South African Theological Seminary Reputation

I’m not sure this thread has addressed one of my principal concerns which is academic credibility . SATS as I understand it has submitted its program to the agency ordained by the SA government to evaluate the quality of independent schools. That agency has looked at the qualifications of the professors, the curricula etc and it did require SATS to give up its doc program. But, SATS is accredited through the masters. Were one to think SATS is inconsistent with quality, then one is questioning the decision of that governmental office which says it is. Were one to pursue that claim, then give proof! That is, the Government of SA says SATS is credible. As I understand, it the SA government University , Unizul, accepts SATS graduates into the Unizul higher degree programs. If one thinks SATS lacks quality, then one needs to counter that phenomenon too. Why would the UZ Dept of Theology accept SATS programs were SATS not credible? That is Unizul, says SATS is credible. Were one to argue that SATS lacks quality , then needs to provide proof! SATS , therefore, is GAAP. SATS has submitted itself to evaluation and has passed muster. Many Others have not.

EG, loads of USA unaccredited theological schools do not do this. They do not submit themselves to academic evaluation. They do not seek accreditation from a US recognized agency. They rather claim phony accreditation , that is, they often misrepresent! Very Christian, isn’t it? Or say they do not want accreditation (ha,ha) at all , that is, often they lie. Very Christian, isn’t it? Does that mean all US nonaccredited theology schools have no academic credibility? Not at all. A few do.

Credibility can be measured by comparing that school’s program to an accredited school’s program: qualifications of professors, teaching strategies and materials, rigor, duration , expectations, and transferability of the program. I understand one unaccredited seminary regularly gets its MDivers into the DTS PhD program! Credibility can oft be measured by how many from any unaccredited school are accepted into accredited grad programs elsewhere. If accredited Christian seminaries will not accept a millish “Christian” seminary grad into its program, then on what basis is credibility determined? If a millish seminary offers degrees for work far substandard to that required in accredited seminaries, then on what basis is quality determined?

Re SATS, it is my hunch that were one applicant to present a master’s degree from SATS to a USA accredited seminary ,wrapping said degree in the SA document evincing SATS governmentally approved accreditor granting SATS accreditation , and another applicant to present a master’s from “Bemuddled Baptist Seminary” , self accredited, whose faculty consists of 12 profs all with ThDs gotten from Bemuddled Baptist Seminary or other of like ilk by taking four classes and writing a 15 page dissertation , then the SATS applicant would be accepted, other conditions being equal, but the grad from “Bemuddled” would not! If one thinks the opposite, then one needs to show how many Bemuddled MDivers or its real counterpart have enrolled in RA/ATS accredited doc programs.

That brings us to utility. It is credibility on which utility is based. It is the SA Gov and a SA state university which gives SATS credibility and therefore SATS will enjoy a wider utility than “Bemuddled Seminary.” Oh to be sure, if “Bemuddled Seminary” is the organ of the Bemuddled Baptist denomination, then within that denomination one’s Bemuddled degree has utility. One with the ThD, then, from Bemuddled will be fawned over and admired as a great scholar by all those Bemuddled Baptists regardless of whether that ThD holder can contrast Rahner from Aquinas on the trinal Persons or apply the Colwell rule to Greek substantives or deal with the hapaxes in the Pastorals. Such a “scholar” can feel proud that he or she is called “Dr.” for that piddling, unchallenging, rigorless Bemuddled “graduate” work, just as all those Drs are so called who actually did it the credible way. Such vain and deceitful uneveness is oft sanctioned by many “Christian” churches , denominations or schools.

The credible way? What is that? That usually is when it is done in a manner which has the approval of those responsible for evaluating academic programs or done in a manner that would be so approved. Credibility in academics is not the function of a particular , as the Bemuddled Baptist, denomination. Credibility in academics generally is based on accreditation which provides some demonstrable standards. God has given that accreditational function to government approved accreditors as AABC, RA, ATS, TRACS etc or in the case of SA SAQA!

But what of those who succeed more broadly, but have only unaccredited degrees? Of course there are these success stories. Tim LaHaye was my pastor for years in San Diego and only had then a BA from Bob Jones. Yet Tim worked hard in his ministry–though he and I may have disagreements on eschatology and cessationism- and became a huge success. Of course it can be done. James White did it with an unaccredited doc. But these are much succeeding not because of, but in spite of, their unaccredited education . And some of that school education still is not at times widely accepted. I think , EG, it would be illegal for White to use his CES doc in secular contexts in one state that actually borders CES itself! And their success does not in academia change the status of a school’s credibility. BJU was already well recognized and would be regardless of La Haye. And CES, as far as I know, has gained no wider acceptance from academia because of White [ I do NOT compare the better CES or the genuinely qualified Walston and his faculty of ‘mentors’ with Bemuddled Baptist and its Bemuddled profs].

Frankly, I think it improper to justify one’s choice of unaccredited schools , which generally are very substandard, or on this board to encourage an inquirerer to do so, on the basis of what one intends to do with that degree, particularly if one is Christian. IMO, “Christianity” should not be an excuse for substandard and even at times deceitful degrees regardless of the application or purpose of that education . Further, unless one’s name is Juanita, and therefore knows the future, how can one rule out the possible need to have a recognized degree or the possible hurt of having not an unrecognized degree? And frankly ,again, it would appear to me unseemly to in the interest of God or His Church or Higher Education or of the individual himself either to encourage on this board enquirers to consider enrolling in [most] unaccredited schools on the basis that some few graduates of unaccredited schools have “made it” big time in spite of having unaccredited degrees! The future is not known for these inquirers and the exception of a few big timers proves no rule.

Of course higher ed should also be done for oneself too. In a way one accredits for himself his own work. Self satisfaction is much my goal. My dissertation topic is of great interest to me , and I think the church dogma on it is wrong. Were I desiring to in the USA RA seminary teach, then RA or even the UK would be the better way to go for a terminal degree. But BTW, connections and reputation, not degrees, are equally important to get a position and the positions for teaching theology are flooded with qualified applicants. So, since I’m just an old guy who is isn’t much looking to change careers and since I do it much only for myself anyway, why not go unaccredited? What’s the diff?

The diff is that my product, ie, dissertation, is going to be read by four very theologically qualified profs on my committee, two from Unizul a government university and two from other SA government universities, not by a Bemuddled prof with a Bemuddled degree. The diff is acknowledged theological experts are going to evaluate whether or not my product equals that expected of a genuine doctor of theology. The difference is credibility! If they approve it, then my product and my degree is credible to more than just to those Bemuddled Baptists. Also, only then is my work credible to me too, ie, for the purpose of getting a doctorate.