BELFAST BIBLE COLLEGE



TITLE - WHAT SORT OF SPIRITUALITY SHOULD WE BE ENCOURAGING IN OUR STUDENTS AND HOW CAN WE BEST DO IT?

DATE - OCTOBER 2006

AUTHOR - FRED MUVUKOR

WORD COUNT - 4,820

Preface

There are ever increasing numbers of Bible Schools and Theological institutions all over the world, and the number of graduates that are produced yearly can only be imagined; but the cry in many quarters is that, many of the products from these institutions are not suitably equipped for the ministry of the Church for which they were trained. The complain is that of Spiritual deficiency. This essay is aimed at shedding some light on the dilemma and to proffer some views as to the nature of spirituality that should be encouraged in the students while in training.

Introduction

Theological institutions and Bible colleges from inception have being places for the

preparation of men and women for ministry in the body of Christ – the Church.

To this end, and rightly so, lots of expectations are placed on these institutions, by the Church. Therefore the institutions, knowing the enormity/spirituality of church ministry for which students are to be trained; and being responsible for the ‘packaging’ of the students, as in admission; the faculty, in terms of employment; the body of knowledge & skills, with regards to their curriculum, and the creation of the enabling atmosphere for the Holy Spirit to work, ought to live up to their noble calling, so that the ministers of God may be adequately prepared for ministry.

This noble and high calling of theological institutions demands the impartation of rich Christian spirituality in the students by every possible means. This “spiritual formation is both the process of all of life and also the very specific, planned experiences in which we engage the thinking-praying-interrelating of our theological students, faculties, congregation and wider community.”[1]

SPIRITUALITY

Definition: Spirituality no doubt implies something that is of the spirit; therefore it can easily be confusing and mistaken, in the context of reasoning for something out of reach. But then in the light of Theological Education it should be well emphasized that the THEO to be studied is Spirit, and living; and has revealed Himself to mankind. So, spirituality is that which has to do with the relationship between God and His people; more so in this case, His people in preparation for His service. In the words of Bruce Nicholls “spirituality is harmony in relationship to our saviour God in worship, love and submission, in relation to God’s people, in witness and servanthood in the world, and stewardship in relationship to nature.”[2]

From the above it can be said that, spirituality calls for a four dimensional relationship:

• Relationship with God

• Relationship with the Church – God’s people

• Relationship with the world (peoples) – God’s images

• Relationship with nature – God’s creation

Of these relationships, God is prominent; giving credence to the fact that relationship with God takes priority over the others. And this must not escape our institutions of Theological Education.

The point is the student/graduate of theology will be better off in his/her relationship with the Church, the world and nature if he/she has a rich and growing relationship with God. On the contrary where the emphasis is placed on any of the other relationships, theological institutions then run the risk of producing good social workers, great humanist and effective police of nature, but not servants and ministers. John O’Malley’s view explains this well as he lays spirituality on the worth of the individual. He argues that spirituality has to do with “character formation”, and “the practice of ‘poverty’, chastity, and obedience”[3]

Importance: Considering the importance of spirituality to theological education I would like to observe that every vision and mission of an individual or a group of persons can not be without an objective. There is always a thing to be accomplished, and this is the goal. Theological education is not an exception, and its goal is the making of the men and women responsible for Church ministries. This is well articulated in the quotes below:

“The goal of Theological Education must focus on the kind of person we expect the student to become. Theological Education is to train men and women in Christian discipleship so that they become truly men and women of God.”[4] Bruce J Nicholls

“… the most important aspect of formation for ministry was spiritual formation”[5] John W O’Malley.

“… before and above being learned, a minister must be godly.”[6] Benjamin B Warfield

Another importance of spirituality is that it is vital to establishing ones calling to ministry. Theological education may be good for all Christians and any body who cares to know more about God; yet bearing in mind that the primary purpose (so I believe), is to produce ministers of God, I dare ask: Of what use is a minister without a sense of God’s call to His service? Bruce Nicholls says: “The marks of discipleship development are many. They include a strong sense of the call of God to ministry … and a call to godliness and holiness of living, so that the disciple in humility may be able to say with Paul ‘follow me, follow my example’.”[7]

HOW SPIRITUALITY CAN BEST BE THAUGHT IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION.

Spirituality is to my mind enormous and fundamental to theological education and Bruce Nicholls gave an informative perspective that is worth noting in proposing ways by which this onerous need can be inculcated in students of theology. He said: “Spiritual development cannot be merely a subject within theological education, separate from other subjects. Rather it must be a perspective affecting the whole educative process.”[8]

In the light of the above I would like to propose two broad based paradigm shifts. One is in the area of Curriculum and the other in Deinstitutionalization of theological institutions.

1) Curriculum Review

Curriculum is that which has to do with the entire package a student is exposed to in order to fulfill the requirement of an institution of learning; with regard to the discipline for which he/she was offered admission, and this by nature is designed to achieve pre-determined objectives. It is not just the contents of courses but inclusive of programmes of activities that take place outside of the classroom. According to Samuel Amirtham and Robin Pryor “Curriculum is not an end in itself; it is only an aid towards a goal and vision of a ministry and mission. Its goal is the formation of a committed leader who is intellectually informed, professionally equipped and spiritually maturing, and all that, in the service of the proclamation of the kingdom of God entrusted to the Church. Therefore in the pursuit of curriculum, sight may not be lost of the connection of the intellectual, professional and spiritual diversions of theological education.”[9] Below are some of the areas of curriculum review that will help the development of spirituality in theological education.

1a) Course contents: “To understand the word of God in its own cultural context and to understand its relevance for the cultural context in which we live is … fundamental to spiritual development.”[10] Consequently, I believe the study of bible languages and cultures and other Bible related courses should be designed in such a manner that pursues profound understanding and application for spiritual development, and not for academic purposes alone. This is to say that personal experiences of how these courses have contributed to the spirituality of the lecturer should be rich in his deliveries thereby moving the studies beyond academic analysis to life realities.

1b) Relationship with the Church: There should be frequent and consistent appraisal and improvement of the seminaries or Bible school/church relationship. The church should be made an active stakeholder in the spiritual development of the students, seeing that they are not only from the Church but are being trained for service in the church. In this regard the students should be programmed to serve the church in different ways while in training. Here Bruce opines that:

✓ Students should serve in given local churches as student pastors as a way of meeting the practical requirement of the institution.

✓ Two days in a week (Sunday inclusive) assignments in a local church, in situations where the students do not have long structured practical programme.

✓ Also recommended is a concentrated period of 2 weeks or the use of holidays in a local church.

✓ A stipulated period of internship, i.e. 1yr, as a mandatory requirement for the students at the end of their class work. [11]

This according to Bruce “…ensures that” the students “develops inner discipline in maintaining at the same time both academic study and evangelistic and pastoral ministries, a discipline he will need very much after graduation."[12]

1c) Institutional Community: To promote the needed spirituality in students of theological education we need to put in place a community that facilitates it. This community is very vital, and its effectiveness can be maximized in a residential setting. The goal of the community is to explore and appropriate the wealth of spirituality that exists in our corporate life as a body of believers.

There are several means by which spiritual development can be enhanced through the community. They include among others, Personal devotions, Corporate worship, ‘Formal’ & Informal Prayer meetings, Retreats, Counseling’s, Mentorship and Modeling of the Christian life and ministry, Social interactions, Practical leadership exposures, Spirit of service, etc. In the view of Bruce Nicholls “The extent to which a residential theological school is a community for discipleship training determines the potential for spiritual development to take place, Seen as a community of faith, such a school is able to bring the whole of its corporate life to a disciplined lifestyle that reflects the nature of the church itself.”[13]

The point above can be substantiated by some of the practices at BBC but I will like to limit my views to the experiences of my school.

CAPRO CASE STUDY

The Calvary Ministries Schools of Mission are specialized missions training schools running four main blocks of courses: Biblical, Christian living, Christian ministry and Missiological. The schools are fully residential and except for the visiting lecturers the staff members live in the school compound.

The community (specifically referring to Institut Interafricaine de Formation Missionnaire, IIFM Yaokro, Cote d’Ivoire) have in place for spiritual formation activities which include: Daily morning corporate hour of worship at 5am; Daily schedule for personal devotions; Monday – Friday half hourly Chapel programme , with staff and students ministering; Daily work duties for the maintenance of the school premises; Corporate cooking/eating and cleaning of dishes by both staff and students; Staff modeling (mentoring) of the Christian/missionary life; Counseling sessions; A weekly small group fellowship meeting tagged Flock Group involving staff and students; Two days in a week corporate prayer meeting for staff and students; A weekly teaching time facilitated by staff and occasionally students as they present their term papers on various subjects and respond to questions and critique from others; A monthly all night prayer vigil; A week of retreat in the year, etc.

Not only are these programmes in place but they are evaluated as part of the students overall training package, and the staff roles are constantly under review, evaluation and reinforcement, to ensure students maximum spiritual development.

The contribution of community to the spirituality of Bible school, I believe can not be over emphasized. “In all its branches alike, theology has as its unique end to make God known; the student of theology is brought by his daily task into the presence of God, and is kept there. Can a religious man stand in the presence of God and not worship?”[14]

“I say it deliberately, that a body of young men, living apart in a community-life, as you are and must be living, cannot maintain a healthy, full, rich religious life individually, unless they are giving organic expression to their religious life as a community in frequent stated diets of common worship … without it you cease to be a religious community and lack that support and stay, that incitement and spur, that comes to the individual from the organic life of the community of which he forms a part.”[15]

1d) Contextualization: Theological education needs to have contextual relevance in order to transmit effectively the needed spirituality. People live within given cultures and have developed for themselves their own world views and value systems which cannot be over looked if spiritual formation is to be properly taught. A training that is isolated from the real life setting will in some way result in either the loss of vision/passion or the student’s acquisition of new cultures foreign to that in which they are to minister.

Care must be taken however to distinguish between what in the culture is in conformity with Christianity so that any and every thing that is in a culture is not brought or taught in the name of spirituality.

The point is, Christ who is central to the Christian faith and the matters of theological education should be sought for within the culture and not as though He is seeking for a culture, and therefore needed to imbibe all in any and every culture in which He is accepted. In other words it is not the culture that gives relevance to Christ, rather it operates from the perspective of seeking what in itself conforms to, and helps to teach/interpret the body of truths concerning Christ and God to its people. For Christ did not come to conform to, but to transform, man and his ways and that include the cultures of men. As Manson puts it, “… if Christ be in truth, the centre of Christianity, then the formulation of the faith must be made to conform to Christ and not Christ to the formulation.”[16]

This point is well articulated in the discussion paper titled Culture and Spiritual Formation, edited by Amirtham and Pryor. It says, “Not every thing of the culture, however, is usable or consistent with Biblical and Christian ideals. For example, the unchecked individualism that is inherent in capitalist societies or the culture of fatalism so characteristic of several African and Asian societies cut against the essential gospel message and therefore, cannot be built upon. Or the authoritarianism so characteristic of prevailing leadership models cannot be used for a new Christian spirituality.”[17]

Having said that, below are some ways in which the contextualization of theological education can enhance spirituality:

✓ Language: This is a means of self expression within a given culture and enhances spirituality when Biblical concepts are rephrased to take the form that best aids the understanding of the people. For instance in missions history there is the account of missionaries translating the phrase “Jesus the lamb of God” to read “Jesus the pig of God” because the tribal people were not familiar with lambs, and pigs were the objects of their sacrifices.

The discussion paper of on culture and spiritual formation explains the same point when it says: “… in Asia where rice is the life-sustaining food, it is more meaningful to say ‘God is rice’ than to say ‘Jesus is bread’, bread being rather an unusual commodity. For that reason Biblical images and symbols need to be translated in a dynamic manner rather than in literalistic fashion. Only then can Biblical concepts, words and symbols, nourish the spirituality of a people”[18]

✓ Structures: This has to do with the cultural and institutional order in which life is administered. For instance in cultures where age is significant in leadership and decision making, theological education should be mindful not to impose on the people foreign practices where the elders are disrespected. Note that, “The pattern of ministry and therefore ministerial formation introduced by the western missions are now seen to have been imposition of a style of leadership foreign to the cultures in which the church was being planted”[19] In like manner, “The institutions need to address the matters of the models of authority exercised in the institution as in the church. For unless leadership models (i.e. those whose authority derive from sacrificial service) are included in the school, the candidates go into the congregations with a defective spirituality. Elitism and authoritarianism should have no place in leadership roles.”[20]

✓ Time: Time is strategically relevant and its maximization should be sought in the quest for spirituality in theological education. The learning systems employed therefore, need to be conscious and sensitive to cultural variations at the point of deliveries so spirituality is not lost in theological education, especially so, with the transfer of the western styled institutions, with its academic pressures. “… curriculum should allow time for reflection, digestion and assimilation of what is communicated. Pressure of time not only makes the seminary a boring factory house, a necessary evil to have done with for the real business of ministry outside it, but also deprives the course structure a chance of being enriched by the ‘hopes and fears’ of the world outside.”[21]

✓ Literature: The wealth of literature available to theological education are basically western culture oriented therefore there is the demand for theological education literature that are culturally sensitive, allowing for contextual relevance. Amirtham and Pryor observed that: “currently, institutions of the two-third world often, if not most times, use the literature developed in other cultures. Such literature, while appropriate to their origin, are not always addressing the theological and religious issues of the two-third world.”[22] And “Culture measured in terms of time and place is essential and non-negotiable for the development of authentic spirituality and theology.”[23]

In the light of the above, I would like to observe that the Theological Education by Extension (TEE) programme is an ideal contextualized theological education though it can be improved

on. Its relevance is most true seeing that it is run in the normal dwellings of the students; allowing them to practice what they have learnt. In the opinion of the group discussion on the ‘Critical study of the Bible and Spiritual Formation’, “TEE course help students to understand their role in the social, political, cultural and religious context in the light of the Biblical text”[24] However, distance from those teaching them negates effective mentoring and requires innovative ways of bridging the gap. Dwelling on this Bruce Nicholls said: “Cooperation between a residential school and TEE programme is to be encouraged, so that extension students can benefit periodically from the corporate life of an institution, and those in residential programmes can spend periods of study while living in the secular world.”[25]

1e) Models of training: Dealing with the models of training I will like to mention them briefly and then attempt a justification for what I consider a balance, bearing in mind that most of my reference sources pointed to the fact that spirituality has always suffered at the expense of academics; yet to them spirituality was the cardinal business of theological education.

Models harmonized as objectives, offer an effective way of looking at the varied package of theological education, but it needs to go a step further to concretize its relevance beyond the demand for an inter-flow to establishing a zone of integration and utmost significance giving harmonization its due weight. The models are: Academic, Monastic, Training, Business, and Discipleship.[26] And the objectives are Academic, Training, and Formation.

Academic: While it is very significant to theological education in that it enables for appropriate interpretation and use of scriptures, it often robs the student of contextual relevance, and as Cheesman will put it “The academic model is inadequate to describe the task of theological education. It strengthens no more than one factor in the ultimate usefulness of the servant of God. Plenty of matured believers have been able to turn upside down their corner of the world without having experienced academic theology.”[27]

Monastic: This model has been described as a model that came to being, in effort to counter the excesses of academics in theological education. Again referring to Cheesman, the model gave birth to Bible colleges so as “…to train Christian workers without the ‘corrupting’ influence of universities or liberal denominational colleges, to prepare non-ordained missionaries, to train lay people for witness and to emphasize spiritual development as the key to equipping Christian workers.”[28]

Training: This model is known to be tough and task oriented; giving professionalism to ministry and missionary work. “Accompanying this model has sometimes been an emphasis on spiritual warfare and a hard life, boiled cabbage and floor scrubbing duty, all of which are ‘good missionary training’.”[29] For this model theology is seen as a task, and “The student taught theology as a task has less problem bridging the chasm between the classroom and the world when he leaves the one and enters the other”[30]

Business: This model sees theological education more or less like a business enterprise; it has to its credit the pursuit of stewardship and accountability, but reduces theological education to products marketing affairs where courses are the focus rather than the students. “Among other things, the principal becomes a managing director, responsible to the chairman of the board, with the treasurer peering over his shoulders. Almost all colleges and seminaries in Europe and North America have gone some way down this road.”[31]

Discipleship: This is the mentorship model with much emphasis on life with the tutor playing the lead and the student following, and learning moments are not confined to the classroom; rather it’s a 24hrs affair. According to Cheesman, “Communication theory would suggest that discipleship is a far more efficient tool for learning than the standard information transfer by lecture. It relates learning to life and reality. In fact it integrates the process of learning and change within the student in the practical, spiritual and academic field.”[32] “More effective” yet not preferred a model because; “walking down this road will be unsettling and threatening to the tutorial staff. It is easier to lecture on holiness than to show it.”[33]

A call for balance in objectives to ensure spirituality in theological education.

FUNDAMENTAL OBJECTIVES OF THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION: In Diagram.

[pic]

KEY

A: Academic, Training & Formation in a balance

B: Training & Formation in a balance but no Academic,

C: Formation & Academic in a balance but no Training

D: Academic & Training in a balance but no Formation

E: Training only, no Formation & Academic

F: Formation only, no Academic & Training

G: Academic only, no Training & Formation

Implications

➢ Whereas sections B – G have their different areas of strengths and weaknesses only section A, has the capacity of producing a well rounded graduate of theological education in all three realms of Intellectuality, Spirituality and Practicality.

➢ The relational probability of producing a well rounded graduate is 1 in 7 given the total segments generated by the matrix of Academic, Training, and Formation. In ratio it is 1:6.

➢ This being in the ratio of 1:6 (A : B-G) calls for proper considerations and strategizing, knowing that section B+ a little of section A; section C + a little of section A; section D + a little of section A, can be interpreted as an inter-flow; yet gives room for loop-sidedness as the measure of A becomes subjective.

➢ Worse still and never to be advocated is the case where any of sections E, or F, or G is pursued independently to a disaster.

To accomplish position A, I recommend that the stakeholders of theological education give a relatively equal strength (a minimum of 30%) to all three dimensions right from design to execution and evaluation of the total package that a student is to experience in the Institution of learning. The 10% left should allow for flexibility in differences/preferences in expressions from one institution to another and/or at varying times in a given institution; though in the significance of spirituality to theological education I would suggest it goes to formation.

DEINSTIUTIONALIZATION OF SCHOOLS

By deinstitutionalization of theological education I mean the removal of the myth that academic excellence is equal to spiritual excellence, and that it can best be attained in the four walls of an institution. That does not in any way imply the abolition of our present day schools but for the pragmatic shift in perspective. Of this I will like to briefly consider issues of Faculties and Structures.

Faculty: Jesus said “follow me and I will make you…”[34] and Paul said “follow my example as I …”[35] Again Jesus said “a student is not above his teacher…. It is enough for the student to be like his teacher.”[36] The implication of the above is that to have effective spirituality in our theological education it must begin with the FACULTY; but regrettably the faculty often distances itself from the real action, having accepted to be no more than lecturers as in the universities. A few views buttressing the significance of the faculty to the spirituality of the students are expressed in the quotes following:

1) Robin J Pryor “… the spiritual formation of theological students is closely dependent upon the on-going spiritual formation of the whole faculty and adjunct spiritual directors”[37]

2) Graham Cheesman “The impact that a professor makes on a student will generally be directly proportional to the quantity of time spent together times the quality of time spent together”[38]

3) Martin Buber (quoted by Cheesman) “The teacher must himself be what he wants his pupils to become”[39]

4) W. Paul Jones “… I was brought to the awareness that while I wrote and lectured well about the ideas of theology, and while I was an effective change agent, my inner life was that of a functional atheist. If the quality of marriage can be measured by its intimacy, the name of my relationship with God was ‘divorce’. Not only did I practice no spiritual disciplines, but talk of piety was embarrassing”[40]

5) O’Malley “If we concede that virtue, wisdom, and love of God cannot be taught, we must still yield to the evidence that they can be called forth by others – but only by those whose art springs from their own inner goodness. We have to take this fact into account when we speak about formation for the formatores. If we do we shall wonder less while spiritual formation so often seems to be an intractable problem that constantly eludes our efforts to program and contain it in tidy fashion”[41]

The crucial role of the faculty is the fact that they provide leadership for the students in training who in turn are going out to give leadership to the church. In this regard the faculty are shapers of those who shape the church. And talking about church leadership, Henri Nouwen argued that: “It is not enough … to be moral people, well trained, eager to help their fellow humans and able to respond creatively to the burning issues of their time. All that is valuable and important … but … The original meaning of the word ‘theology’ was ‘union with God in prayer.’ Today theology has become one academic discipline alongside many others, and often theologians are finding it hard to pray. But for Christian leadership it is of vital importance to reclaim the mystical aspect of theology so that every word spoken, every advice given, and every strategy developed can come from a heart that knows God intimately”[42]

Seeing that a lot lies with the faculty therefore in the spiritual development of theological education I suggest that:

a) Faculty members should see themselves first as ministers before being lecturers. In fact to be ordained will be nice if that will give them assurance in service.

b) Faculty members should be exposed to ministry realities as they are mandated to spend part or their entire sabbatical in a ministry setting, either in the church or Para-church ministries.

c) Faculty members should subject themselves to ministerial discipline, as in the church when in error.

d) Teachings should be enriched with the supplementary services of ministers from the church, serving as visiting lecturers.

This idea no doubt needs polishing, but it’s a worthy question to ask why anyone should expect a ‘non-minister’ either in spirit and/or practice to develop the ministers for the church.

Structural matters: The natures of the physical and administrative structures of most theological institutions are western in orientation, and there is the need to contextualize them to be of relevance. John Frame, quoted by Bruce J. Nicholls said: “I propose first that we dump the academic model once and for all – degrees, accreditation, tenure, the works.”[43]

While not subscribing to the eradication of the Academic model, I believe that its present dominance in theological education be reviewed in conformity to the balance advocated earlier, in pages 12 and 13.

CONCLUSION

Theological education is come a long way though like every pragmatic and relevant course it should remain open to further advancement. I think that the spirituality we seek is right with us if we effectively blend the objectives we have rather than a continued posture of division and competition, bearing in mind that, theological education is all about God who cannot be programmed, confined, or constrained by men.

Bibliography

Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d.

Cheesman, Graham “Competing Paradigms in Theological Education Today” in Bruce Nicholls, (Ed.) Evangelical Review of Theology. Vol. 17 No 4 October 1993.

Jones, Paul. W, “Spiritual Formation and Engagement in the World” in Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d.

Manson T. W The Teachings of Jesus, Cambridge, University press, 1963

Newbigin, Lesslie “Theological Education in a World Perspective” in Conn H. M and Rowen, S. F (ed), Missions and Theological Education in world perspectives, Farmington, Associates of Urbanus, 1984. pg 3–18.

Nicholls, (Ed.) Evangelical Review of Theology. Vol. 17 No 4 October 1993

Nicholls, Bruce, “The Role of Spiritual Development in Theological Education” in Paul Bowers, (Ed.) Evangelical Theological Education Today 2: Agenda for Renewal, Nairobi, Evangel publishing House/WEF,1982 pg. 13 – 25

Nouwen Henri J. M In the name of Jesus. The Crossroad Pub. Company New York 1998

O’Malley, John, “Spiritual Formation for Ministry, Some Roman Catholic Traditions – their Past and Present” in Richard J. Neuhaus, (Ed.), Theological Education and Moral Formation, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1992 pg 79 – 111

Thompson Chain – Reference Bible (NIV) Indiana, B.B. Kirkbride Bible Co., Inc.1990.

Warfield, Benjamin B. The Religious Life of Theological Students, Grand Rapids, Presbyterian and Reformed

-----------------------

[1] Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d. pg. 4

[2] Nicholls, Bruce, “The Role of Spiritual Development in Theological Education” in Paul Bowers, (Ed.) Evangelical Theological Education Today 2: Agenda for Renewal, Nairobi, Evangel publishing House/WEF,1982. Pg. 17

[3] O’Malley, John, “Spiritual Formation for Ministry, Some Roman Catholic Traditions – their Past and Present” in Richard J. Neuhaus, (Ed.), Theological Education and Moral Formation, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1992, pg. 92.

[4] Nicholls, Bruce, “The Role of Spiritual Development in Theological Education” in Paul Bowers, (Ed.) Evangelical Theological Education Today 2: Agenda for Renewal, Nairobi, Evangel publishing House/WEF,1982 pg. 13

[5]O’Malley, John, “Spiritual Formation for Ministry, Some Roman Catholic Traditions – their Past and Present” in Richard J. Neuhaus, (Ed.), Theological Education and Moral Formation, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1992 pg. 90

[6] Warfield, Benjamin B., The Religious Life of Theological Students, Grand Rapids, Presbityrian and Reformed, pg* 2 This book is not paged; so my paging is with effect from the 1st page of the article.

[7] Nicholls, Bruce, “The Role of Spiritual Development in Theological Education” in Paul Bowers, (Ed.) Evangelical Theological Education Today 2: Agenda for Renewal, Nairobi, Evangel publishing House/WEF,1982. pg. 13, 14.

[8] Nicholls, Bruce, “The Role of Spiritual Development in Theological Education” in Paul Bowers, (Ed.) Evangelical Theological Education Today 2: Agenda for Renewal, Nairobi, Evangel publishing House/WEF,1982. pg.17

[9] Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d. pg. 88

[10] Nicholls, Bruce, “The Role of Spiritual Development in Theological Education” in Paul Bowers, (Ed.) Evangelical Theological Education Today 2: Agenda for Renewal, Nairobi, Evangel publishing House/WEF,1982. pg. 18

[11] Ibid. pg. 21

[12] Ibid. pg. 21

[13] Ibid pg. 20

[14] Warfield, Benjamin B., The Religious Life of Theological Students, Grand Rapids, Presbiterian and Reformed, pg. 5

[15] Ibid pg 8,9

[16] Manson T. W The Teachings of Jesus, Cambridge, University press, 1963. pg 5

[17] Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d. pg 82

[18]Ibid pg 82

[19] Newbigin, Lesslie “Theological Education in a World Perspective” in Conn H. M and Rowen, S. F (ed), Missions and Theological Education in world perspectives, Farmington, Associates of Urbanus, 1984. pg 5

[20] Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR

SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d, pg. 83

[21] Ibid pg. 83

[22] Ibid pg. 83

[23] Ibid pg. 84

[24] Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d. pg.78

[25] Nicholls, Bruce, “The Role of Spiritual Development in Theological Education” in Paul Bowers, (Ed.) Evangelical Theological Education Today 2: Agenda for Renewal, Nairobi, Evangel publishing House/WEF,1982. pg 22

[26]Cheesman, Graham “Competing Paradigms in Theological Education Today” in Bruce Nicholls, (Ed.) Evangelical Review of Theology. Vol. 17 No 4 October 1993.

[27] Ibid pg. 487

[28] Ibid pg. 488

[29] Ibid pg. 491

[30] Ibid pg. 491

[31] Ibid pg. 492

[32] Ibid pg. 495

[33] Ibid pg. 495

[34] Matt. 4:19

[35] 1 Cor. 11:1

[36] Matt. 10:24,25

[37] Pryor, Robin J. “Other Resources on Spiritual Formation” in Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d. pg 95

[38] Cheesman, Graham “Competing Paradigms in Theological Education Today” in Bruce Nicholls, (Ed.) Evangelical Review of Theology. Vol. 17 No 4 October 1993. pg. 495

[39] Ibid pg.495

[40] W. Paul Jones “Spiritual Formation and Engagement in the World” in Amirtham, Samuel and Pryor, Robin (Eds.) Invitation to the Feast of Life RESOURCES FOR SPIRITUAL FORMATION IN THEOLOGICAL EDUCATION WCC, n.d. pg 38,39

[41]O’Malley, John, “Spiritual Formation for Ministry, Some Roman Catholic Traditions – their Past and Present” in Richard J. Neuhaus, (Ed.), Theological Education and Moral Formation, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1992 pg. 111

[42] Nouwen Henri J. M In the name of Jesus. The Crossroad Pub. Company New York 1998. pg 30

[43] Bruce Nicholls, (Ed.) Evangelical Review of Theology. Vol. 17 No 4 October 1993. pg. 484

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download