Yesterday saw the shock announcement that Spurgeon’s College is closing. I say that it was a shock because it seemed to come out of nowhere. However, those who have been following the situation with theological education maybe won’t be so surprised that some places are closing. There have been issues with student numbers and finance across the board for some time. However, I also suspect that Spurgeons, along with TEDs in the States will have been considered too big and too famous to fail. There are some lessons there.
Before we are lost in grief at the loss of the name and the heritage, it is worth remembering that this place is not the same as it was when Spurgeon founded it. Here’s a worrying and telling quote from a former Evangelicals Now journalist studying there.
“”Spurgeon’s was a great place to study, with a pleasant atmosphere and a high standard of academic theology – even if sometimes it was somewhat liberal for my taste. Also, students always knew they were loved and well cared for by the staff at every level.”
All of the statements there become meaningless in the light of the words “it was somewhat liberal.”. What exactly he found “liberal”, he does not elaborate on. However, my concern here is twofold. First, just that kind of statement leaves questions about how we are prioritizing things. Should the degree of liberalness of a place intended to prepare people for pastoral ministry be a matter of personal taste, somewhere in the mix with other things.
Of course, what counts as “liberal” to some may not to others. This though links back to my main point here. I think that if you were to look under the bonnet of a lot of theological education then there would be a gap between the expectations of a lot of (especially conservative) Evangelicals and of evangelical academia. Perhaps sometimes that academics might be seen to have a point. However, I can think of a few places where I have heard Evangelical academics tack to a position that I’m convinced they didn’t need to. There is room for bigger conversation there.
My point though is that we should pause before grieving on the basis of a romantic notion of what the early history and the famous name represents and what the current reality is.
At the same time, the impact on students mid course having to find somewhere else to continue their studies and staff with resulting job losses ,(not just tutors but support staff too who may well be hit harder in some respects) is cause.for sadness.
That these places are closing may at the same time be a wake up call for the need for change. Is it really sustainable to have multiple colleges competing in effect for market share, especially when many are looking at alternative forms of study. Back about ten years ago when I was attempting to get theological colleges interested in doing something about urban context training I talked wishfully about them working together. It seemed like I was speaking a foreign language.
Yet surely, the way forward is to bring together a faculty of gifted theologians and experienced pastors to provide an option for residential training for those it will benefit whilst supporting those seeking to train and be trained in context via learning communities.
However, mergers alone will not be the full solution. Primarily the reason that Spurgeon’s College closed was that it was dependent on a single financial backer. I suspect that a number of institutions are not viable based on fees alone. Union has, for example, been heavily supported by a large Korean church. Other colleges may well have a few financial backers. The plug could easily be pulled in those cases. Not only that but financial backers can also influence direction, theology, culture etc. for good or ill. So we also need to look seriously at how theological education is funded.
Faithroots 