One of the best things about the Reformed tradition, in my opinion, is the fact that, throughout the ages, it has placed a heavy emphasis on educated pastors. This emphasis has become less and less important over the past several decades, yet the normative preparation for a minister in the Reformed Church in America still requires a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree, and this – to at least a certain degree – helps prevent (at least to some degree) churches from putting idiots in the pulpit. It also has allowed ministers to sit at the table with other professionals, like social workers, psychologists, lawyers, doctors, etc.
This professional collegiality becomes less of a reality as the qualifications for being a minister diminish (for example, up to 10% of a seminary’s students in a master’s program aren’t required to have a bachelor’s degree — we don’t want doctors who didn’t bother with college, but apparently it’s ok to have ministers who aren’t willing to take the time….) [For the record, I understand that this is meant as an "exception" but I've yet to see it invoked with someone who couldn't get a bachelor's degree.]
Having said all of that, I also understand the key problem with our system. To even candidate for a position as pastor, one needs to have completed (or be very close to) a master’s degree. That means that for the privilege of even applying to be a pastor (one of the lowest paying “professional” positions in the country), one needs to have figured out how to pay for at least seven years of education following high school. In short, to be a pastor in the RCA you either need to be independently wealthy (you can pay for it with family money), really lucky (someone, for some reason, decides to pay for it), or enter into your gloriously-low-paying job with debt dripping from your ears.
In my case, it’s student loans. I don’t come from money and no one graciously offered to pay for my seminary education. Add my student loans and my wife’s and we pay a mortgage-worth of school debt every month… this, merely to reach the most basic qualifications for our jobs.
This is a problem.
Wealth (or debt) should not be qualifications for ministry. On the other hand, neither do I believe lowering our expectations is a good option (although I’d argue it’s the one we’ve flirted most intently with in the RCA).
Yet, let’s be honest, we are never going back to the days where seminary tuition is denominationally covered (as it was when my grandfather went through).
What are we to do?
Let me offer two ideas:
The “Pay if you Quit” Approach
I actually think this is immediately do-able. Essentially, you put an individual’s seminary tuition costs into a 10-year loan (or 15). If they stay in a local church for that period of time, their seminary tuition costs are forgiven; if not, the costs are pro-rated and payed back at a normative student-loan interest.
For example. Let’s take the 10-year plan. If it costs $20,000 worth of tuition per student (some are more, others less), that’s $2,000 a year. If you minister in a local church for 10 years, you don’t pay any of it back. If you only stay in church-based-ministry 5 years, you pay back $10,000 (with interest set at normative student-loan rates). If you never work in the church, the entire $20,000 becomes a student loan – no big deal.
Why working in a local church? Because I believe it’s ministers preparing for local church ministry that seminaries ought to be focusing on not pre-PhD students or people preparing for denominational positions.
The “University of the People” Approach
I actually love this idea! The University of the People is a free university (albeit, yet unaccredited). Cool huh?! Read about it in the NY Times. I’m not sure how well it’d work for a general university degree; after all, tuition and salaries are part of how we pay for professors’ education, etc. However, I am convinced this would work for a seminary. It would only require two things: (1) scholarly-proven pastors to teach a course once in a while, and (2) theological professionals to do a tiny bit of pro-bono work once in a while.
There are hundreds of doctorally-educated pastors serving in local churches. Many of whom would both love to teach an occasional course and be highly qualified to do so. Add to that, theological professionals (of which there are many!) who could do a bit of pro bono work here and there. I’m not talking about a class a semester, I’m talking maybe 1 course a decade… really.. that’s all. Lawyers do pro-bono work… doctors do pro bono work. If pastors and theologians are professionals, a bit here and there wouldn’t hurt us either.
Make it a distance-learning system (like Western Seminary’s DL Program); use Open Source software; demand excellence from high-quality students, professors, and education (making no exception on any of them).
In the long run I don’t believe it does us well to lower the expectations of those we put in the pulpit – and no, as important as “life-experience” is (and as much as many seminary students need more of it), I do not believe it is an adequate substitute for education. And yet, there is a problem with the way we pay for theological education. Wealth or debt ought not to be basic qualifications for ministry….
Grace and Peace,
`tim
tim
some good thoughts on a very pressing issue for the church today. after doing admissions work for a seminary for 5 years these issues are dear to my heart.
the 10% rule you mentioned is an interesting one. we took advantage of this every year, but not to bolster numbers. we were very selective of the men and women that entered this route. many were 2nd or 3rd career in their mid 30′s, 40′s and even 50′s who did not have the opportunity to go to college when they were younger…not just a choice they made. if candidates came to us without an undergrad degree who were in their 20′s we referred them on to a undergrad program. this was always a 2nd preference. certainly we wanted our students to have a full educational background, but we also recognize God’s call to folks from all walks of life and circumstances.
the need to fill parishes is simultaneously wed to a concern over academic integrity. The Free University is an interesting idea. How do you feel about the unaccredited aspect of it? The Association of Theological Schools is great for providing standards for education, I wonder if it can inhibit the ministry of the church? Don’t get me wrong, their standards or regulations are great to keep quality education around (as opposed to scary self-acredited fundamentalist programs that offer courses in Christian Martial Arts – http://www.gmau.org/dev/gmau_college.html)
anyway…just a few thoughts
Ryan…
Thanks for the note.
RE: 10% rule; I get the argument, I just don’t buy it. I understand how a bachelor’s degree can seem like a “hoop” for some people but I can’t imagine any other profession accepting that as an argument. And, as I said, I’ve seen the 10% rule invoked on multiple occasions – in each case it was people who didn’t want to go back rather than people who couldn’t. I don’t believe the hardship of going back to school as a 2nd or 3rd career is more than those who go to school right away… I just believe it’s different. (There are also safety nets for those coming back to school later in life that the rest of us didn’t have.)
As for the accreditation thing. That is an issue for me. I firmly believe in the importance of accreditation. That the “University of the People” isn’t conferring degrees yet gives me a sense of their integrity. We’ll see how well the experiment goes. The ATS accredits distance learning programs – I imagine a FreeSem degree (can I trademark that?!) would fall under the same category.
In the RCA the educational oversight of a student (accredited by the ATS) is (at least in theory) balanced by the ministry/integrity/personal preparation oversight of a Classis and the agency providing a fitness for ministry certificate (which varies depending on the seminary attended).
Grace and peace,
`tim
Tim, there is something in my gut that is bothering me with this post. Admittedly, I recognize that I am probably hearing things that aren’t there, but that I do hear is a type of educated haughtiness. I have been asked recently about what my thoughts are concerning seminary and why I never finished. I have found this to be a very polarizing subject where people put me in the camp of those who think that seminary is unnecessary or put me into the other camp that thinks scholarship isn’t important for the pastorate. The truth is I think most men (and women those those egalitarians) need to go to seminary and scholarship is extremely important.
There is a recent trend of really sharp, entrepreneurial, driven men skipping seminary all together and planting churches. I don’t have a problem with this at all if those people have picked up the tools they need in other places and are continuing to grow theologically and philosophically. If a person can handle the Greek and Hebrew, knows at least at the cursory level Christian history and can wrestle through and find answers for deep, difficult theological questions then he (she) might not need a degree from a seminary. These people are usually driven, avid studiers and readers by nature. If they could, they would spend their whole day with the scriptures as well as with men like Calvin, Luther and Spurgeon. I said might because seminary then becomes an obedience issue between him and the Lord and may still be a very good idea.
On the other hand, if you don’t have the tools, have a tendency to be lazy in study, can’t navigate through the languages, know nothing of how to find answers to deep, difficult theological questions except to quote John Piper or Marva Dawn and know nothing of our rich history then you need to go get some tools. If you are lazy in study and continue to get in front of people and teach, you have much more courage than I do. I would strongly recommend seminary for its accountability and plan to educate you in doctrine, language and history.
I have one year at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School under my belt as well as three years through Western Theological Seminary’s Distance Learning Program. Honestly, both were poor fits for the type of learn that I am. Seminary felt to me like I was laying a foundation in a house I was already living in. Any good educator knows that there are many different ways to learn and often higher education institutions focus on only one or two ways to learn. After a great deal of prayer and seeking wise counsel, my wife Laura and I decided that I would continue to study and learn but not to seek a degree until the time is right or that the patience of our classis grows weary.
In my humble opinion and observations, seminary education does not necessarily equal quality, theologically astute, biblical pastors, nor does a lack of training necessarily equal unbiblical, uneducate and/or unqualified pastors .
Paul,
I don’t know exactly what to say about your response, I don’t know that there really is much to say except this… I think perhaps you’ve read something into my post that I wasn’t trying to say (although, I’m not denying there’s some truth to it). While I do believe seminary is important and I do believe that pretty much anyone can make it through if they set their mind to it, and I also believe that seminary is important even besides whatever scholarly skills and resources are developed, I say all of this not as someone who enjoyed seminary…. at all.
I found seminary to be an exceedingly dark and unfulfilling time. I didn’t enjoy it. I wasn’t encouraged by most of the professors, and I had to figure out how to learn despite the fact that much of what I was learning was presented in ways that were as fundamentally different from my personal learning style as possible. And yet, I still think it was important and still believe seminary should be part of the normative preparation for ministers. Exceptions? Sure, I suppose there are exceptions. But if you ask me they should truly be exceptions.
The answer, from my perspective, is not to get rid of seminary (even though the process, like any, will always have it’s problems), but to help fix it and to help it become something better, healthier, and more effective at preparing people for ministry.
I keep coming back to the fact that, even thought there are obviously some differences between ministers and other professionals, there are (and should be) some similarities too. I don’t care how good of a learner someone is, I don’t want a surgeon who didn’t go to medical school. A lot of bright people represent themselves in court, but they’re never as good as a well-trained lawyer.
Grace and Peace,
`tim