Challenge and opportunity in Theological Education...
I guess that I could be considered something of an
optimist. In most situations I try to find any positive elements that may be
present.
Currently we are in a rather
difficult place, both personally as a family, and with regards to my ministry at
John Wesley College. I do however believe that in the midst of the uncertainty
and challenge that lies ahead there is a great deal of possibility and hope.
This is the certainty of the faith. God works for the good of those who love
God (Romans 8:28). My experience tells me that in life things don't often get
worse, they just change. Sometimes our personal perception of a change is
negative. However, change almost always benefits someone. I hope and trust
that any changes that will take place with be for the greater good, and I hope
to contribute towards that in whatever way I
can.
I include in the read more link
below an open letter that will shed more light on the challenges that lie ahead,
and some of the disappointments that have gone
before.
__________
From: Dion Forster
[dion@SERVER.org.za]
Sent: 16 July 2004 01:15
PM
To:
minister_mcsa@SERVER.com
Subject:
[minister_mcsa] Training for the Ministry - a personal
concern
Greetings
friends!
It has been quite some time
since I have contributed anything towards the Methlist. However, be assured
that I have lapped up much of the discussion that has taken place on this list!
In particular I have found the inputs on same gender relationships to be
extremely stimulating and
challenging.
I wonder if I might
introduce, and perhaps even solicit some personal feedback on, a new topic? The
issue that rests on my heart is that of Ministerial Training (the process by
which we as a Church form and prepare people to fulfil their calling to serve
Christ and the world within the
Church).
I must first preface what I
will say below with a disclaimer. What I write is my own feeling and does not
in any way represent the official view of the Education for Ministry and Mission
Unit, neither does it represent the official view of the Methodist Church of
Southern Africa. Rather, these are some questions and feelings that I have come
to dwell on since arriving in Pretoria and officially joining the staff of the
EMMU in January this year (2004). Furthermore, I don't wish to unnecessarily
present anybody, or any process of the Church, in a poor light. However, I do
feel I need some place in which to air some of my questions and concerns in this
regard, and I would personally value any feedback and correction that I could
benefit from.
I am currently placed by
the Church as a member of the Education for Ministry and Mission Unit (EMMU)
with primary responsibilities for the Academic, Pastoral and Vocational
formation of ministers at the MCSA's seminary, John Wesley College. My primary
functions are managing the college and, facilitating and monitoring the academic
and spiritual life of the college (i.e. I teach New Testament, Systematic
Theology, Ethics and help with Greek, overseeing the other academic staff that
teach from other Universities, Churches and institutions, helping the 70 or so
students in both a pastoral and academic concerns, overseeing the running of the
college, which means managing the buildings and residences, lay staff, and then
some Unit responsibilities, such as designing and presenting courses, working
with probationer ministers and laity in ongoing training, attending Unit,
District and Connexional meetings. My academic responsibilities also include
some Government work. I sit on the South Africa Qualifications body for
Theology and Ministry and have helped to draft the curricula for the new
Theology and Ministry Degrees and Diplomas for Theological Education providers
in South Africa. This has been hugely stimulating and
exciting).
I have found my ministry to
be incredibly stimulating and rewarding to fulfil. However, since my heart is
still firmly lodged in the Church, I asked to be formally attached to a local
Church where I preach every Sunday. I don't believe that one could ever divorce
Academia from the real life situation of a local Church! So, along with the
other joys of my ministry I still get to lead and preach in a local congregation
each Sunday.
My concern has arisen,
personally, over some of the murmurs that I have heard coming from Synod's in
particular, but generally from various places in the Connexion. I think it was
highlighted for me when I saw the responses that came from the resolutions sent
to SYNODS (which were a TOME to wade through, I know!) I think that the
struggles that come from Circuit and Districts are very real, although, I do
feel that a few are based on misconceptions about education methodology and
perceived costs. I hope to offer some insight into both of these areas
below.
The first and most serious
concern I am sensing is, with regard, the cost of training people for ministry.
As a circuit minister for many years, before coming to the College, I understand
the pressures of having to meet increasing assessments levied on an already
struggling Church. I would love to hear what others feel and think about this
issue in particular, and how we can find creative ways of funding the people we
want to staff our Churches.
Personally,
I was extremely alarmed at the letter that I found in my Stipend Package (Salary
Advice Slip) which was sent to all ministers from the Presiding Bishop's office
which more or less said that a Review of Training for Ministry would be
conducted due to 'spiralling costs', concerns about quality assurance, and
concerns over the pastoral nature of phase 1 training. I can only comment on
the cost element and quality assurance. I also heard about the audit from
ministers who phoned about the announcement of the Review on Ministerial
Training in the New Dimension!
I was
alarmed, because this was the first official notice I had heard of such an
enquiry (I would personally consider it good practise to first inform the
ministers concerned, or members of a unit, before them having to read about it
'in the evening news', so to speak). Furthermore, I feel that such a letter
places the Unit in an extremely vulnerable place within the Connexion. It could
leave us open to vilification (almost like saying that we are responsible for
the general financial struggles in many of our Churches). Also, I wonder about
the wisdom of putting this letter in alongside a letter that announces that the
MCO has just increased its staff compliment by one person, and that the
appointment had already been made. I intend no disrespect to the Presiding
Bishop or the Connexional Executive in any way. This is just my personal
feeling on the matter.
Secondly, I
was alarmed because I have had a look at the costs of ministerial education, and
different options of training, and find that there are very few acceptable
cheaper alternatives. Let me say a bit more about that later.
Lastly, and I acknowledge that this is
a very personal and perhaps selfish concern, I am alarmed because I gave up my
Doctoral studies half way through, at the call of the Church to come to the
Unit, my wife resigned from her job in Cape Town, our daughter was taken out of
school and we moved to Pretoria. We left behind a new and vibrant Church that
had been planted in Stellenbosch, and now we may not have a secure place of
ministry in which to serve! In some ways I feel quite used, having arrived here
to serve, and less than 6 months later facing the possibility of being without a
station having moved across the
country!
However, as I say, I do
realise that my personal alarm has to be weighed up in the face of the very real
struggles and concerns of local churches (which I hope I am still in touch with)
on the one hand, and the pressures on the Presiding Bishop to run and manage an
efficient organisation on the other. I guess that somewhere along the line I
just feel a little bit mistreated because of a problem that was not as a result
of my actions, or the actions of the
Unit.
You see, as far as I can see, the
brief of the Education for Ministry and Mission Unit is just that, to provide
Education for Ministry and Mission. In my understanding our role is to receive
the people whom the Church accepts as Candidates for Ordained Ministry, to
prepare them to the standard that the Church requires of a minister (both in
skills of ministry, in attitudes and values of Christianity, and in knowledge of
faith and doctrine). We do not decide how many people get admitted and trained.
That is the responsibility of the Church (here I mean the appointed bodies of
the MCSA who regulate admission and stationing, which is ultimately the
Conference and in other years the Connexional Executive). In order to
accomplish this task the Church has set aside two ministers (in total the Unit
has four staff members, the Director who is in charge of all education in the
MCSA, a co-ordinator for Lay Training, and then the two ministers directly
responsible for ministerial training, namely, a co-ordinator for Ordained
Training, who look after all probationers in circuits, and a person who has
pastoral, academic and managerial responsibility for the Church's Seminary).
My dream is that we would be able to
give every person the best possible education so that they are so well equipped
that they can be agents of healing and transformation in a broken world. I wish
that we had unlimited resources that would allow us not only to give people
perfect academic qualifications (so that they would KNOW whatever they needed).
But, that more than that, that we would produce extremely COMPETENT people, who
would make the best ministers for the Church. In this regard I have absolutely
no concern about a Review of the cost and quality of ministerial Education!
Anything that can inform me (and the Unit - for which I cannot speak) to provide
better, more cost effective, training is most welcome. However, the manner in
which it has been announced, and the manner in which I (and others) have been
dealt with is a cause for concern. I leaves me with a lower morale and great
insecurity. I have had to answer questions from our students who ask whether I
have been retrenched, whether the College is closing down, whether the education
that they are busy with is not good enough, and a host of other difficult and
embarrassing questions. It has not been
easy.
Now, on to some of the cost
analysis issues I mention above. Remember, our task is not to decide who gets
trained, that comes ultimately from the needs expressed by Church, our task is
to train the called people that the Church sends us. In my mind there should be
at least two essential elements to training for the ministry.
A) Part of that training is gaining
knowledge (understanding and learning what Christians believe, learning how to
use the Bible, Doctrine, History, deal with pastoral, practical and contextual
issues etc. to discover and enact the will of God, and learning the necessary
elements of good ministerial practise, such as counselling, management and
leadership etc.).
B) A second
necessary component is the acquisition of good ministerial skills (i.e. not only
what I should KNOW in order to be a minister, but what I should be able to DO in
order to be a good minister).
If one
of these elements is lacking in the training process, one can see that it is not
a well rounded process. For example, many of us left Universities with good
degrees, i.e. we were very knowledgeable, but we didn't have a clue how to do
some of the necessary tasks of ministry, e.g. a funeral! It is no good being
able to talk about the eschatological certainty of the resurrection from death,
but not being able to comfort people in their time of sorrow and grief! Of
course, the reverse also stands. How many times have we seen people who can
make all the right moves in their pulpits, but the message they preach is dry,
out of context and ill informed? My conclusion is that we need balanced well
trained people in the ministry.
When I
arrived at the Unit I was shocked to learn that the average probationer spends
only 1 year, of the 5 years of probation, in a residential learning institution
(i.e. John Wesley College). I enquired about this and the answer was: MONEY.
We can only train people in a manner that the Church can afford. Currently, all
candidates enter the ministry with some credits towards their Diploma, they do
some more credits in Phase 1, and most complete their Diploma in the year that
they get to John Wesley College (many then go on to do Honours and Masters
degrees before ordaining. In the past 10 years the college has had 168
Graduates, 55 have gone on to do Honours Degrees, 8 have completed Masters
Degrees, and 3 have gone on to do Doctoral studies, a further one has already
completed his Doctorate). So in response to this concern, the Unit, began to
investigate different models of training that will offer good academic training
AND good skills (or
vocational) training, at
the best COST.
We have done a great
deal of research into how this can be done and will be presenting a document
with many different models to the Connexional Executive. However, from our
research we are able to arrive at three basic options (of which there are many
derivatives):
1. Some time in
circuits, some time in seminary (like we currently have). This works out at an
average cost of 5.2 Million per year and offers a fair balance between knowledge
and skill training. It has some people stationed at College, but also allows
the Church access to ministers in training to be stationed and so serve the
Church.
2. Full time at a Seminary or
University and very little time in circuit. This is a hugely expensive model
since we now have to have all our probationers (there are close to 200 this
year) full time at a seminary, or a university, for 4 years. Please understand
that the most expensive part of our budget is NOT student fees. The most costly
elements are covering living expenses (accommodation, resources such as books,
medical aid, travelling for students, living allowances for them and their
families whilst they are not earning anything etc.) This model means not only
needing to have the money to fund their learning, but also finding the money to
allow all of these persons and their families to survive for 4 years at a
seminary or University! 4 years is the average time it takes to complete a
Bachelor of Theology degree by one of our students. The reason for this is that
most probationers come into the ministry with insufficient points to gain direct
access to the first year of a Bachelors Degree in Theology (32 points required)
and so need to do some bridging or access year in order to be accepted by the
University (this applies to all Universities we have negotiated with).
Furthermore it would mean huge capital expenditure to purchase accommodation
(either to extend our current seminary to cope with the increased numbers if we
remain here, or buying accommodation near whichever University we go to in order
to attach our learners there). Currently the Church owns the Kilnerton property
at Pretoria, with 12 units for Married couples and enough accommodation for 32
single students (or students who choose to come without their families, which is
not encouraged). This means we can currently house only 12+32= 44 students at
the College. We would need to increase that capacity to house approximately 3
times that number (about 120, since we will have 40 in first year, 40 in second
year, and 40 in third year). Excluding those costs, the Unit itself would still
need further funding. Remember that only two of the four posts in the Unit have
to do directly with Ministerial training and can thus be done away with if we go
to a University. We have tried to find the cheapest way to do this (one
University even offered us up to 90% Subsidy on our student fees - yet we still
need to house, feed, cover medical aid, books, living allowance for all our
students. But in return for this subsidy we had to get the Church to agree to
pay all four staff members in the Unit and put them on the University staff to
teach etc. Plus, Universities are not willing to allow some of the Academic
work to be done in circuits. I must be done in residence at the institution
concerned). The most cost effective option we could come up with (with reduced
numbers of learner
- which the Church would
have to regulate by taking in less Candidates, thus making less ministers
available to place in circuits) was approximately 6.5 Million per year. Now of
course this option has a high cost, but for that high cost one is getting a high
knowledge component, but a lower skills component (just about every University
we have negotiated with has an ethos of training Theologians, not ministers). A
further struggle with this model is that the Church would need to realise that
they have much less staff available to staff the Churches i.e. almost all of the
ministers in training will be in one area, at one college or University, and can
thus only participate in the circuits and churches in that
area.
3. No time spent in a
residential institution, all learning takes place in circuits through a distance
learning institution. Many of us know this model from our own training. This
is a much more cost effective model since it means that local circuits bear some
of the most costly elements of probation (housing, living allowance or stipend,
medical aid etc.). All that the Church in general needs to fund is the student
fees (which are generally the least expensive elements of training) at the
distance learning institution, and perhaps one unit staff member to facilitate
and regulate the study process. Here the person gains, out of necessity, some
good skills (remember those of us who went straight into Churches without any
training or formation before that?) One has to learn how to do the work of
ministry, but sometimes the learning can be quite difficult for the congregation
and painful for the minister (when I look back at some of the sermons I
preached, some of the funerals I conducted, counselling sessions I engaged in,
etc. it is quite scary to think how ill informed, even uninformed, I was in many
of those. It is only by the grace of God that no persons or Churches were
damaged by my self discovery and learning). The other downside of an all in
circuit training is that weaker students don't have as much access to help from
lecturers and other students to help them with their studies. Furthermore, the
circuits will have to ensure that these ministers have at least two days a week
free for Academic work if the person is going to complete their Degree or
Diploma in a similar time frame to what we currently require, or probation will
have to be lengthened again to accommodate a slower pace. A last struggle would
be that the Connexion would need to make many more stations available for
Probationers (currently we struggle to find enough stations in which to place
the probationers we are training, we often have probationers sent to John Wesley
College for further years simply because the Connexion cannot provide enough
stations.) The cost of this model is only marginally cheaper when one considers
some of its challenges and shortfalls. I would cost approximately 3.4 Million
Rand per year.
In short, I am not
in any way opposed to a Review of Ministerial Training. I would love to get
ideas and insights into how best we can train ministers who are knowledgeable
and competent to transform society! I fear though, that the review might
ascertain that there are few better options than the one we currently have.
Furthermore, I personally, am concerned about the perception that the letter
which was sent out in Stipend Packages creates within the connexion. Lastly,
and again personally, I am concerned at how we, the ones responsible for
training for ministry, found out about this review. It does not do much for
morale.
I have no doubt that many of
you will have excellent and valuable ideas that could enrich our content and
process of forming people for ministry. Unfortunately I am not sure how far I
will be able to carry such ideas and inputs, since this is in no way a formal
process. I believe there is a formal process for submissions that has been
announced, but I have not yet been notified of that.
Please could I ask you to do two
things. Firstly please pray. Pray for us in the Unit, and for our Church, that
we will make the most, best trained, people available for ministry in our
Church. Please could you also pray for us as a family (my family that is), we
are feeling quite hurt by how we have been dealt with in this process.
Secondly, please do forward any ideas or suggestions to me on how we can improve
our training. Or, even better, if you have any ideas that I have not touched
on, or find any mistakes or misconceptions in my thoughts above, I would love to
hear them!
Much
blessing!
Dion
John
Wesley College 15 July 2004
Posted: Tue - July 20, 2004 at 04:15 PM