‘A rabbi, a minister and an imam walk into a classroom, and it’s no joke.’ That’s the opening line from the AP story on Claremont School of Theology’s new University project. The plan is basically to have all three Abrahamic faiths training ministers in separate schools within one larger University. Al Mohler (among other conservative voices) have already started revving up the heresy charges. I’ll let you watch the opening news conference and tell me if it smells like a cafeteria of religion or a perfect response for theological education in a pluralistic environment with global crises. If you like the plan why? If not, how should theological education take account of the enduring nature of religious pluralism and the global challenges?
TONS OF LINKS…..Sheryl Kujawa-Holbrook, CST Practical Theology Professor, blogged at the Huffington Post ‘A New Paradigm for Theological Education‘ \ Going Interfaith: Claremont School of Theology’s Radical Move (@ Patheos) \ The Jewish Journal’s Report \CST’s President guest blogs @ the Washington Post here, ‘Methodists, Muslims and Jews: Learning together to lead together‘ \ Here’s Mitchell Landsberg’s sweet post from the LA Times\ ‘Claremont seminary reaches beyond Christianity‘ \ James, a CST grad and Theology After Google Student!!!, blogs on it here. \ Al Mohler’s radio show bit \ Methodist Thinker’s huge link collection.
Thoughts from an Indonesian Pentecostal who is also a student at Calemont: http://shar.es/mkjCN
He thinks it’s a good idea.
Cool. I think this is a great idea. Here at Duke we have a Rabbi and an Imam as adjunct faculty. One of the best classes I have taken in 3 years here was learning wisdom from rabbinic stories taught by Rabbi Sager. It was a class of just MDiv’s (Christians) but to learn the Talmud from a Rabbi was so enriching for us all and will make us better pastors and students of Scripture, I believe.
I applaud Claremont for this. It is so important to for people of faith to continue to dialogue. Given the existence of people who dedicate their entire lives to the impassioned study and learning (not to mention living) of a particular faith/philosophy/worldview, I find it hard to understand how someone outside of a particular tradition could claim to absolutely understand it or engage in a generalized critique of that faith. I would agree with Marshal McLuhan here and say that “we critique far too soon. We must first seek understanding.”
Good job Claremont!
Cool Idea.