More Comments? Always

I got a survey to fill out the other day for the Bethel Seminary MACT program. I finished and then got to the “more comments?” box, where I wrote:

Three realities have led to a dead MACT program at Bethel and my transfer from Bethel to the MAR program (virtual, and ATS accrd) at RTS:

1. Open Theism and similar liberal theology that unashamedly dominates Bethel University and Bethel Seminary. It’s ironic that Bethel attempts to be ecumenical in its educational purposes, but when its comes down to actual theology and knowledge about God, they are clearly in the fringe minority – both by the standards of historical theology and contemporary theology. Boyd, Clark, Beilby, and the others are free to be open theist/molinist, but, that being a minority view that clearly dominates the MACT program, there is little incentive for anyone of the historic majority of evangelicalism (Baptist, Reformed Baptist, Presbyterian, Reformed, Weslyan, etc.) to enroll at Bethel. Indeed, being “culturally sensitive” apparently means sacrificing the animal itself: sound theological education, the very purpose for a seminary…

2. The permeation of vague “spiritual formation” and generic “global theology” and “culturally sensitive” pseudo-theological regurgitations that have displaced hard, solid systematic theology in systematic theology courses and other classes. As far as I’m concerned, 1 class on spiritual formation should be standard for a theological seminary, not 1 third (the spiritual formation sphere in Bethel’s philosophy of education) of the overall goal.

3. The MACT at Bethel is superbly inflexible. I don’t care if the ATS uses Bethel Seminary’s distance program as the “norm” for its nation wide standards, the distance/InMinistry program at Bethel Seminary is extremely rigid when compared with other accredited distance degrees. 6 weeks of expensive, permanent-date, on-campus intensives are required for the Bethel MACT (2 weeks per year for 3 years). This is not only expensive and impractical for the normal person, but entirely unnecessary, both for accreditation purposes (i.e. ATS accr. MAR at RTS that requires only two 3 days intensives for the whole degree) and for educational purposes; the repetition of coursework during the on-campus intensives renders them virtually pointless. That’s A. B, there’s no thesis track available for the MACT, which makes it a poor choice for those pursuing a Ph.D program after. C, the coursework is set in stone. There is no working at your own pace (i.e. finishing a class early), let alone an actual choice for electives since the selection is so incredibly small.  In short, the MACT at Bethel is tailored around the ATS, not the student. That’s the elephant in the room.