Yes, UCLA Has a NT Program
My UCLA colleague Kevin reminds the world on his new blog–while he also notes my “world famous” status. Indeed. Kevin’s post is similar to one that he wrote on the now defunct Novum Testamentum blog. That older post was what inspired me to pursue UCLA as a potential program. If he hadn’t shared that info at that time, my life would look very different right now. His current post complements my announcement about my acceptance to UCLA from about a year ago, if you’re interested in the program.
If you are looking for “official” information on the program, go to this link. The program is a bit of a misnomer as “Religion” since it is really only New Testament and Christian origins. Judaism has its own separate category in the history department. Later developments in Christianity are usually studied under the umbrella of the medieval field, for instance.
Bad News for PhD Re-Applicants
I was flabbergasted to read John Stackhouse’s (theology prof at Regent College in Vancouver) recent blog post about applying to PhD programs. First, he warned applicants against asking to defer their acceptance (“It’s not like undergraduate acceptance”). Clearly, that is sage advice. I’m amazed that people even consider doing that. But the second bit in his post was what got me:
One more thing. I did hear from a senior professor who has held posts at two of America’s top universities that a student who has applied, is turned down, and then applies again the next year does indeed have a strike–or two–against him or her. He didn’t presume to speak for every school everywhere, of course, but he did seem to think this was the way it was commonly done, and he is very widely connected.
Wait, what? It’s counted against you if you reapply to a program that turned you down last year? My entire application strategy was based upon applying to the top tier programs first (all programs that I would say “yes” to without regret) along with some ThM (or equivalent) programs. If I got universally rejected at the PhD level, I’d do a ThM (or equivalent) somewhere and do a second round of applications the next year (with which I would widen the net to “second tier” schools). In the end, I did have two advanced one-year masters programs to choose from, but I am so happy that I got into UCLA as it is really the perfect program for my interests in New Testament social history.
John Stackhouse’s well-connected friend shares information that goes against what I thought to be true. If I had been universally rejected at the PhD level, I would be doing another master’s program right now and panicking a bit. I’m not sure I understand why a school would make it harder for a re-applicant the second time around, unless that applicant had done nothing to improve or had somehow gone backwards. In response to my amazement and confusion, Prof. Stackhouse commented:
I understand your confusion and, perhaps, dubiety, Brother McCullough. I strongly supported one of our graduates who was in precisely this case and whose case elicited this response from my friend. I only pass it along as something my friend sees as common in elite schools: If you’ve been considered and turned down once, you face a steeper hill the next time. It doesn’t make sense to me either, but there it is.
Something to consider very seriously for those who are applying!
I'm goin' to UCLA!
I am pleased to report that I have been offered admission into the Ph.D. program in UCLA’s Department of History, to work under Scott Bartchy, and I have accepted the offer! The specialty is technically called “History of Religions,” but I will mostly be concentrating on Christian origins (especially the New Testament, but also beyond). I understand there was only one spot and I am tremendously honored to have been chosen.
Why UCLA? Several reasons, let’s go for bullet points (in no particular order):
- I am excited to work with Scott Bartchy, who is a member of the Context Group and has significant experience in social concerns (e.g., slavery, gender roles, community formation) with the New Testament, using sociological and anthropological methods of historical research. I have become more and more drawn to social concerns in Christian origins and Bartchy will help me dive in with both feet. More on Bartchy below.
- I also have a burgeoning interest in apocalypticism and Christian origins (as if anyone could define apocalypticism). I am especially interested in comparing and contrasting Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature. A fairly recent addition to UCLA’s Departments of History and NELC, Ra’anan Boustan, has worked in Jewish apocalyptic issues and in Jewish-Christian relations, which is a great resource for my interests.
- I have the freedom to piece together my own program, taking a combination of graduate seminars, directed readings, and even upper division undergrad courses not only in the History Department, but also in world-class departments like NELC and Classics.
- Even though, I’m interested primarily in the New Testament and Christian origins, I can’t shake my interest in the history of Israel, subsequently of Judaism, and their literature. NELC faculty members such as Bill Schniedewind, especially with his interest in sociolinguistics of Hebrew and the social/cultural history of ancient Palestine, will provide deep wells of knowledge for my research.
- In this program, I will get a well-rounded education, with some training in the history of western civilization generally and world religions.
- The opportunity to do adjunct teaching in New Testament studies during my dissertation at several excellent Christian schools in the area. I think this will help prepare me by exposing me to various types of settings engaging students in biblical studies.
- UCLA’s Department of History, according to US News and World Report, is one of the top ten history programs in the country. We all know that such rankings are tenuous, but it’s still nice. Check out the response to the rankings several years back by the American Historical Association.
- I’ve met some of the graduate students who are studying in the history department and become friends with one of Bartchy’s grad students, Kevin Scull. They are happy and seem like tons of fun. That makes a world of difference!
- Also, it doesn’t hurt that Fuller has plans to finish construction of their new snazzy library, which will apparently be the largest theological library on the Pacific Rim, in early 2009. I will certainly be frequenting Fuller’s campus while I’m in the program at UCLA.
Some more on Bartchy: He’s down to earth and has a balanced perspective. He’s a jazz pianist and marathon runner. Professor Bartchy is pretty progressive (see a couple articles on his earth-friendly home; and an online interview on his views of Christianity). He cares about his students, even the undergrads! (At a big research university like UCLA, that’s saying a lot.) Bartchy is involved in campus life, participating in panel discussions on religion. He founded and directs the Center for the Study of Religion at UCLA, which brings together disciplines that work on religion from various angles and which also offers an undergraduate major in religion. As I understand it, UCLA has been slow to consider religion as a valid field at a state sponsored university (with perhaps understandable skepticism), but Bartchy has been leading the way to establish the study of religion on campus. His dream would be the creation of a department of religious studies, where “we would have a budget, and we could call in scholars and very distinguished people who might not fit into the agenda of any particular department” except for a religion department. Bartchy is sensitive to various religious experiences in his teaching. In fact, he offers a helpful metaphor for dealing with difficult research issues: the moving around and adjustment of ideological buckets (maybe I’ll say more about that some other time). All of this to say that Scott Bartchy not only offers academic expertise that is quite relevant to my research interests, but he also models a kind of actively involved educator and mentor to students that I would like to become.
In one sense, my decision to study the New Testament within a history department is a statement about my modern sensibilities. While many are declaring the death of the historical method of interpreting the Bible, here I am signing up for historical scholarship on the Bible and the foundational period of Christianity and Judaism. I believe that postmodern-ish methods of interpreting the Bible from various minority perspectives and social locations are enormously helpful in both keeping the practice of the historical-critical method in check, while also offering unique points of view on how to apply our historical findings to the contemporary global situation. But, for myself, I would like to be firmly planted in the historical foundation of research before jumping too deeply into postmodern or postcritical approaches. What better way to do that than study the Bible and its historical context at one of the best history departments in the country?
Exploring Hebrew narrative for a friend
I have a friend who is currently a first year MDiv student at a school that many salivate over. He currently does not know which way his career will go: academic studies or ministry. Currently, he’s so loaded with the daily responsibilities of classwork that he hasn’t had much time to find a niche of research that he truly gets excited about. His mental skill for academia, however, is off the charts, in my opinion. So, I’m trying to think of ways he can explore his potential academic interests. Out of anything, he is most drawn to Hebrew narrative and is interested more in literary approaches than historical-critical work. I don’t think historical reconstruction does much for him, nor does abstract theological speculation.
Personally, I had a breakthrough when I discovered just what niche I am interested in exploring. First, I thought I would be interested in Jesus studies and the Gospels, but I am not as interested in recovering the “historical Jesus.” I then realized that I’m more interested in social issues in general (hence, for example, my work with Bread for the World this past Summer), so I started to think that way when researching. I found that the themes that I get most jazzed up about are how the early Christians apply their understanding/memory of Jesus to their social situation and, on the flip side, how their social situation affects their understanding/memory of Jesus. I also noticed that I simply got excited when I read apocalyptic literature. So, there it is: social issues in the New Testament and Christian origins, with a special interest in apocalyptic literature. But it took a long time to get there. Well, relatively “long” . . . I’m still in seminary, after all. But I was quite overwhelmed with the vast possibility for research areas up until I pinpointed this.
So, what are some ways that my friend can explore what might excite him most about Hebrew narrative? What are resources that he could turn to that would help him see if this really is his bag, baby? I’m no expert in Hebrew narrative, but here goes my brainstorming session:
- Explore some authors who might be down your alley. It seems to me that this is a key move that opens possible doors in multiple directions. He really liked Robert Alter’s The Art of Biblical Narrative and I think he appreciated the bit of Brueggemann that he read, too.
- Try this: Since he liked Alter’s book, search ATLA and look for reviews of the book. My search pulled up 28 reviews. See what other scholars said about it. This helps him not only to think critically about Alter’s book, but also think critically about where the reviewer is coming from. The reviewer may be someone whose works are worth checking out or maybe not. Or, as with Whybray’s significant review essay in JSOT (no 27, 1983), you may get some historical context and background for Alter as a scholar and this book placed within the larger framework of those scholars attempting literary criticism of the Bible. Actually, it turns out that Alter’s book is a great exercise for this because that particular issue of JSOT contains several reviews of the book along with a response from Alter himself.
- Read other books, or even articles, that might be of interest by these authors. What authors do they reference in the main text and footnotes most often? What topics come up often in these articles and books? That might provide an avenue for further research.
- Following the last point, what are the most important/interesting issues related to Hebrew narrative? What’s going on with the deuternomistic history and how does that color the narrative? What interpretative implications are there for the various dating schemes for the texts (pre/post-exilic)? How might the Dead Sea Scrolls relate to the literature? What do we do with New Testament usage of OT narrative? Try just reading entries about these things in dictionaries like Anchor Bible Dictionary or IVP’s dictionaries on the Pentateuch or Historical Books. Which ideas seem more attractive here?
- When you find names of people that you respect and find interesting, find out where they teach (even if they might be retired) and explore those programs. Alter teaches in the Jewish Studies department at UC-Berkeley. Who else teaches there (e.g., Daniel Boyarin) and does their research seem interesting? Their doctoral program functions jointly with the Graduate Theological Union (GTU). Does that program seem like a good way to go about studying? What are some other major programs in Hebrew Bible? Look at places like Johns Hopkins, UCLA, or U of Chicago. Do these programs seem like a good fit? Who teaches there? Does their work seem interesting? What about a smaller place like Brueggemann’s home at Columbia Theological Seminary? Turns out, Columbia doesn’t have a PhD program. Would you feel comfortable at another seminary environment (like Union-PSCE or Fuller)? In all of these programs: what would be your concentration, who might be your advisor, what kinds of courses would you take, etc.?
- Read blogs that intelligently wrestle with texts of the Hebrew Bible. This isn’t my area, but some good ones for that seem to be Ancient Hebrew Poetry, Awilum, Biblische Ausbildung, Blue Cord, Claude Mariottini, Higgaion, and Ketuvim. I know I’m missing people . . . sorry! Though, trying to read through a bunch of blogs can be overwhelming, especially since a heck of a lot of blogging by biblical studies blogs is not actually about biblical studies, let alone the biblical text itself. What might be even better would be to look at the monthly “carnivals” of biblical studies blogs that highlight some of the best blogging about biblical issues in various categories. Go down month by month and read the Hebrew Bible entries. I think this gives you an idea for the vast array of approaches and ideas out there, giving you a kind of dip into the waters of academia.
- Make sure to make appointments to chat with the OT faculty at your school and get their advice about how to think about these issues, how to get prepared, where to think of applying, what books to read, what languages are important to study, etc.
These are the kinds of things (though from a NT/Christian origins perspective) that I worked through to find my interests. But it is also a deep kind of soul searching, too. I don’t think people should hop into academia because it seems like an interesting career, but because you are driven by it: either to research, to teach, or both. For me, I just have this gut level passion for thinking about social implications of textual issues. I think that comes from its immense relevance to how the sacred texts are socially used and misused in society and culture today. I also have a passion for making the complicated stuff accessible to “average” people who have a hard time dealing with it. I guess it comes down to: with what issues do you want to spend your life wrestling?
Can you guess my desired doctoral programs?
In response to my last post, Michael W-W asked me what schools, programs and mentors I am considering for doctoral studies. At this point, I’m holding my cards close, not merely to be enigmatic, but because I don’t want to appear to favor one program over another in such a public way. To be honest, I feel like I would love to go to any of the schools to which I’m applying. I am excited by all the interesting possibilities out there. But I’m not adverse to others guessing my thought process. Let me tell you what I am generally looking for, and then see if you can guess. I think any responses would be worthwhile in themselves. My wife is, of course, disqualified.
My field of interest: I am interested in studying the documents of the New Testament as a window into the social history of Christianity’s formative period. I am particularly intrigued by questions of how a new movement of Jesus followers balance their rootedness in early Judaism, their attempt to follow the teachings of Jesus, and their connections with the Hellenistic context surrounding them. More specifically, how would their beliefs, and how these early followers “remembered” Jesus (e.g., Gospel narratives, christology), affect their social structures (e.g., family, slavery, community) and vice versa? I am also especially drawn to apocalyptic literature and how themes of perseverance and anticipated eschatological victory work into the social cohesion of early Jesus followers. Spin-off issues of interest include Jewish-Christian relations, the Wirkungsgeschichte (history of interpretation) of relevant texts, and the later transitions in Christian communities due to “Constantinianism.” All in all, I think I would like a healthy blend of both diachronic and synchronic approaches to biblical studies.
What I hope for in a doctoral program: Taking my interests into consideration, I would like to have at least one faculty member who has stellar New Testament credentials. I hope that the program would offer some way of connecting New Testament textual study with social sciences, either in a New Testament or early Christian history faculty member [could be the same as the aforementioned New Testament specialist]. I would also appreciate working with someone who has considerable expertise in Second Temple Judaism. One also hopes that said experts would be caring and compassionate folks. Finally, I would like a school big enough so that I can more readily pursue interests that cross-over with other fields.
And I haven’t even mentioned financial or geographical preferences, but let’s not narrow things down too far . . . what do you think fits the bill?
Moving from Summer into the final year…
Well, I guess I’ve had my first summer vacation away from blogging. I took a break to go save the world as an intern with Bread for the World, as we all know how much of a global difference interns at nonprofits can make. My self-evaluation form for Fuller’s Field Education office questioned what I thought my biggest accomplishment was in this internship. I’d have to say the full-scale initiation of world peace, though my supervisor reminds me that there were a few others involved in that endeavor. I also baked some fine chocolate chip cookies that I shared with my officemates, which may be a close second to global shalom.
In all seriousness, it was a challenging internship and it forced me to gather and put to good use the theological and biblical resources I have developed in seminary and as an undergrad. I developed Bible studies related to issues of hunger and poverty. I will be giving a sermon at a church in the area about some of my reflections. I will be recording a few podcasts next month on the issues. Along the way, I was able to learn a great deal about policymaking and how politicking goes for these sorts of things, and how a nonprofit advocacy group responds to such challenges. I see this internship as the beginning of a deeper engagement with political advocacy, particularly with the mission of Bread for the World. I hope that even as I move towards an academic career in New Testament and early Christianity, I will always stay connected to present-day issues of justice. And someday, if I reach my dream of being an educator and mentor to undergraduate students, I hope to be able to connect them to the same kinds of opportunities for social engagement and evaluation. Even the Bible majors!
All of this said, I do actually miss my time in the classroom and I’m looking forward to getting back into gear this Fall. I will be a teaching assistant for Jim Butler, focusing mostly on grading Hebrew translations and word studies for an exegesis class on Jeremiah. As for my own education, I will be taking a couple classes with Marianne Meye Thompson and gleaning from her wisdom on John, with an exegesis course on the Gospel of John as well as a doctoral seminar on Johannine theology. It will be nice to balance out working on the more heavy theological concerns in Johannine literature with the Greek of John’s Gospel.
And to add to the drama (if you consider any of this to be drama), I will of course begin sending out those doctoral applications starting in November. The application due dates mostly span November to January. I will probably find out what schools have decided about me by late March-early April. I’m going to minimize the amount I publish of my thoughts on application strategy, at least while I’m going through the process, but I can tell you the basics. I will be going for schools that I consider top-class, including some institutions with great reputations but are less often considered by “New Testament” applicants (and some are not quite as competitive as others). I feel that all of these schools are a “good fit” for me (i.e., I’m not going for the brand name schools just for the heck of it). If I strike out with those, I will apply to a few Th.M. programs to prepare myself as a scholar one more year and then try another round of applications the next year.
Working on a Writing Sample: Remembering Jesus
In the next six months or so, I will have to create a paper to submit as a sample to doctoral programs. At this point, I am in the planning stages. None of my classes have provided the opportunity for me to create a paper that I feel expresses what most interests me. The topic that I am playing around with is regarding the memory of Jesus in the early church and what that does to people. In other words, how do Christians live out their memory of Jesus who is called Christ? This is a very broad category. Naturally, there will be some overlap with historical Jesus works (right now I’m reading volume one of J. P. Meier’s A Marginal Jew series), but I am not interested in the memory of Jesus as a way of getting behind the memory to find the “real” or even “historical” Jesus (Meier mentions that the “historical” Jesus is not the “real” Jesus, but rather the Jesus that we can “‘recover’ and examine by using the scientific tools of modern historical research” [1:25]).
Instead, I am interested in what the memory of Jesus means to the people of the early church and how it might have affected their lives. I have a feeling that it may be an impossible question to answer, but I’d like to try. I will be taking a class called “The Cross in the New Testament” with Marianne Meye Thompson this next quarter, which I think will concentrate mostly on atonement theories. How the early church conceived of atonement will certainly be part of this exploration, but not nearly the whole. If you have any suggestions for angles or good reading material, please let me know.
Both fortunately and unfortunately, the paper can only be so long. Here are some of the descriptions of the writing sample requirement for a few of the schools on my application list:
- Boston University: “A writing sample of no more than 20 pages. Academic writing is preferred.”
- Drew: “A recent academic writing sample which should highlight the applicant’s writing and research ability. The writing sample should not exceed 20 printed, double-spaced pages, not including bibliographic data.”
- Duke: “a term paper or sample of other scholarly work of 15-20 pages”
- Emory: “a research paper or academic essay of about twenty pages”
- Notre Dame: “A writing sample is strongly recommended but not required. Writing samples should be between twenty and twenty-five pages in length. An applicant should choose a writing sample that highlights his or her strengths for the area to which he or she is applying. In addition to clear writing and ability to frame a theological question, one might, for example, submit a sample that shows facility with primary-text research languages.”
- Princeton Theological Seminary: “We require a 20-25 pg. writing sample relevant to the subfield area of interest.”
- U of Chicago: “Applicants to the Ph.D. program must, in addition to this essay, submit a writing sample not to exceed twenty-five (25) pages, typed and double-spaced. The sample should be from work you have submitted for a course or for publication. It may be an excerpt of such work (but please include a short paragraph contextualizing the excerpt), but it must not be a re-write done solely to satisfy the stipulated length of the submission.”
- UNC-Chapel Hill: “An academic writing sample (no more than 25-30 pages) is suggested but not required.”
- Union in VA: “A research paper or recent essay the student considers representative of his or her work in the proposed field of study.”
In response to the requirement by U of Chicago that it should be from a work submitted for a course or for publication, I do hope that I will be able to submit the paper to a regional SBL conference. I wonder if that fits their expectation. It looks like I have to aim for a 20 page paper to satisfy all of the above. Many say “not to exceed” or “no more than” 25 pages and I wonder if I should have a slightly longer version for those schools.
SBL 3: “Where do you want to study?”
When I told them that I am an MDiv student hoping to do a NT PhD, this was the inevitable question that arose from scholars I met at the conference. Of course, there are a bunch of schools that would be wonderful to attend and a plethora of exciting scholars under whom I’d love to study. But the real answer is: wherever I can get in. Good stats (GPA and GRE) only get you past the first round of elimination, then good recommendations make a considerable difference. After that filter, so I’m told, admissions committees assess your letter of intent. They may not even look at your writing sample unless there is a close call between you and another applicant. [If anybody has different information about these things, please share!] [Update (9/19/07): I just would like to make clear that "wherever" is strongly qualified by being within a select group of programs that I feel will be a good fit for me, and that will find me to be a good fit for them]
On Monday afternoon, I got a picture of North American graduate programs from a kind of behind-the-scenes perspective. I attended the 4-hour session entitled, “Graduate Biblical Studies: Ethos and Discipline.” Representatives from 10 different programs shared on the details of their curriculum and the ethos of their program. The idea was to get the discussion going between the graduate programs and see how things should be affirmed or transformed. Some representatives were quite honest about the situation within their schools.
The schools (and their reps) were: Catholic University of America (Timothy Friedrichsen & Frank Matera), Dallas Theological Seminary (D. Jeffrey Bingham), Drew University (Melanie Johnson-Debaufre), Duke University (Eric Meyers), Emory University (Michael Joseph Brown), Fuller Theological Seminary (Donald Hagner), Princeton Theological Seminary (Jacqueline Lapsley), Union Theological Seminary (Brigitte Kahl & Hal Taussig), Vanderbilt University (Douglas Knight), Yale University (Adela Collins).
Here are some thoughts and things that stood out to me (but my disclaimer is that these are things as I heard them, I might be misrepresenting the facts):
- Drew University’s most recent admission roster of graduate students was (“proudly”) 100% international and/or underrepresented minority. I had been interested in Drew University, but now I wonder: Can a North American white male make it in? I know three profs who taught or teach at Messiah who went to Drew (all in OT) and they are all white men. [Clarification: Don't get me wrong. I think it is great that there is a place so welcoming to underrepresented minorities in a largely white-male academia. But my conflicting emotion is my own desire to enter academia as a white male. I want minorities empowered, but I (naturally) don't want doors closed for me because of my own race and gender. So it goes.]
- Universities have more funding than independent seminaries like Fuller and Dallas. I know from personal stories that Fullerites have a hard time making the bills (especially in SoCal), so are distracted from their studies. It sounded like Yale and Emory had significant stipends available to students. Emory has an added bonus for minorities. At PTS, the TA income is in addition to the stipend received.
- Emory and Yale (at least) admit a pool of the best applicants into the entire religious studies division and then divide them up by area of interest. That means that I wouldn’t just be competing against New Testament folks, but also theology, Christian history, Hebrew Bible, etc.
- PTS emphasizes biblical theology and interdisciplinary studies at the university, Penn, and other schools are encouraged. Vanderbilt has a nonconfessional approach to the Bible and offers no courses on theology of biblical texts. Union and Drew emphasize nontraditional social-reading approaches to the Bible (the program at Drew enables students to “drive around in the complex three-dimensional map in time and space” that is biblical studies). Yale emphasizes the “text of the canon,” but does not neglect the historical context. Dallas students must agree with the school’s doctrinal positions and research cannot “offend” their doctrinal base.
- It seems like the schools with the biggest emphasis on foundational linguistic tools (like advanced ancient Greek and Aramaic) are Catholic University of America, Princeton, Yale and Vanderbilt.
- Duke’s NT program is a bit of a maverick compared to the other Duke programs. They do not require an external minor (like the other programs) and there are less language requirements in the divinity school exegetical classes as compared to the Religion Dept. exegetical classes. There is sometimes conflict in balancing the perspectives of the confessional students in the Divinity School and the nonconfessional students in the Religion Dept.
As an added bonus, I met a biblical scholar from Eastern Mennonite Seminary yesterday and she recommended Union Theological Seminary in Virginia to me. I will have to take a look into who is there and how their program is set up. People say to focus on potential mentors rather than the prestige of schools, but I’ve also been told to make sure the school’s program is something I want in case the mentor leaves the school or is unable to remain in the supervisory role (Duke admits that this has happened a number of times). Of course, there are always other factors: the size of the preferred advisor’s current plate, the perception of Fuller Seminary and Messiah College, etc. So the search continues and the answer remains: [among the "good fit" programs,] wherever I can get in.
-
Elsewhere . . .- Blog titles beginning with "A" to "Z" on your reader Mark Goodacre
- Of making many books there is no end Chris Brady
- Free Online: The Liddell-Scott Jones Lexicon S and C
- Does Higher Criticism Attempt to “Destroy the Bible”? II agathos
- Steven J. Friesen and the Identity of Satan’s Throne in Pergamum alan
- Does Higher Criticism Attempt to “Destroy the Bible”? agathos
- Bloomsbury buys Continuum Mark Goodacre
- Imperial America Peter J. Leithart
- C.F.D. Moule on the Birth of the New Testament d. miller
- Responding to Kostenberger (with comparisons to Marshall) Jeremiah
-
As a member of RevGalBlogPals, I am committed to building a supportive online community for women clergy, women church professionals, and women in religious life.
Research assisted by: