What attracted me?
I wanted to know the reasons why, behind the dogma. I do come from a rather strict form of Calvinism.
Was really interesting. Depends per country what a theology course will be like I guess. Here, if you do it at a university, you can't get around the critical subjects.
The course consists of lots of subjects, Church-history of course,
Literature of old and new testament. Learning to read texts critical, to make choices in what you read as the most original text. History behind the text. History about how the texts evolved. Quite interesting. This included Greek and Hebrew too.
Dogmatics, where does dogma come from, how did it evolve. What happened when some choices were made, what was left out, where did politics come in, how did that affect things.
Psychology, bit of psychiatry too. Vicars often are first or last resources for people with huge psychiatric problems. Important to recognise, and to learn that you can't solve it all.
Bit of pedagogic skills.
Hermeneutics. Learning to write sermons too.
Pastoral skills, how to talk one on one with people, with respect.
Dialogue. (under the name of missiology) The place I did, theology clearly had the POV that there was no evangelising, but only dialogue, trying to understand. And asking the same attempt to understand from the partner in conversation. This subject consisted of critical attitude towards one self, and learning a lot about other religions. Newer curricula are even more focussed on how society is today.
There was a bit of sociology in the course too.
Feminist theology was one of my favourite subjects. Goddess movement, reading critical from the pov of a woman. Complete different light on it all again.
Philosophy was part of the curriculum too.
I went there for the history of and reasoning behind dogma.
And got every space I needed to ponder on that.
Didn't make me more a believer. Doubt always was and will my middle name. Maybe it did make me a bit more religious, and a bit less committed to one faith. Did give me more patience with believers. Not looking at the beliefs in itself, but at why it is important for them to believe what they do. And it gave me both the tools to be more precise in criticising my heritage, and in valuing the good things it gave me too.
And, as a side-effect, I think it was a very good training for me to learn how to interact with people.
The practical year was very intense, and we were bugged for every possible intonation and wording that could be taken the wrong way. Over the top socialising training, combined with logopedic training. Did me no harm at all.
I still can't deal with groups. Failed miserably at that part of the practical year. But, I can do the one on one, and I can speak to a crowd.
