Bachelor's Degree Required for Seminary?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm 41 and I don't have the time to spend the next 4 years getting a Bachelor's degree in Bible. I'm interested in a seminary level education without the degree.

I'm 42 with 4 kids and am an Active Duty Marine with significant responsibilities. You have less time than I?

I am not trying to defend Robert’s statement, but let us consider the issue of time and his age Rich. He is currently 41, if he gets a B.S. or B.A. in four years that would imply it would be 45 by the time he be ready to meet Bachelor requirement for seminary. Now add on top of that the reality that it is taking longer even for single seminary students compared to the standard two year expectation for earning a Masters. In many cases being four years before the M.Div is actually earned. If such is a case for Robert, then that will place him at about 49 before he could receive a calling or any other high application to his education. And it seems to me unless you’re already planted in a church and doing ministry within that church, it is much more difficult for a non-experienced older person to enter into say the pastoral ministry compared to a younger man in his 30s. That is at least the trend or rule that I see.

According to your signature list Rich, you are currently a seminary student, he is not yet one. You are already ahead of him in pursuing his education. I do not think he was referring to time in relation to responsibilities, but in regards to his age and the reality of the church using him in relation to that education. He can correct me if am wrong.

So why even try to get the education? Because I think it is a requirement for the church to teach these things anyway as being disciples of Christ in fulfilling the Great Commission and for those within the church to learn these things regardless of the level of Christian service one is providing. Now I am going to restrain a rant because it leading off topic of this thread.

The more ministry I have performed in the service of the Church, the more I'm convinced of the need that men be prepared for the same. I realize he has not even achieved a Bachelors Degree yet but age 49 is not too old if he really desires to be fully equipped. Given other responsibilities and my conviction that education ought to be continuous, I don't expect my own education will be completed by the time I'm 49 but will still be able to serve in some form of ministry during that time.

The pitfalls and the challenges to ministry are many. Being equipped to deal with the variety of Pastoral questions and challenges to the Christian faith does not come by easily. I've been in intense personal study for over 15 years and leadership for over 20. Every day I learn new things and I would never encourage a person's impatience to short circuit many things that ought to be in one's "toolkit" before they take on the ministry. I don't consider "degrees" to be the end all and believe pastoral learning is done much more on the ground of personal piety, study, and service to others but the academic preparation cannot be sacrificed in the least. If a Church is able to teach all the above, and thoroughly, then so be it but the implication in "I don't have the time..." also implies that one doesn't have the time for the Church to invest the same time that it would take.

As an example, we don't allow leaders to take significant responsibility in the military until they have many years of academic preparation, leadership, and observation of the same. There are simply no shortcuts to being a leader/teacher and the Scriptures are replete with warnings to avoid assuming these offices hastily.

I don’t think 49 to old to be engaged in ministry, however what I think and what is applied in our churches in reality are two different things. I agree that men should be prepared, however we should consider by whom and how is the person to be prepared academically and spiritually. I agree that there shouldn’t be shortcuts, but let us not command something of our leaders that scripture does not command of, which should be the rule of faith and life; including that of our leaders. Christ did not assign the profitable training of such leaders to a academic intuitional model, like a college or a receiving of a particular type and level of a degree. We as the church have delegated that churchly responsibility of training to our seminaries instead of engaging it ourselves. In fact I would make the argument the church is lacking on just about all fronts of Christian education as seen from the pulpit and Sunday School to Wednesday night and personal/family bible study. This is not to bash anyone’s church or anyone attempt of Christian education on this board.
 
David,

I'm not arguing for a "professionalizing" of pastoral education. I've got an undergrad in Nuclear Engineering, a Masters in Electrical Engineering, and a Master in Military Studies. Of the three, the most carry over is probably from the last of the three degrees but even not that much.

The larger point is that theological education (like any education) takes time. Regardless of who gives the education, pick your poison, because it's going to take time. Think about how many hours the Apostles received following Christ 24x7x365 for 3 years. Thankfully, they knew the Biblical languages and, being raised Jewish, had years of school with the local Rabbis growing up (see Edersheim's Sketches of Jewish Social Life). Even Christ spent considerable time training His "preachers". If a man says he doesn't have the time for an education then it doesn't matter the path, he doesn't have the time for preparation.

I'm not a fan of our method of education and preparation in general but it is what it is. The PCA at least has clauses to recognize education and pastoral experience and ordain in lieu of more formal education so there are always exceptions. It's hard to find the people in ministry with the acumen and time to train other Pastors. I'm very blessed to study under working Pastors who are very good at languages and the various loci of theology but that's not always the case. Even with these men, we're all tired at the end of the day and learning from 1800-2200 once every Monday exhausts even the best of us. I'm very thankful for a Pastor that takes that time with me. Am I, in a sense, getting a "union card" with my Seminary degree? Yes, but it's the general conviction of the PCA that such training is normally required except in extraordinary circumstances and I'm in a position to take the time to apply rigor to my education while adding practical ministerial experience to take the time.

I can tell you this: that after 13 years of pretty serious personal study in the Scriptures and theological reading, I have been personally surprised and elated at how much Seminary added to my theological growth.

Now to the issue of how men ought to be trained. Let me humbly suggest that the way to "fix" the situation about how men are equipped for ministry in general is to start at home. I've had a long time conviction that men need to be trained and have made adult education a priority. I invest and have invested a significant amount of time in men's (and women's too) lives to equip them to understand the Word better (and more than just the Wed night or Sun AM thing). The number of men that will commit to this is relatively small at times but the impact is huge. If you have these convictions then put the time into men's lives and make it happen.
 
There no disagreement that theological education and the prep there of takes times. The main issue that should be looked at is the goal and means to reach that education. We do not want to place something in the way that is unnecessary to that theological education. A general four year degree may not provide the necessary background for that theological education, such as the case of nuclear engineering. Now an undergraduate degree in philosophy, education, or history could. Time is a precious commodity that we cannot get back, therefore careful consideration of necessary prep materials should be employed. It can be done as a reading list, workshops, conferences, and many more ways. As a church we should be preparing people for that education and not a secular college or university.

I disagree that this education should start in the home. As the church being like a mother, we need to get our training from her. You cannot teach your family in the home if you have yet to receive the knowledge from the church first. As the church instructs the men, it should flow then towards the home. People of the church can be like children, they do not know necessarily what they need. It is for that reason that we need our given pastors and elders of the church to guide and instruct us in relation to scripture; compared to the private study that most of us embark on in our own homes; which is important too.

It is wonderful hear thoughtful Christian education towards the men of in the church and encourage you to continue what you are currently doing Rich.
 
I think this is the exception mainly because we are so Western. Some think college is the stepping stone to everything. I think college is overrated.

I used to think high school was overrated. My wife grew up in a rural community where that was the consensus for a long time. As for college/university, it all depends on the quality of the program. As mentioned before, I'm glad for my undergrad years. They exposed me to a wide variety of viewpoints, literature, film, history, philosophy and four new languages. I often wish that I could have taken more.
 
I disagree that this education should start in the home. As the church being like a mother, we need to get our training from her. You cannot teach your family in the home if you have yet to receive the knowledge from the church first. As the church instructs the men, it should flow then towards the home. People of the church can be like children, they do not know necessarily what they need. It is for that reason that we need our given pastors and elders of the church to guide and instruct us in relation to scripture; compared to the private study that most of us embark on in our own homes; which is important too.
When I stated "start at home", I meant that one should seek to fix the problem by being part of the solution. In other words, if one is convinced that men are not being trained theologically in the Church then set up training for men in the Church. Of course, theological training does, in fact, start in the home just like any other education. Years of catechism are not quickly supplanted at the adult level if it can be instilled in a child's lifelong learning. It is also the duty of parents to do so but this is off-topic.
 
I disagree that this education should start in the home. As the church being like a mother, we need to get our training from her. You cannot teach your family in the home if you have yet to receive the knowledge from the church first. As the church instructs the men, it should flow then towards the home. People of the church can be like children, they do not know necessarily what they need. It is for that reason that we need our given pastors and elders of the church to guide and instruct us in relation to scripture; compared to the private study that most of us embark on in our own homes; which is important too.

When I stated "start at home", I meant that one should seek to fix the problem by being part of the solution. In other words, if one is convinced that men are not being trained theologically in the Church then set up training for men in the Church. Of course, theological training does, in fact, start in the home just like any other education. Years of catechism are not quickly supplanted at the adult level if it can be instilled in a child's lifelong learning. It is also the duty of parents to do so but this is off-topic.
Your right, it is starting to get off topic. When I said, “it should then flow towards the home,” I was reinforcing the need for men to instruct their wives and children; which stems originally from the church to start off with. This is not to deny children education by the parents, but a recognition of where that education stems from, which is to say the church. As the church instructs the parents, then the parents can teach their children through bible study and catechisms. To say that education begins in the home is to shift the blame of responsibility against those who job it is to provide theological education. It begins with the parents being trained, so that they in turn can train their families. You wouldn’t want uneducated parents teaching their children on matters they know nothing about because if something is taught wrong it makes the job of correcting the children later on that much more difficult. Now it is better that we receive this theological instruction to begin with as children and what I would add is that it must be done by the church, as the parents, however not alone, being partnered with the teachers of the church, such as the clergy, as the means in which the church give this theological education. And of course this education by the church does not end with childhood, but continues for the rest of one’s life in God’s grace. Which is way I recommend that we do not try to out source our spiritual responsibility in education, but instead try to bring things back to the church and scripture.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top