Collaboration: Accelerating Formal & Non-formal Pastor Training

Collaboration: Accelerating Formal & Non-formal Pastor Training Presentation at the Evangelical Missiological Society SE Region, March 25, 2023 Birmingham, AL Joseph W. Handley, Jr. President, A3 Introduction As we, the Evangelical Mission Society (EMS), engage the conversation about Educating for Contemporary Mission, an ongoing conversation is occurring within the formal and non-formal training world for pastoral (and missional) development that is parallel and should or could be instructive for our journey together. Our endeavor is important as set out to learn from one another: The intersection of education and mission produces a maze of models and practices. From the many pastors’ conferences conducted each year around the globe, to short-term discipleship and leadership development processes utilized by missions sending agencies, to legacy institutions grappling with curricula, the maze grows deeper and more complex. Add into this mix, advances in globalization, urbanization, and technologically-driven educational platforms expedited by the global pandemic, and the maze goes virtual as well. With these models and opinions, key questions come to the forefront. Among these questions are, What are the missiologically responsible, theologically sound, and effective best practices in education for contemporary mission? (EMS 2023) The conversation between formal and non-formal training organizations began with some significant tension. Groups on either side of the continuum would often point fingers at the other suggesting they were not qualified, or they were antiquated and out of touch with the church and mission. Over time, as we have met with one another, and intentionally set forth space for conversations, relationship and idea sharing, the walls have diminished, and the conversations are beginning to blossom. Background In 2014 Jason Ferenczi from the Cornerstone Trust gathered a group to begin conversations related to formal and non-formal theological education collaborating. They met in Chicago and several key organizations were represented.1 Ongoing conversations went forward with a thick sense of tension as each side did not respect or trust one another. Despite the challenges they pressed forward and the next official gathering occurred in Antalya during ICETE 2017. The tensions were starting to fade but a lack of trust was still evident. I was there so I could see it with my own two eyes! However, that gathering fostered a place where things could continue to ferment so that each side began seeing further value to the other. In addition, global conditions: 1 Personal correspondence Jason Ferenczi (via email) on 24 February 2023. challenging economy, churches sending their pastoral candidates less often to seminary or truncating the traditional seminary route (from M.Div. to M.A., etc.). Independent, nondenominational churches relied less on traditional education and preferred non-formal, pragmatic approaches to equipping pastors and leader. Craig Parro stated, “we need to break down the wall between F & NF training and identify the commonalities between the two.”2 The conclusion from the meeting was, “we need one another, but what that looks like remains to be seen.”3 In 2016 a small gathering occurred at the Global Proclamation Congress for Pastoral Trainers in Bangkok which kick started a process of collecting case studies and finding who were participants engaging across the lanes. A follow up meeting occurred at the Leadership Development Consultation 2017 in Chiang Mai led by Craig Parro (Leadership Resources International), Jason Ferenczi (Cornerstone Trust), Malcolm Webber (LeaderSource) and Riad Kassis (ICETE). There they began show casing case studies to give further examples of formal and non-formal partnerships or, at least, engagement. ICETE 2022 The latest development in the story is promising. The International Council for Evangelical Theological Education dedicated their recent consultation to collaboration. It displayed significant progress from where we were just a few years ago. There were a number of presentations focused on working together and the final challenge included a call to action that we might better reflect the hope of Christ: I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one - I in them and you in me - so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. (John 17:22-23) This call to action follows a mandate established by ICETE that is most encouraging. Herein are a few significant quotes from this manifesto. (ICETE Manifesto 2022, pp. 8-9) Perhaps the most formative insight of recent decades is the call for the integration of mission and theological education: Theology and theological education need to become missional in their very essence and orientation. The purpose of theological education must be defined within the framework of the missio Dei and a missional selfunderstanding of the Church.4 2 Notes from the Breakout session at ICETE 2016. Notes from the ICETE meeting breakout. 4 David Bosch 1991. Transforming Mission. Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll: Orbis, 489498; Andrew Kirk 1997, The Mission of Theology and Theology as Mission. Valley Forge: Trinity Press International; Robert Banks 1999. Reenvisioning Theological Education. Exploring a Missional Alternative to 3 • • • Church/mission and academy: The academization of theological education has opened a gap between the needs of the church in mission and the agenda of academia. Programs and institutions of theological education as well as the church are challenged to take concrete measures to bridge the gap between church and academy. Residential, full-time studies and the diversification of education: Information Technology revolutionizes education. Traditional forms of residential full-time studies are being replaced more and more by flexible and modular Diversified Education5 and Open Distance Learning and Education.6 Often remote and online, and in-person and in-community delivery are in tension and we are challenged to optimise the provision of services and accessibility while ensuring holistic education. Formal and non-formal education: Formal and non-formal theological education are equally important for church and mission. They should be offered in mutual respect and partnership.7 Beyond “formal”: We understand theological education in a broad sense including formal and non-formal education and learning. Non-formal learning is normally defined as “learning which takes place through planned activities (in terms of learning objectives, learning time) where some form of learning support is present.” However it typically occurs apart from institutionalized, programme-based and degree-oriented (academic) education. “Informal” learning refers to “learning resulting from daily activities related to work, family or leisure. It is not organised or structured in terms of objectives, time or learning support. Informal learning is in most cases unintentional from the learner’s perspective” (ICETE Manifesto 2022, p. 10) Current Models. Grand Rapids and Cambridge UK: Eerdmans; Bernhard Ott 2001. Beyond Fragmentation. Integrating Mission and Theological Education. Oxford: Regnum; Peter F. Penner (ed.) 2005. Theological Education as Mission. Schwarzenfeld: Neufeld Verlag. 5 Cf. Ross Kinsler 2008. Diversified Theological Education: Equipping All God's People. Pasadena: William Carey International University. 6 Cf. Christo Lombaard 2021. The Bible, Open and Distance Education and Learning, and Spirituality: Possibilities in a Post-Secular Time. Acta Theologica Suppl 31: Integrating theory and practice: A challenge in theological education. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18820/23099089/actat.Sup31.4, 48-65. 7 Cf. the “Pastoral Trainers Declaration”, Cape Town 2010 (https://rreach.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/05/Pastoral-Trainers-Declaration-Cape-Town-2010.pdf); Ashish Chrispal 2019. Restoring Missional Vision in Theological Education. The need for transformative pastoral training in the majority world. Lausanne Global Analysis 8 (5) (https://lausanne.org/content/lga/2019-09/restoring-missional-vision- theologicaleducation); Manfred Kohl 2021. Re-Forma: Solving a Key Issue in Global Training of Pastors and Church Leaders. Evangelical Review of Theology 45 (2), 103-112. Ulf Strohbehn (ed.) 2020. A Manual for Starting and Developing Bible Schools. Appeals and Cases for Paradigm Shifts in Spiritual Formation. Helsinki: Fida International. This chart shows the state of Formal / Non-Formal Partnership going into the Congress. And the thematic analysis indicated the following: The chart shows the upper-level codes that point to the need for FTE and NFTE confluency. FTE and NFTE confluency is desired as both segments look at their ultimate goals. However, as this chart shows, currently there is not a mutual respect allowing collaboration to take place. Yet, in addition, the data shows a lack of direction in how to make this happen while still maintaining distinctives. Further, the report highlighted how the data gathered informed the congress and future directions: The data communicates a desire to consider competency-based education as an alternative to traditional forms of education. This is presented to bring together the knowledge formation of a student in the FTE context with the practical skills formation and contextualization emphasized in NFTE. Re- Forma’s thirty-five competencies were mentioned multiple times as a model to follow and build upon.8 8 Notes from the ICETE data gathering on the Formal and Non-Formal Theological Education in Dialogue Thematic Analysis. July 2022. - The sources of the data are 18 of the C21/22 Consultation forum threads from 2021 November to 2022 July. - https://icete.academy/course/view.php?id=172 The organizers of the Consultation took these issues to heart in planning for the triennial gathering. Of notable import was a workshop track focused on accelerating collaboration. It was encouraging to see that it was the second highest attended track of the consultation, and the interaction over the course of the week was robust. The learning gleaned from the engagement may be instructive for all of us in seeking to educate for mission today. The tract was organized as follows: Collaboration: Accelerating Formal & Non-formal Pastoral Training Background:9 Pastoral training has failed to keep up with church planting successes. Far too many churches are led by pastors with little or no Bible training. This lack creates huge vulnerabilities for these churches, including false teaching, syncretism, lack of maturity, and biblical illiteracy. Many have recognized a pastoral leadership crisis and responded with vast and varied training initiatives, numbering in the many thousands. Formal theological institutions equip many pastors, but a far greater number of pastors are equipped by nonformal means. Sadly, there has been a lack of collaboration between the two sectors, as well as a lack of understanding and appreciation of the invaluable role each sector plays. Through robust interaction, this workshop will unpack the strengths of each sector along with the biases each sector has of the other. Actual models/stories will demonstrate both the feasibility and the synergistic power of collaboration between the formal and nonformal sectors. Objectives and guiding questions & activities. 1. Create deeper understanding and appreciation for what each sector provides a. Take an appreciative inquiry approach, asking each sector: What do you especially appreciate about the strengths that the other sector brings to pastor training? b. Ask each sector: what would you add to what you just heard in terms of what strengths that your sector contributes to pastor training? c. Ask: Many in the Non-formal sector have studied at formal theological institutions. What did you value about your formal training? Why are you now advocating for Non-formal pastor training? 2. Demonstrate both the feasibility and the synergistic power of collaboration a. Present 3 models/stories of F/NF collaborations, varying in terms of development and geography. Jaison Thomas for Seminary, Joe Handley for Asian Access, Craig Parro for TOPIC. b. Ask: What distinctive features or principles contributed to the success of each of these collaborations? 9 2022. Welcome letter to the track by Bp Efraim Tendero, Craig Parro, Dr. Jaison Thomas and Dr. Joseph Handley. c. Ask in a small group setting: Describe effective collaborative models that you have seen? d. Ask in a small group setting: What were distinctive features/principles that contributed to the success of each of these collaborations? e. Each group report out the best model from their group. f. Ask: What are the barriers or hindrances to effective collaboration between the two sectors? 3. Develop an initial plan to collaborate across sectors a. Ask: What are the gaps or unmet needs that your organization has in your pastor training efforts that another organization might be able to fill? b. Ask: What potential partner might be able to help you accelerate your pastor training capacity? c. Ask: What next steps might you take? Case Studies As briefly outlined above, a few case studies (actually 4 rather than 3) were presented to give participants a few models to interact with and critique. Each approach was quite different in size and scope but gave a good lens into ways to collaborate between formal and non-formal training. Asian Access (now A3) Asian Access (now called A3) shared how their approach began with the felt need of pastors in Japan. The founder went to Fuller Theological Seminary asking for help from Donald McGavran who passed him along to Bobby Clinton. Bobby designed the original curriculum incorporating elements of McGavran’s church growth theory. It was a marriage between leadership development theory from Clinton alongside of McGavran’s church growth. Eventually the program was connected to over 95% of the church growth in Japan. (Handley, ICETE Presentation 2022) The model includes a two to three-year journey where collaborative learning communities are formed (typically 10-20 leaders) who meet quarterly for 4 day retreats. The topics covered fall under four categories that are A3’s primary outcomes: the goal is for each alumnus to carry these four outcomes through the duration of their ministry and life: 1. 2. 3. 4. Live in a Love Relationship with Jesus Grow in Christ-like Leadership (predominantly character) Reproduce Disciple-Making Leaders Catalyze Christ-Centered Movements (often church planting initiatives) Today, A3 has a partnership with Fuller Seminary where every graduate receives a diploma with Fuller’s seal. It is unaccredited but the graduates appreciate the endorsement. And, most recently, Fuller and A3 signed an MOU where A3 alumni can receive advanced standing in Fuller’s DMin program if they are qualified and produce papers of substance based on key readings for the program. (to learn more see Handley. “A Reflection of Contemplative Mission.” 2013) Word Partners (formerly Leadership Resources International) Roman Carmana and Pedro Hernandez of Christ for the Cities launched INSEPA in partnership with Dr Jaime Ortiz of El Seminario Biblico de Medellin. INSEPA stood for the Institute for Pastoral Training. The National Association of Evangelicals of Colombia adopted this effort as their pastoral training commission which gave it credibility and broad support among many denominations. It was a church-based effort that began small, with just 3 or 4 host churches. The host churches were critical partners. They hosted the pastors overnight (the training was Friday-Saturday) and provided much of the funding. Very little funding came from the States. So there were four key partners: a mission agency, a seminary, the WEA country association, local churches, and TOPIC Global. Things can get complicated with that many partners, right? But the LORD graciously developed deep friendships on the team, especially with Pedro, Jaime, and Paul Landrey the TOPIC international facilitator. As trust flourished, ministry flourished. Making the training financially assessable was a key priority, since many pastors have very limited means. They were asked to pay for the materials, but even then, the team worked with publishers to get materials at cost or slightly above cost. Depending on the particular pastor, the team sometimes even paid for part or all of their transportation. Financial support was decided on a case-by-case basis. The team invested in the pastor-trainers. Some came from the seminary, others were established pastors. The team brought the pastor-trainers together for weekend retreats to build relationships, cast vision, trouble-shoot, and develop their training skills. A couple of times, they actually brought in key TOPIC leaders from the Philippines to provide a cross-cultural perspective. The Philippines was probably TOPIC’s poster child, so the presence of Herman Moldez and Philip Flores was powerful. The curriculum for INSEPA was a work in progress, negoitiated between Christ for the Cities and the Seminary. Eventually, the seminary formally recognized the value of the training and would give one year seminary credit for two years of training through INSEPA. Many of the INSEPA pastors ended up attending the seminary, so this became a win-win situation. Overtime INSEPA grew to 7-8 host churches in multiple cities and even spawned similar efforts in neighboring countries of Venezuela and Ecuador. 60-70 pastors eventually became 200-300. Let me tell you about one of those pastors. He served in a rural area and had virtually no training. After completing the INSEPA courses and graduation, he was recognize for the gifted pastor that he was. Paul Landrey use the word “catapulted”… this pastor end up leading a large church in Bogata, the capital city. However… Not all collaborations between NFTE and FTE have been as successful. Let me share a composite example of partnerships that did not work out when I was involved with a nonformal training ministry now called WordPartners. We approached a well-established seminary in the majority world about a possible partnership. They were quite eager to pursue this. We agreed to conduct a joint training at their campus as a first step. Our ministry agreed to provide the necessary funding and to inivte a number of pastors from that city. We agreed that the teaching would be shared between our staff and theirs. The seminary agreed to handle the logistics and set the teaching schedule. All good. Our team approached the time with great hopes. Well. The teaching began at 9am and ran until 9pm for 3 solid days, with only brief breaks for meals. When the professors from the seminary taught, they each lectured in their areas of specialization. The partnership did not survive the first test. Two fundamental problems scuttled this partnership. 1. First, the seminary did not share our pedagogy and philosophy of ministry. WordPartners has a curriculum, but we are not curriculum-driven. We are process-driven. Praxis is key to our pedagogy. We briefly present hermeneutical principles but then quickly move into exercises with biblical texts to practice these principles, followed by a time of reflection and discussion. Our approach is highly-relational and learner-centered. One of our maxim’s is: “What is learned is more important than what is taught.” The seminary did not share our pedagogy and philosophy of ministry. 2. Second, the seminary was driven by its own institutional needs. The seminary was facing huge financial challenges and had not paid their professors for over two months. This budding partnership was an answer to their needs. Since we were covering the expenses, they maximized the teaching schedule so that they could maximize the stipends they would pay their professors. That’s heart-breaking on a couple of levels. We felt that pain of those under-resourced. How tragic! It was also heart-breaking because the pressing needs of their institution ended up overriding their desire for a healthy, mutual partnership. New India Bible Seminary New India Bible Seminary partners with LeaderSource to offer their 5C-4D approach to equipping leaders. The 5C’s include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Christ- Growing in intimacy and dependency with Christ. Community – Growing in relationships and interdependency. Character – Growing in the fruit of the Spirit and character in Christ. Calling – Growing in God’s call in personal and church life. Competency – Growing in capacity in knowledge and skills The found dynamics include the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. Spiritual – Connecting with God Relational – Connecting with Others Experiential – Connecting with Life Instructional – Connecting with Truth They have noted a deeper impact on the life of their seminary students and a more transformational dynamic via their training. They see a stronger impact from their students and alumni and a much better bond between local churches and the academy. They also have learned that an ongoing assessment is helpful to ensure these learnings are sustainable. (Thomas Presentation. ICETE 2022) Advanced Leadership Training (LAC) Advanced Leadership Training birthed within Cru and now has a partnership with Kairos University. They focus on competency based theological education pursuing outcomes impacting the head, the heart and the hands of a leader. Their objectives include the following: Grow in Christ and be more Christ-like 1. Love God and People more 2. Love God’s Word more 3. Confident and competent in going to the word to deal with issues of life and society 4. Confident and competent in developing leaders who develop leaders for the 3 GCs 5. Holistic development through Mentor teams They embody this seeking to help leaders: 1. Lead Self 2. Lead Teams 3. Lead Leadership 4. Lead Organizations Through this integration of heart, head, and hands results in greater effectiveness in their church and mission context. Beginning with the end in mind frequently requires a dramatic rethink of any institutional structure, and competency-based programs are no exception. In order to work directly towards developing the student for ministry, most CBTE programs contain seven core commitments. 1. Contextual Learning Developing students for ministry necessitates that students are involved in ministry. Going beyond an internship that constitutes part of their degree program, most CBTE students are immersed full-time in their ministry environment. Assignments and learning opportunities are outcomes-based, and therefore, can be adapted to fit and contribute to the student’s ministry context. 2. Partnered Investment Having students immersed in a ministry environment transforms the program from being primarily a service contract between the students and the seminary to being a partnership in developing leaders between the seminary, church, and network. CBTE programs are increasingly developed in full-partnership with future employers of the students. 3. Team-Based Mentoring Diverse mentor teams are engaged in order to holistically develop students. They work as a team to develop students in all areas of their life. Mentor teams often include: • An academic mentor – a seminary faculty member, • A network leadership mentor – an experienced individual representing the denomination or host network, and • A practitioner mentor – an on-the-ground mentor from the student’s ministry context. 4. Integrated Outcomes To ensure holistic development, the program is designed with integrated outcomes that aim to develop students in all areas of their life. They integrate what you do, where you do it, and how you do it. 5. Timely Instruction By the end of a CBTE program, all graduates will have demonstrated achievement of the same set of standardized outcomes. However, the order in which those outcomes are achieved is highly individualized. Under the direction of their mentor teams, students can tailor their learning pathway to the specific needs they face in ministry at a given time. This promotes “just-in-time” learning, immediate application, and the opportunity to deepen learning through reflection. 6. Recognition of Prior Learning Many students seeking theological education come to schools with prior education and experience. Traditional programs will usually grant advanced placement to students who have completed accredited courses similar to those in the program; credits given for prior credits earned. In a competency-based program, however, credits are awarded for demonstrated competency, not completed courses. An individual’s prior formal learning will likely reduce the length of time it takes to demonstrate a competency, thereby reducing the overall length of the program. So, in effect, advanced standing for prior credits is granted. CBTE programs, however, also recognize informal learning and experience. Since the goal is competency, not credits, students who bring extensive life experience, personal study or ministry service to a program also have opportunity for advanced placement; they may start the program already able to demonstrate several of its outcomes. 7. Rigorous and Adaptive Assessment The rigor of a CBTE program rests on its ability to effectively assess students. Standardized outcomes and indicators are clearly defined and provided to mentors and students. Mentor teams use these rubrics to evaluate a student’s strengths and prior learning on program entry so they can focus energy on maximizing strengths and shoring up weaknesses. Continual assessment throughout the program ensures that students graduate only when they have demonstrated mastery in each competency and are fully-equipped to serve their ministry context. (Tan Presentation. ICETE 2022) Summary from Collaborative Dialog The group shared appreciation for the quality and design from the formal training approaches and for the practicality of the non-formal training. Formal education was highlighted as more comprehensive yet overly structured, and some felt outdated. Non-formal was more contextual based on felt needs arising from the current state of situations but can lack quality controls. One group summarized their assessment as follows: “non-formal appreciates the depth and breadth of the formal training, whereas the formal appreciates the church-centered character of non-formal training.” When assessing the case studies, a few key traits for success were highlighted. First, the relational connections within each model were key. A3 had relationships with Fuller Seminary. Likewise, New India Bible Seminary got to know LeaderSource quite well. LAC built on their connections with Cru and forged a good partnership with Kairos University. Having a common vision and seeking a mutual philosophy of ministry were also key. These groups shared the same interests and built on them, forging compatible approaches, and building on one another’s strengths. Related to the relational aspect mentioned above, the group noted the ability of these groups to listen to one another. Building on these initial ideas, the group followed up with further dialog. When prompted about envisioning a future of collaboration, key factors to multiply or accelerate training included the vision or shared aspiration to grow. Groups suggested that more trainers and mentors would be imperative. Another common theme was the inclusion of churches in the process. So, it would not be just formal and non-formal institutions or organizations but also include local churches as part of the process. When asked what it would take to move toward further collaboration to accelerate the development of leaders, a few salient ideas emerged. Networking pastors with trainers was a key feature so that synergy might develop, and collaboration and idea flow could strengthen. The need to shift approaches from western to indigenous or contextual in methodology and delivery was important. Partnerships between formal, non-formal and churches to streamline and simplify the curriculum as well as provide feedback loops for ongoing improvement and accountability was recommended. This would then foster the development of more trainers and mentors. And, finally utilizing emergent trends and technology like digital approaches to training, regional resource hubs and shared wiki spaces would be beneficial. In looking at gaps that exist, the following ideas emerged. Shared vision or buy-in for churches, formal and non-formal institutions was mentioned. Thus, building relational bridges is paramount. Financial, organizational limitations and government restrictions can further complicate these developments. The group suggested a summit on partnership to take the idea forward. Seeking next steps, the group offered several good suggestions. The summit on partnership would be a way to solidify the vision and pursue further buy-in and adoption. Alongside of this it is important that each group would validate and encourage the other: formal to non-formal and vis-versa. Just like the case studies presented, the group recommended highlighting further models so that we could learn from one another. Micro-gatherings of hubs or networks of formal and non-formal trainers along with church leaders would accelerate the ideas even further than a global summit. And ultimately finding scalable solutions to the challenges we face would be important. Finally, the group suggested we do need to pray to see collaboration lead toward acceleration in equipping leaders for the great need we have today. Overall, Craig Parro had this to say about ICETE 2022 The FTE-NFTE dialogue over the years has been unidirectional in the sense that FTE is the older and wiser brother. Questions usually centered around what NFTE folks can learn from the FTE, especially regarding standards and assessment? ICETE 2022 shifted the conversation into bidirectional benefits, by also asking the question: What can FTE folks learn from NFTE? This new question challenged "the older and wiser brother” notion, and I believe, was well-received by FTE folks.10 Toward a Better Future As we seek to strengthen education for the world of mission today, this multi-year process proves instructive. The process began with a series of conversations between parties that were not on the same page but over time, as they got to know each other, and allowed their perspectives to be shared, progress was made. Collaboration takes time and relationship building! It also takes initiative and working toward common goals. In addition to the findings reported above, Craig Parro aptly noted, The need for many more majority world nonformal pastoral trainers is evident given the scale of the need. Could some seminaries develop a Training of Trainers track among their programs which would intentionally develop pastor-trainers for nonformal agencies, organizations, and denominations?11 In all of this, I am reminded of my own journey in educational theory, mission preparation, and through working in the Orality Network. Complimenting these findings, we would be well advised to include these frameworks in our approaches toward education for mission in the future. When it comes to educational theory, we tend to focus on pedagogy, but I would argue we need far more experiential forms of preparation for mission. Combining our rigorous forms of pedagogy with andragogical forms of training will enhance our success.12 In 1994, Christianity Today published “Re-Engineering the Seminary? Crisis of Credibility Forces 10 Parro, Craig. Personal correspondence 28 February, 2023. Parro, Craig. Personal correspondence 28 February, 2023. 12 Knowles, M. (2019). Informal adult education, self-direction and andragogy, Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/malcolm-knowles-informal-adult-education-self-direction-and-andragogy. 11 Change”13 emphasizing the challenges and other studies highlighted the need for more andragogy in theological education.14 Russell West, took this further in suggesting a Re-Eventing of the Seminary to tackle orality in theological training.15 In my response to West, I affirmed his thesis suggesting that these types of trainings prove far more effective for mission education.16 In particular I noted the excellent thesis by one of my mentors, David Johnson, who compared mission training approaches to ways that he coached professional soccer.17 This was further modeled for me by Richard Slimbach’s unique approach and groundbreaking work in Global Studies18 where I heard of William Farley’s suggestions for strengthening education: Breadth comes from depth, not vice versa. The programs that provide depth over breadth include extended linguistic immersion, a concomitant home stay, courses in the language organized around a theme, and some kind of hands-on out-of classroom experience in the language. This model goes the most distance toward breadth from depth. The huge majority of programs unfortunately just kill time globally, ultimately doing little more than exotically keeping students out of the workforce so as not to cause an economic crash. Many want more than study abroad as glorified tourism... Higher education should also look elsewhere in the world. Go to Kazakhstan, Indonesia, Mali and Brazil. These are the hot places. Make the experience intense, theme-centered, hands-on, long-term, and in the native language.19 Thus, our contention is that as we collaborate and learn from one another, we can become stronger overall. And I contend that these same dynamics are at play for mission education 13 Morgan, Timothy and Giles, Thomas. “Re-Engineering The Seminary? Crisis of Credibility Forces Change.” Christianity Today. Volume 38 Number 12. 1994, 74-79. 14 See: Banks, Robert. Reenvisioning Theological Education: Exploring a Missional Alternative to Current Models. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999.; Alshire, Daniel O. Earthen Vessels, Hopeful Reflections on the Work and Future of Theological Schools. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2008.; Dykstra, Craig, and Bass, Dorothy. For Life Abundant: Practical Theology, Theological Education, and Christian Ministry. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008.; Farley, Edward. Theologia: The Fragmentation and Unity of Theological Education. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983.; Kelsey, David. To Understand God Truly: What’s Theological About Theological Education? Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox Press, 1992.; and Between Athens and Berlin: The Theological Education Debate. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993.; Ott, Bernard. “Beyond Fragmentation: Integrating Mission and Theological Education: A Critical Assessment of Some Recent Developments in Evangelical Theological Education.” Regnum Studies in Mission. Wipf and Stock, 2011.; M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust Review of Graduate Theological Education in the Pacific Northwest. Vancouver, WA, 1994.; Webber, Timothy. “The Seminaries and Churches: Looking for New Relationships. Theological Education, 44, Number. 2008, 65-91. 15 West, Russell. The Re-Eventing of Theological Education: Toward a Pedagogy of Leadership Formation in the Verbomoteur Mode. International Orality Network Forum, April 4, 2014. 16 Handley, Joseph. West, Russell. The Re-Eventing of Theological Education: Toward a Pedagogy of Leadership Formation in the Verbomoteur Mode: A Response. International Orality Network Forum, April 4, 2014. 17 Johnson, David. Specificity in Cross-cultural Training: A Model for Short Term Sojourners. Unpublished MA Thesis, Azusa Pacific University, May 1990 18 Slimbach, Richard. Becoming World Wise: A Guide to Global Learning. Stylus, 2010. 19 Frawley, William. “Home Alone: The Domestication of U.S. Global Education (Part II),” The Globalist, August 06, 2009. today. We are ahead of the curve when it comes to androgenous approaches to education, but we still could grow in the synergy between formal and non-formal mission education. References Alshire, Daniel O. Earthen Vessels, Hopeful Reflections on the Work and Future of Theological Schools. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 2008 Ashish Chrispal. Restoring Missional Vision in Theological Education. The need for transformative pastoral training in the majority world. Lausanne Global Analysis 8 (5). 2019. (https://lausanne.org/content/lga/2019-09/restoring-missional-vision- theological-education) Banks, Robert. Reenvisioning Theological Education: Exploring a Missional Alternative to Current Models. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999. Bosch, David. Transforming Mission. Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll: Orbis. 1991 Dykstra, Craig, and Bass, Dorothy. For Life Abundant: Practical Theology, Theological Education, and Christian Ministry. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008 EMS Conference. 2023. “Call for Papers.” Accessed February 22, 2023. https://www.emsweb.org/call-for-papers/ Farley, Edward. Theologia: The Fragmentation and Unity of Theological Education. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983 Ferenczi, Jason. Personal correspondence (via email) on 24 February 2023. Formal and Non-Formal Theological Education in Dialogue Thematic Analysis. July 2022. https://icete.academy/course/view.php?id=172 Frawley, William. “Home Alone: The Domestication of U.S. Global Education (Part II),” The Globalist, August 06, 2009. Handley, Joseph. “A Reflection on Contemplative Mission.” Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care 6(1), p. 76-81. 2013. Handley, Joseph. West, Russell. The Re-Eventing of Theological Education: Toward a Pedagogy of Leadership Formation in the Verbomoteur Mode: A Response. International Orality Network Forum, April 4, 2014. Handley, Joseph. ICETE Presentation 2022. ICETE Manifesto. 2022. Accessed November 29, 2022. https://icete.info/resources/manifesto/ Johnson, David. Specificity in Cross-cultural Training: A Model for Short Term Sojourners. Unpublished MA Thesis, Azusa Pacific University, May 1990 Kelsey, David. To Understand God Truly: What’s Theological About Theological Education? Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox Press, 1992 Kelsey, David. Between Athens and Berlin: The Theological Education Debate. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993 Kinsler, Ross. Diversified Theological Education: Equipping All God's People. Pasadena: William Carey International University. 2008. Kirk, Andrew. The Mission of Theology and Theology as Mission. Valley Forge: Trinity Press International. 1997. Knowles, M.. Informal adult education, self-direction and andragogy, Retrieved from http://infed.org/mobi/malcolm-knowles-informal-adult-education-self-direction-and-andragogy 2019. Lombaard, Christo. The Bible, Open and Distance Education and Learning, and Spirituality: Possibilities in a Post-Secular Time. Acta Theologica Suppl 31: Integrating theory and practice: A challenge in theological education. 2021 Manfred Kohl. Re-Forma: Solving a Key Issue in Global Training of Pastors and Church Leaders. Evangelical Review of Theology 45 (2), 103-112. 2021. M.J. Murdock Charitable Trust Review of Graduate Theological Education in the Pacific Northwest. Vancouver, WA, 1994 Morgan, Timothy and Giles, Thomas. “Re-Engineering The Seminary? Crisis of Credibility Forces Change.” Christianity Today. Volume 38 Number 12. 1994 Lombaard, Christo. The Bible, Open and Distance Education and Learning, and Spirituality: Possibilities in a Post-Secular Time. Acta Theologica Suppl 31: Integrating theory and practice: A challenge in theological education. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18820/23099089/actat.Sup31.4, 48-65. 2021. Loots, Stephen. Zoom call with other leaders brought together by Dr. Manfred Kohl, January 2021. Ott, Bernard. “Beyond Fragmentation: Integrating Mission and Theological Education: A Critical Assessment of Some Recent Developments in Evangelical Theological Education.” Regnum Studies in Mission. Wipf and Stock, 2011. Parro, Craig. ICETE Presentation 2022. Parro, Craig. Personal correspondence 28 February 2023. “Pastoral Trainers Declaration”, Cape Town 2010 (https://rreach.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/05/Pastoral-Trainers-Declaration-Cape-Town-2010.pdf) Penner, Peter F. (ed.). Theological Education as Mission. Schwarzenfeld: Neufeld Verlag. 2005. Slimbach, Richard. Becoming World Wise: A Guide to Global Learning. Stylus, 2010. Strohbehn, Ulf. (ed.). A Manual for Starting and Developing Bible Schools. Appeals and Cases for Paradigm Shifts in Spiritual Formation. Helsinki: Fida International. 2020. Tan, Henry. ICETE Presentation 2022. Thomas, Jaison. ICETE Presentation 2022. Ulf Strohbehn (ed.). A Manual for Starting and Developing Bible Schools. Appeals and Cases for Paradigm Shifts in Spiritual Formation. Helsinki: Fida International. 2020. Webber, Timothy. “The Seminaries and Churches: Looking for New Relationships. Theological Education, 44, Number. 2008 Welcome Letter ICETE Collaboration Workshop Track. Bp Efraim Tendero, Craig Parro, Dr. Jaison Thomas and Dr. Joseph Handley. 2023. West, Russell. The Re-Eventing of Theological Education: Toward a Pedagogy of Leadership Formation in the Verbomoteur Mode. International Orality Network Forum, April 4, 2014.