In continuation of the post I provided yesterday, I wonder if I didn't come across a bit to harsh? I hope not. But having read it again, I think it is a fair display for healthy criticism.
Today, Luther Seminary hosted its third community forum of the academic year. It considered the way the Bible is taught and studied here, and how that looks in the curriculum of the community. I believe this is a valuable endeavor, and important.
However, out of the questions and conversation that was sparked, questions ranging from: why we do not get taught the Deuteronomic Historical Books?; what does this mean for Biblical Authority?; to, are we learning what we need to learn out in the real world?; came a question to me. In the "so what" portions of classes at Luther Seminary there tend to be applications of what we are learning to the pastoral ministry, and pulpit setting. These applications of vocation are affirming to M.Div. students, but what, I wonder can be said for those of us who are M.A.'s? I am not only speaking to those who feel a calling to continued learning and perhaps Ph.D. studies, but also those of us who are here for other ministry calls? Such as, those of us called to be leaders of non-profits and NGOs? Are there applications that can be applied in class?
I hope so and I believe so. This class excites me, for that very reason as we will be able to work with a non-profit, A Minnesota Without Poverty. I also hope though, that such applications could be more wide scale. Otherwise, the lack of their application, seems to challenge or somewhat question why on earth people like me have decided that seminary study is an integral part of our call.
I wonder then, could this be a valuable and worthwhile consideration for Luther Seminary to use in curriculum construction? Could it be a way for Luther Seminary to be out front of the church, as the church is sensing that its changing on a national and global scale and that forms of ministry are changing to become more fluid and less rigid and structured? Hopefully these are more good questions to consider. At the very least, they are what my head is spinning around at the moment.
Twice today, I've heard M.A. students expressing similar sentiments (and also a number of times in the past). As an MDiv I don't always notice how "MDiv-centric" the seminary is, but it's important to be reminded. I wonder how much the ratio of MA to MDiv students has changed? Could it be that many of our professors could once count on classes filled with nothing but future pastors, but that's no longer the case? I think including people on a variety of paths is something we could do better, and also spending some time with non-mainline Christian perspectives. If the vast majority of American Christians are steeped in the world of evangelicalism, perhaps it would benefit us to be able to speak that language a little better.
ReplyDeleteTimothy, I love all your reflections on life in seminary and your thoughts from your classes! I find them so interesting! Just wanted to let you know that someone else out there is reading this :)
ReplyDeleteI love that you're making these comments, and would simply add that there are several faculty (myself among them) who are trying to figure out how to do more of this. Maybe you can help us come up with ideas!
ReplyDeleteJacquelin, thanks for your thoughts. My hunch is that Luther's ratio of M.Div.'s to M.A.'s has changed greatly over the past decade. I kind of think that Luther is still trying to figure out how to approach this shift.
ReplyDeleteKristen, I am so glad that a friend in Namibia is reading this! :) Allison and I miss you. Have fun up north while away from the internet. (And tell my sister I miss her terribly too!)
Mary, thank you so much. In order to have the best education, not only for myself but also for my friends and colleagues, I think its good to evaluate critically and honestly. That said, I would love to help come up with ideas.