Sentences with phrase «education in theological schools»

Others would be trained to teach counseling, preaching or religious education in theological schools of other faiths.

Not exact matches

In the world of North American higher education most theological schools are like crossroads hamlets.

In current discussions of the nature and purpose of theological education Edward Farley has invoked the older of these two models of excellence in schooling when he describes his book Theologia as an essay «which purports to promote a Christian paideia.&raquIn current discussions of the nature and purpose of theological education Edward Farley has invoked the older of these two models of excellence in schooling when he describes his book Theologia as an essay «which purports to promote a Christian paideia.&raquin schooling when he describes his book Theologia as an essay «which purports to promote a Christian paideia.»

The readers he has in mind include: perhaps a student starting her second year of study, or an academic who has just joined a theological school faculty and has never herself been previously involved in theological education, or a person newly appointed to the board of trustees of a theological school.

The conventional view that a theological school is «theological» because it educates church leadership has been roundly attacked in the current conversation about theological education.

On the other hand, if the concrete way this school does «have to do with God» is ordered to education for ministerial functions, is it not then in practice using «having to do with God» for a further, ulterior purpose («educating for ministerial functions»), thus corrupting its proper theological character («having to do with God for God's own sake»)?

Since many Candler students serve local churches in pastoral roles while they attend seminary, the kind of field education program common in theological schools, a program that provided elementary exposure to the tasks of ministry, was not appropriate.

Christian congregation; some have seen a theological school as distinct from but interrelated with congregations in ways analogous to the relation in the Reformed tradition between the congregation and its clergy; others have seen a theological school as related, not to congregations, but to a cadre of active clergy for whom it provides «in - service» or «extension» education.

Recently James Gustafson has argued anew for this picture of theological schools in «Reflections on the Literature on Theological Education Published Between 1955 - 1985,» Theological Education, vol.24 (Supplementtheological schools in «Reflections on the Literature on Theological Education Published Between 1955 - 1985,» Theological Education, vol.24 (SupplementTheological Education Published Between 1955 - 1985,» Theological Education, vol.24 (SupplementTheological Education, vol.24 (Supplement II, 1988).

Schleiermacher had arranged them in precisely that fashion, and ever since then, that picture of the essential movement of theological schooling has ruled wherever the «Berlin» model of excellence in theological education has been adopted.

Wood is not much troubled by the fact, which so disturbs Farley and Hough and Cobb, that the way in which academic disciplines are institutionalized in American higher education also dictates the structure of the curricula of theological schools.

Not only does Wood distance himself from the «Berlin» model's picture of what is involved in education in Wissenschaft he also rejects its definition of theological education as professional schooling: «Theological education is not necessarily professional education for ministry, but the heart of proper professional education for ministry is theological education&rtheological education as professional schooling: «Theological education is not necessarily professional education for ministry, but the heart of proper professional education for ministry is theological education&rTheological education is not necessarily professional education for ministry, but the heart of proper professional education for ministry is theological education&rtheological education» (93).

Wheeler cites the research done by Auburn Seminary's Center for the Study of Theological Education in intensively examining theological faculties in several seminaries, with particular emphasis on whether such schools will be able to recruit enough qualified faculty to replace the many who are currentlTheological Education in intensively examining theological faculties in several seminaries, with particular emphasis on whether such schools will be able to recruit enough qualified faculty to replace the many who are currentltheological faculties in several seminaries, with particular emphasis on whether such schools will be able to recruit enough qualified faculty to replace the many who are currently retiring.

Furthermore, theological schools have backed off from developing programs of continuing education that would provide sustained intellectual, spiritual and social engagement with the questions and issues being raised by people in diverse vocations.

Can we reconceive theological education in such a way that (1) it clearly pertains to the totality of human life, in the public sphere as well as the private, because it bears on all of our powers; (2) it is adequate to genuine pluralism, both of the «Christian thing» and of the worlds in which the «Christian thing» is lived, by avoiding naiveté about historical and cultural conditioning without lapsing into relativism; (3) it can be the unifying overarching goal of theological education without requiring the tacit assumption that there is a universal structure or essence to education in general, or theological inquiry in particular, which inescapably denies genuine pluralism by claiming to be the universal common denominator to which everything may be reduced as variations on a theme; and (4) it can retrieve the strengths of both the «Athens» and the «Berlin» types of excellent schooling, without unintentionally subordinating one to the other?

The renewed emphasis on religious orthodoxy has been associated with a vigorous upsurge in theological education, in the growth of church - controlled schools, and in concern for religion in public education.

Right now the Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada is conducting a major study of the public character of theological education, with a special focus on how seminaries can educate leaders who take their public roleTheological Schools in the United States and Canada is conducting a major study of the public character of theological education, with a special focus on how seminaries can educate leaders who take their public roletheological education, with a special focus on how seminaries can educate leaders who take their public role seriously.

As I noted in the first chapter, the proposal is a contribution to a larger, ongoing conversation about what is more frequently called «theological education» than it is called «theological schooling.»

Nanjing Theological Seminary, the nation's oldest and most prestigious Protestant school of theological education, was reopened in the eTheological Seminary, the nation's oldest and most prestigious Protestant school of theological education, was reopened in the etheological education, was reopened in the early 1980s.

Theological schools are relatively homogeneous, but dispersed smaller cohorts tend to be even more homogeneous, thereby reducing the operative diversity in theologicalTheological schools are relatively homogeneous, but dispersed smaller cohorts tend to be even more homogeneous, thereby reducing the operative diversity in theologicaltheological education.

I have been driven to grapple with this problem in lectures at Presbyterian School of Christian Education, Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, Davidson College, and elsewhere.

In theological school, the task of education is to enable the students to lay hold of the resources of the just - described professional identity and to overcome any major impediments that prevent them from assuming this identity with courage and dignity.

In such schools and elsewhere the supradenominational and supranational character of theological education is also significantly indicated by the increasing enrollment of students and the employment of teachers from other areas of Christendom.

In this situation more than a hundred theological schools have agreed to examine themselves and the status of theological education in general, to raise immediate and ultimate questions about their purposes, their methods and their effectiveness in discharging their duties; to seek also ways of improving their own ministrIn this situation more than a hundred theological schools have agreed to examine themselves and the status of theological education in general, to raise immediate and ultimate questions about their purposes, their methods and their effectiveness in discharging their duties; to seek also ways of improving their own ministrin general, to raise immediate and ultimate questions about their purposes, their methods and their effectiveness in discharging their duties; to seek also ways of improving their own ministrin discharging their duties; to seek also ways of improving their own ministry.

(0ne school characterizes its attitude toward other denominations as magnanimous; another recognizes only two church bodies — one of these in Europe — as soundly Christian; some denominational programs for the development of theological education move easily from praise of the ecumenical spirit to exclusive concern for the advancement of the denominational ministry.

Both types of excellent schooling are deeply institutionalized in the practices that constitute American theological education of all sorts; neither one can simply be abandoned by a faculty vote!

The following chapters on the nature and purpose of the Church, the ministry and the theological school constitute the first part of the report of The Study of Theological Education in the United States theological school constitute the first part of the report of The Study of Theological Education in the United States Theological Education in the United States and Canada.

My perceptions of the fit between piety and learning in the current world of theological education are conditioned by a recent move from one province of that world — Candler School of Theology at Emory University in Atlanta — to another, Union Theological Seminary itheological education are conditioned by a recent move from one province of that world — Candler School of Theology at Emory University in Atlanta — to another, Union Theological Seminary iTheological Seminary in New York.

The technical emphasis in recent theological education has given us better pedagogies, opened up the larger society as a field for ministry, redistributed authority and power in the schools, and added new and important areas of study.

In a nutshell, theological schools can provide solid and effective professional education only if it is clear to the students that their school studies and experiences are pertinent to their future ministry.

The reorganization of the American Association of Theological Schools in 1956 was symbolic of the change taking place in theological educatTheological Schools in 1956 was symbolic of the change taking place in theological educattheological education itself.

The standard method of theological education — a method practiced in the public schools and on through the university — is one of attending a certain number of classes, drafting some papers and, at the end of the term or course, writing the answers to some questions in order to indicate comprehension of the materials covered.

Seminary administrations — especially in the university schools — were frequently motivated by a desire to bring theological education in line with the highest standards of secular education.33

Thus Niebuhr moves to correct the problem in the revisions of the «Berlin» model of excellent theological schooling that we noted in the earlier reflections of Harper, Kelly, and Brown on North American Protestant theological education.

The current discussion of what's theological about theological education can be read as the first discussion of theological schooling in which both models of excellence are explicitly engaged.

Faculty in those fields who are members of departments of religious studies receive their doctoral education in the same graduate schools as do faculty in theological schools, and faculty move back and forth between the two contexts.

It is not clear, however, whether Brown's constant stress on high academic expectations simply assumes the canons of critical, orderly, disciplined inquiry that the research university model had made commonplace in the 1930s in American graduate education outside of theological schools, or whether he is rather calling for theological school teachers who are very learned but are not necessarily themselves engaged in original research.

We read widely in theological education and practical theology, consulted scholars and listened not only to deans and presidents of theological schools, but also to outstanding ministers and to graduates of Vanderbilt teaching in seminaries and divinity schools.

Theological education is theological because it educates professional church leadership through schooling in historical and, above all, philosophical WiTheological education is theological because it educates professional church leadership through schooling in historical and, above all, philosophical Witheological because it educates professional church leadership through schooling in historical and, above all, philosophical Wissenschaft.

Note that in this way Hough and Cobb address issues about the adequacy of theological schooling to pluralism precisely by the way they address issues about the unity of theological education.

Although both proposals adopt paideia as the type of education appropriate to theological study and explicitly or implicitly urge its modification to embrace certain types of Wissenschaft, they disagree strongly about whether there is some transcendental structure that is self - identically, universally in all types of theological schooling, no matter where it is located.

This has several implications for theological education, all of which are entailed in the distinctive twist this view gives to the school's overarching and unifying goal to educate leaders for the church.

Though such successive innovations in theological study as the social gospel, social ethics, religious education, psychological counseling and ecumenical relations may receive much publicity the schools seem to go on their accustomed way, teaching what they have always taught: Biblical and systematic theology, church history and preaching.

Other indications of the lack of a sense of direction in theological education today are to be found in the hidden and open conflicts present in the schools.

There are few theological schools where these groups do not compete for the students» interest and time, where some members of the former group do not feel that the scholarliness of theological study is being impaired by the attention claimed for field work and counseling, where teachers of preaching, church administration and pastoral care and directors of field work do not regard much of the theological work as somewhat beside the point in the education of a minister for the contemporary Church.

It has been nurtured in many ways: by research into basic issues in theological education underwritten by competitive grants offered by the Association of Theological Schools (ATS) and funded by the Lilly Endowment, Inc.; by the work of some theological educators commissioned by the Endowment to think about these questions; and by a series of seminars and conferences convened by the ATS to discuss some of the results of this research and theological education underwritten by competitive grants offered by the Association of Theological Schools (ATS) and funded by the Lilly Endowment, Inc.; by the work of some theological educators commissioned by the Endowment to think about these questions; and by a series of seminars and conferences convened by the ATS to discuss some of the results of this research and Theological Schools (ATS) and funded by the Lilly Endowment, Inc.; by the work of some theological educators commissioned by the Endowment to think about these questions; and by a series of seminars and conferences convened by the ATS to discuss some of the results of this research and theological educators commissioned by the Endowment to think about these questions; and by a series of seminars and conferences convened by the ATS to discuss some of the results of this research and reflection.

Innocent idealizations of theological education give way before concrete realities of the particular theological school whose ethos is the medium in which one now largely lives and whose polity constrains one's life in powerful but often elusive ways.

In the cosmos of higher education, theological schools are in other respects like crossroads hamletIn the cosmos of higher education, theological schools are in other respects like crossroads hamletin other respects like crossroads hamlets.

It may well be that theological education, if it deserves the name, is a process whose governing purposes are the same in all theological schools.

The model of excellent theological schooling symbolized by the inclusion of a faculty of theology in the University of Berlin tied «practical» education for a socially necessary profession (the clergy) to the «theoretical» education of a research university on the grounds that future clergy would be best equipped for their ministerial functions if they acquired capacities for rigorous critical research.