S.T.D vs PHD in Theology : which one is better?

[ericcantona71]

What do people make of these two doctorates? Which is more academic? Which one do you learn more on? Which one will open up more employment opportunities in the Church for you? Which takes longer?

Which one is the overall best doctorate?

In an ideal world if you had all the time and money in the world, which one would you choose?

 

[cameron_lansing]

What do people make of these two doctorates? Which is more academic? Which one do you learn more on? Which one will open up more employment opportunities in the Church for you? Which takes longer? Which one is the overall best doctorate? In an ideal world if you had all the time and money in the world, which one would you choose?

The STD (Doctorate in Sacred Theology) is a degree with an effect in Church law which can be a requirement of ecclesiastical office. It can only be obtained from a pontifical faculty. Both a secular doctorate and a canonical doctorate are rigorous. However, employment opportunities are significantly dependent on a broad variety of other factors, so I at least, would not hazard speculation about that aspect of your question. The same is true of regarding the matter of the time needed to successfuly complete either degree. If however, one intends to serve the Church, it seems reasonable to conclude that a Church conferred degree would be preferable. The orthodoxy of STD programs and their faculties is a matter of careful regulation by Church law whereas the same cannot be said of a Ph. D. program, even at a Catholic institution. Most of those in STD programs (or in any program leading to an ecclesiastical degree) tend to have been sent for such study by their bishops or religious communities who have a particular future appointment for them in mind. While there are hundreds of institutions offering doctoral degrees, there are relatively few institutions where such ecclesiastical degrees can be obtained. A hint about where most are located is that one should really appreciate Italian food and have some oral and written fluency in a few languages.

 

[Joannm]

One (PhD) is an academic degree and would be more useful in universities. The STD is a Pontifical Degree and is more useful in seminary settings. But I know people who have one or the other degree and teach in universities and/or in seminaries. Both take about the same time, usually two years of residency and a dissertation, which can take a long time to finish. Also there are llimited number of places you can get an STD in this country. Most I know go to Rome to study for their STD. I know Catholic Univ. grants them, Mundeline, I believe Weston School of Theology and maybe ony a few others.

 

[Michael_M]

The Ph.D is the “more academic” degree. It reads Doctor of Philosophy, and someone who obtains a Doctor of Philosophy degree will likely work as a lecturer and researcher in his or her field. If making a career as a theologian or philosopher of religion along with teaching theology students and seminarians is your goal, then you ought to try to gain acceptance to a graduate program offering a Ph.D in theology.

 

[RyanBlack]

The Ph.D is the “more academic” degree. It reads Doctor of Philosophy, and someone who obtains a Doctor of Philosophy degree will likely work as a lecturer and researcher in his or her field. If making a career as a theologian or philosopher of religion along with teaching theology students and seminarians is your goal, then you ought to try to gain acceptance to a graduate program offering a Ph.D in theology.

I would say the Ph.D. as the “more academic degree” is only a matter of perception, or perhaps even anti-ecclesiastical bias. The STD is essentially the same degree as a Ph.D. in theology with respect to the degree requirements and the degree of rigor. Even if you want a career as a theologian or philosopher of religion along with teaching theology students/seminarians, the STD could actually be preferable, if you wish to teach in a Catholic seminary. However, the Ph.D. would make you more employable overall.

 

[Michael_M]

The Ph.D is not “more academic” simply by virtue of common perception. By it’s very structure and intent, it is traditionally the degree required for professional academic employment. There is nothing anti-ecclesiastical about it. A Doctor of Philosophy is one who simultaneously becomes an expert in a particular area of research within the broader domain of their discipline, but also becomes, or at least is supposed to become a philosopher of their discipline - to gain a knowledge and understanding that transcends mere knowledge of the literature and key contributors. Students in a Ph.D program thus necessarily take courses in theory, first and foremost. Other classes taken are merely for the purposes of gaining background in areas related to dissertation work.

I admittedly do not know much about the Doctor of Sacred Theology degree. You say it is very similar to the Ph.D. That may well be true. But by definition, as I have explained, a Ph.D is academic. It is for the purpose of becoming an expert and a “philosopher”, and original contributor. You quite literally become a doctor of the philosophy of your chosen discipline. The Latin root of ‘doctor’ suggests someone who has the authority in their subject to teach and write, making ‘doctor’ and ‘professor’ inextricably linked. The S.T.D degree however, though having the title ‘doctor’ is, in my understanding, primarily for the purposes of filling an ecclesiastical office.

The Ph.D then, is the more orthodox academic degree, that by definition is scholastic, while the S.T.D, though having a strong, rigorous academic component, is religious in nature. If the S.T.D is similar, it has modeled itself on the Ph.D.

I don’t know why I just wrote an essay on this. As if it really matters, haha.

 

[Chatter163]

Don’t set them against each other. They are merely two different approaches to the same field, designed for different objectives. Naturally, each (especially the Ph.D. community) will offer reasons that its program is superior or “more academic,” but in the end, it is like arguing over which is better, the army or the navy.

 

[RyanBlack]

I didn’t say that the Ph,.D. is anti-ecclesiastical. I said that the perception that the STD is not as academic or rigorous as the Ph.D. is a matter of perception, or perhaps anti-ecclesiastical bias. I hold neither degree, but I do hold both the M.Div. and the Th.M. Several years ago, I was accepted into Ph.D. programs in theology at both CUA and Marquette. I also researched the STD at CUA. The STD in theology, church history, scripture, or ethics is truly no different in its rigor and requirements than the Ph.D. in any of those same disciplines. I agree that the Ph.D. is perceived as being more academic, and it is certainly more broadly marketable. However, the perception that the Ph.D is more academic is just that–perception.

 

[otjm]

Don’t set them against each other. They are merely two different approaches to the same field, designed for different objectives. Naturally, each (especially the Ph.D. community) will offer reasons that its program is superior or “more academic,” but in the end, it is like arguing over which is better, the army or the navy.

The navy. Thay have the SEALS…