In Trust Center
The In Trust Center podcast is hosted by Matt Hufman. Walk alongside theological school leaders and innovators as they explore issues relevant to North American seminaries, all while helping institutions live out their missions more intentionally. Find more at intrust.org/podcast.
In Trust Center
Ep. 85 - The State of the Theological Education in 2025
Theological schools across North America are at a pivotal moment. In this episode, Rev. Frank Yamada, Ph.D., executive director of the Association of Theological Schools, and Amy Kardash, president of the In Trust Center for Theological Schools, discuss both the challenges and opportunities shaping the future of theological education. They explore pressing issues such as financial sustainability, leadership transitions, and shifting student demographics, while also highlighting how boards and leaders can navigate these changes.
Hello and welcome to the Interest Center Podcast, where we connect with experts and innovators in theological education around topics important to theological school leaders. Thank you for joining us. Hi everyone. Welcome to the Good Governance Podcast. I'm Matt Huffman. I'm joined today by two leaders in the field who really need no introduction, but they bring unique views of theological education from their work. The first is the Reverend Dr. Frank Yamata, the Executive Director of the Association of Theological Schools and the Commission on Accrediting, which is the gold standard of accrediting accreditation for theological schools in North America, a former president, administrator, and faculty member at Accredited Schools. Frank, welcome to the podcast. Great to be here, Matt. And I'd also like to welcome Amy Kardash, the president of the Intrust Center for Theological Schools, who works with schools across North America to resource leaders, boards, and their institution, and in her role, has really helped define and shape the center for its work, leading initiatives, programs, working with people across denominations. Amy, welcome to the podcast.
SPEAKER_00:Thanks, Matt. It's good to be back.
SPEAKER_01:We are recording at the end of January 2025, just to give people a time reference as we talk about the state of the field, and we'll discuss some of the key issues in the field and what may lay ahead for theological schools. Frank and Amy, as you both know, this has been a tumultuous time for theological education. We know that the field has been under stress with enrollment declines, uh turmoil in the North American church, fewer clergy jobs, executive turnover. And at the same time, there are positives. Uh three years ago, at the start of the Pathways for Tomorrow initiative by Lily Endowment Inc., Frank, you uh you brought out your Hebrew scholarship. You're a Hebrew scholar, and uh and you described this time, referring to the biblical story of creation, which I loved, uh, as a time of creativity coming out of chaos, which I think is such a wonderful analogy. So let me start there with you, Frank. You've you see a lot in the field through your work. I mean, we're five years removed from the initial surge of the COVID-19 pandemic. There's been significant change. There's still stress, there's turnover, there are people dreaming of the future, which, and we'll talk more about pathways more specifically. But let me start with you, Frank. Would you talk a little bit about how you would describe the state of the field right now as we're still entering the year 2025?
SPEAKER_04:Well, I think uh part of the wisdom of the biblical text is that they have an enduring quality, right? So I don't think we're ever out of uh a time when uh both crisis and creativity happen at the same time. I think that there are certain factors within our larger environment, both in terms of the larger environment of the church, of the broader society, and of higher education, that where we're seeing impacts of the different kinds of crises that are confronting schools. Um if you're looking at it in terms of the church, you know, obviously we've known for decades now that there is a decreasing amount of participation in regular worship, in membership in churches. Um, and this goes across the board. Um, it's been more pointed in certain traditions than others, but it seems to be across the board, not just in the US, but also increasingly so in Canada. Um, if we look at the broader environment, the increase of polarization politically, socially, um, this is certainly having an effect on theological schools and on governing boards. Uh, if we look at higher education, the cost and the value of higher education have come um under question from many sectors. On top of the fact that whenever you talk to those who are seeing the broader trends in higher education, particularly in undergraduates, uh, you know, there is consistent talk about the imminent enrollment cliff. So all of these broader factors are certainly having an impact because theological education sits kind of at the crossroads of all three of these big spheres. Um, I think ways that we're seeing it in terms of uh theological schools, I would name four uh broad areas where we're seeing significant both creativity to the challenges that are current in our current environment. Um the big ones are, you know, we've talked in a previous podcast, Matt, about uh the um significant transitions in leadership. So definitely some issues in leadership. We have a whole generation of new leaders, almost quite literally, um, in theological schools. Um, I've stated some of these data before, but since 2017, we've seen about 600 transitions in the top two positions in ATS schools. So that is the CEOs or chief executive officers, the presidents' executive deans, and in the chief academic officers, the academic deans or associate deans. Um, that's significant, that's that is a uh a once in a generation, or in fact, an unprecedented shift in terms of the leadership. Um, with that has come a renewed sense of hope, um, some definitely some creativity coming from these leaders, but also some challenges because a lot of these folks are first time in these kinds of roles. Um we see it in terms of the need for schools to address. Um, we see a lot of schools trying to address the need for a different business or financial model in schools. Uh, and we'll talk a little bit about that when we talk about this next round of pathways. Um, because I think this is one of the primary areas where schools are gonna need to see some significant changes in the in the coming decades and where we're likely to see some significant changes. Because if schools continue to go in their current trajectory, we're gonna see schools just dropping out. They're not gonna be financially sustainable. Uh, the third area is in the different ways that schools are seeking to adapt their educational models. This is happening both in the online sphere, um, the massive move to online after the pandemic, but that's been sustained post-pandemic. Um, the growth of uh areas of theological education like competency-based theological education, but uh a number of different modalities for theological education, and particularly with the non-degree and certificate area is a growing area in terms of the adaptation of theological schools as they're trying to be responsive to the environment. Um, and the last area really is um it this there is just uh uh a different set of student populations that's that schools are seeking to serve. Um those those demographics have changed quite significantly, and I think they're both reflective of the demographics of the church and the wider demographics of North America. Um, those are four areas where one could view them both as challenges or crises, or as places where schools have significant opportunity to um really lean into their historical missions in very new ways.
SPEAKER_01:That's a great summary of some of the issues facing it. There's a confluence, I think, in in many ways that perhaps theological education hasn't faced. I mean, each of these on their own is a significant challenge. Um Amy, let me turn to you because in your work with presidents, with the academic deans and leaders and boards, uh, Ms. Frank noted, I mean, let's start with turnover for a second. Uh, this leadership turnover is a major issue. I mean, it's it's hopefully this is a once-in-a-generation or a lifetime thing, but we're seeing, you know, presidential terms shrink. We're seeing um, you know, boards have to take on kind of a new role. I mean, they've got to have a new understanding, I think, of their maybe fiduciary responsibilities. Uh, but I may be getting cart ahead of the the horse here. So talk a little bit about what what you're seeing, the leadership challenge through all of this, uh, particularly, I think, with um executive leaders churning through those jobs a little more. So, in your work, what would you say you're seeing? Or are boards recognizing some of these challenges? And how do you see them responding?
SPEAKER_00:Well, uh, two sides of that. Thanks, Matt, and Frank. Thank you for that, uh, those sort of four, which you know, um our listeners might not be able to recognize my nodding through all of that. Um, and as it I think as it relates to executive leaders, I I think uh if I had to name sort of a big um kind of challenge, you know, I'd put it in the sort of this humanity people category for for lots of reasons. And we could talk about humanity and technology, humanity and leadership, but particularly to respond to your question about executive leader and transition. I think that um increasingly in a climate of change and shifts and demands, that the stress and the um the work of an executive leader has intensified in ways that is leading to all of these transitions that Frank has noted. Um and um what that translates into, I think, is um a growing need for boards to be attentive to um what care and support of the executive leader looks like and how that might be shifting. Um and so for at least for freestanding schools that have governing boards, the executive leader is the sole employee of the board. And it's it's critically important that boards um tend to that, but also in times of shifts or institutional crisis, and we know that there's plenty of that around, um, that boards remember that and look to the institutional leader for uh answers to questions they might have, to coming alongside the leader in those times of crisis and not reacting as individuals, um, but reacting collectively as board members and really being attentive to that. Um, we know that executive leaders are encountering challenges, new challenges that leaders in the past haven't encountered, whether that's related to technology and AI, whether that's related to shifts as Frank made in student uh demographics and communities that are being served as it relates to enrollment, financial pressures, and sustainability. And so all of these demands pressed upon a person who is likely there for a shorter term than his or her predecessor. Um, those are all uh things I think that boards particularly need to be uh aware of. Um, and there's plenty to talk about as it relates to calling a new leader as well and thinking about uh a healthy transition and healthy leadership development.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, we'll put some links in the podcast caption on on some of these topics. We'll fill it out with like leadership transition development. But this is um it's a significant time. And and Frank, let me go back to you for a second because you called this out right like through the pandemic. You saw the trends. Uh, ATS ran the numbers, and the numbers were pretty significant. I mean, it was it was touching nearly every, if not every school in terms of a shrinking number of uh of the tenure, pardon me, in terms of the shrinking tenure of of leaders, both uh the chief executive and an academic leader. Uh, we've also saw the the churn of it happen. And of course, I think as as we've talked before, the pandemic was kind of a a great time for people to say, this is not the spot I want to be in, or it's it's time to retire or time to move on. Uh in following up in that, now that we're a few years further out of the pandemic, what are you seeing? Are you still seeing these trends kind of continue? Are you seeing more reasons? And Amy, I appreciate the reasons you posted. I mean, AI we haven't even talked about. There's yet another new thing for a an executive leader to uh to to put on their plate. But are you seeing other other ideas or reasons people have been transitioning now?
SPEAKER_04:Yeah, uh thanks, Matt. And thanks, Amy, too, for those thoughts about what boards can do because that's critically important. That was my experience as an executive leader at a school as well, that was undergoing some significant changes. Uh but in terms of the reasons, uh uh you know, I think that we had some data based on a leadership study we did of presidents and executives in ATS schools, and we're actually currently undergoing a new study that's following up on that one. In that study, uh, we did find out from leaders the like the top three reasons that that presidents um that create the most stress for presidents that actually make them think about leaving the profession or thinking about another form of employment. Those three stresses are not not surprisingly aligned with some of those larger trends that we were talking about. Uh enrollment pressures, right? Uh not being able to find a sustainable business model. Um, and the the last was working with difficult people. So um the that humanity element that Amy was talking about is a real one. Um I've heard from a lot of executive leaders that during the pandemic, uh just the the amount of management leaders were supposed to do, because that's usually not the primary call for an executive. Usually the primary call for the executive is to be more about vision casting, about um uh raising resources and funds for the school. Um, it's more the strategic leader. Um, but they were doing so much more management of people. Um, and that seems to have continued post-pandemic because of the changing nature of our organizations. Uh, so this continues to be an issue. Um, and as I see, and as I as we look at the larger data trends for the association, I don't think that enrollment challenges or the inability to find a sustainable business model are going to go away. I assume that those will continue to be the pressures. Um, when we add some of these more recent political and social pressures that are kind of external to our theological schools, we see them internally in the schools among the student population, among the faculty, and among board members. So it creates um more conflict within a school than may have been there, like in the in the previous century, for example, or the late part of the 20th century. Those things were still there for sure, but they're there in such um uh very uh they're there in very difficult and in some ways more amplified ways in these current days.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, we haven't even talked about some of the social pressures or or issues that may happen in this current political reality in terms of the future of education, what things like uh DEI looks like on different types of campuses. Uh, one of the things I I don't think we take enough time to consider is the different constituencies the president or an executive leader of a theological school has to deal with because you're dealing with uh you know spiritual overlay as well, denominational leadership. Uh there there are extra pressures uh that I don't think we touch on. And, you know, again, it's as you mentioned, education roles or education models continue to change with technology. Uh, we recently had Anna Robbins from Acadia Divinity College on the podcast talking about AI and how they were they were engaging that. Um, but you know, one thing that that both of our organizations deal with is remote work. And and there's a pressure that I think presidents, you know, in years past haven't had to deal with. There's there's such a confluence. Um, Amy, you know, again, I thought you you said that so well about the human issues dealing with um the human issues for a board are are more than just the one, you know, they have one employee who's then got bunches of employees. Uh, but a board itself, at especially with I think presidential tenure shrinking, has to take on a new role, would you say? And a new understanding that this is their institution. I mean, this isn't 30 years ago when you expected a president to last 10, 15, 20 years, and that the board would show up and expect a good lunch or a dinner and time with faculty and students. There's a different role, it would seem, for boards in this age.
SPEAKER_00:Right. You're right, Matt. Um I I do want to just comment that when when Frank was sharing, I was thinking about sort of anxiety in the system. And when there's angst and anxiety in the system, it it can create, you know, and uh be fed off of all of these other issues, right? And so I think for executive leaders trying to manage that in the system, um, it can be quite difficult. And recognizing that's coming from students, it's coming from, you know, faculty, administrators, staff, and likely the board. Um, and so, you know, I think Matt, one of the things that we've been talking a lot about over the last year is how can a board provide stability and continuity given um leadership transition, given expectations that there aren't going to be long leadership tenures. Um, and part of our um board study um that we're doing is trying to kind of get at that and recognize for um the majority of boards, they are really executive-centered, meaning they're looking to the executive leader to sort of guide the work of the board, or they're looking to the executive leader to be saying, like, these are the realities of the institution. Um, and part of what we're trying to identify in our qualitative research study this year is um markers of boards that are taking um ownership, you know, of their own space, right? Markers of boards that are um that are allocating the majority of their time to those strategic and also maybe more importantly, those generative conversations of how are we making sense of the information we have? If if our data suggests that our enrollment continues to decline and our financial model is working and we're using that data, what is it telling us that we need to do? What are the changes we might need to imagine? Or what are the possible futures we can imagine together? And I think that is the work that we're hoping to press boards to be more thoughtful about, but while recognizing that boards themselves are constantly responding to change and institutional crisis. So when we're talking about a body of individuals that come together on average three times a year, how are they allocating time between the meetings to tend to the things that are the regular board work so that the majority of the time can be allocated to these bigger issues? And Matt, you and I have talked about the fact that our quantitative study has shown that boards are meeting less frequently and the duration of board meetings continues to be reduced. So we don't know if that's a good or a bad thing. Maybe boards are using all of their meeting time for just the right things, but we really need to probe that and help boards think about allocating time for the most important conversations.
SPEAKER_01:Well, again, I appreciate you pointing out the anxiety in the system. I mean, it's it's throughout it. And in boards now can be engaged more, I think, in some ways, because of things like Zoom, which we're recording on, um, you know, email texts, etc. And at the same point, you can also be more disengaged, thinking, here, I, you know, I gave the president a to-do list. Well, so did every other board member potentially. Um, so I want to talk a little bit about because future in sustainability now. Um, you know, Frank, that's one of the things you mentioned. There are several things that go into that. Um, we've talked about the anxiety of it. I mean, I think boards have such a responsibility right now that to be engaged is vitally important. Because I think this is a time when we're going to look back in 50 years or so. Uh we may not, but somebody will look back in 50 years and say this time period was crucial to the future of theological education. So, Frank, let me let me start with you. As a former president, of course, as the head of ATS now, um, there's you know, so much information that comes across your desk and what you're seeing in the field. Um, everybody's looking to solve, as Chris Meinzer at ATS likes to say, solving for sustainability. Um, and that's one of the things we're seeing pop up out of the Pathways project. It's people trying to find that. What are you seeing in terms of people looking at sustainability, what they're doing in what's working?
SPEAKER_04:So, and I'm gonna kind of evoke Chris here too, because one of the things that um it's it's not just solving for sustainability, but the bigger picture of that is kind of mission vitality, right? Right. So mission vitality has a lot to do with just not not just how financially sustainable is it, that's part of it, right? But it's also uh is is the school doing the right things in terms of its mission? Is is that mission vital enough? Uh you may have a very sustainable model, say you're serving two or three students and you're able to sustain a very good model. You might ask the question if it's a if it's a tradition that um that do they need those three, or um is three enough? Is that mission vital enough? So there's there's that combination of it. Um, but I think in terms of the sustainability, what's pretty clear, and this is gonna, I'm gonna sound like a broken record here, because this is also gonna come up, you know, if we if or when we start talking about pathways, uh, it's clear that from the broader perspective of higher education, that something's broken about the financial model of theological schools, but also of higher education and schools in general. Yes. Um, so what we see is a lot of uh partnerships emerging. This has been a theme of the first pathways, um, is the both the promise and hope of partnerships, but also the difficulty of them. Um when uh you have a lot of schools that have historically always thought of themselves as we are the center of the universe, we have the best way to do theological education, we have the world-class faculty, and every school says this. Right. Um that um it's very difficult for them to think collaboratively or to think as larger than themselves. Um and what we're seeing though is that the need for schools to be able to collaborate, to partner with other organizations or schools is the broader trend. Um some of the examples of these partnerships, um, both from pathways and from the broader higher education, are things like shared service agreements, um, things like outsourcing or services or resources that were once all done in-house by a school, are now done by an external partner or organization. Um in higher ed, uh, consortia are also being thought about and looked at. Um and um this is something that ATS schools had done in previous decades, um, I think with varying success um and actually varying failures as well. Um, acquisitions and mergers, I think, are are very, very um in the atmosphere right now. Um at ATS, we're continuing to see about a merger every three to four months. Um, so this is, I think, what happens as a natural way that's there's a kind of a natural consolidation that happens in an industry where you have basically a flat or declining number of students and a growing number of schools. At some point, you're gonna see some consolidation. Um, another form of partnership is um different forms of institutional structural change like selling a property or moving to increasing the online and decreasing physical footprint of a school. Um, these are other ways that I think schools are trying to change the economic model that underlies the sustainability of a school.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, I think, you know, I'm thinking back in the past year, I've been on about a dozen campuses uh and have seen all of this play out. So let me let me transition. You mentioned pathways for a second because I think part of the sustainability discussion right now has to be tied to pathways. ATS and and the interest center are co-coordinating Pathways for Tomorrow initiative. Um, Lily Endowment Inc. has just made a new announcement about another round of funding uh that's gonna see uh uh several hundred million dollars into uh potentially into schools and theological education, one for kind of sustainability projects and and projects to enhance pathways for to train people and put them into pastoral ministry. And the other is uh really an exciting initiative to add to what you're talking about, Frank, collaboration. Amy, let me ask you to talk a little bit about this because there's a lot of excitement. Um, and and I I'll note, Frank, you know, you and I had a conversation at the last biennial with all the new leaders. There's a sense of freshness um and some excitement with with the turnover. Uh Amy, you and I have talked about this at Pathways. We have seen continued engagement, some freshness in the field, uh, people having conversations. I I don't know that they would have had maybe the space to have um several years ago. Um, so let me ask you, Amy, to start on this. Is uh what are we seeing in pathways? I mean, there's again, right now, as we're talking, there are schools developing new uh planning grants. They're also proposing concept papers for potential collaborations, uh either internally and denominations. So among, as you said, Frank, I think we we may see you know some folks talk about in their own denominations, gathering schools together. Um let's talk a little bit about Pathways, and which is the big elephant in the room and and perhaps a vehicle for some real discussion about sustainability. What are we saying, Amy?
SPEAKER_00:Yeah, thanks, Matt. I I mean, I think Pathways has created wonderful opportunities for theological schools and is such a blessing from Lily Endowment and this new realm. I think it will build on that and expand that in really wonderful ways. And I think that both the aims of the initiative, as you said, to strengthen and support pastoral leaders and laity and Christian congregations, allow schools to really think about and be really clear about what they do and who they do it for. And in the planning grant period gives an opportunity to even do some needs assessment. I think one thing that our schools have been really good at is supplying, right? Supplying educational programs. And I don't know that we're as good at listening to the market and responding to demand. And some of what the round first round of pathways did was allowed schools to be really intentional about listening to the market and connecting with new and more diverse communities that maybe didn't find theological education accessible or affordable. And many schools responded to that. Some schools also were looking at fewer schools, but some were looking at some of the things that Frank had articulated as it relates to sustainability and financial and operational models. And I think what this new round of pathways is doing is saying, okay, let's take what we've learned and let's create opportunities for schools who did not receive opportunities in the first round. But in the large-scale collaborative grants, let's actually push into some areas that maybe weren't clear as clearly articulated in the first round. So we're seeing words like merger, as Frank said. We're seeing words like shared endowment, really being intentional about these kind of larger scale collaborations towards, you know, a kind of a new future. And I think that all offers a lot of opportunities for schools to be intently listening to what's needed. You know, what are potential students seeking from our institutions and how can we be most responsive in order to meet the aims of the initiative? Um, and I think another thing that I would mark that's a little bit of a difference between round one and round two is the explicit request to think about stakeholder engagement. We did not see a lot in round one of boards being engaged from the get-go. We did not see a lot of recognition of other institutional parties and um partners that would be impacted by the initiative. So whether that's libraries or other directors or administrators, so the centering of the Pathways initiative to the core of the mission, to the institutional sustainability, the recognition that boards need to be involved in these planning discussions and recognize that in order for us to fulfill our mission and be good stewards of these resources, the ones we have and the ones we might receive in the grant, this is what we need to kind of imagine together. So I think that this round is offering kind of more um opportunities to be intentional about the things that Frank was just talking about as it relates to um institutional sustainability and stewardship of resources.
SPEAKER_04:Yeah, that's a great point, Amy.
SPEAKER_01:Go ahead, Frank.
SPEAKER_04:Could I jump in there, Matt? Yeah, I was gonna just say I really wanted to highlight both of those things that Amy said, both the engagement of stakeholders internally to the school, um, but also uh attention to the market. Um, you know, that that's very much business language. Sometimes theological scholars or leaders will, you know, kind of bristle at that. Right. But think of it this way it's it's it's schools that should be responsive to the context that they serve. Um schools for for many decades, maybe even centuries, have kind of taken a come on to us, all of you who want theological education approach. Um uh I used to say at McCormick that we often had an admissions department, not a recruitment department. Um and it's uh schools are increasingly, though, going to communities of faith, local adjudicatories to denominations, and asking how can theological education serve you and your leadership? What do your leaders need? I think this is um actually one of the great things that we learned from this first round of pathways that that's where schools were having success with the engagement of communities. Um, and when we think of these broader partnering programs that the endowment is encouraging in the second round as well, um, schools would really benefit by broadening the conversations outside of their walls or outside of their you know proverbial walls or metaphorical walls, and saying, you know, who just needs to be in these conversations, both internally and externally, so that our missions can be vital and so that we as an institution can be responsive to the movement of the spirit or to the movement of where we think God needs to be moving us forward.
SPEAKER_01:The Pathways grant and especially this new round has encouraged schools to think in some ways. I think what what you laid out, Frank, at the beginning of this podcast, we talked about leadership transitions, but the other point you talked about, other points you talked about sustainability business models, education models, different sets of student populations. Um, the whole idea of pathways, of creating new pathways, of figuring out who your students really are, how you serve them, and then how you put them out into service, I think has brought some new creativity and energy into the field. Um the question, I think, is as you say, is as you both have said, is now how do we engage? I mean, from uh a governance perspective, how's the work involved in that? What are the decisions being made? Um, you know, where are we pushing forward? What is the market if if we use the business language asking us to do? Those are tough questions to deal with. But but I was on a campus recently and uh you know, chatting with leaders and talking through some of their plans, including their pathways plans, and and this little interesting tidbit came up. They're talking about their denominational support. And somebody just off-handedly said, you know, 50 years ago, named a number, it was about 50, 55 years ago, the denomination made a decision that they were still dealing with today. It had implications. So I want to kind of bring this conversation a little back to where we started in the field. If we were around in 50 years from now, what do you think the folks then would want us to know today? Or where do you think we are? Because it seems to me we're at this confluence of major, major issues, societal change, political change, anxiety in the system. We're being forced to deal with systemic issues in the field that I think either endowments or as you say, the the admissions mentality, we had adjudicatory sending people to our schools, and when the money was flowing and emissions were good, we didn't have to deal with those. We seem to have to deal with those now. So, what what do you think in this point? I mean, in 50 years from now, what is it people would say or want to say? Frank, you want to start?
SPEAKER_04:Sure. Um, I've often said I just actually wrote a piece, a small piece for Austin Seminary, their little publication on the future of theological education. And I made this provision. I said, I don't have a crystal ball. You know, all the data that we see from 30-year trends is all backward looking. Um, but those trends do suggest some things. Um in terms of where what I would hope that we could say about theological education in 50 years, um I don't think it's likely. Let me say what I don't think we'll see. Say sure. I don't think we're gonna say, well, wasn't it great that we saw this boom in enrollments and we saw this renewed invigoration and the growth of churches in North America? I think realistically that's not on the horizon. Um the question should be, though, um, and what I hope theological schools will have been known for in that 50 years is that they were responsive to what God had called them to be in that moment. And that led to decades of continuing mission for that school or for that uh for those partnerships. Um, I think that increasingly schools are going to be less centralized and more about collaborations and networks and partners. Um, I do think that the mission of schools is going to migrate to places where the mission of God is vital. Um, whether that's in the North American church or the North American communities of faith or broader globe, uh inner uh the global experience of religions and Christianity. Uh I would want folks to say about theological schools that they were responsive to the where to where God was, God's mission was calling them to be responsive. Um and if that's the case, as it was in, for example, in the New Testament in the book of Acts, I think we'll find that the church will be a vital place, that the theological education will be in a vital place. Um, you know, no one could have predicted Pentecost in Acts chapter two. And no one had predicted in the early church um the Holy Spirit falling on the Gentiles. Um, but the church, as it goes through the book of Acts, is responsive to the leaning of the Spirit. Um that's what I would hope for for our schools, is that they would be responsive to where God is calling them to be. Um, and um based on their historical mission, sure, but their mission's adapting to where the spirit is moving them.
SPEAKER_01:Amy, what do you think?
SPEAKER_00:Well, um Matt, I I was thinking about what you said about the the school you were visiting and you know, uh something that occurred 50 years ago having implications today. And I was thinking, um, 50 years ago, I wonder if it would have been easier to predict what was happening now than it is now to predict in 50 years. Um, so having said that, uh, you know, I think, I think one thing that's really hopeful is um I know that people will still want to know God and want to learn and live the gospel in 50 years. And that is really encouraging. I think how that's done, um, I'm reminded of the exercise that we um participated in for any listener that was in the AI symposium in November. There was this exercise to write a letter to yourself from 2040. And and I, in my letter, and you know, as part of the exercise, I said, I can't imagine writing this in five years. Like that's the speed of change, and the up button gets pushed more every year. But I will say that my hope is that the models that our schools um have developed would be ones that don't burden learners or leaders. So I see that will probably be fewer institutions, you know, as Frank's articulated, and more systems of collaborating that is better at stewarding resources together. And my hope also is that the stakeholders who serve in those places have a collective understanding of their individual roles in the sustainability and stewardship. Because I think right now many tend to think it's the others' responsibility to think about finances or think about governance or think about management. And we rarely begin by asking the question: what's my role in all of this? And how can I help facilitate the very things that will allow our mission to be sustainable in whatever, in whatever way that that looks like, that may be quite different than now. But so that's my hope for the future and where we might get to. And I hope it doesn't take 50 years, but I hope we're always leaning and moving into that space.
SPEAKER_01:Those are excellent thoughts to end this podcast on. Really thoughtful, thoughtful uh responses to a very tough question. Um, so I want to thank both of you. Frank, thanks so much for being here. It's always a pleasure to have you on the podcast. It's always a pleasure to be back, Matt. And Amy, always a pleasure. Thank you.
SPEAKER_00:Thanks, Matt, and thanks, Frank.
SPEAKER_01:Thank you for listening to the Intrust Center's Good Governance Podcast. For more information about this podcast, other episodes, and additional resources, visit intrust.org.