Recently, I was talking to a pastor who serves at a church located near a seminary.
Unfortunately, he explained that his church and the school don’t have much of a relationship. Occasionally, he will catch wind of a criticism at the school about his ministry. But apart from that, the seminary is disconnected from this vibrant local church just down the road.
This situation is a manifestation of the “ivory tower” problem. In an ivory tower, scholars work far away from the church, irrelevant and disconnected from its work in the world. In the case of my friend, that relationship may even be antagonistic toward the church’s mission. Sadly, these kinds of situations can foster animosity between church and academia that undermines the opportunity the two have to work together for the sake of the gospel.
For example, when pastors introduce me at a conference, they will often give caveats about me “not being like” other academics. They will sometimes emphasize my commitment to the local church, missionary training, or other practical, ministry realities as proof that I’m “not one of those” ivory tower type leaders. This illustrates the sense that the church and the academy can be significantly divided.
Thankfully, many leaders in theological education want to bridge the gap between the academy and the church and are working hard to do just that. In particular, there are three ways in which bridges are being built between church and academia. I call the first two ways the accessibility-driven option and the competency-based option.
Accessibility-Driven and Competency-Based Seminary Options
The rapid and widespread adoption of the internet over the last several decades has democratized information like never before. Because of this, non-traditional forms of education are booming today.
Various forms of online courses, informal learning pathways, social media, certificate programs, and more—offered by established academic institutions, individual scholars, and others, are reimagining the landscape of learning in new and exciting ways (though certainly not without its challenges).
Theological education has participated in this innovative era, and some of it is done very well. Of course, this varies, but some have led with inexpensive and quick online courses. Many of these modes of delivery are important and helpful, and a student looking into options for theological education can find an array of them. It’s not uncommon for a student to choose to pursue an academic institution for formal education in part because of free or low cost learning options they’ve first encountered from that institution (or a faculty member at the school). This has allowed for easier, faster, and cheaper modes of theological education today that were unimaginable 30 years ago.
While I’m not among those who reject these sorts of options in every circumstance, the wide proliferation of more informal education options has produced a sort of “race to the bottom.” To make theological education cheap, easy, and fast, many have also sacrificed academic quality and rigor in the process, in order to appeal to a wider customer base (i.e., prospective students).
While accessible educational options have a place, it doesn’t mean that it serves the church as an equal replacement to formal education. Many non-formal and informal educational opportunities many be easier to complete, but they can also miss the valuable formative role that a formal theological education plays in a student’s larger journey preparing for their vocation.
