Macrina

I think this sums it up well. Look, I'm sorry you had such a bad experience of your time at divinity school and I really hope your MPH works out better for you, but you come across throughout this post as narrow-minded and judgmental, and not just of your particular program at one specific institution, but of a whole branch of academia and of the church. I don't disagree with a number of elements of your position - I think considering other options is always a helpful idea, and choosing a place that will be in some ways supportive is wise. But I do think you've framed your contributions rather too broadly and I cannot agree with your sweeping condemnations of 'big-name schools', or with your analysis of how pastors should be formed/preach, or with your devaluing of certain voices within the academy, and so on. Much of your position seems to stem from your experiences, your feelings. And, while I understand how difficult it must be to find that your very faith was challenged by your experience of a degree that you no doubt expected would build it up instead, your experience was more a result of a mismatch between you and your divinity school, and should not be construed as grounds for dismissing an institution or genuine scholarship. That's all. I wish you all the best with your future studies.

Look, I've got better things to do right now than to disagree with someone on an anonymous message board, but I think your information is incorrect and your reasoning is flawed. What irritates me in all of this is that you're not even in the discipline, you've just stopped by to impart your wisdom to us all. 1) your thread title doesn't make it seem like your advice is, after all, directed to "a very specific group of people (denominationally conservative minorities with specific requirements)" - rather, you've framed it as "advice for divinity school applicants." 2) you make sweeping and erroneous generalizations about what is and is not studied at various divinity schools and your knowledge of the specifics of early Christian exegesis seems inaccurate. I know that as this conversation has unfolded, you've gotten more specific in some of your criticisms, but I don't think you can speak for the "big name schools" - at least not without a lot more research and actual facts to support your position. 3) I think it's inappropriate of you to come in here and offer "advice" about an area of studies that isn't your area and is colored by your personal spiritual struggles. It's clear that you were hurt by your experiences at divinity school, but you've turned that outward into a critique of major institutions framed as "advice for divinity school applicants" and I don't think that your personal struggles should be given that weight. I'm attempting to offer this as a corrective of sorts, because I believe that the institutions and practices that you struggled with are valid and important voices in contemporary theological education. And 4) what you set forth (faith-based, divinely-inspired readings, with the exclusion of any academic nuances, as the only way for pastors to engage with sacred texts) is wrong. That's not how the majority of clergy and congregations and Christians approach scripture, discernment, life. Just as no one who comes forward for ordination does so solely on the strength of God's word to them, so too faithful interpretation must be carried out in a community of different voices. Rejecting contemporary academic voices as unable to speak the truth is narrow-minded, biased and wrong. It's certainly a hermeneutic of sorts, but it's not one that generates much support in the North American academic community, and you're posting on gradcafe, so.... Lex orandi, lex credendi and all that.

Your argument presupposes a division between academic and faith-based approaches to textual interpretation and, indeed, ministerial formation. For many traditions, the two are not necessarily separate, and faith-based interpretation without a solid grounding in scholarship can sound superstitious, irrelevant, or downright kooky. Pastors in the vast majority of traditions can and do merge faith with academic rigor, without losing sight of the truth of the text and without compromising their spiritual or academic integrity. To do this effectively, they need to be taught both. Your 'general rule' of early exegesis is both overly simplistic and historically inaccurate. Early christian exegesis varied by location, era, and context and the Christian understanding and use of philosophy was probably not what you're thinking it was. You know, for a guy who struggled with his MDiv and lost his faith before getting through the basic degree, you have a lot to say about what pastors do and don't need. Just because it was your experience doesn't make it universal truth. There are, as you say, several ways to derive meaning from the texts, but it is presumptuous to assume that only one way is appropriate for ministry.

Searching for divine meaning within a text is one way of applying your own hermeneutic. While you may condemn various academics for their biases, you bring your own to the exercise, just as much as they do. I would suggest that perhaps a more academic study of Christian history and moral theology might even demonstrate that the reality of Christian practices throughout the past two thousand years is far more nuanced and ambiguous that you believe, and both pastors and the congregations they serve benefit from access to academic methodologies and discipline.

That's all well and good, if you have the vocational clarity to discern where you want to go before you begin the application process. For many, discernment is an ongoing and changing process, and most of us make decisions with only very limited information about where we might end up, or who we might become. I have an MDiv from a "big name" school, though one that was supported by and supportive of my denominational process and standards. It has only opened doors for me, and my educational background is never, ever in question. For that, I am grateful. I would also suggest (gently) that if your educational experience generates a significant faith crisis, then the issue is with your faith practices, and not with your divinity school. Challenge is good. It builds up what is strong and forces you to reconsider those things that don't hold up. If it takes away the very foundation of your belief system, then that system was not well established in the first place. Choose the program that will help you to grow and learn. The bigger names are the bigger names for a reason. Yes, the program and atmosphere is often more challenging than at a smaller denominational seminary, but they will give you a solid foundation in the academics, as well as personal challenges that will form and strengthen you, regardless of your faith background (or lack of it )

Thank you! I couldn't figure out how the free scores/seeing your raw scores thing worked. Ok, I know my desired scores, and I will send if I'm close, wait and decide later if I'm not. Perfect!

I'm just wondering how it works at the end of the test. When you see your scores, how long do you get to decide whether or not to send them? And did you go in knowing what your personal cut-off was? What scores you would or wouldn't send on to your schools? Please tell me how it works after you finish the actual test. Thanks,

I'm in an advanced masters program at one of the big schools. I've never applied to doctoral programs before, but I plan to do so next year and the year after. A lot of the people in my program are people who tried and did not succeed with doctoral apps last year. Several have mentioned their intention to apply again and again. Don't see myself doing that. Two application cycles, maybe three if the feedback is right, and then I'm done. I'll get a church job or similar and start enjoying my evenings and weekends again. What's your limit? And what's your backup plan? And, if you've applied before, did you expect to get in?

Done! Thank you!

And some places require hard copies of the letters, no electronic submissions accepted. In general, you should be able to submit your part and have the school wait for the things from others -that's how they get the GRE scores and the transcripts. It's always good to check on how complete your file is as things don't always get there as quickly as you might hope.

Thanks, people. I appreciate the detailed responses. I would also still be interested in a couple of suggestions for places with strong programs in early Christianity or similar. And, does anyone know what's up with late antiquity at a Duke now? It's always been 'on the radar' but I'm unclear about the program now that their biggest name has retired.

Thank you, AbrasaxEos. I have an MDiv, but it's a few years old, and I did a short summer course of Greek, not for credit. I have one modern language at a high level of proficiency, and I've worked on Latin off and on for a few years. I'm currently enrolled in a second masters program and I don't want to waste my classes on basic language credits - I would prefer to get myself up to a more advanced level, possibly with summer intensives, and then do courses that demonstrate proficiency and allow me to learn about a topic or area. I've started working for just 20 minutes a day on the Greek, and might add in Latin as well once I get through my current essay/writing overload. I *think* this allows me to learn the languages and demonstrate proficiency in them, with a paper trail of credits and grades to support future applications. If anyone has any suggestions, either about the process of learning a language, or about my plans for how to demonstrate proficiency, I'd be glad to hear them.

How did you learn the requisite languages for your intended studies? Classes? Summer intensives? Independent study? What would you recommend for someone who 1) needs to improve their Greek and Latin and 2) should somehow get a paper trail for this? I'm thinking of working on Greek independently over the next 10 months, then taking a course that requires intermediate level skills in the fall of 2014, and doing the Latin as a summer intensive. Is this enough? Should I do both a Greek and a Latin course (intermediate level) next fall?

I'm starting to think about applying in 2014 or 2015, any suggestions for where I should look? Also, I've been wondering about Duke: what's happening now that Elizabeth Clark is retired? Has she been replaced? And how is the overall strength of their faculty without her?

Thanks again. Hmm, Early Christianity? Historical theology? Also, I'm open to a ThD or a PhD. Any suggestions?

Thank you so much! This is tremendously helpful for someone new to the world of advanced degrees. Is there a list anywhere of top schools by area?

I seem to have missed out on the comprehensive list, and yet this sounds important. can anyone enlighten me? Perique69?

Thanks. That's helpful. What about departmental titles? Does being a chair or similar make for a better reference?

That's helpful information. You will almost certainly need a masters degree of some kind to pursue thus (as opposed to a doctorate at this point.) what do you want to do with Christian apologetics? Because there are plenty of possible future directions and a lot of reasons why someone might want this kind of academic background. Are you interested in ministry? If so, you would want to talk to members of your denomination's group that oversees this and you will need some kind of formal study. Do you want to teach? If so, where? You will probably need more/longer studies, but again, the context of your future teaching will affect your current studies. Or do you want to learn more so you can have grounded, convincing conversations with folks in everyday life? In that case, another bachelor's might help, or a course at a bible college. What you intend to do with your studies will affect where and how you should approach them. Where and how and to whom would you like to practice Christian apologetics?

and yes, I know I can pick more than one. but a couple of them overlap time-wise so I have to prioritize. thanks, any advice received with gratitude.

I keep getting distracted by the GRE thread, but I do have an actual question... It's registration time again, and I'm wondering how to pick courses if I'm working towards a PhD app next year. Should I pick the ones most closely related to my area of interest? the ones with the bigger names who might make good references? or the kind of fun ones that would be enjoyable to take (and probably fairly easy) but might not be in exactly the right area? does it even matter? does curriculum/course content count for anything when applying to doctoral programs? how about name/reputation of prof? I'm overthinking this. but it helps to dull the pain of final papers

ok, I'm new here, but it seems like someone doesn't play well with others. Also, upvoting your own post? I think both sides have a point. GRE scores can be used to weed through large pools of applicants and the TT programs do have fairly rigorous standards for acceptance. But, there are always exceptions and an otherwise excellent applicant won't be rejected for less excellent GRE scores. Everyone gets one less than perfect part of the application. if the rest is in good shape, then your GRE won't stop you.

Thank you. You've helped tremendously. I had been looking at Duke, but with more of a focus on the PhD/Religion side of things. As I think about SoPs for PhD apps, it's increasingly clear to me that I need to refine my interests/perspective, but I haven't known how to begin. Your post gives me a way to start looking at this a little differently. Much appreciated.

Thank you, jdharrison and lux lex pax. Can you tell me a little bit more about the Duke ThD program? I think I'm looking for a doctoral program that is open to interdisciplinary approaches, wile still providing solid academics. I guess I would be a better fit for a more practical/pastoral program. Which is kind of a surprise to me given my background in history and theology And I really enjoyed Ellen Charry's book, but had forgotten she is at PTS.

I'm interested in Christianity in late antiquity/early medieval, but I see it as a foundation for pastoral theology. I'm currently doing a masters with a concentration in historical theology and considering doctoral applications, but I'm not sure where/how to combine these interests. I know pastoral theology can seem a bit less academic than systematic theology or similar, and I'm wondering if there are places where the pastoral program is more rigorously grounded in history and/or systematics. Any ideas? Thanks.