Philip Arthur Bence PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText

249
tendencies (e.g., Bible, prayer), while the university
lecturers demonstrate a more broad-minded, academic
inclination (e.g., theology, world).
Two major surprises occur in table 61. One is
readily explained. More lecturers from 'related' and
Independent colleges (than from universities) expressed a
wish for greater integration between teaching in
preaching and the other theological disciplines. But,
these colleges currently experience less such
integration, and may sense the need to a greater degree.
The other--sermon construction (question ten)--defies
explanation. Other 'university' responses, in contrast
to this one, downplay the practical side of preaching.
In summary, the institutional setting does not
appear to play an important determining role, independent
of the theological factors described earlier, in the
teaching of preaching. Overall, the most important
Influences may be in the areas of importance given in the
theological curriculum to the teaching of preaching (as
reflected in responses to question six--number of hours
given) and the general openness to the arts and sciences.
The relationship between 'related' colleges and
universities encourages the former toward teaching which
is less dogmatic than the colleges independent of
university ties. Though 'related' college lecturers may
deny the more fixed views of the independent college
lecturers, they do not yield to the fluidity (or accept