sacklunch

You are clearly interested in a more theological (confessional?) doctoral program. If you want to study/implement theological concerns into your program, then yes, I suspect having an MDiv will help you (be required?). For the purely academic doctoral programs (viz. PhD programs in religion/religious studies at every top school in this country), it makes no difference. One of the reasons folks complete an MDiv before an academic doctoral program is the three years, they say, allows them a bit more time. On the other hand, the rule is generally one does not get an MDiv unless s(he) has some pastoral interests. The fact that most MDivs require such a bloat of 'non-academic' courses negates the extra time one supposedly acquires from that additional year(s) of study. For better or for worse, it is nearly impossible to go straight from college to a doctoral program. This requires one to acquire M* in the field and nearly all the 'great' places to do so are theologically affiliated (however loosely). Thus many of us have 'theological' M*, though have never study theology a day in his/her life (I am such a one). It's also important to note that subfields demand a different amount of previous coursework (at the masters level). So, for example, someone working in American religions will likely not be expected to have 5 years of M* coursework, whereas those studying anything related to antiquity will be expected to have a slew of ancient languages (of which one cannot acquire without 3+ years of study, even beyond the undergraduate level). cheers

Don't let the name fool you. As it was said above, admission rates hover between 30-50% and that's including the more 'difficult' accepted degrees (MTS/MAR). For the MDiv, many of the top schools are somewhere around 40%+. This means their acceptance rates are higher than many state school MA's in religion. If you do end up at a place like HDS (or its peers), nearly everyone will be from non-ivy schools. Good luck.

I'm currently at a top 5 doctoral program in a biblical/ancient area. When I applied I think I had 4-5 yrs Greek (classical, koine, patristic), 2-3 yrs Latin (classical, ecclesiastical), 3 yrs Hebrew (biblical), 2-3 yrs Aramaic/Syriac, 2 yrs German, 1 yr (modern Hebrew). GRE verbal in the low 90s, writing 5 (don't remember my math score!), good recs (all with grad profs), a pretty good writing sample (but in hindsight it was way too philological), and a really solid SOP (I spend at least a hundred hours on that bastard). I have an undergrad in religion/classical languages and two M* (I had 4 yrs of grad courses before beginning the PhD). Most crucial is your language training. This is what every prof will tell you--and they are right. You can play catch-up on most any deficiency, but language training is too time consuming. Admittedly, I think I went a bit overkill on my language preparation, especially since my program is not language focused such as some ANE programs are. I will say I am skeptical of Enki's recommendation that you should (need to?) study modern Hebrew. I have about 3 yrs of modern Hebrew now, and while I am not in HB, it hasn't helped me much (spend the most time on German). Years ago I was about to start French (I already had German) and realized there was perhaps another language that might set me apart from other applicants (in my experience outside of the Jewish academic world, it is fairly rare to find doctoral students studying modern Hebrew). I have really enjoyed studying the language, but I think French might have been more beneficial. In any case, I will need to pick up some reading knowledge of the language if I am to engage with scholarship in my field more fruitfully (I do reception of the HB). cheers

I have no doubt that is is prestigious. Hence why I said I am skeptical of one's chances. Nothing wrong with trying to get it though!

Concerning your last question: yes, absolutely. I have (over)heard several professors in various subfields of religion (from top schools) comment that they would never take a student with a 'theology' (confessional) background. From my experience these are generally religiously non-affiliated scholars who question the academic standards of seminary training. I suspect such comments exclude places like HDS and UChicago Div. Though I imagine it is just as likely for a scholar to question a student's training in a secular religious studies department. In any case, I've found no way of guessing a particular scholar's position on this besides getting to know them. As you all know, there are many fairly religious scholars who are strictly historians and are no different from any other historian who studies living and/or dead traditions. Concerning the M* in RS or theology before applying to PhD programs in philosophy, I would just go ask the peps in the philosophy section. What little I have heard from doctoral students in ancient/political philosophy is they tend to dismiss seminary training. This goes for fields like Classics and RS, too. There are certain reasons for this: 1) many seminaries do not require/require very little language training; 2) many seminaries have incredibly high acceptance rates compared to almost any other competitive M* degree; 3) many seminaries require their students to take a large number of required coursed in a wide range of topics, thus diluting the specificity of the degree; 4) and finally, some seminaries require/expect their students to be of a particular religious tradition. I'm not saying all of these are accurate, just what I have encountered as common reactions to theological training at the M* level. Take them cum grano salis.

marX is right. I'll also just add that doing an ind. course will strengthen your relationship with said professor. When/if they write a letter for you, they will have a lot more to say about you as a person. A very detailed and personal letter of rec. is absolutely great for your chances of acceptance.

While I don't recommend this, owing 180k, if borrowed from the US Government, isn't a complete disaster. Programs like the Income Based Repayment plan cap your repayment each month based on your income (or lack thereof...). Excluding tax complications, you could theoretically pay this percentage each month (you would easily qualify if you made 50k and owed 180k) for 20 years, after which said loans are completely forgiven. Hilariously such a scheme would not even pay the interest on your massive dept, but if the government does not alter its current setup this could work.

I think you made a good call. I know people with M* from Harvard who can't get jobs. Everyone knows if you go to Oxford for almost any degree (including their doctoral degrees in our field) you pay (if from N. America). It's not worth it.

Just call them and ask. Generally whoever administers the language exam has the authority to approve such coursework/background as sufficient (instead of taking the exam). Though every department varies. Most departments will not take an exam passed in a different department. Just call/email them and ask.

I doubt very much it will matter. Usually the writing sample component of your application will have a page cap, particularly for MA programs (nothing over 15pgs seems common). So even if you do the thesis you will only be able to give them a portion of it or a very truncated version of it; either way it might not be the best medium to showcase your writing abilities.

My scores were only points better and I had good results. I spent a hilarious amount of time on my PS.

You might as well apply this fall. If it doesn't work out apply again once the ThM is (almost) finished. Generally reapplying doesn't hurt you.

I imagine two years of German will serve you quite well. Many successful PhD applicants have far less. If the school has a "German for Reading" course you should still take it if you can. Those courses are almost always for graduate students (many M* will take them for credit, while PhD students often audit them to keep up their German/French/whatever). As for Latin and w/e, talk to someone in your area of interest. Current PhD students in that area would be most ideal as they have the most recent insight on what it takes to get into a PhD program. When you arrive at WMU you will (I would think) be assigned an adviser in your area of interest. Let them know of your interests and I imagine they will direct you to the courses you should be taking. A fair bit of warning though. Ask around far and wide and do not take any single person's advice as truth. Opinions vary widely on what a student should or should not be doing at the M* level.

Your interests will change, sometimes substantially so. Take the courses that interest you and be open to changing directions. I cannot speak to the language prep needed for those interests. Maybe someone else can chime in. You usually need a decent amount of German and/or another modern research language (often French). Many people take a course titled something like "German for Reading." Many schools have similar courses for French. Where are you going in the fall?

Two years of a language is generally considered "enough" to get you into a PhD program. But this all varies on one's (sub)field. If you are in classics, for example, two years of Greek and Latin is unlikely to cut it. But by in large classics depts are doing a lot more philology than people in religion (excluding perhaps NELC depts). if you want to work on Buddhist/Christian/whatever texts, then your application will be reviewed on the basis that you have/should have a foundation in the languages required for X research. There are exceptions, of course, but if you need to spend 4 years of your PhD gaining languages you will likely not be accepted. I've said it over and over on here. Languages are absolutely essential for securing a PhD spot. This is what I have been told by every single professor in my area (late antiquity) and related fields (Second Temple and so on). All we have is anecdotal evidence, but I believe this is what got me into some great programs (and was told this by professors after getting in). If you are in an M* and you are planning on applying to anything ancient/medieval and you are deciding between a 'content' course in translation vs a primary language (whether intro, intermediate, or advanced), take the language course. You can easily read a dozen books on a subject (in English) to 'catch up'; the languages simply cannot be learned over one or two years. If you are not in an ancient/medieval field, disregard my comments.

I applaud your decision. It's not easy to turn down Chicago and Oxford. I wish you the best of luck!

FWIW I've been to Middlebury a couple times, once for German. It's a good program and will def. improve your German!

Basically. The field is saturated. Many students interested in the study of religion (and naturally theology) have some level of practical ("ministerial") interest. This is just not the case with most M* degrees in the humanities. Since in this country (and the West, for the most part) Christianity reigns supreme, divinity schools can pump out thousands of graduates per year (with hopes, in theory, of finding employment rather easily...haha!). The consequence is that many are overqualified--in part because if one has academic interests that include their faith commitment, they usually require additional training, and also because those of who do not have such commitments must oftentimes compete with the longer training of the faithful (to whatever degree their training has conflated the practical and academic). In addition, many of our interests, at the M* level(s), are fairly accessible. Many divinity schools do not require that their applicants have any sort of background in religion, theology, philosophy, or even the arts in general. Many of us grow up hearing (some ad nauseum) sacred texts to the western tradition. They are fairly accessible to us. Head over to a philosophy, religion, classics, or archaeology department and count the number of M* students. The benefit of such smaller programs is they often come with fairly good funding (if not full) (e.g. classics MA's at WashU-STL, FSU, University of Arizona, and so on); the perk for many divinity schools is the huge resources a large student body brings (faculty, libraries, alum connections, and so on). /rant

Any of you heading to Durham, NC, I have a room for rent in my house this coming summer. PM me if you are interested!

I'm told the glory days of getting a good job just because you have a degree from a good school are over. My own experience, however limited, confirms this. What comes to mind is a friend who did his MTS at HDS and, after graduating (and deciding not to pursue a PhD), had to take a job at Home Depot stocking shelves (part-time, night shift). This is the reality for many, I suspect. Without a teaching certificate you cannot teach at many schools (including private depending on the state--though community college may be an option). I've heard working in the publishing world can also work. But, generally, those kind of jobs could be had without going into debt (with just a BA). I've found that if one has an M* humanities degree from a top school (such as Oxford or Chicago), employers could care less. They want to know what skills you actually have. And if you are 'forced' to work in the 'blue collar' sector, you will find that people simply do not know the difference between UChicago and Bob Jones University. They won't get it (nor should they). In fact, to some you will be thought to be 'too smug' such that you are above the work you are applying to do. Perhaps indicative of the wider job market I'll note a close friend's experience. He completed his MBA about 5 years ago and encountered this 'you are overqualified without enough experience' response a lot. After temping for 3 years he finally got a real full time job (one that only requires a BA/BS); he moved around the country to do this, too. My point is that times are tough for everyone, particularly for folks with 'only' an M* in the humanities. If those with practical degrees are having trouble securing work, I am terrified to think of what waits for me on the other side (with a PhD in hand no less). On the other hand, I'll say that the abysmal job market has made me more optimistic. If our generation is to be forever in debt and forever poor, I might as well embrace my deepest passions. If my only options for secure employment are medical school, engineering, and the like, I think I'll take my chances in the dying humanities. Still, most of us in the subforum have spent too much time in the humanities to 'turn back'; you may have the luxury of going into another field (perhaps you have a double major, one being CS?). Be strong my friend; you got this.

Think very long and hard. Remember all those times you imagined something would be so awesome only to finally get there and realize it's not 'all that.'? School names are misleading. Don't go because you want the 'experience' of being at Oxford--that elevated feeling will fade, leaving you only with your work. There are far cheaper ways to enjoy yourself. Computer science has enthusiasts, too!

I would love to see some stats on apps to CUA (ECS, Theology, Semitics, and so on). For what it's worth, I know 3 people that have applied to CUA's PhD (one in each of the three depts. I just mentioned) and all were accepted. They were actually competitive applicants, so their acceptances may simply attest to their greatness. On the other hand, I have heard acceptance to CUA (MA/PhD) is fairly common, as almost all of their offers come with zero funding. The word is that the top applicants get some sort of funding (50% for the duration of the PhD) and supposedly the ECS program fully funds a couple students here and there (I heard they were not funding anyone last year; no clue about this season). It's a shame really. I wanted to apply there when I did, but ultimately decided against it as all of their depts. told me they could not offer anyone a full package that season. If you have the funds it is a hard decision. Though I would say if you have the means to move several times, you could always reapply to CUA once you are finished with your M* alongside other 'r1' schools.

PM coming your way.

Wait til you hear from ND. They would be the obvious choice due to funding and your desire to study in a Catholic setting (they are quite Catholic...). I would steer clear of CUA, unless they are giving you funding (I assume they are not). At Duke you will be in the minority as a Catholic. Within the RS department you will find yourself amongst all sorts of backgrounds, many of them non-Christian.

No clue on exact numbers, but Duke will have far fewer MTS students. Duke tends to take way more MDiv's and way less MTS students than all of the big name divinity schools (and smaller ones too I suspect). BC, on the other hand, will have more MTS students than MDiv, due, I suspect, to the Catholic Church's stance on women clergy (also an 'issue' at ND). Both have their benefits. At Duke you will be in class with more MDiv students. BC's MTS, I think, is more open in its requirements. if you want specific numbers just email admissions at both.