Abstract
In recent decades, theological schools have demonstrated increased interest in educational models that not only transmit knowledge and skill to students, but also prepare them to have the character and virtue dispositions needed to successfully navigate the moral challenges that await them in future ministry settings. This shift is reflected in the most recent 2020 accreditation standards of the Association of Theological Schools (ATS), which highlight the importance of “personal and spiritual formation” as a key facet to seminary programs. Research conducted by the ATS (2018) into how seminaries understood the terms “personal and spiritual formation” revealed that over 40% of seminaries do not have a formal or working institutional definition of personal and spiritual formation. While this finding may be understandable given the complexities of terms and definitions in light of diverse Christian spiritual traditions, it also highlights an area of crucial need given the centrality of spiritual formation to the mission of theological education. Accordingly, the aim of this present paper is to support work in this area and to stimulate a larger discussion into the topic of spiritual formation within the seminary context by articulating and putting forth four different institutional perspectives on the topic (from Fuller Theological Seminary, George Truett Theological Seminary, Talbot School of Theology, and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School).
Over the past century, seminaries and divinity schools have struggled with the tension between focusing on intellect and focusing on character and piety in the training of their students, with intellectualism taking precedence for a time (Cherry, 1995). Indeed, the traditional approach to theological education and ministry training had been designed to transmit considerable knowledge and skill (Sandage & Jensen, 2013), but had not necessarily prepared students to have the spiritual and character dispositions necessary to successfully navigate the moral challenges of their future ministry work. This tension appeared to take a turn, when Babin (1972) published a foundational study in the first special issue (of many to come) of Theological Education dedicated to the topic of spiritual development among seminary students. Their article opened with the following affirmation, “For a number of years the Executive Committee of the American Association of Theological Schools have shared with the staff the conviction that a priority issue of major dimensions is that of the spiritual development of persons preparing for ministry” (p. 1).
Indeed, over recent decades, interest and concern for the spiritual and character development of seminarians has grown markedly within theological institutions representing all three ecclesial families—Roman Catholic, Mainline, and Evangelical (Porter et al., 2019). Work related to the spiritual formation of students, which can be curricular or co-curricular in nature, has now been codified into current (and perhaps even more so, future) accreditation standards in graduate-level theological education programs (Reisz, 2003). Moreover, in recent years, empirical studies into the spiritual formation of both seminary students (e.g., Blea et al., 2021; Jankowski et al., 2021) as well as seminary faculty (Hydinger et al., 2022) have also proliferated. Despite these developments, however, no widely agreed upon models nor standards of best practice (or even common practice) exist to guide seminaries as they implement such formation-related training within their degree programs, or as they seek to assess the quality or effectiveness of such training. Relatedly, research conducted by the Association of Theological Schools (ATS; Deasy, 2018) into how seminaries understood the terms “personal and spiritual formation” revealed that over 40% of seminaries do not have a formal or working institutional definition of personal and spiritual formation. While this finding may be understandable given the complexities of terms and definitions in light of diverse Christian spiritual traditions, it also highlights an area of crucial need given the centrality of spiritual formation not only the mission of theological education, but also to the testimony of Christian faith (Porter & Wang, 2021).
The emergence of institutionally based biblically and theologically robust training models for seminarian character and spiritual development would represent a substantial step in the evolution of theological education. But before such a model can emerge, a fundamental and yet profound set of questions must first be asked. First, from an institutional perspective, how do seminaries understand and define spiritual formation? Furthermore, what are seminaries currently doing to intentionally support the character and spiritual formation of their students? And relatedly, how do seminaries understand how these efforts contribute to or cultivate the desired formation outcomes they wish to see realized in their students? Therefore, the aim of this present paper is to stimulate a larger discussion into the topic of spiritual formation within the seminary context by articulating and putting forth four different perspectives on the topic. Accordingly, we have assembled a group of scholars, practitioners, and administrators from four prominent North American seminaries (Fuller Theological Seminary, George W. Truett Seminary at Baylor University, Talbot School of Theology, and Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) who are intimately familiar with and/or help oversee many of the formation-related efforts in their respective institutions. Because none of the seminaries represented in this paper had articulated a formal institutional definition of spiritual formation at the time this article was written, we invited our co-authors to answer a series of foundational questions on student formation from the perspective of the institutions that they represent. We did so in the hope that the responses to these questions (outlined below) can in turn form a rich context out of which (future) formal institutional definitions can emerge and future inter-institutional dialogue be established. Accordingly, the research questions of this study consisted of the following:
What had been done in the past and what is currently being done in your seminary to support the formation of students’ character and spiritual life? What is your seminary's institutional theory of change as it applies to the spiritual formation of your students? That is, what is your seminary's understanding of the means by which character and the spiritual life is shaped among students while enrolled in seminary? And how does your seminary understand their role in facilitating or supporting this development? What are some of the potential outcomes (which may or may not be readily observable) that would be considered indications that formation (however it may be defined and understood) has indeed occurred?
Fuller Theological Seminary
The Problem
Graduate theological education is in a state of flux. Recent studies report a steady decline in yearly seminary enrollments. Not only is theological education shrinking as a market, the world for which it is training its students is rapidly changing. Due to the rapid increase in technological innovation, the world that graduates will face is being described in terms of supercomplexity.
In an effort to understand the experience of its graduates in light of declining enrollments and a supercomplex world, Fuller surveyed 294 recent alumni who graduated from all MA level programs in the schools of theology, intercultural studies, and psychology. Among other findings, graduates reported that their education had little to no impact on their engagement with spiritual practices or understanding of their vocational call. Fuller students also described their seminary experience in terms of disciplinary fragmentation; they were trained well in systematics, church history, pastoral ministry, and biblical studies but were not given the tools to integrate these disciplines into their everyday practice of Christian faith and ministry.
In response to these trends and reports, Fuller's faculty restructured the curriculum in the Master's programs in the schools of theology and intercultural studies. At the center of the curriculum restructure was the development of four new integrative studies (IS) courses, which are now required for all Master's-level degree students. Each of the IS courses encourages integration of the classic theological disciplines into a faithful life of practice.
A second response to the trends and reports was the creation of the Vocation Formation (VF) Division in March of 2014. The aim of this division is to “form global leaders for kingdom vocations” at both the curricular and co-curricular levels. The IS courses and VF Division are connected at the curricular level in that each IS course incorporates mentor-led VF groups, which provide a communal “laboratory” in which to practice these disciplines and to discuss strategies for integrating academic learning into ordinary life. In addition, the final assignment for each IS course requires students to articulate their emerging sense of vocation and develop a rule of life (ROL) that shapes and supports their vocation (described in more detail below).
Fuller Formation: Our Theory of Change
Fuller Theological Seminary's theory of change can be defined as vocational formation that leads to a sense of vocational coherence that builds the capacity for vocational agility.
In the IS courses, this formation involves the ongoing process of integrating academic learning with personal, spiritual, and global formation, using facilitated peer learning, adult-focused mentoring, and practice-based discipleship. An example from IS500: Practices of Vocational Formation, one of the required IS courses, will help unpack how all of these tools and processes come together. IS500 helps students reflect on their own assumed models of vocation by engaging the practices of listening, guidance, rhythms of work and rest, lament, and vocational discernment. For each of these practices, students will participate in the following activities: (1) identify their current understanding of the practice and the way(s) they embody it, (2) engage in academic learning about the practice through readings and lectures, (3) embody this practice in a discipline within their embedded communities, and (4) reflect in a mentor-led VF group on how their initial understanding and future embodiment of the practice might need to change based on the learning and experiences in the course. In addition, students in IS500 will personally engage in the discipline of Lectio Divina every day and write a vocational autobiography.
The praxis model of learning illustrated in IS500 helps students build the capacity to properly identify the personal and communal forces that have shaped their current formation and engage the necessary resources to embody new and faithful practices. By having students embody disciplines in their embedded communities, the course treats students not as brains on a stick but as liturgical animals that learn through their doing. The mentor-led VF groups help promote personal growth and formation in a relational context. It is here that students identify the areas of personal growth that are necessary to successfully integrate the practices of the course into a faithful life of discipleship. All of this learning and formation is ultimately put in the service of helping students develop a capacity to discern and live out their God-given calling. This developing sensitivity to God's voice and direction is not only in the context of their future vocation, but also in the very ordinary and everyday context in which students find themselves.
In each of the four IS courses, vocational coherence is measured and practiced by the Central Integration Question (CIQ) and the ROL tools. The CIQ asks, “At this point in your Christian journey, how do you envision your call to God's mission in the world?” After 10 weeks of embodying practices in their own contexts and reflecting on these practices with mentor led VF groups, students are asked to articulate a vision of their vocation that integrates what they have learned about God and themselves. As mentioned above, this vocation must take into account the student's own strengths and limitations as he or she relates to a community that seeks to participate in God's mission in the world. A student's sense of vocation must also display a coherence and sensitivity to his or her historical context (e.g., “At this point…”). Vocation is not a static concept but is dynamically evolving as the student continues the process of self-reflection in the midst of new and changing contexts.
Closely tied to the student's response to the CIQ is his or her ability to construct a ROL, which is a list of practices and disciplines that shape and support this vocation. A student must have coherence between a sense of vocation and the practices that constitute such a vocation. For example, if a student articulates a vocation of being a scholar and teacher but has no practices around reading, writing, or teaching, then the student's embodied practices are out of alignment with his or her vocation. Another example would be if a student understands God's mission in the world to be primarily about reconciliation, and yet his or her rule does not contain any reconciliation practices or disciplines, then these practices would again be seen to lack coherence with the understanding of God's work.
Outcomes
An important distinction in Fuller's theory of change is that the end goal of a Fuller student's formation is not tied to a particular denominational, theological, or socio-cultural tradition. Rather, the vocationally agile student or graduate is able to envision their commitments, calling from God, and Christian practices within their particular contexts—their neighborhoods, cultures, churches, and theological traditions. Our outcomes aim at forming students by helping them build a capacity to think about and enact their own practices within their own traditions.
According to the theory of change as outlined above, students who build a coherent vocational identity will display the agility to faithfully adapt their embodied vocational practices to respond to each new context. More concretely, Fuller is seeking to form and measure four specific outcomes that constitute (but are not the sum whole) of a vocationally agile graduate. These competencies include (1) utilizing theological reflection in their vocations, (2) actively accessing and participating in relationships of guidance that lead to new growth, (3) remaining malleable and resilient under new/stressful situations, and (4) managing themselves and their resources toward a goal.
The first desired outcome for students formed through Fuller's curricular efforts is that they would display an ongoing ability to reflect theologically on their vocational context. Utilizing the tools, reflections, and experiences gained in their IS courses, mentor-led groups, embodied practices, and co-curricular opportunities, students will reflect theologically on the narratives, traditions, scriptures, and resources that inform their decisions. At each new decision point, it is precisely this type of reflection that helps students to take faithful actions that are aligned with their God-given calling, enabling them to live out their next vocational steps in their current contexts.
The second desired outcome for a student who is formed through Fuller's vocational formation initiatives is a competence for life-long learning, demonstrated by actively accessing and participating in relationships of guidance (e.g., mentor, therapist, vocational coach, colleague, and church member). These relationships are characterized as those that lead to new growth and help the student find new resources to faithfully adapt the expression of their vocation to their current context. The practice of incorporating supportive relationships into a one's vocational sphere reflects Fuller's value that each student must own their needs as a developing leader, identifying those relationships around them that will help guide, nurture, inform, or deepen aspects of their vocation as they respond to the world around them.
The third desired outcome of Fuller's formation initiatives is that students would display a level of functioning that demonstrates a capacity to manage their perceived strengths, weaknesses, and abilities in such a way that they achieve their goals within their particular vocation. This level of integrated cognitive, emotional, and mental functioning involves utilizing mental control, self-regulation, problem solving, reasoning, decision-making, and strengths recognition to assist a person in meeting their desired outcomes within their particular vocational settings.
Finally, students who have participated in Fuller's formation process of change would hopefully demonstrate a capacity to remain malleable over time, recovering from the stresses and difficulties that are inevitable in their various spiritual leadership roles. As mentioned before, Fuller's graduates are entering a complex, changing, demanding world and must develop a capacity to withstand stresses as they continue to function as leaders. The hope is that these resilient leaders will have the capacity to more readily participate and be sustained through the deep-level changes needed to adapt to the future challenges.
George W. Truett Theological Seminary, Baylor University
George W. Truett Theological Seminary at Baylor University opened its doors to welcome the inaugural class of 51 students in 1994. The seminary was founded upon historic Baptist principles with a mission “to educate men and women for worldwide leadership and service by integrating academic excellence and Christian commitment within a caring community.” 1 From the very beginning, spiritual formation was identified as one of the core pillars upon which the seminary program was built. The term “spiritual formation” was relatively uncommon in the contexts of Texas Baptist Churches, but the founding faculty of the seminary chose to draw upon this language to emphasize the centrality of spiritual growth and maturity in a minister's life. They believed in the necessity of personal and communal spiritual practices to nurture intimacy with God and develop Christ-like character.
Seminary faculty and staff understood that students are formed spiritually through several avenues within and beyond seminary life. Students were expected to be involved in activities central to historic Baptist spirituality. They were encouraged to engage in the life of a local church by participating in corporate worship, fellowship, and service. They were expected to practice their own personal spiritual disciplines, including prayer and meditation on scripture. Students were also encouraged to engage in mission and service in their communities on a regular basis (Hinson, 2011). While congregations and communities were understood to be essential contexts for ongoing spiritual formation, Truett faculty recognized that seminaries have a role in teaching about the nature and process of spiritual formation and creating opportunities for ongoing formation within the curricular and co-curricular components of the program. Truett sought to guard against the notion that students need only prepare academically and intellectually to be fit for ministry. Instead, the faculty focused on the formation of the whole person, the intellectual, emotional, relational, and spiritual self.
In order to develop an educational program that attends to formational activities within and outside of the educational context, the seminary hired Dr. Betty Talbert to serve as the first Director of Spiritual Formation in 1996. Dr. Talbert developed a spiritual formation program by drawing upon historical Christian resources. Baptist emphases on prayer, scripture, and service were augmented by Wesleyan models of small group accountability, ancient Christian practices of spiritual direction and discernment, and various forms of contemplative prayer to create a program designed to serve all students and faculty. In the early years, the faculty led small groups of students in weekly gatherings called “covenant groups” for corporate spiritual practice and reflection. In later years, faculty formed their own groups and students met in groups with assigned mentors. Participation in a covenant group was a co-curricular requirement for every student over six semesters. Handbooks were created for each semester exploring various topics designed to support growth in self-discovery and to shape individuals in the relational skills, character, and spiritual resources necessary for ministry leadership. The Director of Spiritual Formation met individually with students every semester to discuss personal spiritual development and progress through a “ROL,” incorporating various inward and outward spiritual practices. In addition to the covenant group requirement, elective courses in Christian spirituality and faith development and other co-curricular components including corporate worship and life-long learning events became standard program elements.
Understanding of Spiritual Formation
Truett Seminary has grown considerably in the number and diversity of students and faculty since the 1990s, and current faculty have been tasked over the last few years with giving careful thought to theology and practice related to the spiritual development and character formation of students. In Truett's formational program, spiritual formation is understood to be a journey that occurs over time in every human life. In the words of Dallas Willard, “spiritual formation, without regard to any specific religious context or tradition, is the process by which the human spirit or will is given a definite “form” or character” (Willard, 2002). Christian spiritual formation, then, is a Spirit-initiated process that forms “the inner world of the human self in such a way that it becomes like the inner being of Christ himself.” Change toward the image of Christ within becomes possible as individuals grow increasingly sensitive to God's presence and activity in their lives, opening up to the power and guidance of the Spirit in order to love God and others as they love themselves.
Spiritual practices are integral to ongoing formation, serving as “patterns of communal and individual action that open people's lives to God's forming and transforming presence through Word and Spirit” (Reed et al., 2015). Within the context of seminary programs, students may be formed spiritually alone and together as they study, converse, pray, worship, and serve. Truett faculty members developed a statement describing a “vision for life together” to express a practical theology of spiritual formation in community. The statement explores practices such as confessing sin; engaging in worship, prayer, and devotion; demonstrating care and gentleness toward one another; offering encouragement and correction; and living in faithful discipleship as students and teachers of the Word so that the fruit of the Spirit might become increasingly evident in the lives of students and faculty.
Curriculum and Assessment
This noble vision must be worked out functionally in practice. The vision is accompanied by a set of goals for the flagship Master's degree programs that articulate what faculty hope students will be, know, and do by the time they graduate. Faculty anticipate that students will be persons with a deepening commitment to the life of the church, persons being formed as followers of Christ, persons committed to integrating Christian practices into daily life, and persons of high ethical standards in relationship to family, congregation, community, self, and all creation. Not only will they be on an intentional journey toward spiritual maturation for themselves, they will be equipped to lead others in their own calls to spiritual formation and discipleship. 2
These goals have become the building blocks for curricular and co-curricular course work. More than two decades after Truett Seminary opened its doors, students and faculty continue to participate weekly in peer covenant groups for spiritual growth and accountability. Students seeking a Master's degree participate in groups that follow a designated curriculum for four to six semesters, depending on their program. Local ministers or advanced seminary students lead the first four semesters. Fifth and sixth semester students are invited to strengthen their leadership skills by taking responsibility for shared group direction. The general curriculum of these programs includes various spiritual disciplines and forms of prayer, spiritual discernment, personal covenants (ROL), Christian service, and other topics and disciplines. In addition, the Director of Spiritual Formation makes one-with-one spiritual direction available to students.
Progress in personal spiritual formation is evaluated via direct assessment measures. Students are required to attend covenant group meetings faithfully, complete weekly readings, and submit assignments that involves self-assessment on spiritual development, reflection on formation through the group experience, and discussion of the readings. Faculty and staff in the Spiritual Formation Office continually evaluate and revise programming in response to these assignments and the observations of group leaders. By studying individual student assignments over the course of six semesters, it has been possible to begin making observations about the development of a student's self-awareness and understanding of spiritual formation over time. Some of the most significant observations about changes in students’ spiritual lives over time include (1) significant growth in the variety of spiritual practices used in everyday life, (2) greater appreciation and use of mentors and peers in personal spiritual development, (3) increased integration of theological convictions and personal prayer life, and (4) increased commitment to the intentional practice of spiritual disciplines for ongoing health and well-being. Students reflect on these kinds of changes in and through the covenant group process, but many other dimensions of seminary programming may be contributing factors for growth over time.
Beyond the six-semester covenant group sequence, Truett Seminary addresses formational goals through other required courses, including Introduction to Pastoral Care, Integrative Seminar: Faith and Practice, Leadership for Ministry, and the Mentoring experience (Field Education). Several elective courses in the Spiritual Formation and Discipleship concentration, such as Traditions of Christian Spirituality and Prayer, Formation for Congregations and their Leaders, and Spiritual Guidance and Soul Care, provide additional opportunities for students to gain knowledge about spiritual development, assess their own growth, and develop skills for tending to the spiritual lives of others.
Seminary Life
There are many dimensions of seminary life that have the potential to meet goals for the spiritual formation of students, though they are more difficult to analyze and quantify. These aspects of community life are best assessed through indirect measure via instruments such as the Graduating Student Questionnaire and other reporting processes. What we discover through institutional assessment is that faculty and peer relationships are fundamental to student experiences of personal formation. Most faculty members have ministry experience, and all are committed to mentoring students. Faculty offices are located next to classrooms, and students regularly seek out faculty for guidance in vocational discernment and issues of personal and spiritual development. Faculty, students, and staff gather for corporate worship and eat meals together regularly. Each student has a faculty mentor who serves as an academic advisor. Graduating students regularly name faculty relationships as one of the most formative dimensions of their seminary experience.
The importance of relationships extends to peer interactions. Student relationships developed in covenant groups and beyond are also regularly mentioned as essential dimensions of ongoing personal formation. Many students develop rich peer relationships that provide the mutual encouragement, care, and even correction that students desire. Some of these relationship remain strong long after graduation. The seminary's commitment to fostering peer relationships extends to faculty and staff who regularly participate in their own peer covenant groups for prayer, scripture meditation, and fellowship.
Identifying Challenges
Understanding how Christian spirituality and character is shaped among seminary students is not without significant challenges. At this point in time, many of the evaluative processes for spiritual maturation among Truett Seminary students lack precision. Assignments involving self-analysis arising from covenant groups led by many different leaders do not always provide consistent results that can be easily measured and evaluated. The seminary also struggles to understand the impact of spiritual formation in other dimensions of the seminary program. There is a tendency for curricular emphases to be separated from one another so that courses in theology or scripture may not include measurable assignments attending specifically to spiritual formation. Finally, the nature of spiritual development and character formation in itself causes some to be uneasy about the ability to honestly and accurately assess spiritual formation, including one's personal relationship with God. In the midst of these concerns, Truett Seminary seeks to continue strengthening spiritual formation programs and opportunities for the long-term growth of its students while in seminary and beyond.
Talbot School of Theology, Biola University
History and Structure
Prior to 1994, Talbot School of Theology did not have any explicit efforts to foster spiritual formation amongst its student body besides the curriculum, weekly chapel, and informal opportunities to interact on spiritual matters with faculty and fellow students. Noting an increasing need for spiritual maturity, the Intentional Character Development (ICD) Program was developed in 1994 to help deepen students’ spiritual awareness of God and to support growth in moral character. The hope was to equip students to know themselves more honestly before God and others, to cultivate intimacy with God, and to grow in obedience to Jesus Christ. ICD included two required courses, weekly participation in faculty led small groups, attending a faculty–student retreat, and additional experiential requirements. Financial support in 1999 allowed Talbot theologians to explicate the theological foundation for ICD, and all courses were required to include spiritual formation assignment(s). In 2002, Talbot launched the Institute for Spiritual Formation (ISF), offering Master’s-level education in spiritual formation and training in spiritual direction. The establishment of ISF provided specialized training for interested students and helped deepen Talbot's overall understanding of and commitment to spiritual formation.
As funding changed, the ICD program was re-envisioned and reconfigured as the Spiritual Formation Focus (SFF). The formation of ISF and SFF allowed for a more robust theoretical and experiential understanding of the process of spiritual transformation during seminary training and what it means to do seminary training “in the Spirit,” including a deeper understanding of the transformative potential of coursework and classroom experiences. Presently, the mission of Talbot is to remain committed to “the development of disciples of Jesus Christ, whose thought processes, character, and lifestyles reflect those of [the] Lord, and who are dedicated to disciple-making throughout the world.” The role of the SFF coursework is to prepare ministry leaders to live intentional, godly lives, including understanding of and preparation for challenges in relationships, emotional development, spiritual maturity, and character.
A series of three courses and two semesters of spiritual direction were developed to help accomplish these goals. The Introduction to Spiritual Theology and Formation course includes an introductory study of the nature of one's “new life in Christ” and the process of formation “in the Spirit.” Curriculum helps students participate in (1) putting off the old self and the former manner of life through dealing with their own sin nature (Eph 4:22) and (2) putting on the new self and the virtues of God through participation in the transformative work of the Holy Spirit (Eph 4:23–24) in light of Christ's work on the cross. Students also learn practical directives for growth and how their overall development impacts the local and global church. The second Personal Foundations for Spiritual Formation course involves a theoretical and experiential exploration of human relationships. This includes a personal understanding of one's healthy and unhealthy development in the areas of romantic relationships, gender, marriage, family, and parenting; these relational capacities are understood to be at the heart of Christ-like transformation and to bear significant impact to the present and future Church.
In the third Spiritual Formation, Vocation, and Disciplines class, students explore the notion of vocation or the “callings” of God. This begins with the general, foundational calls of the Church to love God and neighbor and to train in righteousness and conformity to Christ's image, and it also includes more specific calls on a student's life. Each course includes reading, prayer projects, experiential activities that facilitate self-knowledge, spiritual disciplines, and a weekend retreat. Throughout the SFF courses, students are members of small, intentionally diverse cohorts (12 to 15 students) led mostly by adjunct faculty members trained in spiritual direction at ISF. This provides the opportunity to further facilitate and personalize the theoretical and experiential knowledge in relationship with the triune God and one another. Last, students are required to participate in two semesters of individual spiritual direction (8 to 12 sessions in total), conducted by trained spiritual directors. This provides students with further opportunities to explore their life of prayer and growth, hopefully facilitating their lived experience of intentionally walking with God.
Theory of Change
Talbot's SFF program is guided by a robust scriptural and theological understanding of spiritual formation. Christian spiritual formation is understood as the restoration of the person from the effects of sin and renewal into the image of God (Eph 4:24; Col 3:10). Spiritual formation is growth and development of the person into the likeness of the humanity of Christ—the true human in attitude, character, and action. Thus, Christian spiritual formation is understood as the development of the person into full humanity—in all of her or his personal uniqueness as intended by God. The epicenter of this growth is one's changing love: a change from a natural state of self-centered love to that of true, God-centered love, where one loves God and loves what God loves.
The process of spiritual formation is understood to occur at the individual, intra-psychic dimension—it is personal. Change is also ultimately realized interpersonally and communally in one's relationship with God and the Church—it is social. Change at the personal level happens in one's relationship (union) with God, through the mediatorial work of Christ. Change is applied by the indwelling Spirit of God, who dwells in the heart and works in the psychological dynamics of the heart. Spiritual growth is mediated through direct fellowship with God and in relationship to Christ, the head (Col 1:19). Spiritual growth is also mediated through fellowship with other believers. Members are joined together as the body of Christ, and the nourishing grace that comes from the head (Christ) is conveyed between members (Col 2:19; Eph 4:16).
Christian spiritual formation is understood to be a “working out” of all that a person is, through the psychological and characterological dynamics of the heart. A person gains new prevailing dispositions that were already given “in Christ,” yet not fully realized. While transformation rests on the all-powerful agency of God and his grace, the agency of the person is also involved in receiving the work of God through the Spirit. Growth flows out of one's relationship with and dependence on God. Growth is not focusing on a particular problem and seeking a solution in the power and dependence on oneself, or in the “flesh.” Growth occurs first and foremost in attending to one's relationship to God, learning to abide in his presence, gazing at him and responding in worship, and patiently waiting for his promptings.
The means of Christian formation includes God's conveyance of truth, or his Word. The Word of God becomes a dynamic, transformational instrument as the Spirit of God teaches and applies divine truth to the human heart (cf. Jer 31:33–34; Is. 54:13, 1 Cor. 2:9–13). Scripture provides further guidance about other avenues through which God communicates his revealed truth (ex. general revelation) and how these avenues are utilized to transform the believer through the work of the indwelling Spirit. For example, scripture clarifies that one avenue of growth is suffering. Enemies of growth—the world, our own flesh, and the demonic realm—can generate suffering (Rom. 8:17, 23; Phil. 1:29; 3:10; 1 Pet. 1:6; 5:10; 2 Tim. 3:12). Suffering also arises due to the disciplining and chastening of the loving Father, who uses suffering to produce righteousness (Heb 12:4–11).
Seminary training at Talbot provides one context for spiritual growth to occur. The SFF program aims to provide students with a multifaceted experiential education. Coursework explicates a theology and theory of spiritual and character formation. Education is not reduced to acquisition and recitation of knowledge with promotion of character growth from the sidelines, lest the student choose to engage in this way. Students are invited (and held accountable to some degree) to engage in the real work of God, through Christ and the Spirit, in their own life. Explicit knowledge is transferred through coursework, professors, peers, spiritual directors, and God. Students are invited to walk more honestly and vulnerably with self, God, and other as they interact with truth and people. Space is provided for support, connection, and grace to ripple down to all the members of the Body through individual and group experiences.
Growth Outcomes
One explicit learning outcome is that students would be able to describe and explain (1) basic knowledge of spiritual theology, (2) their experience and understanding of the double knowledge of God and oneself, and (3) how these impact personal vocation and ministries in the local church. A number of other potential “growth outcomes,” seen or unseen, are understood to potentially exist. The following are a non-exhaustive repertoire of potential changes one may see in a Talbot seminary student. One change may be increased dependency on God, including a student's sense of needing God, relinquishing control in various areas of life (including their own spiritual formation), more passivity as opposed to fortitude, and gratitude. Dependency on God may be articulated by a statement such as, “I have a growing sense of my need for God.” Another outcome may be increased receptivity to God, such as a student's “openness,” embodied practices of reliance on the Spirit and Word, and humility toward God; a student may say, “I increasingly make efforts to maintain communion with God throughout my day.” Students may also have less resistance to God, being more willing or able to confess their self-reliance, having more self-knowledge, and exercising honesty before God: saying, “I am coming to realize more fully the ways in which I seek to find life apart from God.”
Related to one's dependence, receptivity, or resistance to God, a Talbot student may grow in self-knowledge, including having a deeper understanding of the content and meaning of their life experiences and person. They may engage in honest confession, more accurately assess themselves, and exercise compassion toward themselves: saying, “I am becoming more accepting of who I really am.” Given students exposure to new information and ideas, they may experience spiritual disorientation, defined by willingness to question and rethink previously held beliefs and the possible deconstruction of false or distorted spirituality: saying, “I am rethinking who I understand God to be.” The rich opportunity at Talbot for connection with peers, faculty, and spiritual directors may help cultivate a student's participation in community. This involves interdependence and connectedness in supportive relationships, having spiritual friends or companions, and exercising forgiveness: saying, “I am coming to realize how much I need relational support and encouragement in my spiritual life.”
Related to the content of course material, students may grow in spiritual understanding, a deepened understanding of the nature and process of spiritual formation: saying, “I am coming to have a clearer understanding of how God transforms human lives.” Given Talbot's emphasis on vocation and calling, students may grow in their vocational readiness, including discerning their own calling, identifying their own gifts/skills and weaknesses, and growing in self-confidence: saying “I am coming to have a clearer understanding of my calling to ministry.” Lastly, a student may grow in their compassion toward others, exercised through social justice, sacrificial service, generativity, and appreciation and love of alterity/diversity in the body of Christ: saying, “I am increasingly willing to sacrifice my own good for the needs of others.”
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
The Story of TEDS and Promotion of Spiritual Maturation
The humble beginnings of TEDS go back to before the turn into the twentieth century (1897). The Swedish Evangelical Free Church began to offer 10-week Bible training courses in a church basement in downtown Chicago. 3 A parallel movement in theological higher education was found within the Norwegian–Danish Department of Chicago Theological Seminary, which began in 1884 and became independent in 1910. These two schools merged in the late 1940s. Then, in 1963, the seminary took on the title of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. Its key affiliation with the Evangelical Free Church of America (EFCA) continues to this day. The first TEDS graduates with the Master of Divinity degree stepped across the platform in 1969.
Though much has changed since its founding in 1897 and re-visioning in 1963, one core premise has not. Trinity Evangelical Divinity School strives before the Lord to offer a transformative, gospel-centered education that prepares men and women to engage in God's redemptive work in a variety of global vocations and contexts. The logo for the university and the Divinity School cites the key phrase from I Thessalonians 2:4, “entrusted with the gospel.” This motto is the ideal starting point to convey the story of TEDS. The faculty, alumni, and constituency sincerely operate from the stance that TEDS is indeed “entrusted with the gospel.” Consider this purpose statement within these lines that Paul wrote and the centrality of the Gospel as the starting point for both education, vocation, and character formation. On the contrary, we speak as those approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel. We are not trying to please people but God, who tests our hearts. You know we never used flattery, nor did we put on a mask to cover up greed—God is our witness. We were not looking for praise from people, not from you or anyone else, even though as apostles of Christ we could have asserted our authority. Instead, we were like young children among you. (1 Thess 2:4–7; Today's New International Version)
Our institutional slogan, drawn from our comprehensive institutional strategic plan, is Heritage and Hope. TEDS has a rich ministry heritage and it is celebrated regularly. This builds identification and unity of purpose. Our evangelical tradition and pietistic beginnings brings an awareness that we are a Word-centered institution that recognizes that nothing can substitute for the essential turn of the individual (repentance) to love the Lord with one's whole heart, soul, and mind (conversion). It is said that what the TEDS faculty and community have in common is the desire to hear God's Word in Scripture. 4 This is the essential spiritual formation philosophy in our divinity school. The community enables its members to hear God speak and act on the global scene, to local ministries, Christian leaders, and individual disciples.
An education at TEDS is also very much about becoming a servant of the Lord, who is earnestly and humbly committed to live as a ministry leader entrusted with the Gospel. The link between the good news of the kingdom of God and Scripture as the inerrant Word of God is inseparable. Accordingly, being faithful to this sacred trust means being fluent with and in the Word of God.
Theory of Change
A Doing Ethic
The early years at TEDS embodied “a doing ethic.” That is, evangelism, social justice advocacy, and social service were part of the education and spontaneous spiritual formation. Apparently, not all the dramatic action in Chicago during the 1960s was restricted to noteworthy political conventions. There were occasional demonstrations around campus and Chicago where seminarians, both faculty and students, were active participants. There were field trips to local ministries, mission fields, college campuses, and other venues to conduct confrontational evangelism or offer apologetic presentations. Thus, the academic environment was characterized by doing actual ministry. Formation was not reflective introspection, but behavioral imitation of active Christian ministry.
Scholarship for Service of the Church
This interviewer was surprised to receive a “homework” assignment in the midst of his interview on the theory of change of TEDS with Dr. John Woodbridge, Research Professor of Church History and the History of Christian Thought. Dr. Woodbridge referred this writer to watch the four-part Know Your Roots lectures (1991) by Carl C. F. Henry and Kenneth Kantzer 5 (Both Henry and Kantzer took turns at being editors at Christianity Today). Thus, they were in the habit of doing expert analysis on the state of Christianity. These talks were delivered 25 years ago to a full house in the TEDS chapel. The lectures and interviews portray the accomplishments and challenges of the evangelical movement over the preceding decades. It was evident that TEDS and its faculty were in the crossroads of the major shift away from a separatist and anti-intellectual fundamentalism to a scholarly evangelicalism. This divinity school was willing to engage culture without diminishing a high-view of inerrant Scripture. The point Dr. Woodbridge made was that such scholarship was conducted for benefit of the church and to continue the legacy of being entrusted with the gospel. Therefore, spiritual formation merged with scholarly activity because the motivation for such effort was service of our Lord Jesus Christ and his bride, the church. Scholarship was never to be done for the sake of scholarship itself or the scholar, but rather for advancement of the Gospel. TEDS was a seminary where evangelicals were encouraged to think and to do so with intensity and integrity while the heart remained submitted to the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Dr. Woodbridge did acknowledge that the influence of Kenneth Kanzter on TEDS’ methods of spiritual formation was seminal. The Evangelical Free Church grew out of Swedish and Norwegian pietism. This is a “priesthood of all believers” faith–tradition. Spiritual development is never mediated; thus, mentoring and guidance take second place to direct encounters with the Holy Spirit. Christian spirituality is experienced through personal prayer, devotions, and sitting under the preaching of the Word of God. Dr. Kantzer, as a graduate of Harvard Divinity School, maintained his own evangelical faith under the heavy influence of liberalism that sought to erode confidence in the reliability of Scripture and Christian tradition. Seminary education was a crucible for faith by design. Accordingly, the key to spiritual formation was to uphold one's private devotions and local church involvement. TEDS encouraged its students to remain invested in a local church for the development of their faith as the seminary facilitates the intellectual skills necessary to be a Christian scholar.
Seminaries Train; Churches Ordain
Dr. Scharf, Professor of Homiletics and Chair of the Pastoral Theology Department, was also interviewed for feedback on TEDS’ theory of change. He completed both his MDiv and DMin at TEDS. He also serves the Evangelical Free Church as a member of the Board of Ministerial Standing that is charged with assessing candidates’ fitness for ordained ministry. He is acutely aware that the following historical view amongst faculty was deeply entrenched. The cultivation of the seminary student's spiritual life and maturity was outsourced to the local church. This is fitting because it will be the congregation of a local church who must recognize calling, gifting, and anointing. Through local congregations, districts, and national boards, the church is the authority that grants ordination; the seminary is its educational agent commissioned to provide advanced biblical, linguistic, historical, theological, and leadership training. Thus, church involvement, through participation and service, was mandated in the curriculum. Field education units for activity in a local ministry were formally tied to graduation as required co-curricular activities.
Faculty Spiritual Formation Groups
Over the past decade, the faculty view on the necessity to engage students in straightforward discipleship has shifted. Faculty now offer formation groups each semester, and students commit themselves to participate for a full semester at a time. Two semesters of a spiritual formation group experience are required, and this engagement is recorded on one's academic transcript (pass/fail). The activities in these faculty-directed cohorts may vary, yet the common elements of Bible study, fellowship, mutual confession, prayer, and support are evident. Dr. Scharf comments that it is in these groups that faculty model for students what a pastor/leader does for his flock. Nevertheless, this is not a repeat of an ordinary church Bible study. The intent is to examine one's extraordinary call to ministry as well as habits of the heart. Faculty provide direct feedback on personal qualities and build readiness for ministry. Fellowship around the table, meal-sharing, is a distinctive of the faculty formation groups at TEDS.
Word-Saturated Sanctification
The conversation with Dr. Scharf considered advantages and obstacles in the formation group co-curricular strategy. There are many pressures on students during seminary (i.e., family, financial, ministry, and coursework). Thirty weeks of group with a faculty mentor may not be an adequate investment. Fortunately, the effort of stimulating spiritual formation permeates all coursework. Lectures can turn into a mild or forceful exhortation. Spiritual reflections or service assignments can serve as part of the course experience. Chapel, which is voluntary, is an opportunity for TEDS community preachers (faculty, administrators, students, and ministry leaders) to mutually speak into one another's spiritual lives. It is the robust evangelical conviction that the Word of God changes hearts that underlies all of our formation efforts. The Word of God is opened and explored in all courses and community activities. Seminarians, faculty, and staff alike are saturated with the Gospel and brought into routine conversation with our Lord. In sum, the underlying TEDS conviction is that contact with the Word of God is our powerful resource for spiritual formation.
TEDS Curricular Objectives for Character and Spiritual Formation
The MDiv has established program outcomes to assist in ongoing evaluation, which have been in use for nearly a decade and will remain in use as the new curriculum is launched. One set of outcomes within this list is titled, Growing in Christian Maturity and Faithfulness, and these aim directly at spiritual formation:
A growing understanding of one's own creatureliness, depravity, and Christian identity in the light of God's grace A growing dependence upon God's grace through the regular practice of “means of grace” both privately and in Christian community A life that demonstrates commitment to being a disciple of Christ and growing in obedience to his commands A growing dependence on and submission to the Holy Spirit as is evidenced by fruit of the Spirit in the context of relationships
Each outcome statement is evaluated through specific course assignments that are gathered together in unique student portfolios. These outcomes are tracked throughout progression through the curriculum via portfolio software (Taskstream). Advisers and department faculty have access to this data when conducting candidacy interviews. This allows objective data to be combined with subjective faculty ratings when making candidacy decisions. Ministry evaluation forms completed by field mentors and internship directors are also available for review. These reflective surveys do highlight spiritual gifting, ministry skill, interpersonal adaptability, and demonstration of character traits associated with the fruit of the spirit. At this point, no self-report or mentor ratings on relational spirituality or spiritual maturity is in use.
There is a course within the MDiv curriculum where students participate in an extensive battery of established assessment instruments so that they can devise a personal development plan (PT 5000 Personal Assessment for Ministry). The assignments in the course require students to explore temperament, emotional intelligence, talents, cultural awareness, personal strengths, spiritual gifts, and use of Christian disciplines. One assignment requires that MDiv students consult with a mental health counselor and discuss the results of a PsychEval Personality Questionnaire. This measure combines a profile of normal personality based upon 16 primary personality factors and a pathology screening using 12 scales covering common mental health concerns. Assessment results are provided directly to the student along with common sense recommendations for remediation, self-improvement, marriage enrichment, and ministry effectiveness. Academic advisors are informed if follow-up recommendations were voluntary or mandated. Specific findings are not shared with faculty or placed in academic records.
Conclusion
In presenting these four institutional perspectives on the spiritual formation of seminary students, our intent was not to offer these perspectives as prescriptive, or necessarily even to put them forth under the assumption that they are exemplary. Rather, we hope that the juxtaposition of these perspectives will provide a rich context for insight and reflection, as the reader relates the views written here with those of their own, or with those of the institutions they are familiar with. Even though all four seminaries are broadly evangelical in tradition and offer degree programs that have been historically (for the most part) residential in nature, there are significant areas of not only commonality and shared vision, but also of distinction and non-overlap. For example, though the four institutions each held different convictions concerning the role and responsibility of the seminary to form the spiritual life of their students and used different terms to describe their unique areas of focus in their formative work with students, each of the seminaries implemented some form of small group context in which students can practice and integrate their learning into ordinary life. For example, Fuller Seminary students took part in VF groups, while Truett students joined a covenant group as a co-curricular requirement of their program. Talbot students, in their SFF course sequence, met together in groups of 12–15 students under the supervision of a trained spiritual director. Similarly, TEDS students are also required to participate in formation groups (led by core faculty) for at least two semesters.
As an exploratory/introductory study, we hope that future scholarship may explore areas left underdeveloped or untouched by this paper. For example, future research should also incorporate voices and perspectives from other ecclesial families into this discussion, such as those from Roman Catholic and Mainline Protestant seminaries. We also hope for future work to explore models and perspectives on student formation across different delivery formats, such as residential, hybrid, and online. Moreover, the question of assessment and evaluation in the area of student formation deserves further development as well. For example, how do institutions evaluate their personal/spiritual formation priorities and initiatives on an individual level and on a cohort or school level? Ultimately, our wish in starting this conversation is for greater dialogue and cross-pollination of ideas to be stimulated between seminaries and denominations so that we can all learn from each other as we together seek to shape and impact future generations of religious leaders of sound moral and spiritual quality.
