This is really significant Q & one that I think about a lot irt to women's discipleship & vocation in church.
Most of my life in ministry has happened as a woman volunteering in working class spaces. This experience has shaped how I think about clergy/ laity conundrum & how we go about the work of the churcg, including discipleship.
On one hand, I'm a strong advocate for theological education, taking women's gifts seriously, & creating cultures & systems that equip all members of the Church to flourish.
OTOH, I don't think the academy & professional ministry is the primary answer to this Q. While more women should have access to seminary & hold official church capacities, this will not correct what is fundamentally a Q of discipleship & lay/clergy divide.
In many ways, the Q of women's discipleship is the Q of lay discipleship & involvement. I have a theory that you can assess the health of a church's lay discipleship by how they equip women for service & integrate them into larger mission of church.
IOW, if your vision for ministry rests on professional categories (from which women are often restricted), it stands to reason that you would also not have a vision for discipling laity beyond obedience & submission to clergy. They exist to obey & fulfill the mandates of pastors.
But, if instead, a church has a robust vision for lay ministry, they will also understand the significance of structures & systems that equip & disciple the whole congregation, including women who are even less likely to end up in professional ministry.
All that to say, I think the discipleship of lay women might be a model for how to disciple more broadly. It is not a win if new women's discipleship/ministry models simply funnel them toward academy & career ministry as it has for men.
Instead, we have chance to ask deeper Qs about our practices. How should we disciple those who won't pursue professional ministry? How would we raise up & identify leaders who are outside the academy? What does ministry look like when no salary is attached to it?
Obviously, this is not to Q the irreplaceable role of the academy. The academy serves the church. And it is essential, imo, that more women be involved there. But academic training cannot be confused for discipleship or leadership gifting.
And the continued professionalization of ministry holds few answers for a global church that do not have the means or wherewithal to access the education & credentialing necessary to attain it.
Coming back to the OP, the American evangelical church sits ensconced in luxury & it is this very luxury that innoculates us from asking Qs about our discipleship & training models.
But there are access points, including women's ministry, ministry among poor & working classes, and global ministry. If we let them, the unique challenges of these spaces will refine & reform prevailing models of ministry for the health of the entire church.
