01.06.2024 / Volker Glissmann
Introduction
Theological Education by Extension (TEE) was conceptualised in the late 1950s/early 1960s within the context of an established denominational theological seminary rethinking pastoral theological education for its context. TEE did not fall from the sky nor was it delivered in a spiritual vision, rather, it developed through a series of small but incremental steps until a new vision and a new approach and a new form of theological education gradually emerged that was able to address the training needs of the local pastors and church leaders.
Though TEE is often associated with grassroots theological education or lay training, its conceptual origin is ministerial theological education which was offered by a well-established theological seminary: the Evangelical Presbyterian Seminary of Guatemala (Seminario Evangélico Presbiteriano de Guatemala). The Seminary was founded in 1935 to train local pastors and belongs to the Evangelical Presbyterian Church of Guatemala (Iglesia Evangélica Nacional Presbiteriana de Guatemala). Roughly after two decades of operation an institutional review showed that only half of the seminary trained pastors were still serving the church, while the other half were no longer part of the church. An additional challenge for the seminary was that it trained both for the urban and rural pastorate and was tasked with training ministers for a church that was culturally, economically, and geographically very diverse. The church membership included the whole spectrum of Guatemalan society from urban Spanish-speaking professionals, a rising middle class, rural Latins and both progressive and isolated Indian tribes who spoke multiple Mayan-languages. Initially, the original TEE started with extending ministerial education geographically but then also extended its ministry ecclesiologically to include grassroots theological education as well.
TEE grew out of a theological and ecclesiological shift in understanding of the lay members, namely the preparation for ministry of the whole church. This is idea is widely known as the “priesthood of all believers” (Exodus 19:6, 1 Peter 2:5, 9, Revelation 1:9, 5:10). Central to the reflection of the global church in the 1960s and 1970s was the renewed emphasis of the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. The refocus on a theology of a priesthood and ministry of all believers was partially due to concerns about the long-term sustainability of church ministry. Church attendance in the so-called West gradually declined, raising questions how in the near future every congregation will be able to afford a full-time paid pastor. At the same time, a similar but reversed tension was emerging in the so-called younger or mission churches who were mostly located in economically still developing areas. Their question was, how can we now provide a full-time paid pastor for every congregation? The long-term sustainability of ministry and the associated growth with it partially led to the renewed interest in the old doctrine of the priesthood of all believers as it was breaking down the clergy-laity ministry divide. Within TEE, the priesthood of all believers expresses itself in the foundational theological vision to empower everyone-everywhere for ministry.
Additionally, the academic enrolment requirements for the seminary excluded many of the naturally developing (non-ordained) church leaders of rural and semi-urban congregations simply due to their lack of formal schooling qualifications. Other of these mature church leaders, even if they had the formal qualification, could simply not leave their families for three years of residential full-time study as they were the main bread winners. In 1963 more than half of all the denominational congregations did not have a full-time paid pastor. The main reason is the financial constraints of rural and semi-urban congregations in raising sufficient funds to pay salaries for full-time pastors. The financial situation of congregations creates a tension between the need for comprehensively theologically trained church leaders while at the same time asking these leaders to serve the church in voluntary non-paid appointment and expecting them to continue earning a living through self-employment.
Faced with these challenges, over time the Evangelical Presbyterian Seminary of Guatemala developed both a vision and a method of how extension education could be used in the field of theological education. Extension education is not a new development (it is common in agriculture), but it was at that time rarely systematically applied to theology. The Guatemalan TEE model of theological extension education is about providing theological education by means of extending the services of the physical seminary to teaching locations which are closer in proximity to the residences of the students. It is about extending the ministry of the seminary outwards. The questions that the seminary struggled with were:
- How can we train all church leaders (both ordained and non-ordained)?
- How can we train church leaders affectively for urban/rural ministry?
- What to do when the gifted leaders are subsistence farmers and cannot leave their homes to study residentially?
- How can we train theologically those that are traditionally excluded due to their formal education?
The origin story of TEE Guatemala model
The best summary of the developments of TEE in Guatemala are in an article by Kenneth B. Mulholland and Nelly Castillo de Jacobs. Nelly de Jacobs was both Professor at Evangelical Presbyterian Seminary of Guatemala, Editor of the quarterly newsletter Extension Seminary as well as Director of the Guatemala Centre for Studies in Theological Education and Ministry. She died tragically in a road accident on 18th September 1981. At that time, Kenneth Mulholland was her academic supervisor of a further study course on the origin of TEE. He is also an experienced TEE pioneer in Latin America since the early years of TEE. The following is an extract from the article “Presbyterian Seminary of Guatemala: A Modest Experiment Becomes a Model for Change” in the Extension Seminary 1982:1, p. 1-2 (The full article is available in TEEnet’s free e-book Anthology of Extension Seminary Bulletins Volume 4 (1980-1985), p. 94-102):
Theological education by extension took shape in the Presbyterian Seminary as a series of responses to a series of problems encountered in the ongoing task of ministerial formation among the sectors of society represented in the Presbyterian Church:
Problem: The numerical growth of the church led to the need for trained national leadership.
Solution: In 1935, a seminary was founded in the city of Guatemala, the nation’s capital, to train leadership for the entire denomination.
Problem: Most of the graduates trained by the seminary either never entered the specific ministry for which they were trained or else left it in order to enter non-church related occupations. In fact, a 1962 inventory disclosed that after 25 years, only ten of the more than 200 students who enrolled in the seminary were still functioning as pastors. Once accustomed to urban life, many students of rural background did not return to the agriculturally rich, but unhealthy and economically depressed areas from which they had come.
Solution: In 1962 the seminary was moved from the capital city to a rural area closer to the majority of churches and more geographically accessible to the leaders of local congregations. By now the denomination numbered 10,000 communicant members with a total community estimated between 30,000 and 40,000 members. A network of 65 organized congregations included ten in the major cities of Quetzaltenango and Guatemala City. In addition there were 140 unorganized preaching points.
Problem: The genuine leaders in the rural areas could not go even a few miles to attend a residence program because of job and family responsibilities.
Solution: In 1963, the seminary leaders took the daring step of minimizing the residence program in order to begin an extension system. They organized several regional centers located so that nearly all who desired could attend. These professors met for a three-hour seminar each week with students. The seminary paid student travel expenses. Periodically during the school year — once a month at first — meetings were held at the central campus for all the students from all the centers. Thus, the extension movement was born.
Problem: “Take home” studies used by the extension students included lengthy reading assignments. These, however, were simply not being digested, especially by the more non-academically-oriented rural students.
Solution: To meet this challenge, the faculty developed a series of workbooks utilizing inductive methodology for the study of the Bible and traditional theological textbooks. They geared them especially for individual study. As time passed, elements of programmed instruction and open education were incorporated into the program.
Problem: Immense diversity in the educational and socio-economic levels of the students was evident. Persons of equally keen leadership and spiritual qualifications possessed radically different cultural heritages, social levels, and academic backgrounds.
Solution: The very flexibility of a decentralized pattern allowed “breathing room” for multi-cultural and multi-social diversity. However, academic differences made it necessary to build a multi-level structure into the curriculum design itself. This enabled students to build their theological studies upon the highest level of secular education previously attained, whether at the level of primary, secondary, or university education. Thus, while all students covered the same basic assignments together, the more advanced students were expected to go “a second and third mile” in reading assignments, reports and projects.
Problem: Particularly in the rural areas, many gifted leaders with innate intelligence had such meager academic training that they could not even do the sixth grade level work required for the most basic courses.
Solution: To meet this need for “pre-theological education”, a second extension program was established on a nationwide basis to help not only prospective seminary candidates but also other interested persons complete their primary schooling and receive their government-recognized primary school diploma. With the passing of time, similar government programs have been initiated making this second system unnecessary.
Nearly all of the above steps met with opposition from one segment or another of the Presbyterian Church of Guatemala. However, by 1966 not only had a coherent extension program emerged, but it was beginning to attract continent-wide attention. With no increase in funds, the student body of the Presbyterian Seminary had increased from 7 to 200, taught by 3 full-time and 12 part-time faculty members.
The six problem-solution steps that Mulholland/de Jacob’s highlight are:
| Identified Problem | Proposed Solution |
| 1) more indigenous leadership need | establishment of a seminary |
| 2) seminary did not produce effective and committed leaders for the rural areas | moving the seminary from the capital to a city closer to majority of congregations |
| 3) rural leaders could still not attend the seminary | start theological teaching extension program to reach them |
| 4) students find the home study difficult | Develop inductive theological/biblical self-study workbooks for home study |
| 5) the new student body had leadership skills and spiritual qualification but educationally were too diverse | Design different levels of ministerial training for different groups of students |
| 6) gifted rural leaders were educationally too disadvantaged that they struggled with the schooling requirements | an extension program of “pre-theological education” (secondary schooling) was introduced |
Summary
TEE was conceptualised over several steps to address a specific training need with a church and within a unique but also representative socio-economic environment. The driving vision of TEE is that everyone-everywhere should be empowered to fully participate in the ministry of the church. The emphasis on providing theological education to everyone who desires it but also who – from an ecclesiological perspective – should be trained, led to academic diversification to cater for all educational levels of all students that the church wanted to train. TEE, which stands of course for theological education by extension, makes no distinction between theological and so-called Christian education. Conceptually for most TEE practitioners, there is only one inclusive form of theological education that caters for all needs and for all academic levels.