Hi Pluralist

You said, 'ask why, of all places, an evangelical college lacks a thorough use of scripture both in a critical approach to training and in worship'.

I've looked through the inspection report and see no evidence that Wycliffe 'lacks a thorough use of scripture' in 'a critical approach to training', whatever that means. In fact I could see no criticism of the biblical teaching provided at Wycliffe, only of the limited use of Scripture in community gatherings. Where's your evidence that critical methods (form, source, tradition, redaction, canonical - you don't mention this last, I wonder why) aren't covered?

From your post it looks like you've just grasped a slender opportunity to beat a familiar drum, irrespective of the facts.

'Pluralism for everyone who agrees with me'.

Toby

Here is quite an interesting site put out as part of the evanglesim program of SSM (the Society of the sacred mission - once known as the 'Kelham fathers').  SSM have moved forward rather than bewailing the loss of the goodole days including their seminary and fine olde buildings at Kelham ....

http://www.stantonyspriory.co.uk/

http://homepages.which.net/~radical.faith/roots/index.htm

http://www.healingofmemories.co.za/

Wish I had their courage.

given the choice, I'd rather be served by clergy who had had good training in pastoral and pratical theology than ones who got a first in some abtruse area of christian theology.  (although someone who was good at both would be great)

Ask why, of all places, an evangelical college lacks a thorough use of scripture both in a critical approach to training and in worship. The answer is because evangelicals use it selectively. In the church I attend, when we've done the various courses - I did a Bishop's Course - we were looking at the Bible with great frequency, and you soon discover it has far more depth, and dare I say plurality, than the rent-a-quote approach so often used as a stick to beat others over the head. All you have to do is apply some of the critical methods, even fairly simply - form, source, tradition, redaction - to soon find out that it demands a critical approach to take it seriously. If your training college is really about producing ministers who go out marketing Christianity, then expect some shallowness. So it is no surprise to me or to some I know that this was a finding about such a college.

The CEN headline ('Wycliffe fails inspection') is misleading to say the least.

There is, however, still much to worry about when an evangelical college is criticised for e.g. lack of scripture in worship!

Yes, Nersen, it is reassuring that the Inspection Report gives a reasonably positive picture of life at the college, especially in the light of the recent upsets in Wycliffe Hall's story.  Even so, given Graham's observation on the other thread on this subject with regard to the quality of expertise offered by those members of staff who have left the college in recent years, it is no surprise that the main deficit in what is offered lies in the areas of Pastoral and Practical Theology.  Professor Elaine Graham, one of the inspectors, is amongst our leading pastoral theologians and her critique would have been discerning and constructive.

It is important to note that the college staff intend to take note and implement the suggestions made for the curriculum in this pastoral area, as well as pursuing the reconciliation urged upon them by the inspectors.

My apologies but my post on this thread this morning should not have been here. Have now offered it to the Zen and a bishop thread !

I hope nobody was hoping for an Anglican college i.e. Wycliffe Hall to get a bad report......... good to see it does much better than most PPH's and one of its students got the top 1st in theology (that sort of thing matters in Oxford but is not necessarily a good thing "on the ground", of course)  -   all in all, a good report for Wycliffe .....  I hope nobody was hoping for anything worse -  the most important thing is that the college functions well as it seeks to serve the CofE and the wider church.

It reminds me of the old (adapted joke), if you saw a Bishop and a Theological Principal drowning and you could only save one, which would you do first, read the paper, or go for lunch?

My comment is here. In brief, paddling its own canoe - selective about the Bible (as passage-quoters usually are) and half an interest in the forms of Anglican worship.

The Bishops' Inspection of Wycliffe Hall at the end of last year has resulted in this report, published today:

http://cofe.anglican.org/lifeevents/ministry/qualityassurance/wycliffehallinspection08.pdf

A response from the Management of the college is here:

http://www.wycliffehall.org.uk/temp/17-03-09spWycliffespSMTspresponsesptospBishopssqspInspection.pdf

A response from the Bishops on the college's Governing Council is here:

http://www.wycliffehall.org.uk/temp/17-03-09spWycliffespBishopsspresponsesptospBishopssqspInspection.pdf

Plenty to read and comment on.