contentious.

After participating in 450-500 ordination exams over the past 27 years, I think that some of us are missing the point. The issue is not an "educated" clergy vs. a non-educated one. If the standards identify outcomes and remain the same, then the question should be about delivery systems.

People who have invested 9-12 years in college, seminary, and graduate school classrooms (with the tens of thousands of dollars of debt that go with it) have an understandable prejudice in favor of traditional tracks. Also, some of us who spent our years and dollars on that approach have a defensiveness for it as well (it was good enough for me . . . ). Unfortunately, since all educational delivery options carry unintended consequences, we must also weigh the negative effects that go with them.

Traditional academic preparation delivers all of the values identified in this thread. It excels at teaching biblical languages, allows for good give-and-take between learners and instructors, and looks on paper like the ideal model. Yet it also tends to abstract people frm their original context, socialize them in ways that often makes them less effective with the people who sent them off to get a theological education, and frequently feeds their pride. I have seen third world nationals come to America to get their education, and finish seminary less able to return to their people. Some of them become so habituated to American culture that they don't go back at all!

I have commented on this thread before that in my own circles, I have observed ministers graduate from seminary demonstrably LESS competent to minister than they were before matriculating.

If your goal is competence "outcomes," you can identify various objective standards and hold the line on quality without prescribing a one-size-fits-all delivery system. How can anyone say that a person who completes a M.Div. (for instance) by distance education is any less "academically" prepared? Frankly, some of the empirical data on DE suggests that tests scores and actual proficiencies are higher for those who complete a DE degree than one who does it through bricks and mortar.

And, when ministerial preparation is the goal, I would much rather see a person who has been mentored by a competent pastor over one who has merely sat in a classroom lecture hall with 150 other students (actually some of my bricks and mortar seminary classes were larger than this!). You Presbyterians seem to do a better job of having PhDs who are also Godly and effective pastors doing the seminary teaching. Most of my profs were either utterly inexperienced in pastoral ministry or failures at it who retreated to the academy in response.

In a world of MP3s distributed for free on the internet, streaming video, and free (or practically free) books and Bible software online, the game has changed. One need not quit his job, travel to Philadelphia, Dallas, Greenville, Pasadena, or Grand Rapids, and rack up gazillions of dollars in debt in order to receive quality instruction. Church based models utilizing readily available lectures, innovative online instructional techniques, and patoral mentoring structures show great promise for delivering the SAME level of theological and biblical education at a fraction of the current cost.

In my view, the "best" theological education would combine top rate content (e.g., many of the BEST Reformed teachers have courses available for free that include EVERY word spoken by the professor to the class including mention of when the course projects are due!) + unyielding academic accountability for learning the "content" of the discipline + adequate mentorship in the practice of ministry + provision for a "community of learners."

How do you find this formula in the real world? Some of our seminaries do a very capable job of delivery. Many do not. The innovative programs being proposed today take advantage of computers and the internet to produce other delivery systems equal in quality but without some of the unintended consequences of traditonal bricks and mortar seminaries.

One of my sons was privileged to complete his theological education using a hybrid model that I find quite attractive. He completed a traditional B.A. with 60+ units of Bible/theology (including a year of Greek). Then, during seminary, he used a modular program. Several times each year he took courses on the bricks and mortar campus. Preparation involved reading the same number of books/pages prior to class, being on campus for the same number of lecture hours (10 per unit) compressed into a single week, and have a month to complete the written work following the course lectures. Courses were team taught by a traditional seminary prof (PhD etc.) AND a proven ministerial practitioner. This model allowed my son to be in full time ministry under the mentorship of an experienced pastor, continue learning and serving on an effective ministry team, AND finish an accredited bricks and mortar degree.

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

Now, I want to ask you - just how many little sects, schisms and spasms are among prebyterians?

Quite a few, but they are very unified within themselves...

What does that mean?

Just making a joke - apparently not a very good one - that the different presbyterian groups are unified within their individual "sect." PCAers are unified within the PCA, OPCers are unified within the OPC, etc...

 

[Pergamum]

Quite a few, but they are very unified within themselves...

What does that mean?

Just making a joke - apparently not a very good one - that the different presbyterian groups are unified within their individual "sect." PCAers are unified within the PCA, OPCers are unified within the OPC, etc...

Oh, every single sect I guess if then unified....until right before a split happens...then they get unified again.

 

[Pergamum]

I have been sitting out this thread because of my respect for Dr. Clark and desire not to be too contentious.

After participating in 450-500 ordination exams over the past 27 years, I think that some of us are missing the point. The issue is not an "educated" clergy vs. a non-educated one. If the standards identify outcomes and remain the same, then the question should be about delivery systems.

People who have invested 9-12 years in college, seminary, and graduate school classrooms (with the tens of thousands of dollars of debt that go with it) have an understandable prejudice in favor of traditional tracks. Also, some of us who spent our years and dollars on that approach have a defensiveness for it as well (it was good enough for me . . . ). Unfortunately, since all educational delivery options carry unintended consequences, we must also weigh the negative effects that go with them.

Traditional academic preparation delivers all of the values identified in this thread. It excels at teaching biblical languages, allows for good give-and-take between learners and instructors, and looks on paper like the ideal model. Yet it also tends to abstract people frm their original context, socialize them in ways that often makes them less effective with the people who sent them off to get a theological education, and frequently feeds their pride. I have seen third world nationals come to America to get their education, and finish seminary less able to return to their people. Some of them become so habituated to American culture that they don't go back at all!

I have commented on this thread before that in my own circles, I have observed ministers graduate from seminary demonstrably LESS competent to minister than they were before matriculating.

If your goal is competence "outcomes," you can identify various objective standards and hold the line on quality without prescribing a one-size-fits-all delivery system. How can anyone say that a person who completes a M.Div. (for instance) by distance education is any less "academically" prepared? Frankly, some of the empirical data on DE suggests that tests scores and actual proficiencies are higher for those who complete a DE degree than one who does it through bricks and mortar.

And, when ministerial preparation is the goal, I would much rather see a person who has been mentored by a competenet pastor over one who has merely sat in a classroom lecture hall with 150 other students (actually some of my bricks and mortar seminary classes were larger than this!). You Presbyterians seem to do a better job of having PhDs who are also Godly and effective pastors doing the seminary teaching. Most of my profs were either utterly inexperienced in pastoral ministry or failures at it who retreated to the academy in response.

In a world of MP3s distributed for free on the internet, streaming video, and free (or practically free) books and Bible software online, the game has changed. One need not quit his job, travel to Philadelphia, Dallas, Greenville, Pasadena, or Grand Rapids, and rack up gazillions of dollars in debt in order to receive quality instruction. Church based models utilizing readily available lectures, innovative online instructional techniques, and patoral mentoring structures show great promise for delivering the SAME level of theological and biblical education at a fraction of the current cost.

In my view, the "best" theological education would combine top rate content (e.g., many of the BEST Reformed teachers have courses available for free that include EVERY word spoken by the professor to the class including mention of when the course projects are due!) + unyielding academic accountability for learning the "content" of the discipline + adequate mentorship in the practice of ministry + provision for a "community of learners."

How do you find this formula in the real world? Some of our seminaries do a very capable job of delivery. Many do not. The innovative programs being proposed today take advantage of computers and the internet to produce other delivery systems equal in quality but without some of the unintended consequences of traditonal bricks and mortar seminaries.

One of my sons was privileged to complete his theological education using a hybrid model that I find quite attractive. He completed a traditional B.A. with 60+ units of Bible/theology (including a year of Greek). Then, during seminary, he used a modular program. Several times each year he took courses on the bricks and mortar campus. Preparation involved reading the same number of books/pages prior to class, being on campus for the same number of lecture hours (10 per unit) compressed into a single week, and have a month to complete the written work following the course lectures. Courses were team taught by a traditional seminary prof (PhD etc.) AND a proven ministerial practitioner. This model allowed my son to be in full time ministry under the mentorship of an experienced pastor, continue learning and serving on an effective ministry team, AND finish an accredited bricks and mortar degree.

Hmmmm.....delivery systems.........


Thanks for that perspective!

 

[DMcFadden]

Pergy, I was primarily dealing with the context I know best here in the U.S. When you add the grinding reality of poverty in some third world settings, my comments about DE and innovative delivery packages would be even stronger.

I have been impressed with the mission of Third Millennium ministries. They say:

Our goal is to provide Christian education to hundreds of thousands of pastors around the world who lack sufficient training for ministry. We are meeting this goal by publishing and globally distributing a free multilingual, multimedia, digital seminary curriculum in English, Arabic, Chinese (Mandarin), Russian and Spanish. The curriculum is designed to be used in support of existing schools, as well as by groups and individuals. It consists of three central elements: graphic-driven videos, printed instruction and internet resources.

Very ambitious agenda with great promise. And, they are REFORMED!!! "Third Millennium Ministries (IIIM) is an Evangelical Christian parachurch ministry in the Reformed tradition."

 

[wmc1982]

I would say generally, but not absolutely.

(I desire so much to go to seminary now but it doesn't seem possible for a good while, I pray a door opens!)

 

[Christusregnat]

Ironically, they bash parachurches and yet find it in their hearts to support me, on odd duck I guess, who partnered with a mission society.

What can I say, you're a likable guy

The flavor of some of the Sovereign Grace Baptists almost seems Landmarkish does it not?

My former pastor was brought up on Landmarkism, and when I met some of his LM friends, they were rather zealous fellows, although most of them seemed to be lacking in a commensurate level of knowledge. I had to be "rebaptized" by the SG pastor, even though the Ref Baps had already rebaptized me from the Nazarene baptism I got as a kid. I've been three times baptized, and the third was so that I could fellowship with the LMs who would think I wasn't a christian for receiving RB baptism.

So....in short...your statement clicked for me and I agree totally with your observation - many Baptists mistake a doctrine of independency for a doctrine of isolationism.

Indeed. Although the ideas of independency/autonomy is not inseparably connected with isolationism, I think that the more consistent a man is with autonomy, the more isolationist he will become.

Now, I want to ask you - just how many little sects, schisms and spasms are among prebyterians?

Ahhh, too true. I think, particularly in America, we all tend to think like baptists in this regard. We don't like one little thing about a G.A., and therefore we separate into a smaller Presbyterian. This is why the liberals gain foothold: we lose conservatives over Psalm-singing. This is why, as you observe, the larger denominations tend to "slide into apostasy". First wind of error, and someone goes packing. I'd prefer them to stick around and work for reform; but they have to do as they think God directs.

Cheers,

Adam