By The Very Rev. Kevin E. Martin

People who hear me teach on leadership and congregational development often comment, “Why didn’t I learn this in seminary?” or “Why don’t they teach this in seminary?” You may be astonished to learn that I do not think either of these two topics should be taught in seminary. In this blog, I will offer my take on how theological education should be altered for the new normal.” What I mean by the new normal is the church that has lost half its membership since 2000 through the death of many of the G.I. Generation, church conflict, and from a failure to reach members of the Millennial Generation--a church that is, by the way, still in decline.

Let me make two things clear at the start. By seminary, I’m talking about three-year residential programs, setting aside for the moment the alternate training that is taking place through programs like the Iona School for Ministry in the Diocese of Texas. I see these latter as especially important for the future of the church but not the subject of this post.

Second, many of our seminaries have picked up on the need for better preparation of our ordained people in leading parishes, and many are now advertising that they are training future leaders for the Episcopal Church. This, of course, has more to do with marketing than reality. I find these claims to be of little value, and I have low expectations that the current curriculum has really been altered to do this. Even stronger, let me say that it is unrealistic to believe that a faculty of academics could even value or imagine what this would really be. 

What I do think seminaries are about is helping form, both academically and professionally, the character and intellectual foundation of future leaders. Said simply, we already expect too much from our seminaries. Longtime professor at Seminary of the Southwest, the Rev. Will Spong (1934-2004) once said, “Every time the General Convention meets, we have a new class mandated to teach.” In other words, the rush to be relevant has created unrealistic expectations for our seminaries.  

What about leadership itself? I strongly believe that the church should train its ordained leaders and that this is a post-seminary task best started in the first five years of ministry. The reason is based on my experience with teaching clergy and having taught at seminaries. Clergy learn leadership best in the field, as they attempt to provide leadership. For most seminarians, clergy leadership is essentially not on their radar screen. And congregational development is beyond comprehension. Put this together with the bias many academics have about what they see as the mundaneness of “Pastoral Theology” and you see the issue.

What is clear to those of us who work with clergy is that the context of having to lead and working with congregational leaders creates a tremendous opportunity for learning and development. I commend Robert Lewis’ book, Curacy Express (Wipf and Stock, 2016) for the practical application of this in the Church. So, from my perspective of working for 30 years with clergy, what alterations would I most like to see in seminary training? There are two. 

First, I would make seminary more of an oral experience. I would ask the professors to base grades on material that is at least half oral. Instead of written reports, I would like to see students prepared to give a 20- to 30-minute presentation on, let’s say, Pauline theology, or the English Reformation, or the Torah and the Early Church.

Then I would make preaching a three-year part of the curriculum. The first year would focus on the basics of sermon preparation and the second year on the effective communication of the Gospel. The third year would be the practice of preaching in class and chapel. Let me add that when students are in their third year, they would receive evaluations that weigh equally the content of the sermon and the effectiveness of the delivery.

Why would this be useful?  Because parish ministry is primarily an oral vocation. When parishioners ask questions of clergy, it is almost always in the context of communicating orally. Yes, I wrote articles for the parish newsletter occasionally, but most clergy work in a parish is done orally. When it comes to preaching, I have observed that many newly ordained clergy make two fundamental mistakes: 1) they read their sermons and 2) their content reveals that they’re preaching to their seminary professors. When I mention this to clergy, several will push back on how important it is to write out their sermons to make sure they are theologically correct. Writing out a sermon in preparation is fine, but reading them is a big mistake. The rules for oral communication are different from written communication. The former bishop of Massachusetts, John Coburn (1914-2009), never got in a pulpit without a manuscript in front of him, and he was an excellent preacher, but he practiced the delivery and memorized the text.  Preaching is an oral experience.

Here is the greatest compliment someone who preaches from a manuscript will ever get: “Thanks, Mthr. Jane, you preached that just like you weren’t reading it.”  Let me add that what we have learned in the live-streaming and YouTube experience during the epidemic is that nothing is more deadly than reading via a visual media.

Second, I would make half the assignments in seminary classes a group exercise--yes, even in the most academic courses. Imagine that Professor Jones is assigning a project or paper on the baptismal service of the 1979 Prayer Book. The professor announces the first task group will be Bill, Jane, Maryann, and Elijah. Both Elijah and Maryann immediately roll their eyes. They are thinking how being stuck with two of the below-par students in the class will affect their grade.  My answer: “Welcome to Parish Ministry.”  Parish ministry is never a solo clergy operation. It always involves working with lay leaders and members. In a traditional academic environment, the emphasis is on the individual’s performance and the individual’s grade. In the church, the effectiveness of one’s leadership and the health and wellbeing of the parish is about us. It makes a drastic difference and often takes several years for newly-ordained clergy to realize this. The reason it takes so long is that they must first unlearn the methods of seminary preparation. 

How can leadership then be taught? Many dioceses already have examples of this through effective curacy programs, mentorships, and continuing education. This part is being driven by necessity. Seminaries have even contributed to this by creating Doctor of Ministry (D.Min.) programs focused more on the practice of ministry for post-seminary.  

I wrote this post because the adjustment and alteration of basic seminary education has changed little since 1968 when I went to seminary. While more classes have been added, the method remains the same.This is because, in many cases, seminary education is being dictated by those not prepared for parish ministry but for the academic community. In a society that continues to have only about one-third of its people with a college education, these academic assumptions only contribute to a growing distance between the church and society, clergy and their parishioners. The new normal demands something different.

The Very Rev. Kevin E. Martin is the retired Dean of St. Matthew’s Cathedral in Dallas, Texas, and is part of the Clear Vision Conferences. For nine years, Canon Martin was the Congregational Development Officer for the Episcopal Diocese of Texas. He was a member of the original 2020 Taskforce for the Episcopal Church. He teaches extensively on attracting new members, evangelism, and the development of new leadership. Before his work in Texas, he served for five years as the Director of Leadership Training in Evergreen, Colorado. Prior to this, he served as rector of three congregations: St. Luke’s, Seattle, Washington; St. Matthew’s, Westerville, Ohio; and Emmanuel Church, Stamford, Connecticut, and he served two years as Resident Chaplain at Bethesda Hospital and Children’s Hospital in Cincinnati, Ohio. Kevin is the author of two books, The Myth of the 200 Barrier and 5 Keys for Church Leaders.