I incline toward RSC's position, although I allow for some room in my views for "distance" or "parish" training where these seem fit to the circumstances. But the question seems to be "what is the best way to do things?"

I am convinced that missionary work and church-planting is inseparable from pastor/elder training, and I think this pattern (along with the institution of "seminary") is biblical.

BTW, I see comments along the line that "Dr. Clark needs to offer a Scriptural argument," but no one has put forward their own "Scriptural" argument in favor of something else, and why it might be superior in one, or in many cases. Appealing to anecdote or pragmatism is insufficient.

As for the amount of time it takes to train pastors well, if the materials are weak, they much be improved, and if the foundation is built on weak materials, and the building falls over, what has been gained? Paul started his "Ephesian Seminary" in the context of a literate, Greek culture. And he trained a class of students for 2 solid years without a break. If it takes an illiterate culture 4-5 years, because their beginning students have to be raised first to be able to handle the material, so be it. Will not God provide?

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --