Seminaries Face Economic Turndown

You may want to join the discussions at http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/

 

This would be typical of the type of classes I am taking now. I am required to do more, and am held to a higher standard, than others I know.

Of course not. I was simply using that as an example.

This is the same feeling that I had, when I initially transferred to the distance ed. seminary I am in now. Looking at the easy time most have in the "well known" seminaries, almost upsets me.

Except those things were not interactive, the way the computer is. With technology like video conferencing, and even simple chat rooms, it is the same interactive learning environment.

I cannot think of a single class that could not be taught through distance ed., unless the student had no church support structure whatsoever: which is a requirement at most distance ed. seminaries that I know of.

Where you are wrong, regarding "no need for in class instruction", is that some people cannot learn via distance ed. You have to be very self motivated. Some people need the classroom environment. Different people learn differently.

Of course, in this particular illustration, the classroom would be the simulator. The "real thing" is the pulpit.

I think this is all dependent on the person in question, not the program. A good distance ed. program, that incorporates modern technology, is in every way equivalent. It just depends on the person taking the class, and how God has made that individual.

I have seen the same thing from university students. They will yap away in class, but you put them in a teaching situation in church, and they clam up. It is no longer "safe" you see. This is why distance ed., in connection with an apprenticeship type program under an actual pastor, works so well.

 

The problem I see with that idea is that today I have met very few pastors whom I would consider good students of scripture and apply their study to ministry. So many just opreaqch sermons thta do not have muich substance.

The professsors I had in seminary had an average of about 10 years of experience pastoring before they taught.

In many ways I think the best method would be to take the best pastors/professors and have them train students in ministry in the churches they are currently pastoring. The problem is that politics in the area gets in the way. There was a time when the professors pastored. Now it is against the rules to let a professor be a full time pastor. So many of them do interim work.

If one looks back on some of the great professors they were also pastors. There was a time when the theologians were pastors and professors but not now. The politicians might not be so able to get their way if the professors were also pastors of congregations.

 

Then they have no business being pastors. There are also a lot of "hot air blowing" seminary professors out their. Even in the audio lectures that I have listened to from various seminaries, I am amazed at what some of the professors say, particular the vulgarity. I think "How did he get away with that?!"

I, for one, have an exemplary Pastor, who is an ex-University professor. It is the responsibility of each person, to place themselves in a church with competent leadership.

In regards to the Sem. professors, the fact is, looking at some of the seminaries now, many professors have little to no actual pastoring experience.

I agree with much of what you say here.

 

You do have to be very self-motivated to do EITHER RE or DE. It takes someone very self-motivated to take 15 grad hours a semester, work part-time, and pastor on the weekends. I outta know

I don't know that this is the bene esee. Knowledge is indeed knowledge, but preparation is different. There is knowledge and application that is gained from social interaction and the culminative experience of peer-to-peer and mentor-to-peer interaction. This is not non-existant in the DE world no more than it's guaranteed in the RE world. However, RE does lend itself to this by nature.

I agree. But I'm equally critical of "I'm more disciplined/wise because I do it solo" approach of those who do DE.

Strawman.

Agreed, One of the worst things in the world is the advent of word processors. The avg person on here has pathetic grammar skills. Makes me cringe just reading some of the posts in this thread as a former English teacher and someone who loves communication as a dilligent student of homiletics.

This is often bandied about as some sort of gold standard in RE vs. DE. It's not a helpful comparison, though it can be a factor. While a prima facie case can be made using this as a factor, it's not sum of the argument.

Conversely, I've seen DE students freeze in the pulpit because they are not used to personal interaction.

I can't think of a single good seminary that's an "easy time."

Homiletics classes come to mind right off. CPE is another. Counseling and PC where verbatims are used are another. A student who has had some training in this area could do doctoral work or advanced work who is a practioner, but a novice would not be well served going this route. A caveat would be a mentor who is serving under the auspice of a local church. But these are few and far between anymore, sadly.

I dunno....there is no substitute for interaction. A good sound library which helps the future minister build his own library is invaluable. Chapel services where the best ministers model exposition are worth Fort Knox and then some.

Most of the good seminaries now remove this restriction. The old guard thought the best prof was a researcher. The best prof now (Thankfully) is considered to be a good researcher/practitioner. And I agree that we need a recovery of the pastor-theologian. That's my model and aim.

I hear this once in a while, but I've never heard proof of the allegation.

I have seen this in RE and DE schools, and it's sad. You want a scholar/minister/servant in an ideal world. This should not be the exception. It should be the rule, IMHO.

In summation, we have to be careful about our dogmatic assertions based solely on narrow experiences. Pragmatism should not lead to dogmatism. I am thankful that I had RE before I ever had DE. I am thankful that RE and DE are available. I recommend RE before I recommend DE. There are far too many options available. However, DE has its place, and that place should be embraced where appropriate.