Here is a quote by John Frame about Race and ordination standards. There is much overlap in that subject (race) and the subject of missionary work among Third World Christians. In my part of the world the Presbyterian denominations lack much forward progress because discipleship of future leadership is not happening. They are said to be "full in the head, and lazy in the feet" as far as evangelism and training others. Below is Frame's suggestion that might combat this:


One of these traditions has been the tradition of a “learned ministry,” which I will discuss at greater length. The academic emphasis of the Reformed movement has led to an emphasis on academic qualifications for pastors. Reformed denominations typically demand an A. B. degree or equivalent, plus some amount of seminary training. And they give to pastoral candidates rigorous examinations in biblical languages, church history, and theological subjects. Members of minority groups typically don’t have the financial or educational prerequisites for this kind of study. The result is that very few minority people qualify to become Reformed pastors. But to attract minority church members it is necessary to ordain minority church officers. This is, I think, a major barrier to minority participation in Reformed churches.

There is much to be said for the concept of a “learned ministry.” The “parson” of early American villages was often the one member of the community with an academic training. He became the de facto local expert, not only on theology, but also on science, history, etc. Some would like to see the Christian church regain this cultural ascendancy.

But it can hardly be argued that such a degree of learning is a biblical requirement for ministry. The New Testament requirements do include the provision that an overseer be “able to teach” (1 Tim. 3:2), and we may infer from 2 Tim. 4:2 that he should be able to “Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage…” Compare Tit. 1:9. Surely these responsibilities require some head-knowledge as well as heart-knowledge. But they do not require, even in our present-day culture, an A. B. or equivalent. The apostles themselves were perceived to be “unschooled, ordinary men” (Acts 4:13). With the exception of Paul, they were not trained in the rabbinic schools, let alone what we would now describe as the disciplines of the liberal arts. The New Testament writers express themselves, not in the Greek of the poets and philosophers, but in the Koine of the common people.

Western missionaries planting tribal churches in areas new to the gospel often encourage these churches to install indigenous leadership as early as possible. Such leaders need to know the Gospel and the basics of the Bible. But no one insists that a young church need wait until some members of the tribe earn A. B. degrees before they can become pastors or elders. Yet Reformed churches routinely insist on such educational requirements (with some slight flexibility) in preparing people for ordination in America.

Why should there be such a discrepancy between our standards for mission churches and our standards for home churches? The mission field exists on US territory today. Educational expectations differ greatly in different ethnic and cultural communities. It still makes some sense to require college or university education of those called to be senior pastors of largely white suburban churches. It makes no sense at all to require such education of those called to work, say, with Hispanic migrant farm workers.

So my suggestion is that we recognize a broader range of educational requirements for different kinds of ministry, rather than having a common set of requirements for everybody who is to be ordained. Of course, some requirements must be met by all candidates: all must have a good knowledge of Scripture and Reformed theology. All must have good ability to communicate these truths in preaching, teaching, counseling. (I would actually elevate the requirements in these areas.) But there should be no requirements as to how this knowledge is obtained (whether by seminary, tutoring, private study). And of course there should be an emphasis on the qualities of character that dominate the Pauline lists of qualifications for church office (1 Tim. 3:1-10, Tit. 1:5-9), qualities that need to be emphasized far more in Reformed churches. But there is no reason also to require college preparation of all ordinands.

It may be that those who are ordained with lesser preparation will need more supervision when they enter ministry. Normally in Presbyterianism we assume that once a man is ordained to the teaching ministry he has all the tools: he is fully prepared to take any responsibility in the church, without any additional help. Of course, in our hearts we know that is wrong. Every pastor needs help, especially in his first years in ministry. In Presbyterianism, supervision of young pastors is supposed to come through presbytery, but that supervision is often very slow in coming. For this purpose, one is attracted to something like Episcopacy, in which one man is charged with supervising the ministries of other men. Presbyteries can approximate this by energizing their committees on “The Minister and His Work.” Through some such mechanism it could be recognized that the education of ministers in an ongoing thing; it doesn’t end with ordination. Given such a system, those who enter ministry with less educational preparation than others could receive regular guidance and counsel from more experienced and knowledgeable church leaders.

Does this mean that minority pastors would hold a second-class ordination? No. In my judgment every pastor should be under authority, under supervision. We should not assume that ordination gives the right to autonomous ministry, following the supervised trial period of licensure. Ordination rightly confers some privileges: rights of participation in session and presbytery; rights to administer sacraments. But it should not be the end of accountability. If every teaching elder is accountable to some fellow-presbyter (s), then we need not worry that this process will distinguish some as second-class.





Brothers, what think ye?

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

I am in complete agreement. In Baptist polity, this is easily exercised. The local church decides the educational requirements because they themselves hire the pastor. Ergo, a church in Washington, DC could require a pastor with a Ph.D. The church I went to in DC had multiple pastors with Ph.Ds.

The church I went to in San Diego had a pastor with only a high school diploma and a handful of college classes. Yet, he had an excellent grasp of theology and the Word and passed an ordination exam given by three well-known Reformed Baptist preachers, two of whom had accredited seminary doctorates.

My ecclesiology is very similar to my political philosophy. I think that it is best to regulate standards at the local level than at the higher levels. Those at the local level have a better idea of what is needed in order to minister to their particular community.

__________________
[IMGL]http://x79.xanga.com/144c6b7b05d37172179798/w130772988.gif[/IMGL]

[IMGL]http://x18.xanga.com/b8cc2b4341633172177963/w130771430.gif[/IMGL][URL="http://www.harborpc.org/"]Harbor Presbyterian Church[/URL] (PCA)
[IMGL]http://x18.xanga.com/b8cc2b4341633172177963/w130771430.gif[/IMGL]San Diego, CA
[IMGL]http://x18.xanga.com/b8cc2b4341633172177963/w130771430.gif[/IMGL][url]http://www.xanga.com/elnwood[/url]

So, what education standards should a minister have?


Also, at what point does a missionary turn over a foreign chuch plant to local control.

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

During the past 26 years I have served on the standing ordination council in my denonimation (the past 14 yrs as chair). Examining some 500+ candidates for ordination has given me a somewhat different perspective than some of you.

1. Full disclosure . . . while the group is Baptist, it does require both a B.A. and M.Div. (or equivalent).

2. I believe in a learned clergy. My own resume includes three theological degrees plus another one in progress (plus a M.A. in organizational management, a 30 unit program in non-profit management from UCLA, and a MBA certificate).

3. At least in Baptist circles, I'm not so sure that the M.Div. has delivered on its promise. Candidates often seem ill-prepared for the simplest ministerial functions. And, for those who attend a "cafeteria" seminary, the process of instruction seems to inculcate an epistemic paralysis where the "one the one hand" cancels out the "on the other hand" rendering them useless (give me a Reformed, Dispensational, OR (even, shudder) Arminian seminary anyday over the motley mix in most "evangelical" seminaries!). Perhaps you truly Reformed guys attending Reformed schools come out with less uncertainty, but most cafeteria grads have a very tough time proclaiming a prophetic word from the Lord (e.g., "on this text, some scholars say, but on the other hand several others say . . .").

Plus, a shocking number of seminary profs move from the academy to the academy, without any significant local church experience in between the two. When a man is fully taught, he WILL be just like his teacher. Unfortunately, graduate degrees in biblical studies and theology do not of themselves correlate with ministerial effectiveness. Three years of "learning" from PhD's only teaches you how to act like them.

4. Frankly, I have come to believe in competence over credentials. And, those who have been mentored by an effective pastor are probably better prepared to serve than many of those who have a B.A./M.Div.

5. If I could re-write the world (probability stands at 0.000000%), we would require seminary profs to have substantial real-world experience and allow for the option of some ministerial candidates to do their studies under the direction of an experienced pastor (with MP3 seminary level courses to be sure that the content is not short sheeted in the process).

6. Greek, Hebrew, Theology, Bible, and Philosophy are ESSENTIAL, not dispensible. However, can't we find a better way of delivering the content without making the resulting ordinands so learnedly incompetent? Repeatedly, I have witnessed the seminary "teaching" unintentionally much that is deleterious to effective ministry without even realizing it.

7. I am greatly impressed with some of the Reformed seminaries mentioned on this board. Perhaps they avoid some of the problems I have experienced with graduates from mostly interdenominational seminaries. However, if we expect the church to be faithfully served, the learned clergy must be taught to be both "learned" and "clergy."

In Reformed circles, there are typically few problems with pastors knowing the theology and polity of their denominations. That does not, however, mean that they can effectively facilitate the health and growth of the congregation. Having good elders alongside you makes an enormous difference. But, I will still carp about the need for more pastoral experiential training.

__________________
Dennis E. McFadden, Ex Mainline Baptist (in Remission)
Atherton Baptist Homes, CEO
First Baptist Church of Alhambra, Member, Transformation Ministries (CA)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

The purpose of ordination exams is to evaluate the candidates knowledge and gifts. If he has demonstrated sufficient knowledge then who cares how he got it? In America, seminary is the more common route to go. In other times and places, discipleship or apprenticeship was the way to go. I think either is a perfectly viable option. So long as the standards are met for ordination, and his gifts have been tested and affirmed in the church, it shouldn't matter how he was educated. Most Reformed denominations do in fact allow a loophole for such non-seminary cases, though it is rarely used.

__________________
Patrick
OPC
MDiv, RTS Jackson.

"He does well, that discourses of Christ; but he does infinitely better, that by experimental knowledge, feeds and lives on Christ." Thomas Brooks.

An initial note - I've read Ken Jones argue that one of the primary problems in the inner city Churches is an ignorant clergy. My own experience with the Chaplains of many such denominations is that oration is valued over Theology. Just the other day, we celebrated the cake cutting ceremony for the Marine Corps Birthday and we had a chaplain who obviously came from the inner city. He was giving an impassioned prayer that was really a motivational speech - all really quite blasphemous. The female chaplain was responding out loud in the crowd. Nothing about Christ whatsoever but simply about how we need to become better Marines and leaders and more motivated.

It is anecdotal, I know, but I've got quite a bit anectdotal experience with Churches of this nature.

Is the spread of just "any Gospel" a good thing Pergie? I'm not convinced it is. Back in the mid-90's people were really excited that the Jesus video was being shown all over the globe. Interviewed thereafter, the responses on "what it meant" were extremely varied - virtually none orthodox.

If you go into Latin America or Africa there is virtually little spread of the Gospel in relation to the spread of the Trinity Broadcast Network and Oneness Pentecostalism. Even on the island of Okinawa, a Church that teaches the Gospel is like a small island in a sea of Word of Faith and other Charismatic expressions or "Joe Olsteen" expressions. Being at the ground level of trying to spread the Gospel in a foreign land that doesn't seem impoverished for opportunity to spread the Gospel has given me a fresh perspective on the absolute necessity for an educated ministry and is actually teaching truth.

That all said, I do think that, organizationally, some place too much value in a "check in the box" with respect to completing an MDiv and passing an examination and Churches do not nurture men for real leadership. On the one hand, they might be missing some opportunities to allow men to Pastor who have sufficient gifting and knowledge and leadership while, simultaneously, thinking a man is qualified for Pastor simply because one day he didn't have a degree and the next day he does. It reflects our society and its view of degrees. I'm not against degrees and education but I do wish people would balance all requirements out some times.

For my part, then, I would never look at a situation in the third world and simply try to be pragmatic and overlook ignorance and say: "But it has to get done." I think that lacking a qualified man to do a work that seems to be absolutely necessary is an indication that the Lord hasn't provided the person yet for that work. That doesn't mean that you stop trying to attract qualified people but it also doesn't mean trying to distill down to a point of minimum standards because a warm and willing body is better than no body at all. Witness the problems the Army is having with recruiting right now and the standards they are now accepting just to fill bodies. That kind of standard lowering always backfires - even with things less spiritually dire.

__________________
Rich
Northern VA
PCA

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I am saddened to hear how prevalent the "prosperity gospel" (I refuse to use the upper case for the word in THIS context!) is in the third world. Yikes! Maybe it is just the fact that I did a masters in management, but leadership seems to be a real lack in my own seminary program (and most others that I know about). The office of pastor is NOT merely that of a theologian, but of a practioner. And, it is difficult to learn practical ministry skills only from academic theologians.

As to the original point of this thread (sorry for my thread drift), third world pastors NEED training as precise as anybody else. If they are to counter the surplus of heterodoxy imported from the U.S., they must have tools to interpret Scripture, place it in its historical context, understand the history of doctrine, and be competent to make theological judgments on various issues facing them in their own unique cultural contexts. Again, I vote for using the technology of the day (e.g., MP3) to give future pastors in the third world the functional equivalent of an M.Div., but in a more culturally relevant and pedagogically appropriate way so that the "learned" part does not dwarf the "clergy" part of the descriptor of a trained pastor.

__________________
Dennis E. McFadden, Ex Mainline Baptist (in Remission)
Atherton Baptist Homes, CEO
First Baptist Church of Alhambra, Member, Transformation Ministries (CA)

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

I have the deepest philosophical answer known to man: it depends. I think it is safe to play each case on a situation by situation basis.

__________________
J. B. Atken
John Knox PCA
Layman, M.A. student at Louisiana College

I did a blog post some time ago on the presumably unconscious elitism that sometimes arises from a rigid list of academic requirements for ordination.

I think it's also worthwhile asking whether John Witherspoon did us a disservice: whether Samuel Johnson (I think) was not right. In short, whether the lecture model is really the best didactic method.

__________________
Ruben
Moderator
F.P.C.I.
Indiana

Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness. -George Orwell

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Calvinistas Conversando - Reformed Discussion Board in Spanish.

Spanish Blog -Teologia en Mexico
English Blog -The Howling Wilderness

How about taking the seminary level education to these minority pastors? Just some food for thought. It is being done right now by certain men that have been called to this particular mission field.

__________________
Kenneth Kneip
Member @ New St. Peter's PC (PCA), Dallas TX
Pastoral Intern @ New Covenant PC (PCA), Dallas TX
M. Div. student @ WTS Dallas

The OPC goes to Korea, goes to Uganda.

Her missionaries start a church. And immediately start training elders. And then found a pastors training academy.

A friend of mine from Seminary, took his MDiv, and immediately went back to Uganda and started teaching students everything he just spent 4 years learning. In addition to being a pastor/missionary. It takes more work, much more, to give people without our education system just the basics of a theological education. But it has got to be done. That is the ONLY WAY a self-sustaining church, with the ability to present a credible alternative to the WOF and pentecostal movements (and the romanists, and anything else out there), will have staying power.

Look: Jesus' mentor-model is still possibly the single, best intensive course--especially if the followers are "uneducated, common men" (Act 4:13). But they still spent over THREE YEARS in the school of Christ, and still needed a good dose of Holy Ghost power to throw the switch, and truly "get it." A guy like Apollos took far less time to get up to speed, and to rise to the first rank of teachers.

There is simply no way to create a church overnight. Even the NT church had relatively significant initial advantages, as OT saints (many of them synagogue elders) became NT saints. And we just tend to totally miss the fact that these short, closely connected, fast-paced chapters in Acts jump sometimes over DECADES of dull, drudge, boring church work. But when we read the payoff, we mustn't forget all the labor that went into it.

__________________
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? --

Mission to the World ( the ARP mission ) has an innovative program called Mobile Theological Training Team or MT3. The "team" is made up of well trained (PhD) men with pastoral expirience who travel to various mission fields to teach courses in local bible schools/seminaries.

A good friend of mine serves on this team and he travels to various countries. He is just back from a month of teaching in SA at 2 schools. The concept is that 3 to 5 men who are qualified to teach seminary level courses travel to various parts of the world delivering the same courses to each school in turn, thus giving hundreds of local men acces to a seminary education who could not otherwise recieve one.

Each local school is the work of a local presbytry or missionary. The visiting prof will spend at least a week or often more, up to one month, before returning home.

This team has served schools in Surinam, Kenya, Pakistan, South Africa, Hungary, Uganda, and I am sure others I can not reacall.

__________________
Kevin Rogers
Sovereign Community Church, PCA
Moncton NB

I'm guessing that you have some former military men in the ARP with that acronym. The Marines currently provide MTT's (Military Training Teams) to both Afghanistan and Iraq.

It's funny, when it comes to the military, everybody knows you can't just send some inexperienced person to train men for battle but we lower our standards for an even harder work. The more I live the Christian life the more I understand why Paul uses so many military analogies.

__________________
Rich
Northern VA
PCA

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

SEMPERFIDELIS:

"...Is the spread of just "any Gospel" a good thing Pergie?..."


Hmmmm...when did I say THAT?



A false Gospel versus a basic Gospel are two different things. A good simple education in the basics is different from needing 4 years of Bible School plus 4 yearsof seminary to minister at all...especially in areas where you can a hundred of milles without passing a single school.


CONTRAMUNDUM wrote: "It takes more work, much more, to give people without our education system just the basics of a theological education."

Yes, amen.


But how far beyond these basics do we require before we let locals own their own church? DO we hold them to our own Western academic standards?

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

I'll ask.

__________________
Kevin Rogers
Sovereign Community Church, PCA
Moncton NB

I didn't say that you did but the point of my soliloquy was to note that you usually end up with one in the end if you take too many shortcuts or take a minimalist approach to the Gospel. I acknowledged that academic credentialing isn't the answer but are all missionary organizations, in many cases, doing much better to really equip simply because they got boots on the ground? The funny thing is that some of these places that criticize a specific education will have their own minimal training and, like the Churches that assume a seminary education guarantees they're ready for ministry, some assume that the completion of their school equips in the same manner.

I noted that it wasn't a matter of being in a rigorous and expensive MDiv that equipped for ministry. Bruce provided a model that I very much agree with in terms of the manner in which the OPC performs missions. Even in the Acts of the Apostles, you may not find Seminaries being set up but you do see a long "dwell time" to ensure that men are being built up in the Church and equipped. I think the requirements for ministry in a man are aptness to teach, a Godly life, and not a small amount of maturity that includes being wise in the "ways of the world." You just can't nail down the "...what about a 4 year program with just a Bible degree...?" Sure, depending on the man but no way depending on another. No matter how much you educate some they'll never be ready for ministry while there is always some minimal education and "watching" that needs to occur before you're sure someone is ready for leadership. Churches need to be patient enough to be ready to send people out when they're ready and refuse to send out anyone ill equipped. But pragmatism won't allow that in many corners.

You had me thinking about this while working out today. I even thought about the fact that a "minimalist" attitude is part of the reason why many men don't really feel the necessity for improvement or education. People rise to the level of expectations. Set low expectations on readiness for something and that's what you're always going to get. (Again, I'm not arguing for PhD's but I am trying to explain my principle).

One of the reasons my recent Pastor left was likely due to impatience and frustration. I think he thought he could just pour Miracle Gro on people with a 3 week teaching series on marriage followed by a through the Bible in a year preaching series followed by 5 weeks and a surface-level interaction in Wayne Grudem's Systematic theology. He had initially agreed with me that the poverty of evangelism in Okinawa was primarily a problem with "fruit". That is, there weren't very many mature Christians who were bearing it. The remedy had to be long term however if it was really agreed that this was the problem. I was flabbergasted as, within a month, he moved from the strong presentation that it is our union with Christ produces this motivation to an exhortation that everyone in the Church should be out Evangelizing. It was almost as if he thought that people had actually matured.

Well, it's sort of a reflection of a typical Evangelical attitude that the job just needs to get done and that as soon as a man leaves the Baptistry that he should be on the corner next day preaching to people about Jesus. Because everybody is qualified for what many believe is full-orbed mission work, then what reason would anyone possibly have to become more qualified? What's the big deal about studying more of Scripture since it would just seem to interfere with the time spent telling people about Jesus?

There's a reason why the type of Churches I described above flourish in Okinawa: Cotton Candy is easy to make and it's easy to teach another person how to make it.

__________________
Rich
Northern VA
PCA

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Owning the church. I think its important that elder training begin almost immediately. I see some missionary efforts as designed to provide long-term, stable employment for the missionary, when he ought to be trying to work himself into superfluity as soon as possible. Ruling elders need no more than the basic qualifications found in the Pastorals.

As for the ministry, I think you need to define not what "western acad. stds." are, but what (as pastor McFadden said) are the minimum constituent elements of a first generation theolgical training regimen.

I have to say that I agree with pastor McFadden that some original language skill--however rudimentary--is nonnegotiable. Has to be there. If it isn't there to START WITH, the likelihood that it can be seen as VITAL later on is very slim. The importance of this skill, though it may not be well developed for the first couple generations of pastors, needs to be pounded into the heads. Shucks, its hard to get that through to Americans!

Teach them the Bible, OT and NT, and biblical, covenant theology. They need to know the story of Redemption, as the Bible presents it so they know the functional outline of the Bible's message. That alone is one of the chiefest safeguards against error and heresy.

As for theology, they need to master a Protestant Confessional statement, they should know how it relates to the most important creedal statements of the church down through the ages. And then they ought to have some grounding in a systematic theology. This is necessary to help them gain a grasp of essential theological coherence, and how all the data on a locus is examined and arranged. If Calvin's Institutes is available, I would just use that.

And if there is no ST they can read (can't read English! No ST of any kind translated in a known tongue!)--then the missionary needs to break new ground. His instructional notes, perhaps only as taken down by the students, will be the foundation for this critical text.

Bottom line: why wouldn't the missionary want to impart as much of his own training to the next generation of pastors as they can absorb, along the way engendering in them an insatiable d