Philip Arthur Bence PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText

167
The 'objectivity' or 'subjectivity' of a college's
theology is, for this question, not necessarily the
determining factor. In an 'objective' college, the
Imparting of a relatively fixed homiletical tradition, or
a set of answers to the questions of preaching content
and practice, would receive priority. Likewise, in
'subjective' colleges, the presentation and consideration
of the questions basic to developing a theology of
preaching would play an essential role in theological
education, and, more specifically, the teaching of
preaching.
We might, however, apply other criteria to the seven
theologies in order to hypothesize the importance
institutions (influenced by one or more of the
theologies) would give to the teaching of preaching.
Comparing the answers of each theological model to
two other questions might prove helpful. First, to what
degree does a particular theology view preaching as a
divine command? Second, does a theology state the
possibility, through reponse to preaching (or other
means), of persons reaching an ideal existence in this
life?
The first question deals with the causative force
behind preaching; the second deals with the potential
result of preaching. An affirmative answer to the first
question indicates a belief that preaching is based
primarily on a supra—human, rather than a merely human,
motivation. A 'yes' to the second question states the