The Academy, the Church and the Theological Disconnect
In the eighteenth-century the nations most important theologians were located in the local churches. The pastoral community, not the academy, was where the theological heavyweights could be found. In fact, the step from professor to pastor was, in most cases, viewed as a step up in terms of theological influence and significance. In the main, theological formulation was done by the pastoral community and then given back to the seminaries, which trained the future pastors. (Indeed, it was the pastoral community that established the schools and colleges in the first place.) Consequently, the professor was not seen as the primary formulator of evangelical theology, but rather the teacher of evangelical theology. Since the overall source of evangelical theology was the pastoral community, the theology taught by the professors in the academy was theology that had its context in parish ministry. There was, I believe, something uniquely healthy about this relationship. But it’s not where we find ourselves today.
As the culture became more urban and cosmopolitan, the pastoral community began to lose influence both socially and politically. This in turn led to a decrease in theological significance. At the same time, seminaries began to liberalize and theological education became increasingly secular. Professors became prominent theologians in their own rights, no longer operating under the informal influence of the clergy. Those seminaries that remained evangelical were forced to develop a specific theology in light of this emerging paradigm. In order to remain respectable in the eyes of an increasingly secularizing academic community, it became paramount for the survival of the evangelical seminary to address the liberal attack on the authority of Scripture. Consequently much of theological formulation became apologetically focused towards institutional concerns, rather than directly concerned with the needs of the local church.
It appears that somewhere between the nineteenth-century and today, evangelical theological reflection began allowing the questions that concerned the seminaries (in defense against the secular divinity schools) to frame theological reflection in a manner that often eclipsed theological reflection primarily concerned with the local church. It was only natural that this would occur, given the new social location of evangelical theologians, yet this shift has not been without effect on our contemporary ability to do theology in way that is helpful to the local church. Dan Migliore writes, “Theology in the academic context naturally tends to be apologetically oriented; theology in the church is interested primarily in the clarification and interpretation of the church’s message…” (Faith Seeking Understanding, 14). I strongly agree with Migliore here, and would merely point out that, in the main, theology is no longer being done in the church. We’ve farmed it out to the academy. If the academy and the local church represent two distinct (and legitimate) guilds, there is a need to resurrect the pastoral-theologian paradigm.
I am not suggesting there are no evangelical theologians in the academy who are driven by ecclesial concerns. Not all. Academicians such as Don Carson, Derek Thomas, Thomas Odem, Doug Sweeney, JI Packer, David Wells, et al, all demonstrate a great sensitivity to local church concerns. Yet the disconnect persists. Too often the theology of the academy is seen as irrelevant to the life of the church. The widening gulf between the theology of the academy and the local church was clearly illustrated to me through the experience of my former pastor. Holding a PhD in theology, he came to our church from a highly acclaimed seminary where he had both served as dean and taught theology. After having served at our church for over seven years, he resigned to once again to pursue a teaching career. Upon submitting his resume to a local Bible school, he was initially given only a one year contract. The reason given by the institute for the tentative commitment was his long hiatus out of academics. There was concern that due to his time in pastoral ministry he would no longer be abreast of important current theological issues. The gulf between the academy and the local church has widened to such an extent that ministry in a local church is now often seen as a detriment to one’s ability to adequately formulate theology for institutions whose primary purpose is to train pastors for the local church. Something seems out of synch here…
Categorized as: From Gerald, Pastor-scholar
