Can We Make Seminary More Effective?

Researching what other certifying groups do would be informative, I’m sure. I don’t know what ACBC’s procedures are, but I’ll bet they have answers for all those questions, as far as how they handle them — which I’m sure differs from organization to organization.

Worst case scenario, the guy loses his certification. This might seem like nothing, but the way these organizations work is that over time (if they do things right) they become respected and the credential is meaningful to those who respect the organization. In addition, someone who pursues certification in the first place, does it because either he saw some value in it or an organization “hiring” him saw value in it, or both. So losing it has at least as much importance as gaining it did in the first place.

I don’t have time at the moment, but maybe I’ll do some digging at ACBC and found out how they do things. But it could be instructive, too, to look at outfits like AICPA, which maintains a Certified Forensic Accountant credential, among other things (at first blush it’s much more academic than what I’m thinking… lots of exams). … And also cert’s like the one Tyler mentioned. But the point is that all these organizations have their procedures for dealing with lapses, failures, etc. There would not be any need to reinvent the wheel, just customize it for the aims of a biblical pastoral certification meant to serve independent churches and ministries.

I would be interested in knowing, though, Don, if you believe church participation in fellowships of churches fits in with your understanding of NT ecclesiology. … and if you see certifications like ACBC as a problem for ecclesiology. The theological objection seemed to be at the core of your feeling the idea can’t work, but I still don’t know what your thinking is on how sound ecclesiology would be a barrier.

It strikes me that we already have, in effect, a number of accrediting agencies out there. They don’t go by that name, but if you have a man who’s a member of the FBFI, or T4G, or is a BJU or Maranatha (Maranatha Ruleth, said it for you Tyler) grad, you’ve got a good hunch about where they’re coming from. For that matter, if a man speaks intelligently about the Fundamentals or the Solas or the creeds, you’ve got another good hint, no?

Now if you formalize it beyond the current level, Don has a point. I’ve been a member of accrediting organizations in my field, and you’ve got to get a consensus among employers that the “stamp of approval” is worthwhile in hiring and retention. I think that’s a step that many churches will need to be persuaded to take, and that would constitute at least a minor modification of their ecclesiology.

That noted, the $64000 question is really what would be in that accreditation, and what would not. As I see things, each of us fits imperfectly into one or more of the “orbits” of fundamentalism, and hence when we hire/promote/teach/etc.., we get a number of known things as well as a number of things which are flying below the radar. I tend to support this kind of notion—and for children’s ministries as well as for pastors—but the trick is in what you’re delivering.

Whatever a seminary does, it shouldn’t ever drop the language requirements. I’m preaching from Mt 26:26-30 on the Lord’s Supper this coming Sunday, and just finished translating the passage. I never appreciated the significance of the adverb καινὸν in Mt 26:29 before:

• Is it a temporal adverb [“in a new era”]
• or an adverb of manner [“in a new way”]?).
• If it is temporal, should the preposition ἐν be translated to reflect a temporal meaning (“during my Father’s Kingdom”) rather than a spatial sense (“in my Father’s Kingdom”)?

These are things you’d never notice in English!

I’m seeing some seminary grads whose expositional sermons are doctrinally sound and the product of sound study but are often as dry as a bucket of dust. (They are an improvement over the birdbath sermons that are 3 feet wide and 1 inch deep.) I’m also seeing seminary grads who are lacking people skills and are preachers but not pastors. Finally I’m seeing pastors who consider themselves “professionals”, strong on administration and academic production but delegating pastoral work to others.

It all falls on the local churches that ordain ministers, and the kind of mentorship these new pastors are given at those churches. One corollary of autonomy is that you’ll always have a quality control problem. Local churches have big responsibilities.

If you are going to go the route of “certification,” you would want to list out what you are certifying in terms of KSAE - Knoweldge, Skills, Abilities, Experiences.
What level of knowledge would you demand that someone certified in your organization had? And would you demand that they keep that knowledge (i.e. Hebrew)?
What skills would someone certified need?
What abilities?
What experiences?
How would you move, as an organization, to set up training centers where those KSAE could be gained/learned/earned?

[Aaron Blumer]

I would be interested in knowing, though, Don, if you believe church participation in fellowships of churches fits in with your understanding of NT ecclesiology. … and if you see certifications like ACBC as a problem for ecclesiology. The theological objection seemed to be at the core of your feeling the idea can’t work, but I still don’t know what your thinking is on how sound ecclesiology would be a barrier.

I am not familiar with ACBC, so my comments are more on generic lines in response. As a counseling certification, it seems to me that it is more oriented to the outside world than to internal church policies and practices. I don’t know of any churches that would forbid their pastors giving counsel, whether they have the certification or not. But I don’t particularly know much about it, as I said.

If certification created an organization that had any authority over the local church, giving any directives, etc, I would find that problematic. Even if the organization didn’t directly impact the church, but had some clout over the pastor certified, I would find that a problem. If certification was merely recognition that person X has taken the required courses/education to maintain his certified status, I guess that might be acceptable. It would be somewhat toothless, however, as anyone can take courses.

I think the main point of Kevin’s article is that we need to do better in our seminaries. I think that is true, and I’m open to innovations to the process, though I think the 96 hour MDiv is a pretty well essential program, with the caveat that I don’t think a pastor MUST have it. If a young man is going into the ministry and has the wherewithal and academic ability, he would be foolish not to take it, in my opinion.

[TylerR]

Whatever a seminary does, it shouldn’t ever drop the language requirements. I’m preaching from Mt 26:26-30 on the Lord’s Supper this coming Sunday, and just finished translating the passage. I never appreciated the significance of the adverb καινὸν in Mt 26:29 before:

• Is it a temporal adverb [“in a new era”]
• or an adverb of manner [“in a new way”]?).
• If it is temporal, should the preposition ἐν be translated to reflect a temporal meaning (“during my Father’s Kingdom”) rather than a spatial sense (“in my Father’s Kingdom”)?

These are things you’d never notice in English!

YES! That was my point in another thread. There is tremendous benefit of translation as part of the exegetical process. Many (most?) pastors neglect this, but it makes the pastor slow down and really look at the passage they are preaching. It also allows the pastor to better understand how the author writes and communicates nuance and emphasis. Even referencing multiple English translations doesn’t provide the clarity that you get from translating some passages on your own.

[TylerR]

It all falls on the local churches that ordain ministers, and the kind of mentorship these new pastors are given at those churches. One corollary of autonomy is that you’ll always have a quality control problem. Local churches have big responsibilities.

In my experience, most people in independent baptist churches (as well as bible churches) don’t know the difference between an M.A., MDiv, or a ThM. Although there is a significant difference in the quality and quantity of education received with each degree, most congregations view them as equivalent master degrees. The same is true for the DMin and PhD. All the congregation knows is that they are doctorate degrees, and the guy can be called Dr. So-and-So. If there is going to be a certain standard of pastoral quality, it will have to be taught and reinforced by the pastor himself so that the congregation will know what to look for when he steps down / retires. There are also books available to help congregations find quality candidates. When the Word Leads Your Pastoral Search: Biblical Principles & Practices to Guide Your Search by Chris Brauns is a good one.

As I mentioned in a different thread, I’ll be candidating next week at a different church, in a different state. In my initial visit, I was asked by the strongest KJV person in the church (he probably isn’t KJV-only, but KJV-preferred) which translation I would be preaching from. My answer was, “My own, but I’ll be reading from the ESV. I didn’t go to seminary for a decade to do otherwise.” He actually seemed satisfied with the answer.

Aaron, I agree that an MDiv is highly desirable. I wish I had done this. At the time I was at BJU, they didn’t offer this program. I considered going elsewhere, but ended up accepting the appeal from a small group of Christians in North Carolina to lead them in establishing a new church. After finishing an MA at BJ, I was ready for a break in academics, and eager to get into ministry. I now understand the value of the MDiv, and wish I had taken the time to acquire one. However, after forty-five years in the pastorate, my training days are over. I would urge all young men preparing for pastoral ministry to acquire an MDiv. You will be glad you did!