Question about Trinity

OK, I know Trinity seminary is not accredited and it continues to mislead people about its status.

Apart from that, I hear nothing but good about its programs of study. So I'm wondering ... Exactly how would you view a person with a doc from the school?

Would that person be viewed in the way Charles Stanley was viewed with his doc before Luther Rice was accredited? If not, then why not.

BTW, I have no plans to pursue a degree from the school. Just wondering if a person, like some of my friends, who holds a D.Min. from the school should be respectfully called "Dr."

The limited utility is fully understood.

Thanks.

Roscoe

 

I would be interested in discussing with that person why he/she contributed to a school which immorally deceives in regard to accreditation in order to make money.

But, I personally would not feel strange about calling that one "Dr" because I thought the rigor of his program was inconsequential. BLD disagrees with my perception ,I think, and Barry took a class at Trinity too.

Ron Clutter, I believe, now heads up the Bib/theo , has the PhD from DTS. I found Dr Clutter to be a hard grader though we disagree on the nature of Christ's humanity (this is my first theological comment in two weeks!)

 

But this one doesn't count because it relates directly to a school program.

And don't think we are going to let you save them up.

 

I think that I would place Trinity C&S in the upper half of state-approved schools. Where it precisely belongs is a matter of taste, I guess.

Pluses: Its "accreditation". While it isn't what Americans understand acceditation to be, it is an endorsement. Trinity does seem to have some kind of intellectual life, though I've never really investigated it. John Warwick Montgomery, if you like what he does.

Minuses: Its "accreditation". The way that it's presented seems flat-out dishonest, and dishonesty is fatal in religion. What I've seen of its intellectual life seems rather confined and doctrinaire. John Warwick Montgomery could be a turn-off if you aren't in tune with what he does.

How would I respond to a Trinity graduate? I'd be interested but a bit skeptical, I guess. The skepticism might be more than with a graduate of a conventional school, but not entirely dismissive.

I probably would react much the same as I would react to anyone with a theology degree from any school. On the macro scale, I'd have my reaction to the whole discipline. On the micro level, I'd respond the individual directly, reacting to his or her personality, skill and expertise.

Perhaps school names and degree titles would have the most impact on me when the other person is absent, and I am asked to accept their assertions based on my faith in their authority as scholars. The Trinity thing could have a distinct negative impact there.

But I think that a strong scholarly paper probably can stand on its own internal merits, no matter what names are on it.

 

If (hopefully, for the sake of several on this list this question becomes outdated by ACCS meeting TRACS' requirements) but, IF ACCS does indeed lose its accreditation, how will they compare to Trinity.

For you who have had experience from both schools, how does the work load, faculty feedback to assignments, and other purely academic issues compare? (Ignoring the question of the Liverpool sticker)

R

 

Good question.

I, too, hope ACCS will retain its accreditation. I still would like to enroll there.

Roscoe

 

===

I've taken several doc level courses from both schools. It does not seem to me that there is in terms of amount or quality of expectations any significant difference between those schools.

I also have a considerable amount of RA grad work with which to make further comparisons. My observations are first, that theology in general requires more effort than some other disciplines in my limited doc /grad experience in Education/English at a state univ/private univ. I recall in one grad English course at USD the prof announced the first night that he would give As to all there!

Second, among the two RA schools of Theology, the one TRACS, and the other Christ Church accredited(ha,ha) [ie,among these four schools] it seems to me the rigor required connects more to the particular subject (eg historical theology vs. systematic theology) and or to the prof than to the school.

My ire at Trinity never has been what they require of students but always has been how they get students! I would be tempted right now, were that possible, to consider reenrolling at TTS if only they would give up that unchristian practice of claiming the UK connection as worldwide accreditation and great utility! That contaminates, IMO, all Trinity stands for and accomplishes as it reveals a major motive to be not to serve but to make money!

 

Hmmm.

Hope our dear Bro. Russell doesn't see this.

Roscoe