A SYMPOSIUM ON KEITH WATKINS: "CHRISTIANTHEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, INDIANAPOLIS: A HISTORY OF EDUCATION FOR MINISTRY"

Encounter, Autumn 2002

My urge in this review, an urge that I will resist, is to compose an extended footnote for Watkins's book that would chronicle the immense legacy of Frederick Kershner's "middle way" in the formation of Emmanuel School of Religion. Identification with this "middle way" is precisely what has tied Emmanuel, like Milligan College, to "old-line Disciples" schools (to use Watkins's phrase), to the Butler tradition, and placed the school in something of a perilous ideological position in relation to more strictly restorationist-minded institutions of the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ. I come away from the reading of Watkins's history with a renewed sense of hope that this legacy may yet be the basis of renewed relationship between "ESR" and "CTS" in the years to come. If there is a common "old-line Disciples" vision, it seems to me that it is the vision of church and academy together committed, in the American context, to defying the polarizing tendencies of "mainline" and "evangelical" affiliations for the sake of an allied commitment to the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. May the Kershner vision live on.

Keith Watkins is to be commended for eloquently telling the story of the agonies and ecstasies of the shaping of that vision.

Edwin L. Becker

Watkins has surely brought the reader inside the sometimes hidden life in the development of what is today Christian Theological Seminary. Those conversations around the dinner table in Columbus were, as he documents, crucial in developing an ecumenical and Disciples seminary.

The issue of its identification with the "progressive" wing of the Disciples is here taken seriously, as it should be. One might then ask, what has been seminary's contribution to creation of an ecumenical and open denomination? The question comes, in part, because of my first connection with the School of Religion in the late 40s. For two or three summers I taught courses on the Church in Town and Country. When I determined to make seminary teaching my ministry, Dr. Shelton urged me to come to the faculty there and, while teaching, also pursue my Ph.D. studies.

Contributing to my reluctance was my uncertainty about the stance of the School of Religion in relation to the "Cooperative" Disciples, an issue clearly noted by Watkins. As late as 1950 the school had no clear position. "Open membership" was also becoming a hallmark issue. Shelton assured me that during that time of controversy he was trying to hold to the middle so that when the separation came "we will have a larger majority." Watkins reports that the decision was made nearly a decade later when, in 1958, a statement from the board clearly identified the school with the Disciples (p. 133).

Evidence of the influence of the School of Religion/Christian Theological Seminary in shaping the thought and membership practices of the denomination has been considerable. Kershner was certainly a mediating influence. Though he left his position with the Christian Standard when he decided to join in founding a College of Religion, his regular columns in the Christian Evangelist were widely read throughout the denomination. Joseph Smith was asked to chair a Commission on the Theology of Mission. Walter Sikes, as noted, brought together Disciples thinkers in the Association of Disciples for Theological Discussion. And CTS was well represented on the Panel of Scholars with Osborn editing its four volumes. Faculty members have continued through their writings to influence the thought of the Disciples toward greater maturity. CTS graduates have also taken major leadership roles in the denomination. Along with other Disciples and ecumenical seminaries, the School of Religion and CTS have often been forces in determining the character of the denomination.