This post was mentioned on Twitter by jrrozko: via lifeasmission: Toward A Missional Vision of Theological Education: Conviction Shaping http://bit.ly/6tiBDP #FB…

This is exactly the point of this series. I don't claim to have all the answers to that question, but I am suggesting that rootedness in a local community on mission together is the only appropriate context for such education to occur.

"What use would education be if we never taught pastors to ply the trade of ministry?"

None at all, but we need to think about doing this in-context and cross-culturally. Sadly, the skills to do this are not offered in schools of theology. They are offered in schools of missiology, but the majority of our pastors are never exposed to the courses or practices which correspond to these skills. When Christendom is assumed, models, not contextually appropriate or culturally savvy abilities to ply ones ministerial trade, are what get emphasized.

I am saying that the very character of Christian doctrine is marred when we think it is something which can be known in abstraction from the life of a community on mission together. I am also saying that teaching ministers to ply their trade is tantamount to their education and formation, but again, that the character of this enterprise is damaged when we think of it more as giving a franchise model rather than passing on skills of indigenous expression.

I think I was confused by: "We have fooled ourselves into believing that the passing on of right doctrine or refined training in ministry models are of prime importance in theological education." I guess in my mind, if one is going for an education, then learning right doctrine and being trained for a ministry seem like really good things for an educational system to focus on.

Of course, you know waaay more about this stuff than I do, so forgive me if I'm just not understanding what you're saying. All too often I think that someone is saying something that they aren't and this could be just such a situation.

I really like the idea of using "the extent to which a particular doctrine helps or hinders our participation in God's mission" as a litmus test for whether or not something is orthodoxy. But I wonder how we could educate people to do such a thing if we don't teach them right doctrine? And what use would it be if we never taught pastors to ply the trade of ministry? But maybe the problem is that pastors are being taught doctrine, and practice, but are not being taught to use those things in order to further the mission of God? Is that right? If so, then totally, we need to address it. But (and I think we're saying the same thing here) we need to do that while teaching pastors doctrine as well as how to ply their trade.

Then again, maybe I'm just not understanding. I'm always nervous about posting on blogs because I'm afraid that my comments come across sounding too confrontational and arrogant. If I come across that way, I don't mean to. I'm really curious.

How you read this is interesting to me since most of my work aims at eliminating dichotomies by proposing alternative paradigms I had no intention to give the impression that I would choose to "askew training & education as superfluous or corrupt." I am instead advocating for a renewed vision of both for those who have in mind helping to lead local churches. For these people, traditional education (classroom stuff) is a part of a larger vision of spiritual formation as opposed to essentially the sum total of it.

Yes, perhaps we can "be trained within a traditional backdrop, while remaining faithful, and upholding a commitment to the truth all while attempting to remain flexible to the manifestation of God's power around us," but my contention is that our current system of theological education is not only not conducive to this happening, but actually works against it. Thus, the need for a new vision.

I take for granted that form should follow function. The function of local church ministry has changed and this calls for new forms of theological education.

I guess what I'm getting at is, sometimes telling a student that his or her idea is heretical is attempting to be faithful to God.

Speaking of fleshing this stuff out in a local context, I am off to a meeting to do exactly that!

One of my mentors in early adulthood embodied this well. He had his own pet doctrinal positions, but he created an atmosphere of safety for exploring ideas which was injected with his own passion for learning. It was contagious.

On the flip side, one of my younger brothers is a sophomore at a prominent private Christian college in the LA area and his professors are commonly strike down students ideas as heretical.

This is an important series you're writing here JR. I hope you have an opportunity to participate in fleshing some of these things out in a local context.