If you haven’t noticed, theological education in North
America is going through a “shake-out” process. I learned this week of one free-standing denominational seminary
that is negotiating to become the divinity school of a college in the same
denomination. Other seminaries are combining
or closing their doors. Those that
survive with find new partners and strengthen their relationships with old
partners.
New approaches to theological education like those being
offered by Central Baptist Theological Seminary require contextualization and
creativity, but they will fail without cooperation. Healthy, flexible, and supportive partners are
needed for these efforts to be successful.
Partners assist theological institutions in a number of
ways. For one thing, partners—church,
judicatories, other institutions—link the theological schools with potential
students. Seminaries and divinity
schools are exhibiting flexibility by offering programs to educate lay or
licensed ministers (such as Central’s Foundation program), train bivocational ministers, and educate
staff and laity within the walls of the churches. The endorsement of a judicatory or church
also provides credibility to the theological institutions. Churches and judicatories often provide
financial assistance for students as well.
Partnerships do not end there, however, but can include
relationships with other educational institutions, not-for-profit
organizations, and other theological schools.
Such relationships can be mutually beneficial for all concerned. The Wisconsin center of CBTS has prospered
due to its relationship with the Housing Ministries of American Baptists in
Wisconsin.
Theological institutions are also finding value in ecumenical
relationships. Some
denominationally-related institutions did not start out to do this, but they
quickly found a responsive clientele in students from other denominations. This is not only aids the viability of the
institution but it enriches the learning environment for all of the
students. In a world where faith issues
are becoming both important and divisive, people of faith must respect, teach,
and support one another.
Finally, theological schools need the cooperation of
donors. For the most part, alumni of
theological institutions are not their best supporters, but one is sometimes
surprised by both the resources and generosity of former students. Present and former students are also a link
to other donors—individuals, churches, judicatories, and foundations. As my friend John Gravley often points out,
seminary students don’t pay for their own education; they provide only a part
of the funding needed. Theological
institutions need friends who are willing to step up and provide the financial resources
to form competent and creative ministers.
Theological education continues to change rapidly but it
will flourish if its leaders, students, and supporters embrace contextualization,
creativity and cooperation.
Comments