I was admitted to the graduate program at my seminary before concluding the MDiv: but, my wife and I both realized that marriage and parenting called us with a greater strength than pursuing the PhD at that season of life. And, I have enjoyed more than 15 years of ministry.

Now that we’re an empty nest, I am making the long, arcing return toward graduate studies in theology.

I mention this background, as I have received plenty of affirmation about returning for the PhD, yet most people have remained silent or have not initiated with me regarding what I perceive to follow completion of the PhD. I don’t expect that I’ll end up in the academy: but, I am keeping myself open to that surprise. I do understand, however, that the kind of writing expected has a much smaller cultural orbit, and extends itself to those within the academy.

Having said this, I noticed- as have many other commentators- that there is strange slogan getting bandied about, and this about your topic: “theology done in service of the church.” This slogan, with many variations, deserves some careful parsing when used by faculty or in promotional material of various media from graduate departments in theology.

Perhaps- and if I understand your post- this slogan really aims itself toward the educating of clergy, or at least the weight of such a slogan bends in that direction. But, rarely does it translate toward the building up of the saints: in that case, such writing always gets mediated through the clergy. And often, that is a very good thing. But, bulk of such a writing orientation targets pastors, seminarians, and other theological educators.

I want to include myself among those who need to learn to write for the folks in the pew, who serve and worship, and in general, remain committed to Christ through the local church and its mission. Such learning will require some genuine humility, and trial and error. I suppose I would add, that some different models of education for the laity, as opposed to the pastor as talking head, might also contribute toward the theological education of those in the pew and in the mission.

Which church?

There are hundreds (even thousands) of Christian sects, and over 2 billion individual Christians on the planet.

Many of these sects violently disagree with the doctrines and beliefs of other sects. And contradict each other too.

Does a peasant Coptic Christian in Ethiopia have any points of similarity with what you promote, or how you live?

Besides which the “church” is an abstract entity–and you cant write to, or communicate with an abstract entity. But ONLY with individual Christians one at a time, who then may or may not change their actions on the basis of what they have understood.

Plus it takes much much more than mere left-brained “theology” to cause people to change at the feeling-heart.

The world is quite literally groaning under the weight of all of the theology that now exists. More people are doing/writing theology than ever before. And reading and studying it too.

Christian propaganda, both printed and via electronic media, is flooding the planet.

And yet the world altogether IS becoming more insane every day.

And hasn’t the overemphasis of the “rational” and “mind” led to the separation of head from heart, theory from practice, and science from wisdom that makes the study of theology seem to so many in the church only a dead science or quaint hobby? Shouldn’t our approach in theological education be to bring together head and heart, theory and practice, science and wisdom?

I think that if you go with your rational side – “come, let us reason together”; the “mind” of Christ – you’ll also do well enough as a scholar, if you chose.