Let me tie a bow around the discussion about the best locale for pastoral training by making a few observations from my experience in Russia. The whole purpose of these past few blog posts was to
establish a case for pastoral training within the context of the normal
functions of a healthy local church. Although my Evangelical brothers in Russia are light years ahead today compared to where they were just a few years ago, Russia still has a desperate need for a
biblically-based model for training pastors that is not simply another western
program. Since the church has dealt with this theological issue over the years,
the experience of practitioners and the reflection of theological writers have
bearing on this discussion. If pastoral training can be seen as an ultimate end
of one branch of healthy local church discipleship, then pastors are best
developed in that context. For Russia, this means rethinking the way
institutions of formal education can service the church. But I would add that America needs to rethink the way we've done pastoral training as well.
There are numerous
models throughout church history. There are more eastern models whereby church
members simply attend sessions of theological inquiry at their convenience. Bill Hull
points to the hall of Tyrannus as an example, but he quickly admits that “contemporary
culture does not provide the kind of environment the hall of Tyrannus had.
Opponents do not stroll in church buildings and dialogue with a speaker.”[1]
Furthermore, this still does not insure the discipleship training of all church
members nor the holistic and relational training of pastors.
Peter Penner advocates the western integration of
theological education and secular schooling. He cites the British model whereby
a theological institute has a partnership with a state university; the
Turbingen model whereby a state university student experiences his theological
education through a local community; the Odessa model whereby there is
simultaneous enrollment in formal but disconnected secular and sacred
educational programs; and the St. Petersburg model of distance education for
theological training while studying at a secular university.[2] He
points to the attractiveness of western education to Russian students and how
Russian “theological schools recognize the variety of programmes and the
individualization of education which characterize the school systems of the West.”[3]
Yet, Mark Harris warns that a western “desire for accreditation can lead to a
curriculum that is more heavily theoretical, and which doesn't prepare people
to serve effectively in churches.”[4] So
this too fails to supply an adequate pastoral training model. Just look at where we are with some of our own American institutions struggling to jump through SACS hoops or catch at least a smile from ATS.
The question as to
what can provide positional, functional, and relational training for local
church leadership can only be answered by a local church theology. It is more
than a village mentality; it is a biblical community, something that the
academy neither can nor should provide.
In Russia and America, local churches need to
develop a more full-orbed theology of church-based discipleship that results in
pastoral training in the local church itself. There is a place for both
seminaries, bible colleges, and institutes, but even training programs
cannot effectively take place without a simultaneous participation in local
church discipleship training. Like Hull says, “Unless they have a
place to practice, people don’t learn well.”[5]
Theological orthodoxy must somehow lead to theological orthopraxy.
If seminaries or other institutes of formal theological training survive
into the mid twenty-first century in Russia, it will be because the theological
rationale for their being and purposes are considered in light of a healthy
ecclesiology. And I would posit that American seminaries must do more than simply restructure the delivery system for busy pastors. The seminary must serve the teaching role of the local church,
whereby it equips senior leadership to train its younger pastors and whereby
local lay persons experience the indirect benefit of full-orbed theological
education as disseminated throughout the entire membership of the local church.
No comments:
Post a Comment