Started by JoshOsbun, January 19, 2012, 04:43:29 PM
Quote from: Dave Benke on January 20, 2012, 08:57:22 AMI don't know why Mr. Mustaine is considered to be headed toward non-completion of the SMP program, Don. Nothing in the article gave me that impression. Dave Benke
Quote from: Josh Osbun on January 20, 2012, 11:29:23 AMQuote from: George H. Erdner on January 20, 2012, 11:22:39 AMAccording to what I've read and been told about SMP, and equivalent ELCA program, TEEM, the benefits you listed are among the intentions of the programs. However, they are not the only benefits and purposes of the programs.SMP is not supposed to supplant the seminaries. But that's exactly what this congregation is doing. They are bypassing the seminaries. They are getting a cheap pastor. They are arranging their own call (which is frowned upon if students and congregations make such arrangements when they go to seminary) and taking a call away from a candidate who went through the formal, long-standing, proven seminary program and giving it to someone who doesn't feel like putting in the effort that it takes to become a skilled theologian and pastor.
Quote from: George H. Erdner on January 20, 2012, 11:22:39 AMAccording to what I've read and been told about SMP, and equivalent ELCA program, TEEM, the benefits you listed are among the intentions of the programs. However, they are not the only benefits and purposes of the programs.
QuoteRigorous? One course per quarter, four quarters per year, four years in the program. That's 16 courses over the course of four years. That's not rigorous.Several of my friends were not only full-time students, husbands, and fathers, but they also held down jobs to support their families. I saw one guy complete three years of coursework in two years because he didn't want to move his family down to Fort Wayne from Detroit. He spend four days in Fort Wayne completing his rigorous coursework so that he didn't have to be bogged down by it when he returned to his family for three days.
QuoteI'm not sure who called it a lack of "real preparation." That doesn't appear in this discussion.I would be willing to call it sub-par and inadequate preparation, though. Can one distance homiletics course really be considered sufficient when three homiletics courses are required of M.Div. candidates? And where's the study of the languages? One course on Paul's epistles? Seriously? This is adequately forming pastors? Not a chance -- especially since they are ordained after only eight courses and two years. Eight courses! That's a quarter and a half of M.Div work.I'm sure that the participants do take it seriously. But what they are taking seriously and embracing is inadequate preparation to be under-shepherds of Christ.
QuoteLet me ask this: would you want a surgeon who only completed 1/4 of the regular academic work, doing so entirely through distance education? Would you want him operating on you after completing only eight courses over two years?Then why is it good enough for the man who is supposed to be your pastor?
Quote from: Josh Osbun on January 20, 2012, 12:34:29 PMI'm not sure that it is just for you to accuse me of having a tightly wound definition of rigorous when you choose to call one course per quarter "strenuous." Your definition of strenuous is far more loose than my definition of rigorous is tightly wound.
Quote from: George H. Erdner on January 20, 2012, 01:13:01 PMPlease bear in mind that while a seminary education is a good thing, and not to be dismissed out of hand, it is not a perfect preparation for being a pastor, nor always guaranteed to produce perfect results. Remember, most of the pastors who were part of Seminex or who left to form the AELC were graduates of LCMS seminaries.
Quote from: Dave Benke on January 20, 2012, 08:57:22 AM<snip>Interesting sub-unit with regard to the SMP, which is viewed so favorably in the article referenced, and very favorably by any number of folks in the LC-MS, on the one hand. On the other hand, there's a Steadfast article indicating from the author's hearing/perspective at the Symposium this week that Larry Rast, new sem president, is not favorable to SMP at Ft. Wayne. So are we going to have the two seminaries duking it out over SMP, with sides being taken on the convention floor? My answer is a tentative "yes," although I am not at all sure about the Larry Rast commentary, having spoken with him about SMP recently myself. I say "yes" because we need something to fight about, to claim turf about, to take enormous bundles of our time and energy. We are Missouri and this is what we do.Dave Benke
Quote from: Dave Benke on January 20, 2012, 08:03:37 AMAnd another very positive and nationally presented view of the LC-MS Specialized Ministry Pastor (SMP) program. . . . Dave Benke
Quote from: John_Hannah on January 20, 2012, 05:18:12 PMThe problem for the future of seminaries is not SMP (or TEEM). The real problem is sustaining seminaries staffed for candidate student body levels of the 1950s when we have actually declined sharply in the last 60 years.If we focus on the merits and demerits of SMP, we will avoid addressing real problem and fail to arrive at real solutions.Peace, JOHN