I've shared some thoughts and questions about theological education in the past here, here and here. With that in mind, Fast Company has an interesting article on the topic of changing culture and higher education entitled, "How Web-Savvy Edupunks Are Transforming American Higher Education." The article says in one part, "The challenge is not to bring technology into the classroom ... The challenge is to capture the potential of technology to lower costs and improve learning for all." And there are schools all over experimenting with this. Whether it be video of lectures, course content online, etc. It's all moving this direction. So, my mind moves to the question, "What are people looking for a higher education paying for then?!" To me the answer seems to be quite simple: the opportunity to learn within context with face-to-face dialog [relationship?]. It's not the content people are willing to pay for, it's interpersonal exchange and context that they will pay for. Certainly the dialog piece can happen over the web but there still seems to be something quite unique about the exchange that happens when applying what one learns in the same context.

How is this addressed in theological training?

What do you think? Do you agree with me? If not, why?

HT: Geoff Hsu for handing me a copy of FC

I've mentioned in the past that we've had an ongoing conversation about what role theological training ought to have in our future. I had the privilege of talking with Mark Lau Branson and Alan Roxburgh last night about such things. But I have–what seem to me–some very practical questions about this. It is clear that a lot of the higher education opportunities available for those seeking to become professional clergy focus in great part upon institutional sustainability. With some exceptions, the fact of the matter is that most Christian institutions and churches are running out of money. This isn't so much about bad business practice (although that is often true) but mostly about the growing irrelevance of how the Gospel is commonly communicated within our culture (ie. no one's interested). It seems obvious to many that we need to find better ways to educate both paid and unpaid leadership in how to guide local faith communities in North America in the 21st Century. But how? And where does a professional clergy fit in? Here are some scatter-brained thoughts that I would love to get your feedback on...

How important is it to get a degree in something focused on Christianity in some manner? Don't get me wrong, I feel as though we need to train people in theology. But what does the future hold for those that have a specific degree in such things? When a handful of us left professional ministry to start Matthew's House, those with degrees in ministry or biblical studies found it very hard to find a job outside of ministry. Yet, there was not a Christian institution that would have funded such a calling as ours. Is a degree important for those called to such work? Or should we get educated in other fields that can support us?

My friend Jamie is a pastor at heart and a theologian to boot. But he is also a sociologist so he can pay the bills. I wish I had been as smart as Jamie... regarding both forethought and intellect. My good friend Kevyn and I got certificates in areas of construction, Rick got his contractor's license. (Yeah, bad "alternative" for us in this economy... like I said, not the best at forethought) Is this the direction that Christian leaders should follow? In an economy such as ours, how many people can afford degrees that may not pay themselves off?

There are some that would read this and feel that I am simply some embittered individual trying to raise trouble. I actually ask these questions out of my deep love for the Church. I recognize that our institutions are not going to change over night. And I still plan to work with them as best as I can. In fact, if I could I would love to walk into a seminary classroom and share what I have learned and I know many others just in San Diego who would do the same. One of the challenges in this scenario is that those of us that have been working at finding new forms of church life do not hold the qualifications to walk into that seminary classroom to share what we've learned (Even if I someday finish an MA it still won't be enough–I need a DMin at minimum).

Lastly, there are schools that are trying to address this. One of the reasons why I met with Alan and Mark was because of this. But a concern of mine is that it will still be the same kind of person that gets educated and I wonder if we should be a bit more deliberate about changing that. What I mean is that it still seems as though we are mostly educating white, middle to upper class males. Yet, those doing some of the most selfless, risky amazing ministry amongst people are not those kinds of people. This has a lot to do with broader social issues. But these others are often the voices we need desperately to hear from. White, middle to upper class white men have been the recipients and shapers of theological education for a long time. Yet, as we stand at the tomb of Christendom, how do we empower those that have actually–for a long time–found ways of doing ministry without the resources of the Christian institution? Especially since more and more of us are doing just that today.

There isn't one answer to this. But I am curious to hear about your experiences and thoughts. Please share.

I've written before, that several of us in San Diego have been reflecting on what it would look like to provide an alternative form of theological development. One that is attainable and attractive to the many rather than the few. (TC Porter has even challenged Bethel Seminary San Diego to reconsider it's role in theological training.) As this conversation has gone on, a couple of books have come up that deal with different approaches to education. First is Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed. When my housemate, Matt, read over what Allelon is doing with their training centers he encouraged me to read Freire. The recommendation has come from several others as well. You can read a segment of the book online here.The other recommendation has been Ivan Illich's Deschooling Society. You can read Illich's book online for free here. This book was recommended quite a bit when I asked what I should read by Illich. I started reading Deschooling Society last night when we got home late from my parents' and Matt was having trouble sleeping with a cough.  What stands out in chpt. 1 so far is this: The failure of contemporary education is that it commonly convinces us that learning it isolated to one environment: school. Disabling the public to discern learning opportunities within the other aspects of life. Illich writes, "Work, leisure, politics, city living, and even family life depend on schools for the habits and knowledge they presuppose, instead of becoming themselves the means of education." He is critiquing public education in the U.S. While I'm not yet convinced about the public school system, I certainly see the truth of this within theological training. We commonly have a limited imagination of how theology works with our everyday lives. It seems to me we are a missing a 'give-and-take' relationship betwen theology and context. Context should inform theology and theology should inform context. But our current tactics–from Sunday school to seminary–often do not provide the tools to do this. How might this change?