Are Seminarians Trained to Lead the 21st c. Church?
I spoke with Adam at Emerging/Mainliners last January about the kinds of congregations some of the seminarians he knows hope to serve after graduation. Are they looking for traditional Constantinian congregations? Are they hoping against hope to find something within their tradition but beyond the box?
A survey came to me recently from a seminarian in one of our esteemed PCUSA institutions requesting my insights for a worship paper. I was snarkier than usual because the survey indicated no awareness - much less understanding - of anything more than a 20th (or maybe 19th) century understanding of the church and the culture.
Example: Which do you prefer to wear in the pulpit?
A) Suit. B) Robe with clergy collar. C) Robe w/o collar D) Cassock
Note: there was no “none of the above.”
This came from a woman who entered seminary as a second career, and maybe this explains her limited possibilities for clergy wear. It goes without saying that she assumes that preaching will take place “in the pulpit.” Is this an anomaly? Or are most seminarians being trained to serve the Constantinian Church?
Does anybody know where we might find a seminarian who longs to serve Jesus outside that box?
Comment by Jim Bonewald on 2 May 2007:
Jan,
Great questions, as I finished seminary two years ago the emergent church was only coming on the radar screen at Dubuque. I was trained in preaching from a pulpit with a manuscript and of course, wearing my robe!
I occasionally break out of the mold and long to do so more, not because I was taught too but because various practices seem to work better in my congregation than what I was taught in seminary. So now for instance I only wear my robes on Communion Sundays and on high holy days. On occasion I now use video, images, powerpoint, and attempt to preach from the floor in a more interactive manner. (though I still have a long way to go in adopting such practices.)
I think your question may go deeper than just seminary training…I am now on my presbytery’s CPM and I see that Presbyteries have great difficulty understanding the emergent church and some of the changes that are necessary to move away from the Constantinian church.
When a student comes expressing some emergent attitudes and practices we’re not quite sure what to do with them; since they don’t look and talk like our candidates used too.
If presbyteries and churches aren’t asking for it why should we expect seminaries to provide it?
Comment by jWinters on 2 May 2007:
Hmmn…yeah, maybe there’s something there, but I think this is much ado about not a whole lot. “In the pulpit” is pretty clearly Christianese parlance for “when you be preachin’”.
I think what this really shows is that there is a growing gulf between “emergent” types and “Constantinian” types. I’m not a big fan of that. In fact I’ll go as far as saying that I’ve seen as much spiritualized snobbery out of “emerg…” types as I have from “Old School” Christians.
The Emerging church is still emerging. It’s foolhardy to assume that the emergent/emerging/yackety yack yack church will remain exactly as it is now. This is a shift in the culture of the Christian church as a whole.
As with any shift in culture there will be those who are slow to go along with the shift, those who die before they shift, and those who are ready to shift every two weeks.
Be patient. Watch both “sides” of this fence, keep your eyes on Christ above any church movement, shift as the Spirit moves you, and help others to see your way of thinking before you condemn them for “pulpit usage” or “collar wearing.”
Comment by jledmiston on 2 May 2007:
I agree with you, J Winters — the shifts are often unclear and messy. A traditional congregation - led well — can be as outside the box as a non-traditional congregation. The difference, it seems, is in mindset. I’m concerned when I speak with seminarians who have not been equipped to serve in our culture. At least where I live (suburban DC) it’s no longer much of a Christian culture at all. I wish the survey I received had reflected on that — leading worship, or simply worshipping in these days. It’s more than what we wear in or out of the pulpit.
Comment by Drew Ludwig on 2 May 2007:
My school, Eastern Seminary (now Palmer), did a decent job, I think because they have rejected the liberal/fundamentalist split–i.e. social gospel and individual conversion are important; evangelism AND social action–because they emphasize mission, and because they are a majority non-white seminary.
Haven’t attended Pittsburgh Seminary, but I know some that have, and it seems to have done a good job, too.
So, to answer your last question: in Pennsylvania, in both Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.
Comment by jWinters on 2 May 2007:
Agreed jledmiston. I’m a seminarian myself (the dirty LC-MS kind). When it comes to being prepared to work in a place like suburban DC, most aren’t fit. When it comes to being a pastor for little old ladies in Iowa, we’ve got the cream o’ the crop.
Yet I think it does deal more with mindset. Most of my seminary training hasn’t even pretended to be very practical or pointed toward one community or another. We learn our Greek, our Hebrew, the way theology has been done in the past, and what’s being done now (and by “now” I mean the obligatory 10 or so years back that it takes the academe to catch up). Going to a campus ministry setting, I can’t say that I’ve taken any classes that will make me a better campus minister, and I can’t say that I’ve missed any that would make me better at that job.
I’m heartened that we’re seeing the best and the brightest from seminaries across the world looking into some of the ideas of the emerging church. I think there is something to be said about that. Dan Kimball said he used the name “emerging” because Leadership Network was talking about “advance scouts for the emerging church.” I think we’re still living in the days of the advance scouts. Things are getting out, but Christians change slowly.
…and after all, we still need pastors for blue hairs in Iowa.
Here’s a question for you:
What sorts of classes would you institute in a seminary setting to prepare students for today’s ministry environment?
Comment by jledmiston on 3 May 2007:
Hmm.
Theology, practical theology, history classes - maybe continuing education reflection groups - would address some of the changes. I’d start with reading/discussion of several of the books listed here on the Presbymergent resource list: McLaren, Franke, Rollins, Borden, McNeal, Gibbs & Bolger. Some of the insights are practical in terms of leadership development - how to organize church leadership (there are options even in the PCUSA), roles of pastor/officers/congregation members/higher judicatories. As you said, much of what we learn in ministry is on-the-job training that nobody can teach us.
All I know is that the church I was trained to serve doesn’t exist either in small town or big city America. At first I was thinking it was more a village/city thing. But you’ve helped me see that this isn’t necessarily the case.
My first call was to a tiny congregation in a town of 700 in upstate NY. They wanted their pastor to be a chaplain — to preach, marry, baptize, and bury. But if I’d know then what I know now, I would have served them - and God - so much better.
I did not equip them for ministry because I’m not sure I was equpped, nor did I even realize I was supposed to fulfill that role. I was trained to be a chaplain and to be the sole spiritual leader of a congregation, offering wisdom (at the ripe age of 27) to old and young. We thought we were being trained both Biblically and in accordance with the PCUSA Book of Order, but our understanding was narrow and based mostly on a model of church leadership that faded away after the 1950s/60s, in my humble opinion.
Comment by SDeGeorge on 3 May 2007:
I’m currently doing a DMin at Drew Theological in “21st century global leadership” and it’s entire focus so far has been on preparing for serving in non-Constantinian settings. Does that translate to the same thing for folks doing the MDiv? I don’t know. Also, I’m aware that Drew isn’t a PCUSA seminary, but it was the one program I could find that had this great mainline yet emerging focus.
Comment by Doug Resler on 3 May 2007:
It seems to me that we may want to begin by asking whether or not it is even possible to “train” seminarians for a world that hasn’t yet come fully into being. I think Joan Gray said it best when she addressed the GAC this past year and told them we are on the cusp of seeing God do a new thing in our denomination. She went on to say that new, by definition, is something that hasn’t happened before and is therefore of an unknown. (At least this is how I understood her.) If this is true, and I believe it is, then perhaps “training” isn’t really the issue. To me, it seems that the role of the seminary is to teach students how to “think” theologically about the church, their engagement with the culture, their local situation, etc. Certainly that is going to mean some changes to the curriculum,(such as including more and more global voices to go along with the heavy dose of Calvin and Barth that I received at Princeton)but ultimately it is up to the student to cultivate an ability to discern how the Spirit is moving in their unique situation. In a post-modern world where metanarratives have collapsed and local narratives are privileged, it seems to me that trying to train seminarians with a “one-size fits all” kind of mentality, whether Constantinian or Emergent, might be counter-productive. Instead, equip them to think, to discern, get them to listen to divergent voices from across the spectrum, push them into internships that take them out of the box and force them to engage other cultures, that kind of thing. I know Princeton is considering doing this and I am pretty hopeful about it. (Although someone who is there might be able to give a better picture of what is actually taking place…)Naming Darrell Guder to the post of Academic Dean was a masterstroke by Dr. Torrance and I look forward to seeing how PTS changes in the years ahead. I am starting my DMin this summer at Columbia Theological Seminary in the Gospel and Culture track and am pretty excited about the opportunity to work with Steve Hayner among others on how the church raises up leaders in the 21st century. So I think some things are already happening in our seminaries and I hope it continues.
Comment by Jan on 3 May 2007:
Great points Doug.
Back to my comments on the worship survey sent to me by the seminarian: I felt a bit like a broken record (which of course, is such a 50s-70s metaphor) but most of my responses mentioned context. One size never really fit all, but we tried.
This change is sweeping way beyond the church.
Comment by Doug Resler on 3 May 2007:
Your last comment is right on Jan…this change is indeed sweeping way beyond the church.
I was speaking to my father-in-law who works for a big defense industry contractor about some of these same issues and he talked a great deal about how his world has changed significantly in the last several years. Sort of the “World is Flat” kind of thing if you’ve ever read Freidman.
Anyway, I re-read your post again and then some of the comments and I think you are right to point out the breach that is rapidly opening between what congregational and pastoral expectations. I know we have struggled with that in my own situation. This is my first call out of seminary and it is a church that worships at about a 100-120 on a Sunday. When I got here 70% of the congregation was sixty-five or older (not exaggerating) and there were two other elementary-aged children besides our own. I am pretty sure the ONLY reason we’ve had such a fruitful relationship is that they saw the handwriting on the wall. At our first elder retreat, I asked them where they saw the church in ten years and over half of the Session said, “With a For Sale sign out front.” That led to some pointed discussion about what we were willing to give up to prevent that from happening and we have gone from there. A lot of the time it still feels like we are taking one step forward and two steps back but I am confident that God is at work in our midst and I am seeing lots of spiritual growth in our membership as we connect with our community, reach out to the unchurched, etc. It is a struggle and we’ve lost some folks (2006 was an extremely painful year for me personally and professionally) but God is faithful even as he prunes.
Throughout the process I have been comforted by something Edwin Freidman said in his book “Generation to Generation” about changing emotional systems. We have to be a healthy, non-anxious presence in the congregation. The more we are able to do that, the more the system will be forced to adjust and change. It is easier said than done, to be sure, but it may be the best gift we can offer to the people of God.
Comment by Shawn on 4 May 2007:
Maybe a more appropriate question is: are seminarians being trained to start 21st century churches? The vast majority of churches out there aren’t even close to being “with the times” and are not likely to change.
Comment by Jim Bonewald on 4 May 2007:
And are presbyteries and/or local congregations ready to support the start of 21st century churches….
Comment by Brian Wallace on 4 May 2007:
I think one of the questions to be asked is “What is the role of the seminary in preparing pastors?”
In my seminary experience I decided that it was the seminary’s job to teach people how to think - not what to do.
Seminaries, while they are certainly contextual to a certain extent, are severely limited.
There are huge cultural differences between small churches, medium-sized churches, and large churches Presbyterian churches right here within the Pittsburgh region.
I believe the critical component to seminary education is a simultaneous involvement in a faith community. If you learn how to think in seminary, you learn your application skills in the church.
The challenge is finding communities of faith that are suitable for seminarians to study in.
I’m not taking seminaries off the hook as far as adapting to changing cultural contexts, but it is limited to changing how they teach people to think.
Comment by David A. Zimmerman on 4 May 2007:
I can’t keep silent, even though I’m a nonseminarian, unordained layperson. But I really resonate with the problem you’re identifying here. Our church (suburban Chicago) has two Sunday services–a traditional and a “contemporary”–during the school year, but they’re combined during the summer. My pastor has gotten the message from the lay leaders in the traditional service that the robe stays on, but the robe comes off and he wanders from the pulpit during the contemporary. (”Contemporary” is a gracious way of describing the service, to be honest.) The summer months get tricky as a result. So does the budgeting: should we drop the cash on a grand piano or on new lighting systems?
I have this sense that we as a church need to do some missions analysis of the villages we inhabit–who lives here, who’s finding the church, how are they finding it. We need that as much to get both services on the same page–that worship temperament aside, we’re inhabiting the same cultural universe–as to identify what our church would become naturally if we weren’t bureaucratizing and politicizing its growth.
Comment by Rev. David Williams on 4 May 2007:
What box? What we wear is neither here nor there. My congregation has a “blended” worship, so I slap in my lil plastic collar, robe up, make sure my stole matches the liturgical season…and then bellow along as the praise team cranks. I’ve even been known to clap on occasion, having finally received a special dispensation from my Presybtery’s Committee on Decency and Order.
Comment by Doug Resler on 4 May 2007:
I agree in part with Shawn (that seminaries should be training more church planters) but I would say that we can’t just abandon the people of God in our existing churches no matter how resistent to change they may be! I think there is plenty of room for both. In fact, I would even go further and say that our best chance for renewal and revitalization in our existing churches will comes as they see new churches being planted with 21st paradigms. I am a big believer in the transforming power of mission and would love to see our emerging churches be more intentional about reaching back to our existing churches without apology and without compromise for who they are and how they have sought to follow Christ.
And Jim is certainly correct to point out that our presbyteries will have to be open to supporting 21st century church planting efforts…
Comment by jledmiston on 6 May 2007:
One of my “beefs” with emergent/mainliner conferences of late has been that the leadership has (mostly) been people not currently serving mainline/loyal radical people in established congregations. Many of the leaders have been either church planters or ministers of non-parish settings (college chaplains, para-church organizations, etc.)
There is a hunger for support which equips those serving First Presbyterian Church of Small Town or St. Andrews of The Burbs. Something we might think about down the road.
Comment by David A. Zimmerman on 6 May 2007:
I agree with jledmiston. I worry about the diffusion of the church’s mission as well as the promotion of spiritual narcissism when people’s default option, in the face of a weak church, is to go start something new and unconnected. I don’t mean to accuse all church planters of such, but I do think it’s a concern. When we’re frustrated with the compromised values or limited vision of a place, is it better to get fired or to quit?
Comment by Patrick Hiltz on 6 May 2007:
I can’t speak for other seminaries, but Union-PSCE does not really acknowledge the emergent church as something that is on the radar screen. At least not in any of the classes that I have taken.
It’s a fine institution but everything I know about post-modernity and the emergent church is primarily from my own readings. Hopefully our new school president will address the void of teaching on the rise of the emergent church.
Comment by Gabrielle on 6 May 2007:
Hey guys! It sounds like you are talking about big business here. Where is trusting and seeking God in all this? Where’s the prayer and fasting? When considering career, church size, etc. - what about your individual gifting when seeking to serve God and do His will for your life? For wise counsel on the future of the church, church growth, planting, and Christainity you might consider CJ Mahaney. He is the former Sr. Pastor Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg,MD (also the home of Sr. Pastor Josh Harris author of “Stop Dating the Church” and “I Kissed Dating Good-bye”, and New Attitude). CJ author of such books as The Cross Centered Life and Humility, is now leading Sovereign Grace Ministries and answering all manner of church growth questions. Great leader and teacher, look him up some time.
Comment by Nick Larson on 10 May 2007:
I’ve been reading for a while but this is my first post. Now before you take what I have to say to seriously
you might note I’m not PCUSA, but I am attending a PCUSA seminary in San Francisco Theological Seminary.
I thought it would be helpful for me to add to this conversation and share my experience with the current situation at least at my seminary. The emergent movement at SFTS is at a fairly low level of knowledge/involvement from a curriculum, administrative, and faculty level (some understand and teach from a postmodern perspective, some do not), but there is a group of students on campus who are very interested in reinterpreting some of the class materials we are getting into a more postmodern setting.
A few of us have managed to get plugged in with Mission Bay Community Church (www.missionbaycc.org) and Bruce Reyes-Chow (www.reyes-chow.com) who is a regular around here. I can say that my currently ongoing internship there is very helpful for my own growth and understanding of church planting in an emergent style. It has been invaluable to get hands on experience and being able to watch an experienced emergent pastor.
Mentoring is a very helpful tool in teaching pastoral ministry and should not be overlooked. The one suggestion that I could make about what people involved with presbymergent churches can do is to offer internships to seminarians. Nothing is as helpful as training future church leaders with hands on experience. If you want to better prepare them/us for leadership for the 21st century then that’s the experience they/we will need.
Pingback by Seminary Training? « seanchow.com on 16 May 2007:
[...] which is a website that combines ideas from the PCUSA and the Emerging Church. The article was on Are Seminarians Being trainined to Lead the 21 Century Church?. This is an issue that has been thrown around a lot lately. An issue that we are discussing at one [...]
Pingback by Presbymergent Retrospective, 2007 : presbymergent on 1 January 2008:
[...] Are Seminarians Trained to Lead the 21st Century Church? by Jan Edmiston [...]