Ministry Formation (without Bishops): second reflection

In a previous post, I began this series of essays on ministerial formation and credentialing. These essays are in response to a post by Joey Lyons at Radical Hapa where he raises some profound questions about our process of ministry formation. In my previous post, I made the distinction between formation for ministry, and meeting the requirements for fellowship with the Ministerial Fellowship Committee. I also indicated that our credentialing process was designed to establish uniform standards for ministry, and so while the individuals who are involved in administering the process may be very supportive of individual students, the system is intended to screen out unsuitable applicants, rather than support formation.

There is an old maxim: Many are called, but few are chosen. Individuals, either by divine inspiration, by a quiet voice within, or by rational calculation of how best to use their assorted talents find themselves "called" to ministry. But to be a minister is to be in service to a particular faith community and that faith community must choose who will be and who will not be a minister.

Each particular faith community has a process for choosing among the many who feel called. Many faith communities select who and who will not go to seminary, there is considerable individual counseling, and clerical supervision of this process. The seminarians are supported financially and supervised throughout the process of their preparation. Other faith communities, including our own allow those who feel called to begin the process and then engage the selection process after the aspirant has had some education and experience. Bishops do not select our theological students, our students self select to go to school, with the understanding that the UUA will grant them candidate status only after they have completed the following requirements:

1. Career assessment program at a career center approved by the Ministerial Fellowship Committee. (MFC)
2. Candidacy status granted by a Regional Sub Committee on Candidacy.(RSCC)
3. Sponsorship by a UU Congregation.
4. a year of theological school.

This means student must make a considerable investment before they reach the first stage of qualification, meanwhile our students observe their fellow students from a presbyterian, or episcopal polities to be "in care" in their more supportive but more controlling denominations.

Our Regional Sub Committees are recent innovation, before they were instituted students had no denominational feed back about their prospects before their interview with the MFC. The student could have a M.Div. and complete internship and be surprised that they were rejected.

Once upon a time, which wasn't so long ago, almost all Unitarian Universalist theological students went to a Unitarian Universalist theological school. The faculty and administration were Unitarian Universalist ministers, and the school was committed to forming liberal ministers. Most of the students were known and supported by their home congregations, and in relationship to the minister in their home church. Informal and formal mentoring and support for ministry formation came from the schools and the congregational ministers. Students were adopted into the ministers association by friendly gatekeepers who would spot a promising young man and invite them in. (The sociological name of this informal system is called an "old boys network.")

Now most Unitarian Universalist aspirants and candidates for ministry are enrolled in non-Unitarian Universalist schools, and located in geographical areas where there are only a few Unitarian Universalist congregations and ministers. The result is that these students have no formal support for Unitarian Universalist ministerial formation and experience themselves as isolated and neglected. In many of our non-UU theological schools the students have formed a UU students support group and UU ministers have been invited to be 'advisors' and teach polity courses, UU theology courses, etc. The UUA has limited funds available to support courses at non-UU schools, but has provided grants to support such efforts. While these efforts can not provide the same support as a UU theological school, they do provide some support.

Is a limit to the number of theological schools that we can support? I will be so bold as suggest that at best a UUMA chapter can provide support to two schools, because of geographical dispersion some of our chapters would not be able to do that much. If we are going to try to build a system of support for ministry formation, we must select which schools we can provide support services to, and which we can't. Students should know before they apply, what we can do, and what we can't.

There are other possibilities, such as retreats and special on line classes which we can explore. I think the UUA and the UUMA need to organize a consultation with some representative students to explore some of these non traditional possibilities.

I think it is time to embark on a whole new approach to theological education, ministerial credentialing and ministry formation. But that is the subject for a different essay.