Beware Your Seminary Professors
A seminary professor is not the same thing as a church elder. That was probably the main thing I observed at last week’s Gordon Conwell Seminary conference “Renewing the Evangelical Mission,” which I attended with Michael Lawrence. Consider a couple of obvious matters:
· An elder is chosen (hopefully) for his exemplary character, his ability to teach, and his track record of doing spiritual good (fruitfulness); a seminary professor is chosen because he or she excels in research and writing.
· An elder’s position requires a holistic regard for his sheep (their intellectual, emotional, spiritual, and physical states); a seminary professor need only be concerned with the “intellectual.”
· An elder’s entire life is expected to be integrated into the congregation’s life (like a shepherd and sheep); a seminary professor need only interact with students in the classroom.
What struck me at this academic conference, however, was how much the “rules of engagement” differed for elders and academics. Three examples:
· In the Western secular academy, one of the highest values is an open exchange of ideas without pre-judgment, a value which has clearly transmitted into Christian academic circles. Yes, there should be a place for Christians to openly consider new ideas, but consider the anthropology behind that democratic value: it assumes (these days, at least) that people are rational, objective, and basically good. When this is our starting point, we feel free to say whatever, whenever. An elder has a very different starting point. He knows that his sheep are weak and susceptible to temptation and self-deceit. Like a parent, he knows that intellectual growth is highly intertwined with spiritual and social maturity. So he takes great care in what he says and does not say. He’s not nearly so democratic. Instead, he must be judicious.
· The academy, by definition, places a higher premium on saying something “new.” Many churches wrongly do this as well, and, admittedly, there is a right place for a “new song.” But the eldering enterprise, by definition, is about faithfulness. The best Christian academics, that is, the Christian academics to whom we are all indebted, say new things from time to time, but only in the effort to be faithful. Too often, however, the ambition for newness is an utterly different thing than the ambition for faithfulness.
· Academics tend to work in isolation, and are assessed only (i) for their ideas (ii) by a small group of similarly-situated experts in their sub-specialty. Elders work in the midst of the assembly, and are assessed (i) for their ideas and their lives (ii) by the whole church body in all of its sociological diversity.
None of the rules for academic engagement are bad, per se. But they become bad in the Christian academy when they're divorced from pastoral sensibilities. This struck home, to speak frankly, by the utter lack of pastoral carefulness demonstrated by many of the speakers, a carelessness which I’ve witnessed too often in Christian academic circles. Here are three examples which showed up last week:
· Most of the speakers seemed only too happy to treat Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox as “brothers and sisters in the faith,” as easily as a Baptist might refer to a Presbyterian. Now, I trust that some RC and GOs are Christians, but such unqualified, unnuanced passing remarks effectively dismiss the Reformation and jeopardize souls. Don’t you realize the effect your passing comments have on sheep?
· One speaker presented what he described as a “new” formulation of how the divine nature participated in Christ’s death on the cross, which involved jettisoning divine impassibility and simplicity. At the conclusion, another professor responded by saying that he was willing to go along with this new formulation. Really? A sixty minute lecture and you’re persuaded? You’re willing to re-conceive the divine nature because someone really smart gave a paper? No prayer? No long hours of investigation? No discussion of the matter with the elders of your church?
· At a conference with the title “Renewing the Evangelical Mission,” not a single talk of the eleven was about the gospel (with one abstruse half-exception, mentioned in the last bullet).
Numerous matters like these, all heaped together, reminded me what a different thing the academic enterprise is from the eldering enterprise. One is about intellectual stimulation between supposedly good, rational people; the other is about spiritual warfare between desperate, clinging-to-grace people. It’s as if you enter the Christian academic realm and all the rules for pastoral care and wisdom suddenly change—in fact, it’s as if all the rules suddenly go out the window. “We’re all equals here. We’re all discerning and wise and godly. Take no heed!”
I praise God for the faithful academics who trained me in seminary. Yet the best ones were good because they were churchmen first and academics second. Any academic who takes offence at my remarks, I dare say, just might take offense because he or she finds more identity in being an academic than in being a churchman.
If you are an academic, may I propose, do not conceive of your students, colleagues, journal editors, and publishers any differently than you conceive of the members of your church. All of them are sheep who are threatened with temptation and deception on a minute-by-minute basis. Remember that you, too, are a sheep, and that you need the accountability and restraints of your church and its elders in your academic work, even if you are smarter than all of them.
Jonathan, excellent remarks. I've seen this type of approach for some time now. I hope many read this and take heed.
Thanks.
Posted by: Mark Lamprecht | Oct 20, 2009 8:52:56 AM
Jonathan you are right on the mark with this. I just sent it to a friend who is in seminary right now. I wish I had a heads up on this thinking before I went to seminary rather than just finding it the hard way. Thankfully, many of my profs were godly men and mentors.
Posted by: Polarbear | Oct 20, 2009 11:19:42 AM
I think you are very mistaken when you say "consider the anthropology behind that democratic value: it assumes (these days, at least) that people are rational, objective, and basically good."
I assume we are all prone to be irrational, biased, and evil, but that includes myself and those who have taught me in the past. Therefore I give people of differing views a hearing.
It seems as if you are actually applying a double standard: The people who have taught you thus far are apparently "rational, objective, and basically good" while you make no such allowance for those with oppossing or "new" ideas.
Posted by: George C | Oct 20, 2009 1:20:53 PM
Excellent observations, Jonathan, and much needed! I was equally disturbed and discouraged upon attending an ETS meeting during my time at seminary. Lord willing, churches will continue to pick-up the mantle of pastoral training and prevent academic "objectivity" from infecting future pastors.
Posted by: Steve | Oct 20, 2009 2:31:08 PM
Jonathan,
A good post as food for thought.
"I praise God for the faithful academics who trained me in seminary. Yet the best ones were good because they were churchmen first and academics second."
A few names come to mind for me: Tom Schreiner, Donald Whitney, Russell D. Moore, Stuart Scott, Tom Nettles, Bruce Ware...
Those Southern Seminary professors, and others, are why SBTS has been a great place to get a theological education, with some pastoral ministry thought mixed in. Not pastoral ministry training, but still a very beneficial step in preparation for pastoral ministry.
Posted by: Garrett Wishall | Oct 20, 2009 11:48:46 PM
I am a GCTS grad (M.Div. '98) and nothing you write surprises me in the least. GCTS hires men (and women) who, on balance, have little pastoral experience (in some cases, none) and demonstrate far more passion for their "discipline" than the Church of Christ. I'm inclined to say that seminaries that are non-denom./unaffiliated are ALL like this, probably by design. Little oversight, headaches, etc. from the local church.
Posted by: Matt Beatty | Oct 22, 2009 7:56:47 AM
"I trust that some RC and GOs are Christians"
why do we need to qualify and nuance that RCs an GOs are christians? are we really ready to say that ALL Baptists and ALL Presbyterians are true believers? wouldn't we have to nuance that too?
Posted by: HC | Oct 22, 2009 8:56:05 AM
Wow, that's really surprising. I'll have to try to listen to the talks. Some of the names I might expect this from, but Packer and Horton?!?! I've been reading Horton's Gospel-Driven Life and can't imagine that he would never mention the good news...
Posted by: Nathan Carter | Oct 22, 2009 9:31:01 AM
Most of the American church is so "in the box" on this topic. I can't tell you how many closed doors I personally have run up against because I don't have a seminary degree. Almost no one stops to evaluate character or maturity or anything if there aren't letters after your name. And if there are letters after your name, often those other things are simply assumed, which is a dangerous thing.
Posted by: msatty | Oct 22, 2009 11:32:38 AM
Amen.
Posted by: Ray Van Neste | Oct 22, 2009 1:44:33 PM
I am saddened by the fact that your seminary experience has left you with these conclusions. Please allow me to share my response/rebuttal to your post.
You write, 'A seminary professor is not the same thing as a church elder'. Agreed, but many profs are in fact church elders and devote much of their time and energy outside the classroom to their local churches. That said, at least some (and I suspect many) profs are indeed qualified to pastor and counsel students, should the student seek his or her guidance. I can testify that many of my Bible college and seminary profs (who by the way taught at non-denominational institutions [see the last comment]) did have fulltime pastoral experience in addition to years of serving voluntarily in the church. And many continue to do so despite the fact that they work fulltime training other/future leaders and continue to publish when they can. In fact, many (myself included) had a difficult time discerning their calling to academia because their philosophy of classroom instruction overlapped so much with their vision for pastoral ministry. Beyond that, I am delighted to share that several of my seminary profs spent hours with me outside the classroom, counseling and praying for me, while never replacing or subverting the role of the church. In fact, they all acknowledged the seminary-church/prof-pastor distinction, while also realizing that their abilities to shepherd younger believers did not cease the minute they stepped inside the classroom. And this has also been the experience of many of my friends who attended other institutions. Perhaps, then, the qualifications and expectations you list for seminary profs are a bit minimalist.
Furthermore, as somebody currently candidating for Bible college/seminary professorships, I can testify that many evangelical institutions require quite a lot of evidence of spiritual and ethical maturity as well as experience leading in the local church. In fact, I have been surprised by how little attention in the job application process is devoted to publications and plans for future research. Alternatively, most evangelical institutions want their candidates to submit several short essays addressing their Christian testimony, approach to personal spiritual development, ministry experience, and other kinds of issues unrelated to academia and one’s intellectual abilities. While I have yet to face a ‘spiritual interrogation’, what I have seen so far is quite balanced.
Also, I am not as certain as you that academics spend more time in isolation than do teaching pastors, for instance. In fact, if teaching pastors spend as much time prepping for their sermons as needed to communicate clearly, relevantly, and accurately, then they would easily rival academics in the amount of time spent in their studies. From my understanding, a leading complaint on the part of most evangelical profs is that they actually don't have much time at all for research and writing; thus, the reason they need sabbaticals to complete research projects, and that so many evangelical profs don't publish much over the course of their career. (And let’s be clear, most educated pastors rely on at least a handful of reference works authored by spiritually-minded academics, who have labored for years to publish this or that commentary, not simply for their own ‘intellectual stimulation’ as you suggest, but because they wish to see the church edified by the faithful, as opposed to ‘novel’, exposition of Scripture).
To be fair, not every seminary course/prof that I took was great, but many were! And I assure you that I am not defending academics because I find 'more identity in being an academic than in being a churchman', but because I fear that the good reputation of many seminary profs and the institutions they represent will be tarnished by generalizations. I suspect that you would be equally defensive if you read a blog post titled 'Beware of Your Pastor' and I made an unnuanced assertion such as 'pastors are uneducated and don't know how to interpret Scripture', and then suggested that this was an 'obvious matter'. Clearly this is sometimes true, but praise the Lord that often times it is not. From my perspective the only ‘obvious matter’ on this topic is that every seminary/prof is different: some are strong academically; others are strong practically; some emphasize ‘spiritual formation’; and still others attempt to excel in each of these areas. The lesson to be learned in this regard is simple: find out who you are learning from, what they really care about, what they wish to impart to you, and then choose accordingly. Of course we’d advise the same for anybody searching for a good church, right?
My plea for you, then, is equally simple: Let’s be careful how we generalize! While differentiating between ministry roles and responsibilities (pastors vs. professors) is certainly helpful, presumably many of the readers targeted by this post (like the one who pointed me to it!) will not know when your assertions stray from fact to opinion to fiction. They may then become unnecessarily suspicious of (or even repelled by) ALL seminaries and the godly men and women they employ.
God bless you in your ministry.
Posted by: John | Oct 22, 2009 5:08:56 PM
Jonathan, I would simply add to your statement:
"Remember that you, too, are a sheep, and that you need the accountability and restraints of your church and its elders in your academic work, ESPECIALLY if you are smarter than all of them"
Posted by: TW | Oct 22, 2009 10:24:15 PM
You won't have this problem with seminary professors from Bethel Seminary of the East. They all have to have or still are Pastors.
Posted by: Michael Del Tatto | Oct 23, 2009 8:00:40 AM
I wouldn't lift man up too high, even if he is a deacon or elder. I would presume that many have experienced those who sought the position, without passion, or the knowledge of what is required.
btw - I attended a talk that Michael Horton gave at Baker Book House and left a bit disapppointed.
Posted by: Yooper | Oct 24, 2009 1:36:55 PM
Jonathan, I have to respectfully disagree with just about every generalization you made from your few days at a conference (which, although held on a campus, is not anything like a Seminary or Bible College semester long course, or total educational experience). You are comparing “apples to oranges.”
Well, everything I was going to say John (above) beat me to it.
But I will add this: your opening descriptions of an effective Elder quite accurately describe the best Seminary/College Professors I have had, and know. In my own experiences of 8 years of higher education (both at a BC and two Seminaries), and 10 years of serving within one, I have come across very, very, few of the kind of people you describe.
Really, as one of those professors, I hope we are far more about the first list you present than the other two.
Nonetheless, thanks for the reminder of what my ultimate calling is – or at least should be – about.
Blessings
Posted by: Bill Higley | Oct 24, 2009 9:49:25 PM
In my studies at SWBTS, I was required to take a class titled "Pastoral Leadership in the Church." It was taught by a man who had been a military chaplain for years, but had never pastored a church. The main textbook we used was "Luthern Clergy Desk Book," that, despite the fact that we were Southern Baptists prepping for ministry in SBC churches. The prof was a godly man, just totally out of his league teaching such a class.
Posted by: Hugh | Oct 29, 2009 9:22:06 AM
it seems like you really have a tendency to over generalize a good bit in this article. you evidently have many who read your blog and comments...so, it saddens me when I read "us and them" rants especially when the ideas discredited seem too generalized. I know this is extreme (and not directly related to your article) but it reminds me of all of the anti-Obama emails that were forwarded to and by folks within the Christian sub-culture during the presidential election. Many of the ideas that were spread were very inaccurate and unbalanced. I am more politically "libertarian", by the way...so didn't even support our current administration. But it seemed Christians were so eager to spread these ideas about a guy running for president that they didn't like, that they ended up spreading irrational and false rhetoric. They often over generalized much of the president's life and ideas. So...here is my point: As Christians, one of the things that should mark us above anything else is our unashamed love for the TRUTH, wherever it is found. All of it is God's and wherever it is, it brings Him glory. So, I conclude with urging a fellow brother who believes the gospel that is "total truth", to refrain from over simplified and over generalized rhetoric of others and there positions. It is dishonest, and in "small" ways kind betrays one of our our callings as believers. By the way, as i am typing this to you, I am very aware that I fail miserably at what I am chastising you for. So this is preaching to myself, just as much as anyone else...please know that.
Posted by: wesley strebeck | Oct 30, 2009 11:31:27 PM