Last month, Rev. Dr. John Vissers wrote in his moderatorial column about the future of the Presbyterian Church’s theological colleges. The Record invited the heads of the three colleges to share their thoughts on the future of theological education in our denomination.
Ministers of Mission
By Stephen Farris, Dean, St. Andrew’s Hall, Vancouver
It is indeed time for the denomination to ask what its theological colleges have been discerning for the past several years: what kind of leaders will be needed in the almost unimaginably different church of the future? How can those leaders be best prepared?
The question has emerged because we as a denomination are also asking: “How much can we afford?” We know good leadership will not come cheaply but poor leadership will be more costly still. My colleague John Vissers in his excellent article uses a phrase first coined by me regarding a description of ministers as those of mission, maintenance or mischief. It came to me when I was sitting on yet another committee trying to clean up the congregational mess caused by a minister of mischief. I realized that the cost of the denomination’s annual grant for theological education was far less than what this and other ministers of mischief cost the denomination with countless person-hours in congregations and higher courts dealing with antagonism, division, heartache and tears, severance packages and closed congregations. That, we cannot afford.
Colleges need to help ministers of maintenance, the ones who know how to keep a congregation ticking along, become ministers of mission. Ministers of mission can perceive God-given possibilities for a congregation and can inspire people to share and act on a vision. Above all, ministers of mission can speak winningly of the gracious God made known in Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. This is the mandate of all our colleges.
I was mildly unwell recently and stayed home on a Sunday morning. I had a cup of coffee, read the paper, watched the more athletically inclined run in the park. It was a wonderful time. Why should the people who do that every Sunday bother to go to church? For the music, programs or fellowship? Probably not. They will only come to a congregation with leaders who can winsomely show those people the God-shaped hole in their lives and invite them to a mature worshipping community. That will not happen in any sustained manner without ministers of spiritual depth with wise leadership skills. Effective ministry is not just a matter of technique. It is also a matter of the spiritual maturity that is nurtured by an excellent and relevant theological education. The real question the denomination must ask in these days of culture’s increasing abandonment of Christian discipleship is: “Can we afford anything other than excellent theological education?”
This is not to say that theological education won’t change. It can and must change. But good education can’t be obtained on the cheap.
At St. Andrew’s Hall in Vancouver we have been holding consultations about effective leadership for the future church. Our commitment to discovering, enabling and sustaining those gifted by God to be the best potential leaders and laying the challenge of ministry is better informed, resourced, and stronger than ever.
The moderator suggests that “one big college” in one or more sites could be the right path forward. We disagree, and not just because desired financial savings are largely illusory. Would the computer industry be better for having only Microsoft and no Apple? How would an ice cream stand fare that sells only vanilla? Different people in different places will propose different solutions to the challenges we face. Variety is a gift of God.
St. Andrew’s Hall welcomes the denomination’s engagement as we all discern how we can help provide to the church the best leaders for a complex future.
Wise Stewardship
By Dorcas Gordon, Principal, Knox College, Toronto
The issue of theological education is a question that needs to be raised but, given its genesis, I would worry that we emphasize the last phrase of the Assembly Council recommendation rather than the middle phrase. In other words in preparing leaders for the PCC, what is “wise stewardship” in allocating the resources that God gives us? So often the preparation of leadership for the denomination, whether lay or ordained, is something we take for granted. Perhaps that is a good sign indicating that in many congregations there is only thankfulness for the devotion and skill that leaders bring to their calling.
Certainly I agree with Dr. Vissers that there is no better time than now to consider the way in which we educate and equip leaders. My experience is, for most of my almost 14 years as principal at Knox, this is happening on a regular basis. Those of us appointed as principals and dean by the General Assembly, in collaboration with our boards also appointed by the assembly, have such discussions at almost every meeting. Debates sharing wisdom about preparing future leaders, about programs for theological education and about stewardship of the church’s resources are ongoing. Perhaps what Vissers means is that this discussion and debate needs to be expanded.
More troubling for me is that, having read and re-read his column, I realize that I don’t really know where Assembly Council’s primary motivation lies: is it a concern for excellent leadership for the church in secular post-Christian Canada or is it about cost-cutting? My hope is that it is the former but my fear is that it is the latter. Whatever it is, much is riding on the answer.
To Serve The Church
By Dale Woods, Interim Principal, Presbyterian College, Montreal
Dr. Vissers’s article, as I understand it, is a rallying call to think deeply about the kind of leaders the PCC will need today and into the future. He reminds us that theological education is the responsibility of the whole church. Unless all of us take our responsibilities seriously we will not have the type of leaders we need.
As noted in the article, theological education is ultimately about the mission of God and the church’s vision for the future. Before we can make serious and discerning decisions about the future of theological education we need to ask: “What is our vision of the Presbyterian Church?” It is only when we have a clear vision of our calling as a church that we can really answer the question, “How can our colleges best serve that vision?”
As in any important discussion, there are various options or directions we can take as a denomination. It will take conversation, collaboration, clarity and a great deal of commitment. In an age of change, diversity and geographical differences, it seems to me that using and developing the strengths of each college to offer something unique and necessary for the future of the church would be a helpful direction. In my view, the larger the institutional nature, the slower the pace of change is likely to be.
Presbyterian College has been working on a strategic plan with a focus on equipping leaders for starting new worshipping communities as well as congregational renewal. It has a vision for developing leaders within its unique context within Quebec. And it has a vision for a leadership institute that could be in partnership with the other colleges and serve the needs of the wider church.
These are challenging days for the church. However, with challenges come new opportunities. Leadership is key and the questions Dr. Vissers raises are questions with which we all need to wrestle.
