Suspect Credentials and Phony Degrees in the Church

Of course not. But in no other profession do we see such a propensity for fakery regarding academic qualifications. That's why this subject exists and focuses on religion. Don't shoot the messengers; decry the frauds that give the genuine folks a bad name.

 

Rich,

Like you, I have been a DegreeInfo member since its inception. The fact that I "decry the frauds that give the genuine folks a bad name" is well documented within the DI archives. In this thread I merely wish to differentiate between those who would obtain a credential via a 5-page report and payment of a fee, and those whose needs are met by a substantive unaccredited credential.

 

Let me agree with you that these distinctions exist. But you said:

This implies a level playing field, but not level emphases. In other words, that degree fraud infects all professions, not just religion. But this isn't true. There is an overwhelming propensity for religious leaders, especially in non-high churches, for degree quackery. It doesn't exist on that level in any other profession.

The post wasn't directed at you, just at your comment, which implied the problem was with the emphasis being placed (on religion) and not the preaching hypocrites in question. That's what prompted my "shoot the messenger" comment.

Again, no other professional has such a proclivity towards degree quackery as does religion. It's not even close. And this fact besmirches legitimately educated practitioners, who ought to be mad.

 

What IS it about religion that it attracts such NUMBERS of charlatans?
---------------------------------------------------

Actually it isn't religion's fault. It's the American public's fault. The American public uses greater discretion and common sense when managing their money, real estate or stock portfolio than when dealing with religious or spiritual matters. In fact, the American public uses greater common sense in almost every endevour than the religious/spiritual life. This is why all the NEw Age stuff gets a free pass. Tis sad but true. It does not help that Americans tend to be utterly theologically illiterate. I am pretty knowledgable about the teachings of the Orthodox Christian church and have read extensively from the early Fathers of the Church and the decisions of the early ecumenical councils. I can usually spot a heretical idea or theology a mile off because it usually involves a faulty Trinitarian or Incarnational theology. Not only do I know what I believe, I know why I believe it. I know why it is necessary for Jesus to be one person in two hypostases. I know why the whole structure of christian theology would crack if that were not the case. Your typical American parishoner in most churches would give you a blank look if they were asked to explain the meaning of the Nicene creed they just recited. So when a person like Benny Hinn states that the trinity consists of 9 persons, most people in the pews just get a blank look. Its hard to be a skeptic when you lack basic biblical and theological literacy.

 

One additional thought ....... maybe this problem is also due to a faulty religious model.

One reason to be wary of "nondenominational" or "Free" churches is that one is more likely to find religous quackery in them because there are no lines of authority above the parish church level. One rarely finds an LCMS Lutheran or Episcopalian or Prebyterian pastor/priest sporting improper or fake credentials. That clergyman has to answer to a higher denominational authority to whom he owes enormous accountability for his position. He also has real academic standards to meet prior to ordination. Its the "wacky fringe" of protestant evangelicalism with a .... IMHO ... quite faulty ecclesiological model where this stuff flourishes. One question about pastors in "nondenominatinal" churches that I have often wondered about is why such men are unable or unwilling to place themselves under the authority of another. They may have valid theological reasons (though as a member of a hierarchical church I am unable to fathom what those might be.) Of course, they may also be sociopaths. One hopes congregations can tell the difference.

 

Actually the post to Jimmy was sarcasm, Rich.

If the above statement has documented validity, IMO, it is because of the religious exemption clause which allows less-than-credible institutions to exist in the first place, not because of religion per se. Given human nature, if secular insitutions could operate under a similar exemption, the proclivity towards degree quackery could be seen among any and all professions.

 

I'm cool with that, and I suspect it's true. That's why I'm against the exemptions. I don't think they do much to protect religious freedom, but they do go a long way to support academic fakery. However.....

My personal belief is that the field of religion, just like astrology, parapsychology, and other belief systems that reside outside the realm of human observation, is ripe for charlatans to operate. I've seen enough of Robert Tilton and Peter Popoff to know that.

 

Indeed!

 

SPMORAN: Many Christians with doctorates who teach in Evangelical seminaries are paid very little. While at Western I was surprised that Profs with ThDs from Dallas or PhDs from Fuller made less than did a school teacher with a BA. I myself have completed work for three masters degrees and a doc (or will have formally when I graduate in absentia on May 14th) in my area, but I do not realize one penny of profit from these, nor do I expect to, nor do I wish to.


Chris: I applaud your understanding of the ancient creeds, while I disagree with their application of the verb gennao to an intratrinal relationship. IMO that is not in the NT.


Russell/Rich: In regard to Christian ministers getting and hawking substandard theological docs , that practice IMO is more wretched than it is in the case of the nonChristian because Christian ministers say they live by a higher standard and Christian ministers should embrace the rigor required to know their subject--not do end runs around that rigor .