Attention to theological education and preparation for ministry has always been a part of the Methodist/Wesleyan expression of church. I’m a Methodist by choice. For me, one of the attractions to the Methodist Church was the emphasis on an educated clergy. The primary center for training clergy is the seminary.
As they train the clergy, there is a sense in which the seminary shapes the church. A dramatic witness of this comes from Bonhoeffer. When he came to study at Union Seminary in New York in 1930, he was shocked with what he found, especially in the seminary. He wrote to his superintendent, “There is no theology here…They talk a blue streak without the slightest substantive foundation and with no evidence of any criteria. The students…are completely clueless with respect to what dogmatics is really about. They are unfamiliar with even the most basic questions. They become intoxicated with literal and human phrases, laugh at the fundamentalists, and yet basically are not even up to their level”
Though he was referencing one seminary, there is no question…mainline seminaries were following the same theological trend that was shaping Union Seminary.
The coming separation in the United Methodist Church is, in large part, a theological one, particularly as it relates to the nature of the Bible and the authority of Scripture. The week I began to read Eric Metaxas’ biography of Bonhoeffer, from which I quoted above, the Dean of Union Seminary made the news, denying the virgin birth and the divinity of Jesus. That seminary is one of the approved seminaries for training ministers for our United Methodist Church. It is critical that those who are now giving shape to the emerging Global Methodist Church give serious attention to seminaries and theological education.
Along with that, is the issue of ordination. I believe the new denomination will have to focus in a marked way on church planting. This will probably necessitate better, and more creative, use of lay persons. This gives us the opportunity to think positively about the ordination and deployment of what we presently call local and lay preachers. Training is a huge issue. Simply adopting an existing “course of study” is not going to meet the need. Also, how limited or expansive are we going to define the roles? We must in no way infer a second class understanding of this ordination.
In no way should does this, or should we, diminish theological education. The more expansive use of lay persons will open the door for exciting creativity not only in church planting, but evangelism, serving both rural and urban populations, and shaping essential “charges.” Hopefully, the church and the seminary will be more intimately related.
The Global Methodist Church gives us a once-in-many-generations-opportunity to be guided and empowered by the Holy Spirit to do a new thing without diminishing what the Holy Spirit has done or sought to do in the UMC or other Wesleyan movements. If we will stay on our knees enough, keep our minds open enough, and our hearts yielded enough, the world is going to be amazed.
*This article appeared first in the newsletter of THE CONFESSING MOVEMENT.