During the 1980s, an extensive literature critical of North American theological education appeared. It challenged basic and widely accepted premises of theological study: its orientation toward clerical tasks, its conceptions of theory and practice, and the way studies were structured in a fourfold pattern of Bible, theology, history, and practice. Deploring the fragmentation that clericalism, theory-practice dualism, and disciplinary dispersion had produced, many of the authors called for a unifying theological emphasis, by which they meant that theological study should form habits of intellect and character that enable a person to make theological judgments. In the same period, however, social trends and developments pushed theological schools to diversify, offering new specialized programs for ministers and laypersons as well as new program formats for older, less mobile students. The call for unity and coherence and the countervailing trend toward diversification and diffusion will force theological schools to make choices in the 1990s that will influence the shape of religious life and leadership in the century to come.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Thomas F. O'Meara, “Doctoral Programs in Theology at U.S. Catholic Universities,”America, 3 Feb. 1990, pp. 79-103.
2.
2. The last major work on theological education before the early 1980s was the comprehensive study by H. Richard Niebuhr, Daniel Day Williams, and James M. Gustafson, The Advancement of Theological Education (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1957).
3.
Farley's constructive proposals for theological education are found in his Fragility of Knowledge, pp. 103-191.
4.
4. In Farley's account, this change is marked by the publication of Frederich Schleiermacher's Brief Outline of Theological Study. Farley, Theologia, pp. 84-88.
5.
5. For a bibliography of these works, see W. Clark Gilpin, “Basic Issues in Theological Education: A Selected Bibliography, 1980-88,”Theological Education, 25(2):115-121 (Spring 1989).
6.
6. The phrase was introduced by David H. Kelsey, To Understand God Truly: What's Theological about a Theological School (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992).
7.
James F. Hopewell , “A Congregational Paradigm for Theological Education,”Theological Education, 21(1):60-70 (Autumn 1984).
8.
8. David H. Kelsey, “A Theological Curriculum about and against the Church,” in Beyond Clericalism, ed. Joseph C. Hough, Jr. and Barbara G. Wheeler (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1988), p. 37.
9.
9. Roman Catholics joined this organization—then the American Association of Theological Schools—in large numbers in the years 1968-73; most received their accreditation between 1970 and 1977.
10.
10. George P. Schner, “Evaluation” (Manuscript, Auburn Theological Seminary, 1990).
11.
Robert W. Ferris , Renewal in Theological Education: Strategies for Change (Wheaton, IL: Billy Graham Center, 1990). A small group of scholars from seminaries serving several branches of evangelicalism has begun to meet at Fuller Seminary and plans further publications.
12.
12. Neil Gillman, “On the Religious Education of American Rabbis,” in Caring for the Commonweal: Education for Religious and Public Life, ed. Parker J. Palmer (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1990), p. 112.
13.
13. Ibid., p. 115.
14.
14. Ibid., pp. 120, 123.
15.
15. Ibid., p. 129.
16.
16. Glenn T. Miller, “The Virtuous Leader: Teaching Leadership in Theological Schools,”Faith and Mission, 9:31-32 (Fall 1991).
17.
The enrollment figure is from Gail Buchwalter King, Fact Book on Theological Education for the Academic Year 1990-91 (Pittsburgh: Association of Theological Schools, n.d.), p. 29.
18.
18. Figures are for a year of full-time professional study. King, Fact Book, pp. 78-82.
19.
19. Doctor of ministry enrollments have increased from a handful twenty years ago to over 7000 (headcount), or 13 percent of total enrollment in 1990. In the short interval between 1989 and 1990, enrollment in nonprofessional master's programs increased by about 6 percent while enrollment in the core professional program, the three-year master of divinity, decreased 8 percent. King, Fact Book, p. 31.
20.
20. For an especially vehement account of the overcommitment of theological schools and its consequences, see James M. Gustafson, “Priorities in Theological Education,”Theological Education, 23 (supplement):69-87 (1987).
21.
21. Ellis L. Larsen and James M. Shopshire, “A Profile of Contemporary Seminarians,”Theological Education, 24(2):22 (Spring 1988).
22.
22. Ibid., p. 27.
23.
23. Two phenomena, the establishment of the doctor of ministry degree and the advent of women in substantial numbers in theological schools, seem to account for virtually all the increase in total enrollment in the last 25 years.
24.
King , Fact Book, p. 37.
25.
25. A copy of this document can be obtained from the Association of Theological Schools, 10 Summit Park Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15275-1103.
26.
26. Conversation with Glenn Miller, 1992.
27.
27. A survey of Phi Beta Kappa members shows that in the years 1945-49, equal numbers chose medicine/dentistry and the ministry/priesthood/rabbinate—about 4 percent in each case; in 1975-79, 19 percent chose medical professions and less than 1 percent, religious professions. Howard R. Bowen and Jack H. Schuster, American Professors: A National Resource Imperiled (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), p. 227.
28.
28. In the General Social Survey from 1972 to 1988, about one-third of respondents indicated that they had “a great deal” of confidence in the leaders of religious institutions. Scientifically based professions ranked higher; education was about the same; legally based professions, government, and the press ranked lower. General Social Surveys 1972-89: Cumulative Code Book (Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, 1989), pp. 185-189.
29.
29. This thesis is advanced in Sherryl Kleinman, Equals before God: Seminarians as Humanistic Professionals (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), pp. 1-23 and passim.
