The Future of Theological Education: Switching on a Light – Lee Hinson-Hasty

In the year 2000 the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) had sent to the presbyteries for approval, for a second or third year in a row, a controversial constitutional amendment that, in essence, would allow the ordination of homosexual persons.  For months, the rumor mill in the presbytery in which I served was rapidly churning.  Although the ministers and elders of the presbytery had consistently voted against parallel amendments, the opportunity for discussion and discernment had been ample and intentional.  This time would be different.

As soon as this particular amendment came to the floor for discussion a well known minister stood and “called for the question.”  In Robert’s Rules of Order, this is not a debatable motion.  Approval would mean that the body would immediately move to vote on the amendment without discussion.  That, in fact, is what happened.  As one might expect, the presbytery answered such an amendment with a negative response.

That same year the confirmation class at the church I served was especially sharp and they were present for events that I have just described.  The other pastor and I had prepared both the class and their parents for the dialogue and debate that we anticipated on the amendments to the constitution.  They were sorely disappointed.  This is not to say that they disagreed with the outcome as many did not.  What we all grieved was the loss of the opportunity to grow as community of faith through theological dialogue on a particular and practical issue.

One especially insightful and analytically gifted young woman in the class practically lost her breath when the motion to call the question was approved.  She turned to me after the vote and asked in a loud whisper, “What just happened?  Aren’t they going to at least talk about it?”  “Not today.” I answered.  Exasperated and deeply disappointed she said out loud to no one in particular, “That’s not right!  That’s not Presbyterian.” The next month when I visited her and her family in their home to discuss her decision about joining the church, these events were fresh on confirmands’ mind.  She was not sure she could be a part of a community that failed to be in dialogue about difficult theological issues.

Her concern, I believe, is a concern that both the church and the academy need to take seriously. If congregations and scholars are to be true to their calling, dialogue on complex theological issues must thrive.  Both are responsible for ensuring that dialogue takes place.  When gifted youth and young adults, future leaders in the religious community, leave or ignore the institutional church I wonder if they are leaving because the church does not provide enough space for serious theological inquiry.

The future of theological education and the future of the church are woven together.   When they deepen dialogue and foster healthy theological inquiry, public and personal relevance, effective ministry engagement, and commitment to God expands.

Theological education is happening in congregations, colleges, conference centers, mission opportunities, books, blogs, bible studies and every other place that healthy theological dialogue and reflection take place.  No one has a full picture of what the future holds.  However, there are some signs that point toward a healthy direction for theological education in the future:

• Intentionally recognizing that the church is part of the world: Religious leaders must understand the world around them and encounter subjects often considered outside traditional boundaries of theological curricula.
• Increasing knowledge of theologies of the Global South: Global citizens need to be globally aware and engaged. Curriculum and composition of those understood as sources and teachers in all contexts need to be cross-culturally representative.
• Increasing understanding of World Religions: North Americans have privileged Christian and Western perspectives on religion.   We need to continue to find ways to learn with and from resources in our own communities and the global community in which we as Christians are living out our faith today.
• Making theological resources more widely available: Education, in all forms, is a real privilege and often reserved for people of privilege.  Sharing stories and building relationships across perceived or real divides will be essential.  Digital tools, the arts, and tactile experiences are likely to have a tremendous impact in this area and others.
• Working collaboratively and ecumenically:  Stressed financial and human resources in churches, denominations, and seminaries contrasts growing interest in religion and spirituality.  Finding funding and mission partners will only increase in the future. On the flip side, collaboration to forward a theological education mission will be a prime opportunity for transformation of the church and the world.
• Keeping Bible and theology as a core curriculum: Learning how to think theologically and interpret scripture will continue to be a central need, but challenged by the outcry for more practical skill training.  I am of the opinion that practical skills without theological and biblical grounding risk being more destructive to the church and world.

Among others, my father-in-law, E. Glenn Hinson, gives me hope for the future of theological education.  A lifelong theological educator who was born and raised during the Depression, he posted a video on Facebook last week. Although the vast majority of his multiple publications and, I dare say, communications were pounded out on a typewriter he now regularly makes video calls, emails, stays in touch with hundreds of friends via internet based social networking, and monitors the news from multiple global sources.  A church historian, New Testament scholar, and the author or editor of over thirty books, Hinson is adapting his skills and methods to fit the ever-changing context of his ministry.   He describes himself as being from a typographic period where words reigned supreme.  Yet he recognizes a revolutionary reversal in the current religious context:

This revolution reverses one that occurred on the eve of the Reformation of the 16^th century with the invention of moveable type by Gütenberg.  Although Roman Catholic bishops at the Council of Trent deliberately reaffirmed the iconic/tactual medieval inheritance, Protestants embraced the typographic; scriptures and sermons increased in importance as images and sacraments decreased …Post-modern culture of the 21^st century has shifted from a more typographic to a more iconic and tactual character …

Recognition of this revolution in the 1990’s resulted in a major shift in my approach to teaching spirituality at Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond (BTSR).  Until 1992 I … typed all of my manuscripts on a 1923 Underwood Standard.  BTSR, however, did not have a pool of typists to turn my sloppy copies into neat ones.  The seminary supplied me with a computer.  I used it almost exclusively as a word processor.  Using it, however, switched on a light.  The world was passing me by.  If I did not want to get left behind, I had better adapt and accommodate.[1]

As people of faith and as theological educators we will need to continue to adapt to explore changing trends and adjust to ever changing contexts or theological educators (faith communities, theological schools, theological scholars, etc.) will become increasingly irrelevant or, as Hinson says, “get left behind.”

---

[1] E. Glenn Hinson, “What I See for the Future of Theological Education,” (Unpublished address for the inaugural E. Glenn Hinson Lectures at Kentucky Baptist Theological Seminary, Lexington, KY 2009).