Nones at Divinity School

[Donald_Kirchner]

A question that needs to be considered is how much of the resources available should be used to support general religious education.  Not that such would be a bad use of resources, but resources are finite and needs to be used well.

I don't understand.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:

Frederick  Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor.    What they have in common
is this:  Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers.  All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.

Bottom Line:  Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.

You forgot to include moderator, Richard Johnson. (His daughter also went there.)

[Dan Fienen]

A question that needs to be considered is how much of the resources available should be used to support general religious education.  Not that such would be a bad use of resources, but resources are finite and needs to be used well.

I don't understand.

Denominational Seminaries' mission is primarily to train pastors for the churches of the denomination and secondarily to train other church workers.  So the staffing and curriculum is geared to that end.  Someone who wants to study religion in general would likely want a somewhat different curriculum.  To offer a general religious studies curriculum suitable for the Nones could take additional resources.  How much such coursework could be used in the pastor preparation track and how much expense there would be to appeal to the Nones would have to be considered.

[Dave Likeness]

Educational Bio of Walter A. Maier:

Concordia High School, Bronxville
Concordia Junior College, Bronxville
Boston University, Bachelor of Arts, 1913
Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Bachelor of Divinity, 1916
Harvard Divinity School, 1916-1918
Harvard Graduate School, 1918-1920

Bottom Line:  As a result of his academic work during 1916-20,
Harvard granted him a Doctor of Philosophy.

[Donald_Kirchner]

Educational Bio of Walter A. Maier:

Concordia High School, Bronxville
Concordia Junior College, Bronxville
Boston University, Bachelor of Arts, 1913
Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Bachelor of Divinity, 1916
Harvard Divinity School, 1916-1918
Harvard Graduate School, 1918-1920

Bottom Line:  As a result of his academic work during 1916-20,
Harvard granted him a Doctor of Philosophy.

No. "Maier studied at Harvard Divinity School from 1916 to 1918, and at Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences** from 1918 to 1920. These four years saw the completion of course requirements for both Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy degrees...[Maier] received an M.A. in Semitic language, literature and history from Harvard University in 1920; and in 1929 became the twentieth person to ever receive his doctorate from Harvard in Semitics." It appears that he did not complete and defend his dissertation until 1929 when he received his doctorate from Harvard University, not HDS.
Bottom line, Maier did not graduate Harvard Divinity School as you stated, which is why he was not on the list I read and why I did not forget.

Pastor Don Kirchner forgot to mention one of the illustrious
graduates of Harvard Divinity School: Dr.  Walter A. Maier...

**"The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences is the academic unit responsible for many post-baccalaureate degree programs offered through the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Harvard University."

[Donald_Kirchner]

A question that needs to be considered is how much of the resources available should be used to support general religious education.  Not that such would be a bad use of resources, but resources are finite and needs to be used well.

I don't understand.

Denominational Seminaries' mission is primarily to train pastors for the churches of the denomination and secondarily to train other church workers.  So the staffing and curriculum is geared to that end.  Someone who wants to study religion in general would likely want a somewhat different curriculum.  To offer a general religious studies curriculum suitable for the Nones could take additional resources.  How much such coursework could be used in the pastor preparation track and how much expense there would be to appeal to the Nones would have to be considered.

Sem StL has both M.A. and Ph.D. degree programs. I would think that one could do a form of "general religious studies" in either of those programs. In fact, there certainly are students from other denominations taking coursework at CSL.

[Richard Johnson]

Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:

Frederick  Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor.    What they have in common
is this:  Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers.  All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.

Bottom Line:  Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.

Gee, it also produced me. And Pastor Wolf. Into which category do we fall? 

[Charles Austin]

I have known many "theologians" produced by our seminaries and many pastors produced by places like Harvard Divinity School. The suggestion that the school determines what one is doesn't fly.

[Satis Est]

Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:

Frederick  Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor.    What they have in common
is this:  Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers.  All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.

Bottom Line:  Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.

I could give you at least as long a list of names, all parish pastors, who studied at Yale Divinity School. As a matter of fact, YDS (at least through the mid-eighties when I was there) had as one of its goals the training of parish pastors.

And I am more than dismayed at the implication here that parish pastors and theologians are two seperate and distinct entities, and the one cannot and is not supposed to be the other.

Balderdash. 

Parish pastors had better be theologians. Otherwise they are cheating their parishes.

Oh, why not? I will list a few parish pastors who came out of Yale Divinity School:
   Peter Marty, Leah Schafer, Henry Brinton, Nadine Lehr, Sally Colgrove, Jeff Merkel, Stephen Petrica, Robert Bader, Laura Sugg, Richard Johnson, John Wolf. And yes, myself. And there are more.

There are also those who are professors, authors, deans of other divinity schools, and other esteemed posts outside of parishes. So?

And I will also remind those here, that one can become a fine parish pastor even if one's M.Div. is from Harvard Divinity School. One such person (before being elected to serve as a bishop):  Pastor Elizabeth Eaton.

[Donald_Kirchner]

Yale Divinity School produced the following theologians:

Frederick  Buechner, Stanley Hauerwas, Richard Hays,
Reinhold Niebuhr, H.R. Niebuhr, William Willimon. and
Barbara Brown Taylor.    What they have in common
is this:  Several became prominent professors as well
as well-known preachers.  All have become popular
authors as well as good theologians.

Bottom Line:  Seminaries produce parish pastors and
Divinity Schools produce professors and theologians.

I could give you at least as long a list of names, all parish pastors, who studied at Yale Divinity School. As a matter of fact, YDS (at least through the mid-eighties when I was there) had as one of its goals the training of parish pastors.

And I am more than dismayed at the implication here that parish pastors and theologians are two seperate and distinct entities, and the one cannot and is not supposed to be the other.

Balderdash. 

Parish pastors had better be theologians. Otherwise they are cheating their parishes.

Indeed.

Very few clergy (or even bishops) have advanced degrees in theology. They are not the church's theologians.

As one with four degrees in Theology, including a Ph.D., I would respectfully disagree. The real theologians are those who teach and confess where the Church is found - that is, where the altar and pulpit offer God's gifts to His world.

Most of the damage that has been done to the Church's theology has been done by those with advanced degrees.

One of Dr. Gibbs pet peeves, a pastor stating, "I'm no theologian, (I don't have an advanced degree..)" Gibbs: "Yes you are! You are a theologian of the Church, and you are the theologian of that congregation to which you've been called."

[mariemeyer]

Theology is for proclamation.

RPG+

I read that somewhere!  An excellent book.

The book to which you refer is Theology is for Proclamation  by Gerhard O. Forde.   I agree it is an excellent book which is why I do not understand why LCMS theologians find fault with Forde.


In regard to the Church as "hidden" rather than invisible he writes, "The church knows itself to be the hearer of the gospel. If it knows itself properly it will have no illusions about itself.  It will know that it is constantly in the position of the hearer and that it will desire and have to hear ever and again. it will know that such speaking and hearing  cannot be taken for granted. It will know itself to be the company of those who are always sinners who live from the concrete, present tense proclamation (simul iustus et peccator).  it sill know that it cannot life today on yesterday's gospel. It must hear again and again and assembles so as to hear, and takes steps it can to guarantee that it will indeed hear the gospel.  It orders, cares for, and gather around the public office.

"As such the church is hidden and revealed. It is hidden because the hearing of faith in not directly discernible or certifiable by the canons of this age.  As such the church of 'true believers' is an object of faith.  It is the 'body of Christ,' the company of those who have been out to death and raised in Christ. The way of that company can never be comprehensible to this age. Its existence is a matter of faith. We believed in the holy catholic church,

"The church is revealed in the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments..

see pages 188 ff

Marie

[Dave Likeness]

Another excellent book by Gerhard Forde:

"On Being A Theologian Of The Cross"
Reflections on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, 1518

Eerdmans 1997  Paperback  121 pages

[Team Hesse]

Theology is for proclamation.

RPG+

I read that somewhere!  An excellent book.

The book to which you refer is Theology is for Proclamation  by Gerhard O. Forde.   I agree it is an excellent book which is why I do not understand why LCMS theologians find fault with Forde.


In regard to the Church as "hidden" rather than invisible he writes, "The church knows itself to be the hearer of the gospel. If it knows itself properly it will have no illusions about itself.  It will know that it is constantly in the position of the hearer and that it will desire and have to hear ever and again. it will know that such speaking and hearing  cannot be taken for granted. It will know itself to be the company of those who are always sinners who live from the concrete, present tense proclamation (simul iustus et peccator).  it sill know that it cannot life today on yesterday's gospel. It must hear again and again and assembles so as to hear, and takes steps it can to guarantee that it will indeed hear the gospel.  It orders, cares for, and gather around the public office.

"As such the church is hidden and revealed. It is hidden because the hearing of faith in not directly discernible or certifiable by the canons of this age.  As such the church of 'true believers' is an object of faith.  It is the 'body of Christ,' the company of those who have been out to death and raised in Christ. The way of that company can never be comprehensible to this age. Its existence is a matter of faith. We believed in the holy catholic church,

"The church is revealed in the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments..

see pages 188 ff

Marie

Marie;
I, too, have been somewhat surprised at the animus expressed toward Forde by some LCMS theologians. Since I attend LCMS continuing ed events on a regular basis, I have experienced this on several occasions. In the last Concordia Journal there is an article on sanctification where Dr David Scaer states in a footnote "Gerhard Forde's highly regarded exposition of the law and the gospel was not based on the atonement which he denied."(page 247) This is where I would guess many dislike Forde. I discussed this with some of my friends who were graduate students and close friends of Forde. Their comment is that this is finally a misreading of some things he said removed from the context in which he said them. Forde was not a fan of "atonement theories" per se. Theories remain in the realm of ideas. He was much more interested in the concrete reality of the atonement won for us on the cross, a reality which no one theory can fully explain or comprehend, and a reality he embraced as a theologian of the cross.
There are the beginnings of a plan to hold a theological conference on this subject through ILT.


Lou


There are also a significant number of LCMS theologians who enthusiastically embrace Forde's work.

[Harvey_Mozolak]

and that is a touchy subject, Lou, like a number of others that Lutherans should discuss and talk about but while we scream at each other excesses (and they exist to be sure), no one is willing to trim the edges where some theology has oozed and set up beyond Scripture and beyond the presence we know in the incarnate, crucified, risen and returning Lord.

[John_Hannah]

Sometimes some in Missouri simply grab any excuse (or contrive one) to prove we are better than anyone in the ELCA (and any other Lutheran body).

Peace, JOHN