The leaders of the 11 seminaries connected with the Episcopal Church have agreed that the schools they lead will consolidate their efforts in four areas of theological education.
The agreement came during a January meeting at Grace Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Attending the meeting were deans and trustees — including many board chairs — from nearly all 11 of the seminaries, along with many of the bishops who serve on some of the seminaries’ boards.
The collaborations will be distance learning, Spanish-language ministry preparation, Anglican Communion partnerships, and seminary-diocesan partnerships for local ministry development education.
“The spirit of cooperation” that was present during the meeting is “critically important” to the success of the plans, and marks a major change in the way the seminaries relate to each other, the Very Rev. Ward Ewing, dean and president of the General Theological Society (GTS) and convener of the seminaries’ Council of Deans, told Episcopal News Service.
“This is a big deal because we say we’re not going to be Lone Rangers anymore,” agreed Donn Morgan, dean of Church Divinity School of the Pacific (CDSP) and Ewing’s predecessor as convener.
I just can’t see Nashotah or Trinity signing on to this program- unless they did so in some restricted capacity. If the article had been less biased and more interested in showing reality, we might have learned about exactly how all the seminaries are participating.
I agree. I see nothing here guaranteeing that either school won’t be pressured into changing their curriculum in order to ensure conformity with the rest. They are the only bastions of conservatism left which, at least on the surface, constitute a source of orthodox-minded clergy for those dioceses of that persuasion.
Does anyone here have any knowledge or experience regarding Bexley Hall in Rochester, N.Y. (not the Ohio location)?
I believe Bexley returned to Ohio, to a different location (not Kenyon), perhaps linked to a Lutheran school…
Who were the 11 seminaries attending these meetings?
One of the issues/problems “sneaking into” the seminaries is the idea that priests are “trained” and not “formed.” Of course training is involved, but the seminaries are not utilitarian “vocational schools” or “diploma mills.” The move to more “corporate” and “commodity” oriented concepts of priesthood and ministry, which can be seen in all the seminaries conservative a liberal alike, pushes us to “train” and not “form” priests. We become CEO’s or technocrats rather than pastors, teachers, disciplers, counselors, etc. Function over being, or some such thing. I hope this is not the result of all the “changes” that all seminaries are going through (which is true, but perhaps not for the better).
A couple of answers to questions from above.
-Representitives from all 11 TEC Seminaries attended these meetings, including Nasotah and Trinity.
-Bexley Hall’s main campus is (still) located in Rochester, NY. They have recently established a “branch” campus on the grounds and in partnership with Trinity Lutheran Seminary in Columbus, OH.
-I do have some experience with Bexley…did you have something specific in mind?
Grace and Peace,
Joe
Considering that there can be no way to get an answer wrong in an Episcopalian seminary, it shouldn’t be too hard to coordinate efforts.
#8
From what I gather there is one sure way to get an answer wrong in an Episcopal seminary: cite it from the Bible.
I didn’t get aboard at the station, so I might not know where this train is really going, but…
Is their financial crunch so BAD that these seminaries are willing to sacrifice portions of their cherished autonomy in order to stay afloat? Has money decreased so drastically? Numbers of students?
In faith, Dave
Viva Texas <*))><
dpeirce (#10) – it is true that seminaries in general, among all denominations and independent institutions, are having financial difficultly (with exceptions, of course). Virginia is fairly well set financially, but as the article stated they will not be able to be all things to all people or meet all the needs.
Just to counter Didymus a bit – your assertion was not my experience!
#7 I will be moving to Rochester in October and am considering three schools for my Masters : Colgate Rochester Crozer Divinity School, Bexley Hall, and St. Bernard’s Institute. I was wanting an insider’s perspective on Bexley Hall especially as they are the smallest and there is very little about them on the internet.
Bob G (#11): “…with exceptions, of course”. Can you dwell a moment on those exceptions? Why are they exceptions? And, in WHICH seminary is it that Biblical obedience is enforced (re #9)?
In faith, Dave
Viva Texas <*))><
This article contains a typical amount of TEC spin. Grant LeMarquand, Academic Dean of Trinity and Robert Munday, President of Nashotah House attended the seminary Council of Deans meetings, where these ideas were presented. Grant reports much discussion was held on a variety of topics, but NO FORMAL AGREEMENTS were signed or made. In the opening sentence of the article – “seminaries agreed that the schools will consolidate their efforts in four areas” – there were NO AGREEMENTS signed or agreed to in any area. Grant and Robert told the group that the Trinity and Nashotah faculty met together last fall and are planning to meet again to consider ideas for our two schools.
Tina Lockett
Director of Admissions / Dean of Students
Trinity, Ambridge, PA
Bexley Hall has a very small number of seminarians. I know this from mailings I have received from BH and connecting the dots between what they say and comparing it with information available elsewhere.
Enrollment numbers and lots of information on all seminaries can be found at the Association of Theological Schools website – http://www.ats.edu
Tina Lockett
I am a senior at Bexley Hall in Rochester, NY. The campus in Columbus, Ohio is at Trinity Lutheran Seminary and is now considered the “main campus” although it has only existed about 10 years. The Rochester campus began in 1968. The official letter I received in June did not say the seminary is closing. In that letter the seminary was to continue just not enroll any more MDiv students. From being a student there I can tell you that boxes are stacked in the classroom and bookcases that were in the classroom last semester are not there anymore. I know of no Bexley Hall courses being offered for MDiv or MA students after the end of May (there will be one course following graduation). All matriculated students are graduating May 17th. So, from the prespective of this student, Bexley Hall in Rochester is closing.
Michele
dpeirce (#13) – Seminaries across the board, across theological perspectives and denominations – liberal, Evangelical, Reformed, Catholic – are facing serious financial problems. Small institutions of higher education, which seminaries are, are having great financial difficulties. There are liberal seminaries, like Harvard’s, that are doing fine financially and they certainly wouldn’t fall within your description of a successful seminary that enforces biblical obedience. Likewise, there are very faithfully seminaries that are barely making it and they would certainly be the type you believe should thrive because they enforce obedience to the bible (like Nashotah House).
Bob G (#18), Perhaps I stated my questions poorly. Let me rephrase, and ask my questions again :^>:
1) You mentioned that some seminaries are EXCEPTIONS to the general situation of having financial difficulty (#11). I asked WHY those exceptional seminaries are exceptions? What are they doing “right”?
2) And you also mentioned (#11) that in your experience, citing from the Bible ISN’T the way to get an answer wrong in a seminary (referring to #8). I asked in WHICH seminary you obtained that experience? My original question didn’t include this, but it would be good if you could include examples in your answer.
Is that clearer?
In faith, Dave
Viva Texas <*))><
Thank you, Michele, for the update. (My grandfather taught for more than forty years at Bexley (Kenyon); my father, his brother, and brother-in-law all went to Bexley; ‘the first of Kenyon’s goodly race, was that great man Philander Chase’). Bexley has clearly been eaten up and has lost all recognisable connection to its origins and history. Part of this was an ‘ingenious’ plan from Almus Thorpe, Sr, presented to the National Church (itself a new thing), to consolidate, ecumenise, and urbanise the seminary landscape. Doubtless changes needed to be made. But this was largely a miscalculation as to the future and also the nature of the problem. The book on this is yet to be written. Why, for example, are all episcopal seminaries in the US so anemically influential in the larger cause of Christendom in the US, compared with Princeton, Duke, Yale, Emory, Notre Dame, Trinity-Deerfield, Fuller, Wheaton, or Regent in Canada? No one wants to look this problem in the eye, but for all the (benighted) sense of self-importance of TEC, it really has no theological outposts with impact in cultural terms. The UK struggles with this (look at Wycliffe-Oxford problems). Even if +RDW is judged a mistake on Sahria law, the BBC is ready to put him in the first ten minutes of busy PM news. No TEC bishop, no TEC seminary lecturer, is going to occupy this space. One can say +RDW occupies it by being controversial/wrong. But TEC will never occupy it except by being a byword. No one asks Schori for a view on major issues, and this is not likely to change in the future. People can dispute the views of NT Wright, here in the US, but he has no problem making the Christian case in the public arena in the UK. He gets a space in the cultural debate. That is never going to be true of TEC bishops on right or left—except as they belong to parties in a debate the public might follow like they follow any debate.
This is a serious problem that anglicans in the US must look at.
#20 Ouch! You nailed it. We need people like YOU to be part of the solution.
Dave – As I’m sure you know, there are a whole variety of reasons why some seminaries are more financially successful than others. A seminary’s ability to draw enough students to be viable, which relies on such things as the quality of professors and education in general, the depth and quality of spiritual life on campus, etc. Of course, a seminary’s ability to raise funds, run the institution well, and wisely manage the endowments come into play. Some seminaries do these things “right” to varying degrees, others don’t.
My response to Didymus (#9) – my experience at GTS was not aligned with his sarcastic statement.
Obviously, our four required Scripture courses made great use of the Bible (along with the plethora of elective Bible courses offered). Scripture imbued all of my theology courses – pastoral, ascetical, ethics, systematics, etc. That was my experience.
Bob G (#22): Thanks for the response which actually paid attention to my questions this time.
1) I had wondered if you knew of some specific things that financially unstressed seminaries had done which might have been helpful to others. Long shot, but worth taking.
2) So, how would you characterize GTS for conformity with the Bible? To put it another way, if I stated that homosexual acts are sinful and referred to Romans 1:18-32 to buttress my case, would my answer be marked correct or incorrect?
In faith, Dave
Viva Texas <*))><
23. dpeirce wrote:
“2) So, how would you characterize GTS for conformity with the Bible? To put it another way, if I stated that homosexual acts are sinful and referred to Romans 1:18-32 to buttress my case, would my answer be marked correct or incorrect?”
I would say that so long as you presented a coherent and consistent argument, you would be fine. You might not be popular! However, it would not be held against you in terms of grading. I have found the emphasis at General to not be on what one ought to think, but on how to logically move across the fields of ethics, Biblical hermeneutics, theology, liturgy, etc. in a consistent and honest way.
If you have a consistent worldview that is supported by Scripture, Tradition, and Reason and you can articulate that worldview intelligently, you will do very well at General, regardless of the angle you come from. The vast majority of my professors have been very respectful of a broad range of opinion, pushing and prodding to gauge that the student has thought through all of the implications of their claimed positions.
I am currently an M.Div. student at GTS and can say that I have been very pleased with the faithfulness and Christian commitment of the faculty. I have not always agreed with their specific interpretations, but have always received a fair and considered response when I have raised questions. Moreover, when I have argued from the Biblical text, I have certainly not been penalized.
An example would be a recent paper I wrote on how one would defend the divinity of Christ in a “modern” world. My answer never deviated from the citation of verse after verse of Biblical text that assures of of Christ’s Sonship. The paper received a very good hearing from a professor who might not have entirely agreed with my methodology, but was pleased that I could marshal a consistent and coherent defense based on a systematic approach to the question and the texts. He was looking for intellectual coherence and the ability to reason through the argument, not for the “right” answer.
Most of my paper topics have tended toward the orthodox and my answers are rooted in tradition and this has hardly been held against me. Fellow classmates of mine who are similarly orthodox have also enjoyed success here thusfar.
General seems to be getting lumped in with schools much further out on the fringe of debates. It is a broad church experience in the best sense of the word, providing a place where a range of views are expressed and respected. I may not agree with them all, often vociferously disagreeing, but the tone of those conversations is civil and the dialogue heartening.
The students here cannot be pigeonholed in terms of theology or ideology and I think that is a gift to the church. Our interest is increasingly focused on finding a way forward together when we disagree. It gives me great hope for the future of the church, even when I am dismayed at times by the present.
Sorry for the long and rambling answer to a short question!
Yours in Christ
dpeirce (#23) – rjhend1’s description of things at GTS was also my experience. The following is too long – sorry.
The reality of Anglicanism, and its strength IMHO, is that Anglicanism has traditionally allowed for wide landscape of theological perspectives and Scriptural interpretations – from fundamentalist to what in my opinion is heretical, from High Calvinism to Anglo-Catholicism. The tension (iron-sharpening-iron) keeps us balanced and as we move forward keeps us honest. The other thing Anglicanism allows for is being wrong (all of us are at some point in our Christian maturation). I’ve heard this repeated often by Roman Catholics concerning their own faith expression. It also allows for people who are truly seeking but have a very difficult time believing.
I think one of our many problems is that we have gotten out of the habit of saying, “I may be really struggling with this or that theological point or belief, but this is what the Church believes and teaches as presented in the Book of Common Prayer…” We are quick to wear our questions/struggles/troubles on our sleeves without faithfully teaching what the Church states by faith is the Christian truth.
GTS allows for all of this, just as long as people can show that they are truly struggling through the questions honestly and consistently within the traditional Anglican frameworks. AND, GTS is almost alone of the 11 seminaries that still offers daily Morning Prayer, Eucharist, and Evening Prayer/Evensong, along with Compline, Lectio Divina, Quiet Days, and many other regular worship/contemplation experiences. GTS also has a mustering of monastics that visit for spiritual direction.
Now, not everyone may have had the same experience. I know that some adjunct instructors that have taught when professors were on sabbatical have not been so generous or consistent. Some have been (and are) downright awful. GTS also has a lot of problems administratively.
rjhend1 and Bob G (#24 and 25): Thank you for the opinions you’ve offered, and for the kindly manner in which you’ve offered them. Accordingly, I shall offer mine, worth what you pay for it but noting that I have paid dearly (although not in terms of suffering).
First, I *have* read descriptions of GTS which aren’t so charitable. And I’ve read others more like yours. I’m not really in a position to know from experience what is the truth about GTS; however, I personally would appreciate two things: fairness and patience toward he who struggles with his faith, and constant exposition of truth according to scripture and the Traditions of the whole Church. From your responses to me, I suspect there is not as much emphasis on truth as there should be.
Second, while the ability to reason coherantly and argue logically are absolutely necessary, there *IS* a right and a wrong. Right is right whether argued well or not, and wrong is wrong even if argued with great coherance and knowledge. There is something askew in a system which goes to such pains to allow fairness and respect for others’ opinions, and which encourages such intellectual rigor, but which produces leaders who deny that Christ is the sole way to the Father. No matter how coherant and “broad” the reasoning and motivation, Ms Schori and those other leaders who agree with her are simply wrong.
Please don’t misunderstand. Reason, struggle, and tolerance, are absolutely necessary – but only so long as the truth is held up constantly before all. The truth is that Christ and his Word *ARE* the only way to the Father, much as we might prefer otherwise. Yes, a person may be struggling to accept that truth, and learning to express it so that he can instruct others in that truth, but he must through the whole process know what that truth is. There is a certain lattitude for interpretation, but interpretation may not deny the basic truth. Sometimes one must accept what he does not yet understand.
The Episcopal Church, and her leaders, are failing in truth. From what you told me, I’m not confident that GTS is always holding up the truth to its students, but is rather hoping they will discover it for themselves. That unfortunately produces a lot of error.
In faith, Dave
Viva Texas <*))><
26. dpeirce wrote:
“From your responses to me, I suspect there is not as much emphasis on truth as there should be.”
Thanks for your kind response to my comments about my experience at GTS. The comment you made above is certainly one that I often made initially at GTS, but also applied more broadly to seminaries in general.
I think that General is working hard to find a way to be the seminary of the whole church and thus navigates some very interesting waters. For example, in liturgics we had a fiercely divided conversation on the Real Presence with lower churchmen arguing against the reserving of the Sacrament and private Masses and with Anglo Catholics defending Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament and all seven Sacraments. Either of these views can be viewed as “truthful” and as “faithful” and yet are polar opposites.
So where does a professor’s role come in as far as teaching truth? It is very difficult, so the professors present the strains of thought through history and leave it to the students to study/reflect/pray and find answers from among the challenges and positions.
I do feel that General makes a concerted effort to balance the strands of tradition/reason/observation…
Two comments by professors stand out to me (among many)…
1) In a conversation about our role as theologians for our parish, a professor strongly encouraged us to remain immersed in the Bible and the tradition of the faith for “The longer you look at the mirror and talk only to yourself about these things, the sooner you will see the devil looking back.” This statement was a really great moment for me at General for it affirmed that we cannot rely on reason alone, the texts take precedence, and there is a force for evil in the world that will exploit our arrogance.
2) Another professor, in a conversation about the creeds, said that he had often thought that students who could not honestly recite the Apostles Creed without crossing their fingers and who could not, in good conscience, teach it as living witness to their parishes should be “shown where the door is” to leave the seminary.
There have been other moments of encouragement for me at GTS, including small group discussions where real engagement is made with the Word and the troubles facing Orthodox/Trinitarian/Catholic tradition.
My experience here has convinced me that there are, coming on the horizon, a group of well-trained, orthodox clerics who will be able to articulate traditional views in a way that can build up the faith and grow the church while avoiding the trench warfare that can distract us all from God’s mission and saving work.
Sorry again for an inelegant and too lengthy answer! I have been so pleased with my time here, that I often work to convince other orthodox seminarians that they would not be unwelcome here! Indeed, I have port and biscuits waiting for them.
Yours in Christ
#27 That our seminaries form men and women such as yourself is testimony that God is still with us in TEC and that light, bright and beautiful, shines even in this present darkness. The parish or ministry that calls you to lead and to serve them dpeirce is blessed indeed.
rjhend1 (#27), I’m glad your experience at GTS has been a good one, and that you have been encouraged to understand that you “cannot rely on reason alone, [but that] the texts take precedence, and there is a force for evil in the world that will exploit our arrogance’. In you, the Episcopal body isn’t quite dead yet. I believe you will expound Truth to those who will depend on you as their shepherd.
I have to wonder, though, if the majority of your fellows have achieved the same understandings, and if they will be honest shepherds or dishonest.
Archangelica (#28), thank you sooo much for your misunderstanding :^>, but I’m not a priest. I’m a used-up uneducated old duffer who still tries to help out in Christian Education and the like around his own Catholic parish (former Episcopalian). But, used up and untrained as I am, I will still offer this advice to an MDiv and priest-to-be: Yes, there may be some misunderstanding and disagreement over whether the Eucharist is the exact Real Presence of Christ among us or is only a Memorial to him, but never forget that Jesus said, “Take, eat; this is my body… Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” THAT, you MUST teach. And you MUST teach that Jesus Christ is the sole and only way to the Father; we might prefer it to be another way, but that’s what he said and we must be taught to trust what he said.
Finally, I appreciate that GTS commendably tries to be the seminary for the whole church, and that it’s a tricky thing to manage, but it isn’t entirely scriptural. Jesus did come so that the whole world might be saved through him; but he DID dismiss the goats. Telling a goat that he’s OK with God is not helping him; that’s the horrible thing the Episcopal leaders have done, and I fervantly hope you will not repeat it.
In faith, Dave
Viva Texas
Viva Texas: Deepest apologies to you, my commendation was directed to rjhend1, sorry for the confusion.
(#30): Oh! Pooo! Shucks! Doggone!
I thought somebody had finally recognized me for the good that I am… even if they were wrong :^>.
Dave
“Sharing resources” with some ECUSA seminaries sounds about as appealing as swapping spit with a cholera victim.
30. archangelica wrote:
“my commendation was directed to rjhend1”
Thank you so much for your kind comments! It has been my experience that there are some great candidates for the priesthood out there that I am thrilled to be serving alongside.
Pax et Bonum
From the article:
Ewing said all the deans’ conversations come down to two questions: “How do we work better among ourselves?” and “How do we really serve the Episcopal Church and build a structure that provides mutual insight into how we do theological education in the church that’s emerging today?”
I find it very telling that the second question is about how to serve the Episcopal Church and not how to serve Christ. Just one more echo that shows where many people’s loyalties are coming down to. May I never seek to serve an institution but Christ only.
And before somebody says that I’m reading too much into it, I would have agreed if the church were not in the place it is now.
I might have missed the boat on this discussion, but I was discussing Anglican Theological Colleges and Seminaries with my bishop the other day. Being English, my closest understanding of US colleges etc would be to transfer UK knowledge over. Thus I found myself thinking about the Ivy League and Yale Divinty School in particular. When I suggested this as a place to study, my bishop visibly paled, saying it was “off the wall liberal” and no longer really prepared priests spiritually (ie compulsorary daily offices, communion etc).
1) Is this true about Yale in particular
2) Is there anywhere where people can find out about the reputation and churchmanship of Theological Colleges, particularly in the US?
[i] Check out Trinity School for Ministry in Ambridge, Pa: http://www.tesm.edu/ or
Nashotah House in Nashotah, Wisconsin: http://www.nashotah.edu/ [/i]
Marcus:
I don’t know if anyone is still following this thread, but an email to KSHarmon-at-mindspring.com, or T19elves@yahoo.com, or contact@standfirminfaith.com might yield a starting point. Good luck and vaya con Diós!
In faith, Dave
Viva Texas
#35–I was trained in the Yale PhD programme and taught, and was tenured, at YDS, from 1987-1998, before moving to St Andrews. YDS had some brilliant faculty: Childs, Frei, Lindbeck, Holmer, et al. They are all retired. Six people trained in that context are now teaching in Toronto, at Wycliffe College, in the University of Toronto. You might give it a think. Radner, Sumner, M Taylor, G Taylor, Joe Mangina, and myself.
[i] Here’s the link to the web site: http://www.wycliffecollege.ca/ [/i]
Marcus – It depends on what you are looking for – academics or priestly formation. If academics is your desire, then Yale, Princeton, and Vanderbilt are all excellent academic institutions, but you won’t be formed as an Anglican priest in these institutions. The Episcopal Church does have a seminary associated with Yale Divinity School – [url=http://research.yale.edu/berkeleydivinity/]Berkley Divinity School at Yale[/url].
[url=http://gts.edu/]The General Theological Seminary[/url] (GTS) in New York City is the only Episcopal Seminary that offers an academic ThD program.
I can only vouch for my alma mater, but if you are looking for priestly formation in a seminary that tends towards the Catholic side of the Anglican spectrum, GTS continues the tradition of Daily Offices – Morning Prayer, Evansong, Evening Prayer, and Compline a couple times a week – as well as a daily Eucharist. Being in New York City, it also offers a wealth of ministry, educational, and cultural opportunities.
Required daily offices for ordination track students, ample formation, and evangelical-catholic resources at Wycliffe, inside the Toronto School of Theology. It is also true that a school like General Seminary occupies a distinctive niche on the theological spectrum, so there are choices. General probably occupies the space that a school like Cuddesdon does in the UK, or Peterhouse. Wycliffe Toronto is more like Ridley, but in a major city and consortium of schools.