Photo by Jonas Allert on Unsplash
The African church has one reputation of being a mile wide but an inch deep. Bishop Alfred Olwa, in his workshop on Theological Education, said that while that reputation may not be entirely true, it reflects a grim reality that must be combatted with good, in-depth, and scripturally sound theological education.
The fact that now, years after the development of GSFA, we are still talking about the need for good theological education shows there are issues have not yet been addressed. Bp. Olwa stated that, “As the seminary goes, so goes the Church. The life of the church members and their ministries will reflect what has been taught in theological schools.” Similar warnings went out decades ago, yet the Global South is still struggling against false teaching among its members and the Anglican Communion as a whole. It still needs to find firm footing on historic and scriptural Anglican theology in a way that anchors all the churches in the Communion. Theological education more rooted in psychology and sociology isn’t just affecting the West. Bishop Olwa made it clear that it’s affecting historically conservative churches in Africa as their seminaries receive money, teachers, and influence from progressive sources. He outlined a number of shortfalls in recent years that have limited the church’s maturity and its ability to meet the challenges of the day even among biblically faithful leaders. First, schools measure success by purely academic standards rather than a holistic approach to learning that encompasses the entire person and their ministry. They also minimize the requirements for what maturity looks like and focus on knowledge rather than character. Finally, more pastoral training that includes healing and deliverance is needed so that demonstrations of God’s power accompany the proclamation of scripture.
In East Africa, dioceses often train leaders in pastoral work and mission while theological schools remain purely academic. Bp. Olwa contends these two ways of approaching ministry must be united for a grounded, growing Church in addition to ongoing mentorship of each student. In the GSFA, there are similar trends. Some provinces, dioceses, or regions focus on mission and heavy growth but risk a shallow theological foundation that cannot sustain the church being built. These churches are often affected by poor theologies, like the prosperity gospel rampant in East Africa, with little theological resources to properly combat them. Other provinces, dioceses, or regions focus on academia and have either adopted progressive theologies or have never experienced the power of God in mission and ministry thereby stunting their growth. A holistic approach to theological education which incorporates academics, pastoral experience, and administrative training will produce leadership resourced to support the churches being served.
In all our travels to East Africa and our work with the Church there, the American Anglican Council encountered vibrant, growing, and biblically faithful communities. To learn of the struggles and shortcomings of the East African Church’s theological education is sobering. If these struggles remain here, then they exist in other provinces that have yet to approach the kind of missional fervor found in East Africa. Bp. Olwa’s exhortations should be heard and acted upon by the entire Church.
The question is, why haven’t these warnings been heard before?
The connection between doctrine and practice is not new but a decades-long discussion in the GSFA. Action is needed to develop a solidly consistent, biblically faithful, and relevant method of theological education. Bp. Olwa outlined the four Rs needed to maintain integrity in theological education: Right teaching, Right practice, Right attitude, and Relational training. With all these aspects present, the whole person is built up and trained to minister.
But where will members of the GSFA find this kind of holistic and biblically-grounded education? Will the same problems persist with no real move towards a solution?
Without clear action, nothing will change. In one area of the Communion, the prosperity gospel infiltrates the Church; in another area Western progressivism does. What will be done to build a consistent system that is available to all members of the GSFA? Will a fractured approach to theological education continue a dogmatically-fractured Communion? Would providing an accredited, consolidated path for theological education in the GSFA help to produce greater unity? How does GAFCON’s theological education program factor into all this, and can the GSFA make use of that body’s resources in this area?
The Anglican formularies provide a way forward for a contextualized expression of an unchanging faith or, at least, they should. The Church around the world provides prayer books, liturgies, and homilies that can craft theology to shape Anglican leaders for generations to come. But as long as the cry continues for this need without concrete solutions, the churches of the GSFA will still find themselves in the same struggle ten years down the road. It will become a Communion that is a mile wide but an inch deep. If the GSFA encourages and grows its theological education in a well-rounded and holistic way, however, it will help build leaders that are both knowledgeable and prayerful, able to proclaim scripture and demonstrate in power the truth being proclaimed. Only then will the GSFA become a mile wide and a mile deep and begin to reflect the richness and fullness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
