• Toward a Missional Vision of Theological Education: New Soil

    November 24, 2009

    Previous Posts in this Series:

    Preliminary Thoughts | The Root of the Problem | Fruit of the Problem

    After laying what I consider to be some necessary groundwork for this conversation, I’m excited to begin moving us in a more constructive path of conversation as we try to get at what a missional vision of theological education might entail.

    A missional vision of theological education differs from our current one, not as a reaction to it – the classic pendulum swinging in the other direction sort of thing, but as a completely alternative paradigm.  For the same reasons that megachurches can’t be missional, methods of theological education rooted in Christendom systems of coercive power are not designed to equip missional leaders.  Thus, at least two different kinds of work are needed.

    One, binding up that which is broken and doing what we can to restore it to health.

    And two, planting new trees in new soil.

    To the best of my knowledge, in the first instance, centers of theological education are…

    1) Making missional adaptations to their curriculum: offering courses in missional hermeneutics, missional ecclesiology, missional theology, etc.

    2) Offering more creative program options: utilizing online methods of delivery, developing intensive based courses, moving to cohort-based programs, etc.

    3) Trying harder to actually partner with local churches to offer students more opportunity for in-service learning.

    These are all good, helpful, and necessary changes within the current system.  We need to see more and more schools moving in these directions.

    But.  These remain changes within a system that I am saying is flawed at its roots.  It’s kind of like painting the walls, fixing the plumbing, and replacing the electrical systems in a house that has been irreparably eaten by termites.  You may as well do what you can as long as the house is standing, but if you’re not also working on building yourself a new house, you’re gonna be in trouble.

    This leads us to the second sort of work that needs to be done, not so much mending, but tilling and planting.  To use biblical metaphors, I think of it in terms of wineskins (Lk. 5:36-38) and kernels of wheat (Jn. 12:23-25).  Now is not a time for repairing old wineskins, now is a time for new wineskins and new wine.  To go further, our current system of theological education (not unlike the dominant expression of church in the West) has a God-ordained opportunity to count its loss as gain in Christ.  If they would only spend themselves fully on behalf of those that are coming after by being wiling to die rather than move into survival mode at all cost (a patently un-Christian stance for sure), what an explosion of Kingdom power we might see!

    Whether this happens or not remains to be seen, but as we move toward a missional vision of theological education, I suggest that it will be marked by the following:

    1) Community Rootedness*

    2) Character Formation

    3) Conviction Shaping

    4) Contextual Training

    5) Cross-Cultural Pioneering

    In the coming weeks, I hope to deal with each one of these in turn.  I’m anxious for your comments and insights on this and future posts.

    *I changed this from Communal Discernment to Community Rootedness as a more encompassing term.
    Related Posts with Thumbnails
    • Share/Bookmark

    Posted in: christendom, church, community, culture, discipleship, kingdom, leadership, missional, modernity, spiritual formation, theological education, theology, western culture

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Recent Comments

  • Jason Coker said...

    1

    Well, you know the "Link Within" plugin is working when it pulls up an MAGL post in this context : )

    I'm going to have to stew on your points a bit, but my first question is what distinguishes a system of missional theological education from the church itself, especially in a post-Christendom context? If there's no need to prepare a professional clergy class, why is there a need for a separate organization? In my mind the Church is tasked with each of those 5 marks.

    I can certainly see a need for leadership training, even if it's largely lay leadership (and here I'm making an assumption you haven't established), but that seems to also be a task of the Church. Perhaps in a liminal time, with little resources there's a need for braod cooperation across local bodies to fill the gaps. Is this what you have in mind? Networks of collaborative leadership/theological training that overlay local missional communities?

    Sorry, that was a bit stream-of-consciousness wasn't it?

    11/25/09 1:07 AM | Comment Link

  • R. Giselbrecht said...

    2

    Hello there. My PhD is about gender reconciliation and the historical roots of male dominance in Protestantism beginning in the 16th century that divided men and women in the church. I believe that the paradigm shift that must take place in theological education so that we can participate in the missio dei in contemporary Western culture involves all of the things that you mention, but should also be sensitive to the fact that until men and women can work together in a "trinitarian" model that furthers the alter (the other), we cannot be the "city on a hill" that we the people of God are called to be. Men and women working together in unity for God's purpose without the current hierarchy would truly set the church apart as a role model for the world. I think that the beginnings would be within the academy and thus theological education. 70% of the students at the U of Zürich theological faculty are girls. What does that tell you about theological education and the church? My goodness, I wrote a lot, but only drew a stick figure of what I am working on. Hope the outline is meaningful to your project.

    11/25/09 8:47 AM | Comment Link

  • jrrozko said...

    3

    Hey Rebecca, thanks so much for taking the time to comment. Your PhD studies sound incredibly interesting and vitally important.

    I am curious, not knowing the Swiss context all that well, what does it say that 70% of the theology students at U of Z are girls?

    I love that you are working on a trinitarian model of gender roles in Christian leadership. Much like the sad and tired liberal/conservative debate, the complimentarian/egalitarian one is built on faulty assumptions and is therefore lacking in terms of a missional understanding of gender. Please do pass on articles and tid bits that you are finding helpful.

    That being said, while this topic is bigger that I am probably going to be able to include (at least substantively) in forthcoming posts, suffice it to say, I take it for granted that we need to be identifying and equipping gifted leaders whether they be men or women.

    Thanks again.

    11/25/09 3:10 PM | Comment Link

  • Jason Coker said...

    4

    Wondering if you've seen this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o

    11/25/09 4:03 PM | Comment Link

  • R. Giselbrecht said...

    5

    What does it say that 70% of the theology students at U of Z are girls?

    In reply: When the church is in crisis, fairly often in the history of the church, women are allowed to serve in leadership positions. When the tide turns, and the church is more powerful, women are required to take a back seat to male leadership. Naturally, this has lots of implications, but I am sure that it takes both genders together for success, and the Bible supports me on this. Getting this part of mutuality right could change the world. Women doing theology and working for a dying contemporary European church is typical of the church's historical story. But what if men and women could work together without dominance and hierarchy?

    Did you know that this is the first time ever that I joined a blog conversation? Greetings at home!

    11/25/09 4:16 PM | Comment Link

  • jrrozko said...

    6

    HA! Well, for my part, I'd love to have you as a regular voice.

    Yes, that bit of church history (and current practice) begs for some serious consideration. Love that you are doing this work. We need lots more of it!

    11/25/09 4:20 PM | Comment Link

  • Josh Garrington said...

    7

    JR,

    How do newer traditional church based education inititives fit into this discussion.

    These could take the form of things tied very tightly to one church, like the stuff Piper is doing with The Bethlehem Institute, basically putting a seminary in a church setting.
    The other end of the spectrum is things like Micheal Patton's 'Theology Program' that is put together with the intention of being hosted and run in local congregations, but is also available for individuals to do on their own, or to join in an 'online' community setting.
    Or some combination of the two, maybe like the 9Marks stuff that Mark Dever does.

    Are you putting these under the category of 'traditional' theological education, missional, or something else entirely?

    11/25/09 6:33 PM | Comment Link

  • jrrozko said...

    8

    These aren't what I have in mind when I am talking about traditional theological education. I am thinking of Bible school and Seminary. I am definitely heading in a church-based trajectory, but what is currently out there, at least to my knowledge, is just what you said, seminary in a church setting. This doesn't get at the core of the problem. In fact, it might accentuate it by reducing the amount of diverging perspective student have access to.

    Little known fact, Piper personally asked me to consider the Bethlehem Institute and as we talked it became more and more apparent that it was (for better or worse) mainly a breeding ground for Piper wannabe's.

    Patton's Theology Program may have its place, but it's a far cry from what I am after. It's mainly about making basic Christian education available to as many people as possible. A noble enterprise, but not specific enough to the equipping of missional church leaders.

    9 Marks seems more about indoctrination than spiritual formation – trying to convince people what they should think and who they should be rather than equipping them how to think and how to become more like Christ.

    11/25/09 6:56 PM | Comment Link

  • Josh Garrington said...

    9

    Thanks for the clarification. ____I tend to agree with your assesments of the above. I like both Dever and Piper's preaching, but find their supplamental materials to be somewhat heavy handed with some tunnel vision. I love the Theology Program stuff and actually frequently listen, or relisten, to it while working; but I see what you mean in that it is geared more as a general background education, not leadership training.

    I'm really looking forward to seeing what training model(s) you end presenting.

    BTW: I'm pretty sure my Dad's Master's Thesis was related to this topic. Had something to do with alternate methods of training pastors beyond the seminary model, I think.

    11/25/09 8:01 PM | Comment Link

  • jrrozko said...

    10

    I have. As a matter of fact, I introduced it into the material for one of the MAGL classes while I was there. Lots to consider for sure.

    11/25/09 4:17 PM | Comment Link

  • geoff holslcaw said...

    11

    great stuff. can't wait to see the rest.

    11/25/09 11:03 PM | Comment Link

  • Ben Sternke said...

    12

    I like the 5 elements, JR, and how you're planning to fold them all into some kind of theological training that is consonant with the local church. Looking forward to more to come!

    11/27/09 9:30 PM | Comment Link

Leave A Comment

Mail (will not be published) (required)