i posted this comment on dr alex's blog in response to a query raised by steven:
I’ve learnt after leading a silent retreat for a group of graduating seminary students, that they have been trained to be activists rather than contemplatives.
Wow...is that true? what sort of activists?
But it's definitely difficult to think deep and act...too difficult. Some of us just don't have that sort of disposition.
p.s. i have expanded my original comment with further explanatory comments:
----------------------------------
dear jack and alex,
while most seminaries in the west seem to be geared towards the active life and end up producing graduates with little in the contemplative, part of the problem seminaries in malaysia wrestle with is the students' lack of comprehension and ability to understand and grasp deeper things. don't expect much help from the present malaysian school system which teaches students to memorize by rote (and not to think for themselves).
while a seminary like seminari theoloji malaysia (STM) do emphasize the contemplative, the present batches of students struggle with the key issue of time which is the number one contrainst. because of their lacking in critical comprehension, they take longer time to digest what they read or to write. hence, the time that is supposed to be set aside for contemplative use is also used for other things like reading, comprehending and writing.
in the older days like 25 years ago, students came out from the government schools with a greater grasp of english. hence, when they entered semianry, they could read faster, comprehend easier and write more eloquently. time for the contemplative could then be utilized for that purpose.
unfortunately, after the last 20 over years of b.m. syllabus and english 121, the students coming into seminary today lack the necessary critical qualities. the seminary syllabus is like an arts course, not a science one. seminary assignments are not like writing science papers, merely quoting facts or showing the equations. it deals with logic and the ability to argue or defend one's position, rhetoric or the ability to persuade people to your position, and a wide grasp of the subject to be studied. all these unfortunately are often lacking in present batches of students (except for some bright fellas growing up in english-speaking homes and churches).
once in a while, some bright students come in and they can handle what is expected of them and not encroached into the time set for the contemplative. these are the ones who can balance active and contemplative life with lesser difficulties (not that they won't find difficulties at all).
for a seminary to produce the 'best' or 'all-round' graduates for the ministry, we have to begin with the best material (sometmes the sending churches expect seminaries to produce instant miracles! here is someone we cannot handle in our church, we sent him to you, change and mould him into a pastor in the next 3 or 4 years! then we will take him back). unfortunately, we do not get the best always. the best always seem to go for medicine, law, engineering etc. so, the question is 'can we ensure we send in the best qualified people for the job?'
some other questions i can raise connected with this issue:
1] how do we attract the best people for seminary training?
2] are christian parents themselves holding back their best sons and daughters?
3] are the youths themselves not interested in full-time pastoral ministry? can the christian vocation of pastoral ministry be presented as a viable vocation like any other secular vocation?
4] is the trend in malaysia going to be people who have worked a considerable number of years in the secular world and then opt to take optional retirement to come into seminary for training and serve their remaining years in the full-time ministry before they officially retire at 65 years?
I’ve learnt after leading a silent retreat for a group of graduating seminary students, that they have been trained to be activists rather than contemplatives.
Wow...is that true? what sort of activists?
But it's definitely difficult to think deep and act...too difficult. Some of us just don't have that sort of disposition.
p.s. i have expanded my original comment with further explanatory comments:
----------------------------------
dear jack and alex,
while most seminaries in the west seem to be geared towards the active life and end up producing graduates with little in the contemplative, part of the problem seminaries in malaysia wrestle with is the students' lack of comprehension and ability to understand and grasp deeper things. don't expect much help from the present malaysian school system which teaches students to memorize by rote (and not to think for themselves).
while a seminary like seminari theoloji malaysia (STM) do emphasize the contemplative, the present batches of students struggle with the key issue of time which is the number one contrainst. because of their lacking in critical comprehension, they take longer time to digest what they read or to write. hence, the time that is supposed to be set aside for contemplative use is also used for other things like reading, comprehending and writing.
in the older days like 25 years ago, students came out from the government schools with a greater grasp of english. hence, when they entered semianry, they could read faster, comprehend easier and write more eloquently. time for the contemplative could then be utilized for that purpose.
unfortunately, after the last 20 over years of b.m. syllabus and english 121, the students coming into seminary today lack the necessary critical qualities. the seminary syllabus is like an arts course, not a science one. seminary assignments are not like writing science papers, merely quoting facts or showing the equations. it deals with logic and the ability to argue or defend one's position, rhetoric or the ability to persuade people to your position, and a wide grasp of the subject to be studied. all these unfortunately are often lacking in present batches of students (except for some bright fellas growing up in english-speaking homes and churches).
once in a while, some bright students come in and they can handle what is expected of them and not encroached into the time set for the contemplative. these are the ones who can balance active and contemplative life with lesser difficulties (not that they won't find difficulties at all).
for a seminary to produce the 'best' or 'all-round' graduates for the ministry, we have to begin with the best material (sometmes the sending churches expect seminaries to produce instant miracles! here is someone we cannot handle in our church, we sent him to you, change and mould him into a pastor in the next 3 or 4 years! then we will take him back). unfortunately, we do not get the best always. the best always seem to go for medicine, law, engineering etc. so, the question is 'can we ensure we send in the best qualified people for the job?'
some other questions i can raise connected with this issue:
1] how do we attract the best people for seminary training?
2] are christian parents themselves holding back their best sons and daughters?
3] are the youths themselves not interested in full-time pastoral ministry? can the christian vocation of pastoral ministry be presented as a viable vocation like any other secular vocation?
4] is the trend in malaysia going to be people who have worked a considerable number of years in the secular world and then opt to take optional retirement to come into seminary for training and serve their remaining years in the full-time ministry before they officially retire at 65 years?
Comments
Thank you for this response to a comment on my blog. I will like to expand the discussion here and here.
To me, it's economics. I am frustrated at the proverbial poor pastor/seminarian/fulltimer(correct me if I am wrong about this situation, I only know "proverbial-ly").
What we pay is what we get. If we want good brains and good talents, we've got to pay for it. The church should spend on human resource development and human development if the "church" means "people". Instead of the monies going into buildings first or charity first, take care of your CEOs and the Execs (pastors, theologians, fulltimers, missionaries). Feed them well, then we'll have the best-est mind to lead us into all other things.
The lack of economic motivation also contribute to the lack of competition which will promote agressive church workers. Like in the corporate world for example, the one who give out best will get the best ppl. And the best ppl will always try to remain the best in order to secure their piece of meat.
Sometimes, i cannot help but think that our seminaries and churches are getting those misled by a sense of [fake] altruism (check out my recent post here ), but are in effect are paralyzed by "christian values" and therefore are unable to compete in the real working environment. With due respect to the other wonderful church leaders and scholars, including Reb...
Time changes (a wonderful sermon on this was preached in my church last sunday by my Elder), the Church probably need to expand their horizon in this areas, look at the economics of things and move on. We cannot keep expecting ppl to be altruistic and "give" their best kids to a job which does not well...pay the bills or afford them comfortable living.
Jack
there are no simple answers to the questions i have raised either. but i raised them to generate responses. we all will tackle the issue from a different perspective - pastor, layperson, church leader, student etc.
while economics or financial reward is one of the factors (it may not be the most important, ask anthony), it certainly plays a role in our children's choice of career. We need to move away from the "God will keep them (pastors) humble while we (the church) keep them poor" syndrome which is prevalent among some churches. Sometimes I am sickened that the church members accept the fact that they pay their pastors less than what they will pay their workers. From a pastor's point of view, it must have been difficult to minister to who flock who drives around in Mercs and BMWs and yet refused to increase his salary.
Saying that, I have observed how God works to meet the financial needs of his 'full-time' workers.
I agree there is no simple answers to the areas you have raised. Therefore I look forward to your postings on these areas.
Shalom
(sorry anthony, I have to post this comment for Jack's blog here as I do not seem to be able to comment on his blog)
You have made a very important point here. In the stressful environment of the marketplace, it is natural for us to seek a way out. It is also true that some Christians may think that going into a 'full-time' work in churches are the answer. However, that is a fallacy and the grass is definitely not greener on the other side. I have met enough burn or stressed out pastors and seminary lecturers to know that. For them, some pastors seek to get out of their stressful environment by taking up a full time course in one of the seminaries.
There are no easy answer but I would like to remind us of the Lord's teaching about the Sabbath. Sabbath taking is a spiritual discipline and one we all need to practice. Maybe if we all have our Sabbaths, we may cope in our stressful environments better.
You are probably rite about grass is not greener, but I just can't help to think it is relatively, at least...but life's more complex than this I guess.
I've just had a good 2 hour late afternoon minum session with a dear fren who is with FES in Penang. I was convinced that he really have it...the sacrificial and generous heart of service. He's my age and I totally encouraged him to carry on with what he is doing...and a brilliant young chap too btw.
But my point is that our current system, our CF's,our church (which my FES fren above equate to "protective zoos for endangered creatures"), even our theology, may give weaken our strength to survive in the torturous world of free market and give us the false idea of altruism and service to go into fulltime or a "more christian work".
Then we may get the "dropouts of the real world" in our seminaries and church ministry. Sorry for the harsh words...hehehe...but probably it's more of a sad fact.
It would be great for seminary and church leaders to do some sort of roundtable and think of revamp perhaps? this is probably too idealistic, but we've gotta start somewhere...I am willing to campaign for this...heheheh...if only my voice is not too petty.
Jack
it looks like there is less problem with many professional laypeople giving up their secular careers and taking up the pastoral role of a church without resorting to travel the theological education route first.
Mid-life entrants into Bible college are a valuable resource for the church and should be welcomed. With life expectancies of about 79 nowadays these people could possibly be in productive ministry for 30 to 40 years.
on giving what is 'due' to the full-time staff, that is the ideal. but as alex had mentioned, many churches and members still hold the idea that those called to full-time minsitry are to make the necessary 'sacrifices' in terms of pay, emoluments, etc.
i see the trend continuing for mid-life entrants into the pastoral ministry. this is good for the church as we attract people with secular experience (which can help to balance those younger ones who come in fresh from school).
stm has a policy not to accept people coming immediately from school. we expect a minimum of 2 years working experience, preferably secular.
the only problem with those coming in older is they don't serve long. most churches have a retirement age for pastors - like 65 years old. if one gives up his/her job at 50 and do a 3 years course in seminary, he/she starts at 54 and work for only the next 11 years. some churches like the trac methodist can still employ the pastor past mandatory retirement age on a contractual yearly basis.
Then we may get the "dropouts of the real world" in our seminaries and church ministry. Sorry for the harsh words...hehehe...but probably it's more of a sad fact.'
in response to steven's first comment, it is true that sometimes in the church or christian setting, we create a sub-culture of toleration and forgive/forget that actually weakens the christian's resolve when he/she faces the real world. in fact, it may be worthed finding how many of our present pastors (without long secular experience) can actually 'survive' in the secular world and how long they can survive. can they hold a secular job in the face of constant pressures and deadlines? of course, to a certain extent, i believe if they can survive in the pastoral ministry, they can survive anywhere!
as to the second comment, it is true that we do sometimes get 'dropouts' from the secular world coming into the full-time ministry and seminaries because they have nowhere to go or they can't get a job or they are out of a job or they think it is an easier job! again, i am generalizing as the percentage of such cases is low. there will always be one or two such cases but the seminaries and churches do interview and assess candidates carefully for the ministry. sometimes, some may slip through the screening but often we can detect them at the initial stage.