A key indicator of the character of today's Christianity is ministerial formation, precisely because how Christian traditions recruit, train, equip and morally ‘form’ their leadership candidates can determine the quality of and their faithfulness to their calling. Calling or vocation is exhibited in the character of the person in the community and in concrete participation in the lives of people. It is a consistent message that heals, nurtures and matures members of the community. Thus the character, activities and teaching of ministerial candidates are crucial.

Theological education becomes an instrument of a broad-based formation process which ensures that ministerial candidates are properly ‘formed’ so that they can serve as the vanguard for the transmission and survival of a particular Christian tradition. In addition, an obvious thing to say about the reasons for and methods of ordination training is that they are not obvious. If the professional status of pastors is somewhat ambivalent, then one would expect that the training and formation that ministerial candidates receive will likely reflect this. However, this is not quite true. Students who prepare for ordained ministry, in whatever institution they are being formed and educated, can point to a curriculum with:

• • a disciplined approach to prayer and worship;

• • an ecclesial tradition that adds to the ethos of the institution;

• • practical assignments that continue to test the depth and trajectory of a vocation; and

• • a continuous process of theological reflection that links the intellectual, social, personal and transcendent dynamics of formation.

Yet such a sketchy outline of the priorities for theological education affords considerable licence to any church tradition and its training institutions. Is there anything that might be said to unite the diversity within theological institutions? If one looks beyond the superficial differences in terms of ecclesial emphasis, history and resources, is there some kind of trace or sense of a common code that might be said to be distinctive – especially in relation to the rather nebulous concept of ‘formation’?

Several observations are made in this chapter to map out the way forward. This is done by integrating the persistent themes in ministerial formation in South Africa from the previous chapters.