Flexibility and where to apply it
The training of a minister takes a long time. Once upon a time, length of time was no problem. It was a necessity that bred quality.
Take the oak tree. It takes 100 years to grow to maturity. When they used to build ships out of oak, someone had to think 100 years in advance. You had to plant your oak so that your children’s, children’s, children would have enough oak to build the ships that would be necessary for trade, defence and discovery.
The people that brought the gospel to Australia came on oak-built sailing ships. They came when oak supplies were running low. Some of them planted their oak trees in this new land, ready for a future long ahead of them. There are some oaks just down the road from Moore College that are almost ready to build a ship out of! They were planted for us.
When Australia’s first Christians thought about planting the gospel in this new land, growing churches, expanding numbers and strengthening congregational life, they thought with an oak-informed head. Growing churches was not for any immediate gratification, for the glory of the minister, or to achieve some short or medium-term goal. The oak-head asked long-term questions: how could the gospel seed be planted in this new land so that the next generation—no, the third generation after them—would still hear of the word of life?
Perhaps the oak-brained wooden sailor-types heard the biblical images of growth better than the 21st-century urban generation that followed after their instant fixer parents. Consider Jesus’ parable of the growing seed: planting is followed by a long period of inactivity. Consider Jesus’ parable of the sower: a lot of seed is not fruitful at all; so much effort is wasted, and even more time. But the important thing is not the result (God does that anyway), and it’s definitely not the time expended (that has to happen). What is important is that the word (NB: not the church) is planted with the long-term in view.
Even God seems to take the long view. The plans he put into effect with the creation still haven’t been brought to that harvest—that is, the kingdom of God! The plans he had in mind when he made promises to Abraham took over a thousand years before their fulfilment began with Christ. The plans that he wanted to keep on the boil by the gift of the gospel—the ‘good deposit’—to the apostles—were no instant fix, but a long-term strategy (“[A]nd what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also”—2 Tim 2:2).
The 18th and 19th-century oak-men (“What about you, Jimmy; are you an oak man?”—sorry, a distraction from Tarantino just slipped into my mind) thought at least three generations ahead. Then, at the turn of the 20th century, the slogan changed to “reach the world in this generation”, which, of course, then took many good, solid evangelical institutions down the path of Liberalism (“The world needs evangelizing, not time for theological niceties”). And now, in the 21st century, what of the post-instant generation generation? Are they going to ‘plant’, or will they just manage another couple of ‘events’? It remains to be seen.
What has this got to do with theological colleges and flexibility? If it really is an issue that ‘theological education takes too long’, then we should apply ‘flexibility’ to the things that are of lesser importance (the pre-college university course; the pre-college apprenticeship; the post-college assistantship). But to fast-track, cut down and speed up theological education is to short-change not just this generation, but the generations still to come (should the Lord tarry). If anything, theological education should be deepened, strengthened, lengthened.
Perhaps Tarantino’s question was not a distraction at all. Heaven forbid: perhaps I have, at last, received my first word of knowledge: “Now, what about you, Jimmy; are you an oak man?”
The problem with the oak analogy is ... the current redundancy of oak as a ship-building material!
But I am with you. Christians can afford to think in centuries, surely.
I agree with you Peter, that Christians need to think in the long-term.
But we also need to have the urgency of the short term - Jesus is coming back!
Length of time seems to be a recurring theme in your posts, so I wonder what you consider to be the ideal length of time studying at Bible college? Should it be 8 years? 10 years? 16 years? At what point has one reached the optimal level of theological education?
I fail to see how longer = better. I understand that more time studying means a longer period learning, but this assumes that learning stops once I walk out of the last exam. Yet the Christian life is a continued education (talking to people, listening to sermons, reading books and commentaries) - that doesn’t stop for the college student once they leave college.
Hi Peter,
Loved your post. The Biblical paradigm for ministry training seems to be parenthood. Parenthood (like growing Oak trees) takes a long time. Just one comment (as I wear my MTS Director’s hat). You have assumed that the pre-college apprenticeship is not theological training! At least that’s what you seem to be implying. I’d beg to differ. In fact the apprenticeship is about the mature elder training the younger Christian in three areas (i) Christ like conviction (theology) (ii) Christ like character and (iii) ministry competency. So I’d suggest that the pre-college apprenticeship is the essence of what you’re talking about in your post. The older generation training the younger in deep close personal master apprentice type relationship long term (for at least 2 years). Spiritual parenthood. The pre-apprenticeship isn’t really in the same category as ‘Civil Engineering’ or other such uni courses, because it is about growing in Christ to proclaim Christ. Civ Eng has different goals. Thanks again for your post brother.
I think lessening the time or the quality of would be pastors’ theological education would be catastrophic! Even now, there is a real problem as more and more church leaders think pragmatically about church before they think theologically!
In agreement with Ben, MTS is also theological education. In fact, some of us would contend that MTS students benefit more from their years of formal theological education, as they tend to integrate what they are learning with what happens in church. This means they are less likely to fall into the ‘pragmatism trap’.
Hi Phil, how have you come to the conclusion that less than 4 years would be catastrophic?
Funny you should say that. The only word of knowledge I’m aware of having had was also from Tarantino… the same film in fact! A friend of mine was in a very dark place and in need of a jolt when a completely inexplicable thing happened in her room whilst she was alone, utterly freaking her out. As I approached the building unawares, prior to finding her in the stairwell, I had ringing around my head that line from Jules, to paraphrase: ‘You;re looking at this the wrong way. It doesn;t matter whether God stopped the bullets, or turned Coke to Pepsi… What is significant is I felt the touch of God. God got involved’.
That strange event, combined with my ‘insight’ turned her around and snapped her out of a significant depression. The memory of it years later reminds me of a God who will not always be bound by our expectations - and this coming from a straight-laced conservative evangelical, attending a church where you’ll rarely see so much as hands raised in worship!
All thoroughly off-topic, but I was struck by the link!! (Great post, by the way)
Hi Steve,
When I’ve compared graduates of Moore or other colleges who have done a 3 year course with those who have done 4 the difference is obvious. I think it takes 4 years to teach most students how to think theologically.
Of course, and as you point out, learning continues beyond one’s academic training. However, that training is vital if pastors are going to lead churches shaped by theological principles.
That is not to say that the current system of theological education is perfect. In fact I think there is much more that should be done to ensure graduates don’t fall into what I call the ‘pragmatism trap.’ But the solution is not to lessed the number of years of formal study.
Peter,
I don’t feel your articles engage sufficiently with the reality that the future leadership of many small rural congregations in Australia will not come from paid people brought in from outside but from unpaid or part-paid people raised up from within. Those congregations will generally not have the resources to support folk during four years’ of full-time study and the personal circumstances of those leaders (eg farmers supporting elderly parents) may make it very difficult for them to be away from their base for any length of time.
That is, the particular circumstances which make flexible training options a necessity in Peter Scholl’s context are also at work here in Australia, particularly once one moves outside Sydney.
Sorry to be tardy at getting back to this guys, I have been off air over Easter. Great to spark a few real life applications of Tarantino—aren’t there just so many?? But, I digress.
Ben, I think my sentence can be read to include pre-college apprenticeship as part of the process of theological preparation for a congregational minister. My point was, if we have to shorten the time taken (the issue I have basically been bouncing against in these three posts) then what are you going to cut out? my highest value would be the college experience (keep at all costs); my #2 would be the apprenticeship period, although for some the pre-college apprenticeship would be best, for others the post-college apprenticeship, others both! (retain if possible, but sacrifice before you mess with the college experience); , then there is the prior university degree/work experience, which (in my mind) must come in at #3, and is the place to start chopping if anywhere (given other things are equal, maturity, ministry commitments, etc etc).
Theological reflection is certainly done, picked up, and taught at various levels throughout life, and if anything in my posts implies that this does not happen, or that it stops when you graduate from college (that would be a failure of the college process!), then I repent in dust and ashes. However, a sunday school class is not a bible study; and an apprenticeship is not a theological education ‘proper’. In the good old days MTS was a ‘dose’ of hands-on ministry experience under the direction of another, which would raise the questions about life and ministry that the theological college would more deeply answer. Has that philosophy changed now Ben? Is MTS doing the same thing as Moore, and it is of little difference which you place on the chopping board for those who wish to wield the axe?
Mark, forgive my urban mindset and your point is, of course, one that needs to be borne in mind. I did not engage with rural issues at all, of course. But is this really a new issue? Australia has had far flung and smallish communities almost as long as white settlement, of course. The issue is still how can we give the best theological education to those who will be pastors of congregations? I would hate to have a situation that meant ‘full blooded’ training only for the Urban ministers. If, like in Pete Sholl’s setting, there is a sense that yes, fulltime theological education is the best for this purpose, but we have such financial problems that we have to settle for less than ideal (at the moment), then this is different from settling for less than the ideal as if it is the norm. If congregations still consider (as I do) that congregational pastors are best equipped by the full-time theological process, then these congregations should make all the sacrifices they can to find the funds (from themselves and from others) to solve the financial problem, at least for ones or twos if they can. As we think long-term (as we have to with the appropriate rider, should the Lord tarry), these Issues of quality and value should be the priority, especially as cost-cutting becomes increasingly necessary and church and denominational officials feel the pressure to take short-cuts for financial reasons.
And by the way, even though oak may be redundant for ship-building, that means there are lots of ‘spare’ oak trees still growing to remind us to think long-term, and to remember God has acted in slow time. The point here is quite simple: who says that it is a problem to take a long time to prepare a person for such an important task as pastoring a congregation of God’s people ?
There’s been quite a few posts on the topic or factor of length lately, obviously in logical response to the current issues being talked about (all pretty interesting, thanks). But when it comes down to it, aren’t length, flexibility and all that just factors that contribute to the ultimate goals for both blogging and theological education?
For example, with theological education, it looks like the goals are quality (faithful and deep training in the Word sufficient for leaders and ministers) and efficacy (actually carrying that through). Flexibility and length of training are factors which (according to comments on both flexibility posts about training being suited to the individual and speed and financial considerations and even the idea that it attracts students) may contribute to efficacy in that some argue certain changes in these areas will more effectively get the job done in greater numbers at greater speeds to help more people, while the others think that changes in these factors will ulitmately negatively affect the primary goal of quality.
So far, it doesn’t seem like anyone has really significantly changed their mind on anything, concessions are minor and replies are often clarifications of the same point. I know it’s not the aim of the whole thing, but it just seems like it would be most productive to come together first and say that quality is the primary goal and efficacy is the secondary goal - and that flexibility and length are worth considering for their impact on the goals and to consider them not singularly but within the context of the ultimate goals? (so that it’s more of a team effort where flexibility is considered seriously for its contribution to efficacy but not given more importance than the goals themselves.)
And, I guess, speaking of ultimate goals, if our aim is to glorify our sovereign God, I hope and sort of assume that everyone has been praying about this, that He would guide decisions according to His will and not our opinions, to achieve in part the primary and secondary goal, in part many coming to know Him & grow in Him and ultimately His glory.
Melinda,
well put. Quality comment, and efficacious.
Commenting rules
If you would like your comment to be considered for publication, please observe the following rules:
Failure to adhere to these rules will result in your comment being quietly deleted.
If you want to give us feedback but don't want your comments to appear on the blog, DON'T use the form below. Instead, please send us an email or click on the button below.
Your Comment
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.