Latest / Future Christian / Ted Smith talks about the Past, Present, and End(?) of Theological Education

Transcript

Ted Smith talks about the Past, Present, and End(?) of Theological Education · Future Christian

0:05
>> Paul: Welcome to the Future Christian podcast, your source
0:08
for insights and ideas on how to lead your church
0:11
into the 21st century.
0:15
At the Future Christian podcast, we talk to
0:18
pastors, authors and other faith leaders for helpful
0:21
advice and practical wisdom to help you and your
0:23
community of faith walk boldly into the future.
0:27
Now here's your host, Lauren Richmond, Junior.
0:35
>> Loren: Welcome to the Future Christian Podcast. Today we're
0:38
welcoming the Reverend Doctor Ted Smith.
0:41
Ted is Charles Howard Candler professor
0:44
of divinity and associate dean. A faculty at
0:47
Emory University's Candler School of Theology.
0:50
He holds degrees from Duke University, Oxford
0:53
University, Princeton Theological Seminary, and
0:56
Emory University. He is the author of three
0:58
books, the New Measures. We're John
1:01
Brown and most recently, the End of Theological
1:04
Education, which reviewers have hailed as a
1:06
generational landmark and reflection on theological
1:09
education. He has edited books on
1:11
sexuality and ordination, contemporary issues
1:14
in preaching and economic inequality.
1:17
Smith also serves as director of theological
1:20
education between the Times and the editor of the
1:23
series of books that have grown out of that project.
1:26
Ordained to ministry in the Presbyterian Church,
1:28
USA, Smith served as pastor of two
1:31
congregations in upstate New York prior to beginning
1:34
his doctoral studies. Let's welcome Ted to
1:37
the show.
1:48
Welcome to the Future Christian podcast. This is Loren Richmond, junior,
1:51
and today I am, uh, pleased to be joined by the
1:54
Reverend doctor Ted Smith. So thank you for being here and welcome
1:57
to the show.
1:58
>> Ted Smith: Thanks so much. It's a treat to be here.
2:00
>> Loren: Great. Looking forward to having this conversation.
2:03
Uh, what else would you like to share with our listeners about
2:05
yourself?
2:07
>> Ted Smith: Well, uh, not in my bio.
2:10
I, uh, don't think any, ah, bio that you might
2:12
use are my family connections, and
2:15
those are really important for this
2:18
book. Um, this book is dedicated
2:21
to my parents, who are very,
2:23
uh, deep in the world of voluntary
2:26
associations. They manifest, my mother
2:28
manifested. She's passed. Now, my father continues to
2:32
many of the highest virtues of that world.
2:35
Um, and that was certainly what they raised me to
2:37
do. And it's also written with my
2:40
sons very much in mind. They're 17 and
2:43
15, and I
2:45
am passionate about
2:48
thinking about what a church that is life giving for
2:51
them is going to look like. And so
2:55
it's very much a book about how do I hand
2:57
down or hand on the real
3:00
living heart of what my parents gave to me,
3:03
uh, to that next generation.
3:05
>> Loren: Yeah. Teasing a little bit of the content there,
3:08
aren't you?
3:10
>> Ted Smith: Not on purpose. I'm just telling you where the book came from.
3:12
>> Loren: No, it's good.
3:13
>> Ted Smith: I think some of the passion, uh,
3:16
behind it, I think, is because of those personal ties.
3:19
>> Loren: Yeah, I'm sure share, if you would, kind of, about your faith story,
3:21
your faith journey, what that looked like in the past and what that looked like
3:24
today.
3:25
>> Ted Smith: Sure. Well, as I
3:28
said, I was absolutely. I'm a child of
3:31
the church through and through. My family have been
3:33
Presbyterians since before we can
3:36
remember. We don't know of a generation that
3:39
wasn't and especially involved, uh,
3:42
in a single congregation in my
3:45
hometown of Springfield, Missouri. So my
3:48
grandparents, my great grandparents, my parents all
3:51
had helped to lead that church as passionate lay
3:53
leaders. And so I think growing up, what
3:56
being Christian meant to me was
3:59
sustaining that institutional church. It meant being
4:02
a good person, high moral standards. It
4:05
meant giving to the community, and then it meant
4:07
serving and sustaining that church in every way that you
4:10
could. Um,
4:13
and I think that was the faith I was raised with. There wasn't
4:16
a lot of emphasis on, um. Uh,
4:19
what we might. That was the
4:21
spirituality, I would say. Right. Uh, was that
4:24
institutional sustenance. And I
4:27
think, uh, I still value institutions very
4:30
highly. I think the book reflects that. But I think in
4:33
the course of my faith journey, I would now
4:36
describe the center of my faith
4:38
is that in Jesus Christ,
4:41
God has made a decisive, um,
4:44
move for the redemption of the world. And
4:47
that that move is unfolding in history, and that our work
4:50
is to respond faithfully to that
4:53
work and join it, uh, from the moment in history in which
4:56
we find ourselves. And, um, that's both
4:59
more and less than the sustenance of
5:01
institutions.
5:02
>> Loren: Yeah. Yeah. What, uh, are some spiritual
5:05
practices that you find meaningful in your life that
5:07
you're willing to share?
5:09
>> Ted Smith: Sure.
5:11
Um, you know, I think my first vocation is
5:14
really as a preacher. Um, I think
5:17
that's literal in the temporal sense, and it's
5:19
probably also, um.
5:22
It works metaphorically as a kind of. It is
5:26
the vocation that has priority over others and
5:29
defines others. So the simple act of
5:32
preparing for preaching is, uh, for
5:34
me, and then delivering the
5:37
sermon, that
5:40
is a deep spiritual practice for me. It is a source of
5:42
joy, it is a source of life, communion, uh, with
5:45
God. Um, so I'm very
5:50
always happy when I'm able to
5:53
do that. Um, I think related to
5:55
that are disciplines of lectio divina,
5:59
uh, which I pair with exegesis
6:02
in sermon preparation, and then, uh, centering
6:05
prayer. So those are kind of
6:08
bedrock for me. I'm an ecumenical oblate
6:10
of a benedictine monastery in upstate
6:13
New York, and I think that's where especially the
6:16
lectio and the, uh, centering prayer
6:20
kind of took shape for me.
6:21
>> Loren: Yeah. Yeah. Well, thanks for. Thanks for sharing
6:24
that. So, uh, Ted is on the show here
6:27
to talk about his book, the end of
6:29
theological education. And there's no subtitle here. I'm just
6:32
noticing he's there. It's, uh, just short and sweet. Most
6:35
books have a long subtitle. So the end of theological
6:38
education here. And, uh, I read the book, I think,
6:41
a couple months ago now, but I've been looking forward to having this
6:44
conversation, uh, with Ted for a
6:47
while. So we're going to kind of jump in.
6:50
Hopefully there's a lot here in the book. So,
6:53
um, I think let's start by talking about like,
6:56
the background of formal education
6:59
and churches in the United States.
7:03
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, the formal theological
7:05
education in the US. Yeah.
7:08
The book has a strong historical slant and I think
7:11
that's because to understand the present moment, we have
7:14
to understand how we got
7:17
to where we are. Um, and
7:20
so the book begins with what
7:22
I call, uh, borrowing language
7:25
from, um, the social
7:28
order in Connecticut, the standing orders.
7:31
And the standing orders were what Europeans, uh,
7:34
brought to the United States in their imagination.
7:37
And it was shaped by the kind of. By the treaty of
7:40
Westphalia and the way that, uh, the religious
7:43
violence in Europe was resolved, which was to say
7:45
that each political unit will have
7:48
one established religious body,
7:51
one established church. So nobody
7:54
was really able to do that in North America, but that is
7:57
what they brought with them in their imaginations. It's what the
8:00
puritans. The puritans were dissenters in England,
8:02
right. But they wanted to
8:05
establish a, uh, purified
8:07
church in North America. So too, the
8:10
anglican settlers of Virginia, um, they brought this
8:13
kind of standing order imagination. And in the
8:16
standing order there's really. This was true in Europe,
8:19
and it was true in the earliest university, uh,
8:22
colleges in the United States. Um,
8:24
Harvard, Yale and William and Mary. Uh, down in
8:27
Virginia, uh, there really is no
8:30
distinction between the regular curriculum and
8:33
theological education. The regular curriculum for all
8:36
undergrads is thoroughly theological because the
8:39
standing order itself is theological. So to take your
8:42
place in it, whether as governor or as
8:45
a teacher in the college or as a
8:47
pastor or as a lawyer, whatever, to take your place in
8:50
that standing order is to be theologically
8:53
educated. So there wasn't really,
8:55
um, a stark separation. Pastors
8:58
then would just get a little kind of
9:00
postgraduate apprenticeship with
9:03
somebody, um, who knew the kind
9:06
of craft of pastoring. But the
9:09
theological education was part of
9:12
everybody's undergraduate. Well, uh, in the
9:14
early national period, uh, with the founding
9:17
of the nation and with the revivals
9:20
that were very much a part of this story, you just
9:23
couldn't sustain that vision of
9:26
a unified standing order
9:28
anymore, um, certainly not on a national
9:31
scale. So you get a separation between church and
9:34
state politically, and then that's mirrored
9:37
educationally with the founding of
9:40
a new kind of institution, which is the
9:43
seminary, uh, Andover
9:45
theological Seminary, founded in 1807.
9:49
Uh, they were breaking, uh, they were critical of Harvard,
9:52
but they didn't found a new Harvard. They founded
9:55
a new place that was dedicated entirely to the training
9:57
of ministers. Now, that became the norm in the United
10:00
States over the next 200 years. But it's worth
10:03
remembering that it's actually a fairly new kind of
10:06
thing, right. That it wasn't the norm, uh, before. It's
10:09
not how any of the, ah, Puritans or
10:12
early anglican pastors were trained here. Um, and
10:15
it's certainly not the norm through the
10:18
millennia and across the continents, but
10:21
that's the form that really took shape and became dominant in the
10:23
United States.
10:25
>> Loren: Yeah. So you talk about in the book this move
10:28
from that standing order to what you
10:30
call, or perhaps others call, but you use the term too in the
10:33
book, voluntary associations.
10:36
Uh, so share about that kind of, that transition from the
10:39
standing order, as you call it, to the voluntary
10:42
associations.
10:44
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, it's from the established
10:46
church, uh, to a
10:49
model that is very familiar to
10:52
those of us who are connected to churches
10:54
today. Model in which you have multiple
10:57
denominations that are together under
11:00
maybe in a more or less contentious way, but together
11:03
under a canopy that is defined
11:06
largely by the nation. By the nation,
11:08
uh, the nation state. They exist together
11:11
under that canopy. So how did that come to
11:14
be? It's always,
11:17
uh, worth remembering, I think, that
11:20
when the standing orders had kind of run their course,
11:23
when they no longer fit the imagination
11:26
of people, church membership in the United States was
11:29
very low church adherence.
11:31
Um, so at the time of the revolution, by one good
11:34
estimate, it's about 17%
11:37
of Americans are affiliated formally with a
11:40
congregation. Now, that number needs nuancing because
11:43
the standards for formal affiliation were sometimes very
11:45
high. There might have been a wider penumbra, but
11:48
still, um, the church was
11:51
badly out of sync with the national imagination
11:53
in 1776, and the numbers reflected
11:56
it. What the revivals did, they
11:59
were, um,
12:02
the revivals of the first of the second great awakening,
12:05
especially those early national revivals.
12:08
They were a revolution in worship style, for
12:11
sure, that fit with these new democratic
12:14
times. They were also a revolution in
12:17
institutional style. So you moved from an established
12:20
church to, um, churches
12:23
that were these voluntary associations where people of like
12:26
mind got together. They might have called their
12:29
pastor, right? They had that kind of power, rather than a bishop
12:32
appointing them. Uh, and then they
12:35
funded themselves not through taxes, because the
12:37
taxation, funding by taxation went away in
12:40
the first three decades of the 19th century. They funded themselves
12:43
through donations. So you've got a really new kind
12:46
of organization that emerges in those
12:49
first decades of the 19th century. Um,
12:52
and that's the congregation as voluntary
12:54
association. And you know, this was
12:57
shocking to outside
12:59
observers. When Alexis de Tocqueville comes to the United
13:02
States, you know, he's a french aristocrat. His
13:05
imagination is shaped entirely by the
13:08
old westphalian standing orders. And so he's like, well,
13:11
if they don't have that, it's just going to be chaos here
13:13
and it's going to be, uh, atheism, because
13:16
how would you have a church if it's not established? So
13:19
he comes here, though, and he sees this
13:22
incredible, uh, religious
13:24
vitality, for one thing. And he also
13:27
sees, um, not chaos, but
13:29
people organizing themselves into these voluntary
13:32
associations with all this dynamism and energy.
13:35
That's, uh, just surprising to
13:38
him. And then he gives us a brilliant chronicle of that.
13:41
But it's worth remembering how new that
13:43
was and what a kind of revelation it
13:46
was, uh, at that moment in.
13:49
>> Loren: History, I'm thinking, as you
13:52
were talking, assuming about, I have my history correct.
13:55
The denomination I'm ordained in, the christian church, disciples of
13:57
Christ, is really
14:00
a, uh, product, right, of this process.
14:03
>> Ted Smith: Absolutely right, yeah,
14:05
yeah. Cane Ridge and the whole
14:08
restoration as tradition was really
14:11
one of the, I mean, the revival at Cane Ridge was one of
14:14
the most powerful, uh, and
14:17
influential revivals that kind of rolled out of that
14:20
early national period. Um, but yeah, a lot of the
14:23
disciples, the, uh, church of Christ,
14:25
um, emphasis, you see it in the kind
14:28
of the very democratic notion of
14:31
pastoral leadership, um, the
14:34
democratic sense that anyone can celebrate the
14:36
Eucharist, right. That we're going to share that
14:39
around. It was there in the preaching style, it's there in the
14:42
polity, it's even there in the ecumenism
14:45
m because there's an ambivalence about
14:48
being a denomination. We don't want to be a denomination, we're just a
14:50
church. Uh, but there's still that
14:53
sense that all of, uh, all christians
14:56
are actually connected, but they're not connected
15:00
in that restorationist mind as a state
15:03
church.
15:03
>> Loren: Mhm.
15:04
>> Ted Smith: They would be connected as like one mega denomination, that kind
15:07
of thing. So, yeah, you're exactly
15:09
right. This is your DNA. And it's kind of mine too,
15:12
because my presbyterian, uh, roots are in the Cumberland
15:15
Presbyterian, which is like kissing cousins
15:18
to disciples.
15:19
>> Loren: Yeah, I was at. I was fortunate to be at Cane
15:22
Ridge last summer as, uh,
15:25
part of when the disciples had their general
15:28
assembly in Louisville and they took a trip out there.
15:30
And to me that's. I mean, to me that's just.
15:35
It's holy ground. And I don't say that as like someone who's
15:38
like, committed in the wool to disciples. I say
15:41
that as, you know, a place where something
15:44
supernatural, if I can use that word, like, took place.
15:47
Um, but, yeah, for sure. Interesting. Like, how
15:50
much coral there is there. I, uh, was just like,
15:53
thinking, like, do I need to look back at my, um.
15:56
What's the book? Stone Campbell encyclopedia. Make sure
15:59
I have the dates right before I ask that question.
16:03
>> Ted Smith: But you've got it.
16:04
>> Loren: Yeah.
16:07
So, uh, you know, in
16:10
the context. So maybe we'll talk here,
16:13
at least through the. My reference point
16:16
of like, the christian church, disciples of Christ.
16:19
When did this, uh, because
16:22
again, thinking back even to disciples history, like,
16:25
uh, even broader speaking, like,
16:28
I've worked in the Methodist church, and there was certainly, like, uh,
16:32
the writing preacher. What's the word? You know, circuit
16:35
writing. Yeah, the circuit writing preacher. There wasn't like
16:38
the professional, like, full
16:41
time pastor as we think of today. When
16:44
did that model really begin to take
16:47
shape?
16:48
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, that's a great question. Um,
16:52
that model of the kind of settled,
16:55
professional pastor had a very uneasy
16:58
relationship with the revivals. Right.
17:00
Um, because the revivals were often
17:03
challenging the credibility and the
17:05
authority of exactly those kinds of pastors.
17:08
Um, and often the people who were
17:11
doing that challenging were people were women and
17:14
children and enslaved people, uh,
17:17
or formerly enslaved black, uh,
17:19
citizens for whom ordination
17:22
was not always going to be an easy path. Right. It was
17:25
really an upsetting of the,
17:28
of the kind of. That kind of hierarchy. And you're. You're exactly
17:31
right to say that the circuit writing Methodists and
17:34
the kind of. There's a kind of, there's
17:37
a kind of charism that was attached to the circuit riders that
17:40
was not easily domesticated. And, you know,
17:43
Methodists, uh, retain a sense of itinerancy
17:46
and their elders that is supposed to echo that and carry
17:49
that charism forward. Um, and I think it's more or
17:51
less practiced. Um,
17:55
but it's a reflection of that
17:58
ongoing uneasiness. It really happened,
18:01
though, for these traditions that we're talking about, the
18:04
more revival oriented traditions. It happened
18:07
across the early decades,
18:09
um, um, of the 19th
18:12
century. Um, a key figure in that
18:15
is Charles grandison Finney, the great
18:17
revivalist. Um, my first book, the new measures, is
18:20
on him. And, you know, he was trained as
18:23
a lawyer. And in many ways, what Finney did was
18:26
to take that ecstatic revival
18:28
energy and channel it into,
18:32
um, more respectable forms. So nobody
18:35
was, you know, taking off their clothes and running around in
18:38
the Holy Ghost power at a Finney revival. That
18:40
wasn't going to happen. But there was still that new kind of
18:43
energy that then was, um,
18:46
grafted into, uh, the mores
18:49
of an emerging professional class. So that's happening
18:52
especially across the 1820s and
18:54
1830s in the south
18:57
with Methodists. A similar process is happening.
19:00
Uh, Christine Lee Harriman has a beautiful book
19:03
on this southern cross that kind of shows
19:06
the gradual assimilation of Methodist, uh,
19:09
pastors into these more settled
19:11
and, uh, quasi professional
19:14
roles. You see the real
19:17
professionalization of ministry, though, across the
19:20
19th century. Uh, and then
19:23
it really is taking hold in the 20th
19:25
century, and I mean professional here in
19:28
a very kind of strict social science kind of
19:31
sense, like from Max Weber.
19:34
Um, and the professional is
19:37
neither labor nor capital. The professional
19:40
is part of a guild that, uh, has a certain amount of
19:43
autonomy, that kind of thing. And
19:45
then the professional has a special education
19:48
just for them. And so the,
19:51
um, professionalization of ministry happens across the
19:54
19th and then the 20th century. And it's
19:57
important, uh, that really ministers were
19:59
in some ways the first professionals in the US. You
20:02
have theological schools before you have medical schools
20:05
before you have law schools proper. Right.
20:08
Um, so the education
20:10
differentiates sooner, and the
20:13
ministry kind of emerges as a professional
20:16
class sooner. Uh, um, but
20:19
then medicine and law join it, and then
20:22
other professions as well.
20:23
>> Loren: So like these other more established denominations, like,
20:26
I'm thinking, like the congregationalists,
20:28
Presbyterians, would they have already had this
20:31
kind of professionalization or, uh, to have been
20:34
more informal?
20:35
>> Ted Smith: That's a great question. Uh,
20:38
they were warmer to the more settled
20:41
ministry patterns to one
20:44
pastor in a place. Um, and it's one
20:47
reason they didn't grow in the same way that Baptists
20:49
and Methodists just took off, disciples as well took
20:52
off in those early national period.
20:55
Um, and the Presbyterians and congregationalists, who had
20:58
more numbers at the turn of the
21:01
century, they had more numbers, but they didn't grow because they
21:03
didn't hitch, uh, themselves to the
21:06
revivals. And part of that was
21:08
because of their commitment to that settled
21:11
ministry. So they already had the
21:14
people who were in place, uh, with
21:17
authority over a congregation. That
21:20
ministry professionalized, though
21:23
over the course of the 19th century, they weren't fully
21:25
professionals in the early decades of the
21:28
19th century, they were more like it was still kind
21:31
of a holdover of the old standing order. They were more like a
21:34
local squire.
21:35
>> Loren: Hm.
21:35
>> Ted Smith: Or something. Right. A kind of echo of an
21:37
old, almost feudal kind of order.
21:41
Uh, but then it becomes professional later on. And one
21:44
way you can see that is ministers didn't used to move
21:47
around a lot.
21:48
>> Loren: M. Um.
21:48
>> Ted Smith: And so if you were in a place, you were of
21:51
that place. But a key feature of
21:54
professionalism is that you get a credential. You've got an m
21:57
div paper and you
22:00
can, you've got an MD, you've got a JD and you've passed your
22:03
boards and you can take that credential and move around with
22:05
it. Right?
22:06
>> Loren: Yeah.
22:07
>> Ted Smith: And you don't move, uh, you know, in the real
22:10
professional model, at the, at the way the bishop moves you, you
22:12
choose when you move. And so then you get the kind of.
22:15
You get a, you get a career path that's appropriate to
22:18
professionals. Like, you start with a small church, you go to a
22:21
bigger one. You go to a bigger one, and then you retire. And,
22:24
uh, you have. And retirement is
22:27
possible. You don't have to work till you die. Right.
22:29
Because that's that movement into a professional
22:32
class. And there's a pension plan. What,
22:35
you know, the denomination has a pension plan. Yeah.
22:38
>> Loren: It is interesting thinking about that model
22:41
of the more of the denominations or groups that
22:44
really had to use the term hustle
22:47
they experience, the more growth. And we kind of see that maybe
22:50
this will play into our conversation more. Like. I think we
22:53
really still see that today in many ways, like the
22:56
clergy that still have to, quote unquote hustle to use the term,
22:59
like those churches tend to be.
23:02
Not, uh, always, of course, but it seems like there's a correlation
23:05
there with more church growth and
23:07
vitality. So it's an interesting
23:10
dynamic there. Um,
23:13
I feel like we're staying in this professionalization
23:16
conversation for a while. Hopefully that's okay here.
23:18
So we've kind of built the background. So let's talk now
23:21
about the challenges, uh, of this
23:24
professionalization model.
23:27
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, um,
23:30
I think there's two challenges or
23:33
problems or sites of ambivalence, however you want to frame
23:36
it. One of them, uh,
23:38
has to do with social class and
23:41
what happens with the professionalization of
23:44
ministry, especially in the denominations where
23:47
it happens the
23:49
most. Right. Where they really, really do kind of enter
23:52
that professional class is that you get an
23:55
alienation of church leadership
23:58
from poor people and even from working
24:01
people. And sometimes, I think,
24:03
ministers, even when we were
24:06
fully professionalized, the salary often. Wasn't
24:09
there a, uh, profession is not
24:12
just about income, it's about social class.
24:15
And when you have a ministry that
24:18
is part of the professional class, well,
24:20
then, uh, it just
24:23
creates relational obstacles, um,
24:26
in connecting with working and poorer people.
24:29
And I think that's one reason why you see,
24:32
um, the denominations that most professionalized their
24:35
ministry really ceased connecting
24:37
to working class and poor people in America. And to
24:40
me, uh, I mean, my denomination did that.
24:43
That is what we did. Um, and I think it's a scandal
24:46
of the gospel, um, and it's not just
24:49
because to me, what Jesus is doing is not
24:52
just, um, doing good things for
24:54
poor people from a position
24:57
of relative privilege, which is the core of the
25:00
professional ethos. Right. But no, what Jesus is
25:03
doing is a deep form of solidarity,
25:06
uh, with the poorest people around him.
25:09
And, uh, the professionalization of
25:12
ministry blocks that in a deep way.
25:15
So that's r1 crisis,
25:17
I think, that it creates. And I think a second one, um,
25:22
is a more subtle theological
25:25
problem, because the
25:27
professional. Deep in the professional ethos,
25:30
especially a professional ministry ethos, is that you
25:33
want to make the world a better place.
25:35
>> Loren: Mhm.
25:35
>> Ted Smith: That's not a bad thing. Um, it does happen
25:38
from a position of power. I'm going to use my social
25:41
power to make the world a better place. I mean, that's what I was raised to
25:44
do, use your power to make the world a better
25:47
place. But I think the problem with
25:50
that theologically, is that it often uses
25:53
theology and all the stuff of
25:56
church life, the church, the sacraments, preaching,
25:59
all of that becomes
26:01
instrumental to the transformation of
26:04
society. So, um, our
26:06
talk about God, we want to talk about God in a way that's going to
26:09
bring about the kind of changes that we want to see. That's
26:12
an instrumentalization of theology.
26:16
But the thing is, uh, that gets
26:18
the relationship exactly wrong. Right.
26:21
Um, God is not a tool in our hands to
26:24
do what we want to do.
26:26
Um, and
26:28
instrumentalizing theology,
26:30
instrumentalizing the sacraments, worship, all of
26:33
this stuff, um, it brings a deep distortion
26:35
into it, and I think the professional model
26:38
invites that. So, uh, those are
26:41
two crises that I think were kind of baked into the model, and
26:44
I think you see all kinds of reactions
26:47
to them. Another one, I mean, that goes right along with the
26:49
class piece, is just the way in which
26:52
professionalism is tied to a politics of
26:54
respectability. And I,
26:57
um, think a younger generation, especially of black
26:59
scholars and activists, have really
27:02
clarified the limits
27:05
and, uh, just the deep problems with
27:08
the politics of respectability.
27:09
>> Loren: We may not get past this professionalism part because there's
27:12
so much here, like, as you're talking about,
27:15
like, the alienation, I'm thinking, like,
27:18
again, as someone who has standing in
27:21
my denomination, like, I have to take boundaries
27:23
classes. And I was
27:26
thinking about, like, and this is, this leads into
27:29
another question I was going to ask you. Like, like, how much of
27:32
this is, how much of these kind of like,
27:34
uh, professionalism models are really tied into like,
27:37
what we'd call mainline institutions versus like,
27:40
uh, more evangelical traditions, like
27:43
Baptists or even now, you know,
27:46
non denoms? Um, because, like, I'm thinking, like,
27:49
you know, as a. I was trained, I'll say, like,
27:52
as someone who's ordained, like, you
27:54
don't have friends in your church ministry context.
27:57
Right. Um, there's very, you're
28:00
supposed to have some fairly, I don't know,
28:03
secure boundaries, I guess. Um, which, again,
28:06
kind of thinking about implications. Right. Can lead to this
28:09
really isolation, uh,
28:12
in loneliness for clergy, which
28:14
there's. I've read a few good books out, but,
28:17
like, I'm thinking about, like,
28:20
I have some good relationships with
28:22
evangelical folks, uh, church
28:25
folks, and, like, talking to their pastors,
28:28
like, the idea that you can't be friends with a clergy,
28:31
you know, or friends with your parishioners is
28:33
bizarre. Um, so, like,
28:37
again, I'm kind of long winded here, but like, is this,
28:40
is this a thing that has not. Is this a
28:43
problem somewhat unique to these
28:46
mainline traditions, I guess, is what I'm asking.
28:48
>> Ted Smith: Yeah. Um, it's definitely
28:51
native to what we call the mainline.
28:54
>> Loren: Yeah.
28:54
>> Ted Smith: Um, so that's where it
28:57
is. Yeah, it's where those trends are deepest.
29:00
With that said, I think,
29:03
um, the master of divinity
29:06
is a professional degree,
29:08
and ats is very. The association of
29:11
theological Schools, which certifies,
29:14
uh, those schools that offer an MDIV
29:17
is very clear about enforcing those kind of
29:19
standards, um, so that it becomes a professional
29:22
education. Now, people might undergo that with
29:25
their fingers crossed behind their back, or it might not take very
29:28
deeply. Um, but if you have an
29:31
mdiV, then you've received a professional
29:33
education. And to me, one of the, I talk about
29:36
this in the book. One of the most striking things
29:39
about, uh, the last half of the 20th
29:42
century is the way in which
29:45
all kinds of christian traditions
29:48
have moved to professional, uh,
29:51
theological education. That's true of
29:54
Catholics, which you could say, does that
29:57
really fit with the catholic theology of the priesthood? Not
30:00
so sure. Um, but if you've got an ATS
30:03
accredited catholic institution, um,
30:05
then there's a professional formation that's happening there.
30:08
Does that fit with Pentecostals um. But the
30:11
assemblies of God has sought
30:14
um, as has kojic. They have
30:17
sought ATs, um, accreditation
30:20
for their mdivs. And if you really want
30:22
to be a leader in those denominations now, you better go get your
30:26
seminary education.
30:28
Those. So, on the one hand, the latter part of the 20th
30:31
century saw that spreading to all, spreading
30:34
across movements and denominations, including evangelical
30:37
ones, very much. I think what we're seeing now,
30:40
though, um, is a real, and
30:43
this is at the heart of the book, is an
30:45
unraveling of the professionalization of
30:48
ministry. That's unraveling. And with
30:50
it, the congregation has voluntary
30:53
association and the notion of a denomination.
30:56
All those things go together. Professional
30:58
ministry, professional education. The congregation is voluntary
31:01
association and the denomination, and all four of
31:04
those things are unraveling together. And so
31:07
I'm trying to think about, you know, what does
31:10
theological education look like now? What does ministry look like now?
31:13
What's the form of, uh, the congregation or a
31:16
local gathering of christians?
31:18
>> Loren: Yeah, well, there's, like I said, there's so much here to
31:21
talk about. Um, like, hopefully this
31:24
is not being the same drum here of
31:27
professionalization and ministry. So forgive me if you're trying to move the
31:29
conversation along, but I'm thinking like, like
31:32
a, like, I just heard this, I think, recently from
31:35
Tom, I can't remember, see his name, Tom Reiner, the
31:38
SBC guy. He mentioned something like in a
31:41
podcast I was listening to, like a really small,
31:44
surprisingly small percentage of SPC pastors
31:47
have even a bachelor's, I think it. I think he
31:49
said. And then I'm like, I'm also thinking about,
31:52
um, like in, like the Calvary
31:55
traditional, if I understand this
31:58
correctly, and I think I do,
32:01
folks can kind of just train informally, almost like an
32:04
apprenticeship. So, uh, this kind of. I think this kind
32:07
of broadens out into one of the themes you talk
32:10
about, at least as I understand it in this
32:12
book, this need for a more, I don't know if this is
32:15
the right word, more specialized approach,
32:18
um, to ministry.
32:22
>> Ted Smith: Yeah.
32:22
>> Loren: Um.
32:24
>> Ted Smith: I do think we're seeing all kinds of signs of,
32:27
uh, the formation of,
32:31
uh, christian leaders that are happening outside of
32:34
professional education that's really expanding now.
32:37
So I think the 20th century saw this incredible.
32:40
It is really a remarkable consolidation
32:43
of the forms of training, uh, across
32:46
the denominations and
32:49
of the, and the forms of the institutions, too. So there
32:52
was that consolidation, and now I think it's a time of
32:54
unraveling, and that means there's all kinds of
32:57
other energy, there's all kinds of other, uh,
33:00
things that are developing like some of the ones you name
33:03
and what I'm calling for in the book. Um,
33:06
well, I'm very careful, I think,
33:09
not to give a blueprint for a next theological
33:12
education because I really
33:15
believe, I mean, it's a theological conviction for
33:17
me that, uh,
33:20
that's going to come about only
33:23
as groups of christians gather
33:26
together for faithful discernment in their
33:29
place, uh, from their tradition, with their
33:31
folk. Um, that's how it's going to happen.
33:34
Because if I just like, hand down the
33:37
blueprint from the fifth floor of candler School of theology at Emory
33:40
university, this is just a replication of that
33:42
professional model. Um, so I'm not going to. I
33:45
don't think, I don't think there's any good in that and I don't,
33:48
um, it might make for cleaner talking points, but
33:51
that's not what I'm trying to do. So instead what I offer
33:54
are a series of renunciations. You know, if the
33:57
professional model is over, well, then we need to give up professional
34:00
status. We need to stop pretending, uh, to be
34:03
in that kind of space. We need to give up
34:06
the instrumentalizing relationship to theological
34:09
knowledge, and we need to give up the financial
34:12
model for theological education as professional education
34:15
which relies on student debt, um, which
34:18
could be justified if you become a professional. Well, then, you
34:20
know, it could be worth it to go in, but
34:23
that's not what's happening anymore. Um, and then I try to
34:26
name some affordances that people can discern
34:29
in the world as it is. Um,
34:32
so it, yeah, it's
34:35
more trying, uh, to bring the
34:38
church to self consciousness and then provide resources
34:41
for discernment. And I think
34:43
and hope that what comes out of it is
34:46
going to be richly plural. It's going to be
34:49
different, uh, traditions and different
34:52
communities pursuing different paths.
34:54
Um, I think that's what the church needs
34:57
right now.
34:58
>> Loren: Yeah. So let's talk, if we
35:01
can, here just about some, some perhaps
35:04
challenges of this new vision you
35:07
have, at, uh, least as I see them. And I think you kind of lay
35:10
these out in the book, if I understood you correctly.
35:12
But you talk about this move towards smaller
35:15
and more homogenous
35:18
denominations, and I think, at least
35:20
in my context, I feel like we're kind of seeing that, I mean, quite
35:24
literally, like with the United Methodist church, right, like
35:26
the splintering right from the global
35:29
Methodist church to now, there's a smaller
35:32
but certainly more progressive liberal,
35:34
whatever you want. Like, I think I just got an email, like, hey, we
35:37
can really celebrate that we're now a progressive denomination. Uh,
35:42
um, the same thing has happened
35:44
in the. Every mainline denomination,
35:47
I think, has gone through some sort of splintering, often
35:50
around the issue of LGBTQ or
35:53
gay marriage in the past. Um,
35:57
so obviously there are some strengths to
35:59
that, whether it be
36:02
more, um, focused clarity on mission and
36:05
values and ethos. But
36:08
what are some drawbacks, do you think, of this
36:11
really smaller, more homogeneous,
36:14
um, units?
36:16
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, that's a great question. Um,
36:19
and it is exactly the dynamic that I
36:22
see right now. I, um, think
36:25
where that fits in the larger story that I'm trying to tell
36:29
is that when the voluntary associations really
36:32
have their power, uh, they almost have a kind
36:35
of aura, and sustaining the
36:37
denomination, sustaining the
36:39
congregation, that becomes in itself, a
36:42
worthwhile activity. It's so important, and
36:45
that's absolutely true for my parents and their
36:47
generation to be Presbyterian and
36:50
to sustain first in Calvary Presbyterian church like
36:53
this was at the center of their faith. Um,
36:56
and I have enormous respect for that and the sacrifices
36:59
they made to do that. But what you get with, uh,
37:02
the kind of individualization that I name and
37:05
the expressive qualities that attend to that
37:08
are there's a big shift in people's
37:11
relationship to the institution. And now it becomes
37:14
more important that I get to express
37:17
myself and that the institution reflect my values
37:20
than that it simply be sustained.
37:22
>> Loren: Mhm.
37:22
>> Ted Smith: And one way, you know, that is, you know, the.
37:25
The denominations were like, they held together
37:28
when people lost votes. They. They
37:31
worked to win next year, but they stayed,
37:33
like, and they stayed because the institution meant so much
37:36
to them, the institute. And now if people lose
37:39
votes, they leave. Right. They're out. Right. Um,
37:42
and that's, uh, that's tied to this kind
37:45
of, uh, what Robert Bella et al.
37:48
Call an expressive individualism. So
37:51
Robert Wuth, now the great sociologist, named the
37:54
rise of special purpose groups
37:56
within denominations that were kind of. They were almost
37:59
like lobbying bodies, advocacy groups. And
38:02
I think what's happened in the last 20
38:05
years since he spotted those groups, and those
38:08
groups often connected much more deeply with people,
38:11
um, because they were more expressive of
38:14
what they really care about and of their identity and their
38:17
values. Um, but what's happened is
38:20
not that any of those groups took over a
38:22
denomination. It's rather that through the fracturing,
38:25
the denominations kind of became special purpose groups.
38:28
>> Loren: Yeah.
38:28
>> Ted Smith: Um, and so they're more expressive
38:31
for people, and I think that's where you get the celebratory
38:34
email, ah, that you were referencing.
38:37
Hey, finally, the denomination can reflect our values.
38:40
Um, they're smaller, more
38:42
homogeneous, just as you say. Um,
38:46
so what are the challenges of that. I think,
38:48
um, one of the biggest challenges of
38:51
that is figuring out
38:54
how these different bodies are
38:57
going to relate to one another, because the
39:00
denominational ethos, um, and this is why
39:03
many people, uh,
39:06
that is there in ecumenism,
39:08
the denominational ethos at the heart
39:11
of it is, hey, uh, you
39:14
may be a wesleyan, you may be a calvinist, you may be a
39:17
thomist, whatever, but we all have a
39:20
sense of being like
39:23
all of these traditions are valid in some way at least
39:26
deserving the respect of the state. And,
39:29
um, we have a place for
39:32
them as part of a larger national mission.
39:35
So I think part of the problem with the old denominational
39:38
ethos is the way that it made a sort of idol out of the
39:41
state. The state was that which was holding all of
39:43
the church together. Um, but the
39:46
challenge now is with these new, more expressive
39:48
denominations, it's harder
39:51
for them to want the other ones to continue to exist.
39:55
They would like for them just to disappear. And to find any kind of
39:58
common cause starts, uh, to feel really,
40:02
really problematic. So I think, uh,
40:04
that's the great challenge that we have. The other
40:07
thing that's really interesting, though, it's a
40:09
misreading, I think, of the present moment. If
40:12
what you see is a breaking of denominations.
40:15
The biggest movement that's happening right now
40:18
are congregations just
40:21
moving out of denominations, even if they're
40:23
officially still in. But they,
40:26
uh, a really wealthy, uh, mainline
40:29
denomination or mainline church,
40:32
they might run all their own ministries, they might have their own
40:34
missionaries. They're kind of becoming
40:37
increasingly, they're, ah, doing a lot of the things the
40:39
denomination used to do themselves. And a large
40:42
number of the churches that left in the most recent
40:45
presbyterian and Methodist splits,
40:48
they're not even joining the so called conservative
40:50
denomination. They're just going out on their
40:53
own. Um, and that I think,
40:56
uh, there's a way in which that fits the times. Right. You're
40:59
not part of this larger thing. Uh,
41:02
you're part of a congregation that's more expressive,
41:05
um, and closer to the
41:07
individualized individuals that are at its heart.
41:10
>> Loren: Yeah, like, it's interesting. Cause on both sides
41:13
of that, like, I'm thinking about, like, I think it's church of the
41:15
resurrection, right. The Methodist church in Kansas City. Like, they're
41:18
still part of the denomination. And I think,
41:22
um, what's his name? Hamilton, you know, is
41:24
quick to point out they're proud to be united
41:27
Methodists. But like, like you said, like, isn't it, like, I
41:30
don't. I mean, I could be wrong here, but I don't think, like, they're necessarily, like,
41:33
using everything from Abington or whatever the publishers
41:36
are, you know, I think.
41:38
>> Ted Smith: Uh, again, or their associate pastor just, uh,
41:41
recently became the director of the press at Abingdon.
41:43
>> Loren: Oh, interesting.
41:44
>> Ted Smith: So, you know.
41:46
>> Loren: Yeah, kind of a. Kind of a. Kind of reversed
41:48
there, right?
41:50
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, I think. Yeah. And then. And they've
41:52
convened meetings.
41:53
>> Loren: Right.
41:54
>> Ted Smith: And none of this is criticism. It's just to
41:56
kind of name sociologically the dynamic.
41:59
>> Loren: Right.
41:59
>> Ted Smith: Where really. And you see it even in,
42:02
um. You see it in money.
42:03
>> Loren: Yeah.
42:04
>> Ted Smith: Denominations, uh, at least experience themselves as broke,
42:07
right? Oh, my gosh, we don't. But. So
42:10
where is. Where's the money concentrated in
42:13
Christianity? In America today? It's concentrated in,
42:16
um. In large
42:18
congregations or wealthy congregations through
42:21
endowments or through present giving.
42:23
>> Loren: So do you think this is something that gives, like, the evangelicals
42:26
a big. I mean, certainly, broadly speaking,
42:28
the SBC would be part of evangelicalism, and they're
42:31
certainly going through their own institutional challenges. But
42:34
do you think, like, because of, like, the light or
42:37
the lack of, um,
42:40
uh, overhead, so to speak, from non denoms, like,
42:43
there's some loose networks and such, like, do you think that
42:46
gives them, I hate to say, advantage? Um,
42:49
some.
42:49
>> Ted Smith: Well, I think.
42:50
>> Loren: Yeah, go ahead.
42:51
>> Ted Smith: Yeah. You would say, are they better adapted to the.
42:55
And here I would. I would.
42:57
>> Loren: Uh.
42:57
>> Ted Smith: I think evangelical versus mainline as
43:00
theological markers, I think, will lead you
43:03
astray.
43:03
>> Loren: Yeah, that's fair.
43:04
>> Ted Smith: M because the SBC,
43:07
uh, has seen a decline in baptism
43:10
and a decline in membership now for
43:12
15 years, um, it's been precipitous.
43:15
And, uh, what is it?
43:18
Southwestern Baptist theological Seminary, I
43:20
recently read, has seen like an 80% decline in the number of
43:23
mdivs. So, uh.
43:26
But here, note the key. What's declining
43:29
the denomination, what's declining the
43:32
seminary that provides professional education.
43:35
So both of those are well adjusted to that
43:38
older order of voluntary associations.
43:40
Now, where do you see the growth? You see the growth and the
43:43
vitality, um, in the places that are
43:46
well adapted to this present moment of
43:49
individualized individuals. And I do think a megachurch
43:52
is that, um, megachurches are
43:55
better adapted to this.
43:57
Um. And here's why.
44:00
Um, they often are designed to
44:04
give, uh, you a chance for that kind of
44:07
ecstatic, expressive experience. And,
44:10
um, that's true in worship. But I want to reject
44:13
the denominationalist critique of
44:15
the mega church that says, well, it's just a consumer
44:18
spirituality. No, some of the things that can happen in those
44:21
small groups, which are the necessary component, can
44:24
be profound. Study of the scripture
44:27
profound, uh, work of discipleship.
44:29
And I also want to push back and
44:32
be, it's not obvious to me that serving on the building and
44:35
grounds committee makes one closer to
44:38
Jesus than being part of a small group and
44:41
then going to ecstatic worship.
44:43
Um, but
44:46
those are the different ethos that
44:49
are in play there. So I do think that the megachurch
44:52
is better adapted to the times for better and
44:55
worse. I, um, also think house churches
44:58
often are, um. And the key
45:00
there in both cases is that you're
45:03
not asking members to
45:06
sustain the institution with their labor, with
45:09
their voluntary labor. Because. And in the megachurch it's
45:12
because paid staff.
45:13
>> Loren: Right. I'm thinking, uh, yeah, ah, I was thinking like
45:16
the, the mega church near me in my neck of the woods, like at
45:19
least one of the two big ones. Like they have like a
45:22
christian school. Like I think they have some kind of
45:25
like theological training center now. Like they're really,
45:28
they're becoming like a mini denomination almost in
45:31
their own right. Uh, which leads me something. You said.
45:34
I want to ask real quick your thoughts on this. My
45:37
thought is in the future,
45:41
the best forms
45:44
of church are going to be, like you said, the micro church and the megachurch,
45:47
these churches in the middle are just going to get squeezed
45:49
out. Do you think that's right?
45:51
>> Ted Smith: Well, that's already happening demographically. I mean, all the
45:54
numbers point to that.
45:55
>> Loren: So it's almost like you're better off being a micro church than you are
45:58
being a church of 150. Right.
46:01
>> Ted Smith: Uh, and there are more such
46:04
churches, I think. What, it depends though, there's a lot
46:06
of different ways to be a so called micro church. I think,
46:09
um, what I would want, uh,
46:12
and I say this as one who is pastor of two small membership
46:15
congregations in a rural area myself, I
46:18
think the most important thing in those kind of
46:21
settings is to embrace
46:24
that smaller form instead
46:27
of trying like what's death
46:30
is to have
46:32
75 members, trying to
46:35
sustain a congregational model that really
46:37
takes 200 members. And then everybody's just
46:40
exhausted and burned out. And if somebody new,
46:44
miracle of God, uh, walks through the door, somebody new
46:47
walks through the door, everybody just descends on them like vampires.
46:50
And it's like, hey, you've been here two weeks. Would you like to chair the christian education
46:52
committee? Because the
46:55
institution needs it, just needs the life.
46:58
Right? But when we spot that
47:00
vampire dynamic, that's when we should say, okay, that's not
47:03
church. Church should be giving
47:06
life. Um,
47:09
but I think, uh, there are super, uh,
47:12
strong models of
47:14
congregations that are very small. They might function more like
47:17
extended families, even if it's not necessarily a blood family.
47:20
But that's the logic of them. Um, they might
47:23
have really low institutional
47:26
overhead. That's in terms of cost, like their space, but it's
47:29
also in terms of their committee structure and
47:32
their finances, their personnel, all
47:34
that. Um, I think those
47:37
can. And a lot of the so called fresh
47:39
expressions, movements, they
47:42
really, they fit that, uh, model,
47:45
and they tap into the desire
47:47
for expressive individualism.
47:50
M. Uh, that, I think is very much, uh, kind of a sign
47:53
of the times and intimate community, you know,
47:56
not, um, in a committee meeting, but in a Bible
47:59
study in which we're talking out of the issues in our
48:02
lives.
48:02
>> Loren: Okay, I know I'm keeping along here, so let me ask you one more
48:05
question here before we take a break. Um, and there's so much more I wanted
48:08
to get to, but, uh, like I said, I knew there's gonna be a lot of, a lot
48:11
of stuff here. So let's talk about this expressive
48:14
individualism that certainly is the.
48:17
The water we're swimming in, the air we're breathing right now in our
48:20
context. Um, you write in your book
48:22
this shift in institutional rules from
48:25
formation to platforms.
48:28
Denominations almost are seen as,
48:31
um, well, quite literally
48:33
platforms to help someone express themselves or
48:36
be their full selves in thinking about
48:39
this model. Um, and as I
48:42
understand you advocate for seminaries taking on a more
48:45
individualistic approach in ministry. Like, what
48:48
is the danger of, like,
48:51
are we adapting too much to the culture? Like, we're kind
48:54
of like, feeding this thing? That's really not a
48:57
healthy dynamic. Does that make sense?
48:59
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, for sure. Um,
49:02
the formation versus platform
49:06
distinction, uh, that, uh, I'm, uh, trying
49:09
to make there is, I think you see it clearly
49:12
on a congregational level, where,
49:14
you know, a congregation, there's a way in which the
49:17
professional minister, one of the virtues of a good professional
49:20
minister is they really serve the institution.
49:23
Um, and they get what authority they have from the
49:26
institution. So, um, they stand,
49:29
you know, if you were to draw it, they stand under the
49:32
institution holding it up.
49:34
And what I think we're seeing now, increasingly
49:37
is pastors of large churches.
49:40
Um, they're not standing under that institution holding it up. They're
49:43
standing on top of it. And it is their platform that
49:46
lets them reach, uh, even more people.
49:48
>> Loren: If I can even interrupt there. Sorry, I'm just
49:51
thinking I'm an example
49:54
of this right now. There's so many clergy my age who are just like,
49:57
we're not willing to, from a
50:00
crumbling institution, we're not willing to
50:03
hold that up and get crushed by it, right?
50:06
>> Ted Smith: Yeah, yeah, I think that's right. I mean, this
50:09
is the, ah, this is where I'm an
50:12
old style reformed.
50:15
>> Loren: Uh.
50:17
>> Ted Smith: In my theological DNA. I'm
50:20
deeply ambivalent about the voluntary association
50:23
model. It did crush, uh, people
50:25
that, uh, making the voluntary
50:28
association central had all, you know, it had the professionalization
50:31
problems that I named. I'm ambivalent about that
50:34
and I'm deeply ambivalent about the order that is
50:36
emerging now. Um, but I
50:39
think theologically God
50:42
is. There
50:45
have been no unambivalent moments in human history.
50:48
All the moments in human history have been shot through with
50:51
sin. Um, and
50:53
God has, uh, in God's
50:56
graciousness has decided to work through human history for the
50:59
redemption of the world. So, uh,
51:02
that's what I think is happening now. And that's where I think
51:05
the idea I would absolutely want to resist.
51:08
And I really loathe the kind
51:11
of writing that it takes like a little pop
51:13
sociology, mhm, or something, and then
51:16
shows the church how to conform better to the age.
51:19
Basically, that's what it's doing. Well, that's not
51:21
theology, that's advertising.
51:25
So I don't want to do that. I think we have to
51:28
do the sociological
51:31
work through theological lenses so
51:34
that we know what our moment in history looks like and we're not
51:37
deceiving ourselves. Um, but then I think
51:40
we have a critical relationship to that. Um, so I'm
51:43
not calling for a more individualistic mode of
51:45
theological education at all. Um,
51:48
I do name individualization
51:51
as an affordance for theological education, but
51:54
it's a very indirect one. Like the biggest way in which
51:57
it's an affordance is, uh,
52:00
in some ways it's terrible. This
52:02
individualization that we have. It carves people out of
52:05
communities. It leaves them on their own
52:08
without any kind of story to orient their lives, and
52:11
then it charges them with building all on their own
52:14
an authentic self. Well, I wonder
52:17
why anxiety is so widespread. Like, that's
52:20
just a terrible kind of condition
52:22
that a lot of people are in right now, right?
52:25
And I think if what theological
52:28
education is designed to do is to
52:31
say, hey, you need, we're going to give you professional credentials to
52:34
go lead these crumbling voluntary associations. People
52:37
aren't interested in that, just like what you're saying,
52:40
right? But if theological
52:42
education says,
52:45
hey, uh, I see this enormous
52:48
challenge that you, that the world has given
52:50
you, that you have to put a life before God together
52:54
and you have to figure out all, you know what
52:56
and there's actually learning through the centuries. That can help you
52:59
do that. Um, well, that's a different
53:02
purpose for theological education. It's less
53:05
professional education, and it's more like,
53:07
um. Yeah,
53:10
it's more
53:13
oriented towards helping individuals put selves together.
53:16
And a lot of our students are already doing
53:18
that. They get an M div, and then they go, uh,
53:21
into social works. They get an M div, they go on to law
53:24
school chaplains. Well, and chaplaincy to
53:27
me is like the signature, one of the signature
53:30
forms of our time for religious life.
53:32
Because what is a chaplain, a religious
53:35
leader who isn't part of a voluntary
53:38
association. Right. They're not
53:41
leading a voluntary associate. They're employed
53:44
usually in a, you know, a for profit or non
53:47
profit, um, hospital, military
53:50
corporation. Um, and they. There's no
53:53
building and grounds meeting for a chaplain. Right.
53:56
And a chaplain doesn't need to invite anybody to do
53:59
that work. Right. So they are the religious
54:02
leader kind of emancipated from or
54:05
stripped of leading a voluntary association.
54:08
And I think that's why that, uh,
54:11
like, students want to do that. And there's a
54:13
growing, um, possibility for it.
54:16
>> Loren: All right, well, we're already, like, 53 minutes in,
54:19
and.
54:20
>> Ted Smith: Sorry, I've been.
54:21
>> Loren: No, like, I want to talk for another 53 minutes, but
54:24
I unfortunately have other things to do.
54:27
Um, and I'm sure you do. So I really appreciate the time.
54:30
Like I said, there's a lot more to talk about here. There's
54:32
a lot more in the book. So I do want to
54:35
recommend the book, the, uh, end of theological
54:38
education. Uh, who is it? Erdman.
54:40
So check it out. Let's take a quick break, and we'll come back with some
54:43
closing questions.
54:48
All right, we're back with Reverend Doctor Ted Smith.
54:51
So thanks so much for the conversation.
54:55
These closing questions are meant to be taken as seriously
54:58
or not as you'd like to. So if you're pope for a
55:00
day, what might that day look like for. For you?
55:05
>> Ted Smith: Well, you know, I'm a cranky old presbyterian, so it would
55:08
look like dissolving the papacy.
55:10
>> Loren: That tends to come up a lot here in this
55:13
podcast.
55:14
>> Ted Smith: Well, you need to talk to some better.
55:16
>> Loren: Yeah, I do. Unfortunately, I do.
55:18
Um, a theologian or historical, uh,
55:21
christian figure, uh, you'd want to meet or bring
55:24
back to life.
55:28
>> Ted Smith: That's interesting. Uh,
55:31
Jesus, for sure. It's the
55:34
obvious, but not to say it would be
55:36
insane. Um, I think
55:39
another, uh, that I would really like to
55:41
meet, uh, and talk with is Benedict
55:44
St. Benedict, um, in part because
55:47
the communities that he founded have been so meaningful to me,
55:50
and in part because I think he's both. He had an
55:53
innovation that was theological, it was
55:56
liturgical, and it was also institutional. And
55:59
I think we need something on all three of those levels. And for the
56:02
record, I do not think Rod
56:04
Dreyer's, uh, the benedict option understands
56:07
benedict, really, at all.
56:08
>> Loren: Oh, I like that. I like that. Okay, good, good.
56:11
>> Ted Smith: So, yeah, I mean, one reason I'd like to have him back is just to say,
56:14
that's not what I meant. Please don't assimilate
56:17
that through, uh, your
56:20
particular political battle axis that you're trying to.
56:23
>> Loren: Yeah, I've not read that, but I'm familiar with it, so that's
56:25
intriguing. Um, what do you think history will remember from
56:28
our current time and place?
56:33
>> Ted Smith: What will history remember from our current time and place? I
56:36
think one thing that will be
56:38
remembered is the staggering
56:41
inequality of our society.
56:44
The growing number of people who are homeless
56:47
or who are working in jobs that,
56:49
like, you can barely get by. There's
56:52
just no hope. And then the
56:55
top end is just
56:58
unbelievable. It's the greatest wealth the world has ever
57:01
known. But those two things
57:04
coexisting. So not to our credit, I don't
57:07
think.
57:07
>> Loren: Yeah. Let me reframe this last
57:10
question here. What do you hope maybe for the
57:13
future of church institutions?
57:18
>> Ted Smith: Yeah.
57:19
>> Loren: Seminaries, churches? Answer how you'd like
57:22
to.
57:23
>> Ted Smith: Sure.
57:26
Church, uh, institutions right now,
57:30
I think, feel. We feel
57:33
poor.
57:34
>> Loren: Mhm.
57:34
>> Ted Smith: And disrespected and besieged.
57:38
And I think that's because we are trying
57:41
to prop up a
57:44
model that has lost its
57:48
living connection to the
57:50
times. But, um, we are
57:53
not in fact, poor, um, and not just in
57:56
a gospel sense, but there are real
57:59
resources in all of these institutions.
58:02
Money, um, and
58:05
then just really gifted people who are ready
58:07
to serve, uh, in profound
58:10
ways, um, and ideas and
58:13
traditions and practices. So there's just a lot
58:15
of wealth
58:18
in the full sense of that term, in these
58:21
institutions. And what I would love for us to do
58:23
is to turn that wealth
58:26
towards creating institutions
58:29
that fit these times. And those will be
58:31
ambivalent, um, just like the ones
58:34
that we're inheriting that are. But just to turn from that task of
58:37
propping up to building, uh, what we
58:40
need to build. Um, and I want us to build something
58:42
between a kind of gnostic
58:45
individualism. It's just kind of me
58:48
and God, often our own little
58:50
meditation app, um.
58:54
Uh, and the kind of
58:57
sustaining of the voluntary association,
59:00
um, at all costs. Um, there's just got to
59:03
be a better alternative for that. And I think we're seeing
59:06
some of those alternatives already starting.
59:09
And I want that, not because I want
59:12
the church exists, um,
59:15
because God has
59:18
decided to use the church in ways for the redemption of the world.
59:21
So that's what I really want,
59:24
is that work of redemption to continue with
59:27
faithful responses from us.
59:29
>> Loren: All right, I'm going to pop, uh, a question here. Yes.
59:32
No is your choice of response.
59:35
Uh, so, like, a comment has been made, like, I'm a member of the pension
59:38
fund for the christian church, that the money of the pension fund will
59:41
long outlive the denomination. Yes or no
59:44
question. Will the, uh, money from mainline
59:46
institutions outlive the institutions?
59:51
>> Ted Smith: Uh, no, because the money
59:54
will be used to sustain the institutions.
59:55
>> Loren: Okay. Okay.
59:56
>> Ted Smith: Um, but I think the institutions are going to take
59:59
very different forms. Literally, it's already
1:00:02
happening, uh, as the denominations are
1:00:05
becoming large, special purpose groups instead of
1:00:08
denominations, even if they still call themselves.
1:00:09
>> Loren: Boy, we need another 45 minutes for that.
1:00:13
All right, where can, uh, people connect with you, get your book,
1:00:16
all that stuff?
1:00:18
>> Ted Smith: Uh, yeah, I don't really do social media, so
1:00:21
not through any of those usual channels, but I'm at
1:00:24
emory's candler school of theology. Um, I'm
1:00:27
happy to respond to emails as best I can at ted
1:00:30
Smith emory.edu. And, um,
1:00:34
yeah, those are the main and best ways. They're
1:00:37
welcome to come to candler anytime. I'd love the
1:00:40
conversation.
1:00:40
>> Loren: Yeah, well, this has been. I've really appreciated the conversation,
1:00:43
enjoyed your perspective. So thank you so much for sharing
1:00:46
with me, uh, and hopefully with our listeners here.
1:00:49
So I always leave folks with the word of peace. So may God's peace be
1:00:52
with you.
1:00:53
>> Ted Smith: And also with you.
1:00:56
>> Paul: Thanks for joining us on the Future Christian podcast.
1:00:59
To learn more about Loren or the podcast,
1:01:01
visit future dash christian.com.
1:01:05
One more thing before you go. Do us a favor
1:01:08
and subscribe to the podcast. And if you're
1:01:10
feeling especially generous, leave a review.
1:01:13
It really helps us get the word out to more people. About the
1:01:16
podcast. The
1:01:19
Future Christian podcast is a production of torn curtain
1:01:22
arts and resonate media. Our episodes were
1:01:25
mixed by Danny Burton and the production support is
1:01:28
provided by Paul Romaglevitt. Thanks
1:01:31
and go in peace.