One issue our elders at Sojourn have been dealing with since the beginning of the church (2000) is the role of seminary students in our membership. There have been several exceptions, but by-in-large the elders haven't been impressed by the involvement of our SBTS'ers. We've begun including a section in our membership classes that's addressed only to the seminarians called, "Shepherding Seminary Students". The following is a more filled-in outline of my comments to them--a sort of hodgepodge of ideas based almost completely on my reflections from time spent at CHBC.
To begin, the Lord in His infinite kindness has used Southern Seminary for Sojourn's good. Four of our six elders are graduates of SBTS and probably around 50-65% of our members serving actively and consistently in the church (above and beyond regular weekly attendance) are seminarians. We've had seminary professors come and speak at our Theology Breakfast (Wellum, Ware, Whitney, Seifrid, Allison) and preach on Sundays. So what we're not saying is that we dislike the seminary or think it's doing more harm than good.
However, there are some potential pitfalls when one begins a seminary education.
1. What we have seen oftentimes is the supposed idea that a Christian's time in seminary is sort of its own 'dispensation'. What would be required from a regular lay-member isn't required from the seminary student because he's working towards future ministry and can't be hampered by present ministry. This kind of thinking creates a two-tier membership, an idea which is completely foreign to the New Testament's teaching on the local church.
2. There is an implicit appeal that runs throughout the New Testament. Every letter penned by one of the Apostles was presented within the context of local churches. There is no part of the Christian life in the epistles which is detached from that overarching framework. Every command begins within one's local church. For example, 1 John 3:11-18: "Love your brother". Implicit in this command is the knowledge of how your brother needs to be loved. You must know your brother’s needs--you must have a relationship with your fellow church members! Paul assumes the same kind of close relationships for the purpose of spiritual care: In 1 Corinthians 5 Paul expects these believers to know this man is in an adulteress relationship and to work at restoring him to the Lord.
3. I can think of few things as counter-intuitive as a man training for eldership to pull back from involvement in the local church so he can prepare for eldership. The catchy slogan would be: "Seminary doesn't make pastors, the local church makes pastors. Or maybe for clarity's sake, "chapel and shepherding groups don't make pastors, but the main meeting of the church and intra-church small groups make pastors".
4. Not to mention the command in Hebrews to "not forsake the assembling of the saints" (10:25), a command that in many contexts (determined by the elders) includes more than one weekly meeting (I think I'm departing from CHBC here). At Sojourn, our elders have decided that intentional community is important enough to require participation in a weekly small group (obviously there are exceptions due to scheduling, etc.). In terms of these groups, our standard line to seminarians is, if you don't have enough time for a small group, you probably don't have enough time for this church.
5. It's also the local church that is supposed to confirm the call to ministry in any individual pursuing the pastorate. And, just like every other command in the New Testament, the qualifications Paul gives for elders are all set in the context of one's local assembly. The members of one's church must be able to see these qualifications, which (especially in regards to being apt to teach) means they should have more than just a surface involvement in the church. In these ways, those studying to be pastors should be MORE involved than others. Paul's qualifications (which are expected from all Christians) should be embodied in these men. He should be what my pastor calls a "Gospel Pace-Setter" in his church. It is these men and these men alone whom Paul tells us are called for the eldership.
6. One big task in eldering seems to be learning how to shepherd those who aren't like you. For most of us that means non suburb-raised/white/reformed/20-somethings. This opportunity is much more available in local churches than in seminary. Involvement in the church will teach you how to love those who aren't like you.
7. Finally, the local church is the hope of the world. It is the front-line work. It is the church that the gates of Hades will not overcome. It is the church that Christ promised to build. And it is the church that displays to the world the closest thing any of us can see to the coming kingdom of heaven.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Good post. What are some examples of involvement? What about the many who were affirmed and encouraged by their local church before being sent out? Should seminarians be expected to be "involved" more than other members considering the responsibility of marriage (usually new), work, and the heavy load that most classes pile on? Which one should be compromised first? Is viewing time in Seminary as 'prepatory dispensation' to ground oneself theologically as much as possible since it is a unique time and oppurtunity in the life of a minister wrong? I don't know the answers to these questions but would love your thoughts.
I know that a conversation like this is completely contextual...it depends on a lot of different factors. I knew that in a 15 minute talk I wouldn't be able to nuance everything or anticipate every different 'type' of seminary student that would be at the Gospel Classes.
That being said, I picked the group to target that I think will be in the most spiritual danger--folks who will come to Sojourn on sundays because it's a particularly easy church to attend on sundays and will play in intramural ping-pong tourneys during the week, never showing up at members meetings.
I have to admit that being single, I was definitely thinking more about that life-situation than folks who are married--one of many reasons the content of my comments is so limited!
The truth is, i'm not really sure how any of this works. I do know that my first semester in seminary was completely seminary-based with no real local church involvement and my spiritual health suffered. Every semester since then has been local church centered with seminary in the periphery and that has been much better! That's the point that I wanted to make to that group of seminary students.
In terms of your questions (which are really good questions), I have never been married so I can't speak to that. In terms of classes, I intentionally slowed down so I could be more involved and prolong my time at Sojourn. I bet it would have been different if I had come into school with a definite plan for the future, a church I knew I was going to pastor, or something like that, but my future was wide open and the Lord has used that for my good.
Also, except for the languages, I've never really felt that limited in terms of learning by not being in the classroom. One of the sweetest things the Lord has done for guys like us is to give us great resources to navigate and learn from--stuff we can get our hands on whether we're taking the class or not. So for me, I have never felt like a semester was wasted (or even injured) by only taking 9 hours.
In terms of the prepatory dispensation, I guess that could be okay...but i'm suspicious because I don't see anything like that in the New Testament. Being intimately involved in the local church was the air those New Testament writers were breathing and I know that our culture fights against that truth tooth and nail. My flesh's default is to resist the kind of radical 'togetherness' that I see over and over again in the New Testament.
In terms of work, I wish members of our local chuches would help pay for seminary. I've often said I think it's dumb when Dave and Maggie are paying for seminary. If there was more financial help, then "work" time could be set aside as part of this dispensation instead of local church time, which I would have no problem with.
So, I'm not sure...But I did tell Dave Ainsworth that when I doubt these comments it's because I've seen the way you've mastered every one of your semesters at Southern. You've kind of messed up my paradigm.
Thoughts?
I completely agree. You are very right about the conversation being contextual. I do think there are more seminarians who need this talk than don't, by far. I have been unpleasantly suprised with the amount of guys we have with no responsibility in the church or classroom. If I were you, in these talks I would assume you are talking to lazy, selfish, uncommitted seminarians, just to be safe. I am still trying to figure out these things for us. Balance is key. Thanks!
Thanks for thinking about this stuff and taking the time to write it down bro. It's very helpful. They are good things that seminarians should think about. I think I might push back on reason number 4, and maybe distinguish the other numbers as things that you would expect from a church member, but maybe keep that as separate from a category of required.
I don't feel comfortable telling someone they cannot be a part of a church if I don't have biblical grounds for denying them. In your case, you would say that if a person is unwilling to join a small group and attend regularly then they would be guilty of disobeying Hebrews 10:25. If you're willing to say that this is not referring to one weekly meeting, presumably the meeting that happened on what was referred to as the Lord's day in the NT, then you must be willing to say that this assembling together can also refer to a gathering that is not considered the local church gathering. It at least seems like you are. How is a seminary student supposed to determine which gatherings inside the larger church gathering he is supposed to assemble with according to Hebrews 10:25?
But if you don't consider those meetings to be gatherings that Hebrews 10:25 is referring to (meaning gatherings that would happen on days other than the Lord's day I guess which is what I think seems to be regular in the NT), and if church membership comes down to those whom you regularly admit to the Lord's table, then how will you deny someone church membership for something that doesn't seem to be sin?
Obviously, it seems that Sojourn is willing, at least for Sojourn's members, to say that skipping out on a small group is sin.
Kev,
It was foolish of me to bring Heb. 10:25 explicitly into this conversation. I've never heard our elders link this passage to community groups (that I remember at least), however, our elders do see these groups as incredibly helpful for spiritual growth, accountability, etc. So, I really don't know if they would employ 10:25, or just say it's a matter of prudence drawn from clear scriptural principles.
Either way, I don't think I have any problem with comm. group membership being expected from church members. In fact, I can't think of any reason from conscience (to employ our regulative principle categories) that would keep anyone from joining a group. We grant that some folks have a particular life situation that keeps them from attending: weird work schedule, etc. But for most folks, I would say they need to trust our elders and take part in this part of our church life which all of their brothers and sisters are taking part.
And don't forget, we don't have a Sunday night service, so this is the family time on top of the sunday gathering that we're asking people to commit to--just like Mark 'strongly encouraging' members to come on sunday nights. I think that idea at CHBC and this idea at Sojourn is good and wise. But, I need to think about it more.
I would also say that because of the way our elders and staff operate, these community groups are more necessary than they would be at CHBC.
Post a Comment