Contemporary evangelicals are particularly susceptible
to thinking that we, at last, have finally discovered
some earth-shaking, paradigm-shifting truth that has
been hidden beneath two thousand years of Christian ignorance.
Conversely, some of us who prefer not to shoulder the
burden of novelty present our agendas as a recovery of
some truly ancient, even apostolic doctrine or practice.
Yet even the most cursory stroll through the halls of
history will often reveal these common claims of discovery
and recovery to be ill-informed at best. It may be that
what we thought was a brand new discovery has been articulated
by scores of thoughtful Christians since Augustine, or
was actually condemned as heresy sixteen centuries ago.
It may be that what we're calling a recovery doesn't
quite have the historical pedigree we hoped for, whether
because historical precedent is scarce or because those
who advocated our views aren't exactly the guys we want
in our corner in a theological debate. If Pelagius, Socinus
and Finney all agree with you, that doesn't necessarily mean
that you're wrong, but it should make you uneasy.
One current group of evangelicals who are offering fairly
constant claims of discovery and recovery are those who
believe that the church's mission includes social justice
and caring for the poor, not merely evangelism and discipleship.
While leading voices calling for renewed attention to
social justice and the poor may not present their case
in either of the admittedly extreme molds I outline above,
they are quite self-consciously calling evangelicals
to change, to recalibrate our mission—in other
words, to either do something new or recover something
old that we've lost. As such it is not irrelevant to
ask,
"Have we had this conversation before?"
SOCIAL ACTION AND THE CHURCH'S MISSION: WE'VE BEEN
HERE BEFORE
One needn't stroll too long through the halls of history
in order to discover that we have. In fact, this debate
was central to evangelical conversations about evangelism
and the church's mission in the 1960's and 70's, as Arthur
Johnston's book The Battle For World Evangelism (Tyndale,
1978) amply demonstrates.
In this work, Johnston, who was a missionary to France,
founder of The Alliance of Independent Evangelical Churches
in France, and later the chairman of the Division of
World Mission and Evangelism at Trinity Evangelical Divinity
School,
"focuses upon three main subjects" (17). First, he "attempts
to show what is the evangelical message of the Gospel
in contrast to the ‘social gospel' of the earlier
decades of this century, to the ‘larger evangelism'
of Madras…1938 and to the ‘holistic evangelism'
of this decade," that is, the 1970's (17). Second, Johnston
argues that "the World Congress on Evangelism of 1966
held in Berlin represents a continuity in evangelism
that has its roots in the New Testament as well" (18).
In other words, Johnston believes that the initial evangelical
response to the ecumenical movement's evangelism conferences
was both biblical and historically evangelical. Third,
Johnston examines "the 1974 International Congress on
World Evangelization held at Lausanne, Switzerland."
Of particular concern to Johnston is "the new understanding
of the mission of the church. Historically the mission
of the church is evangelism alone…The author is
concerned that the redefinition of the mission of the
church will distract from historic evangelical evangelism
and, thereby, diminish both world evangelism and
the by-products of evangelism in social and political
spheres of life in this world" (18-19).
Although Johnston lists these subjects as three discrete
topics, one could accurately summarize his work in terms
of two trajectories, one ecumenical and the other evangelical.
The ecumenical agenda began in earnest, Johnston argues,
at Edinburgh in 1910, and continued through the conferences
sponsored by or affiliated with the World Council of
Churches from the 1940's to the 1970's. The evangelical
trajectory, on the other hand, emerged in force at the
Berlin Congress on Evangelism in 1966 and extended through
the 1974 International Congress on World Evangelization
at Lausanne, Switzerland and the ongoing work of the
Lausanne Continuation Committee, which was later renamed
the Lausanne Committee on World Evangelization.
THE ECUMENICAL TRAJECTORY
Johnston argues that the World Missionary Conference
at Edinburgh in 1910 marked a serious departure from
historic evangelical evangelism and initiated a trajectory
which culminated not long after in the loss of the gospel
itself. Johnston asserts that those who led Edinburgh
1910 had adopted a looser, more modern view of biblical
inspiration, a more inclusive theological platform, and
an openness "to progressive theology and syncretism" (46).
And according to Johnston, over the next several decades,
in various institutional manifestations, this ecumenical
movement pursued a theological trajectory of "larger
evangelism"
and "holistic evangelism" which eventually led to a wholesale
loss of the gospel. Over time, the ecumenical movement
embraced an increasingly explicit universalism which
resulted in understanding evangelism to be a proclamation
of what is already true about every human person and
in elevating social concern to a place of dominant importance
in the mission of the church.
But for our purposes, what is especially interesting
about this ecumenical trajectory is not just how it got
from Point A to Point B, but the specific language its
proponents used to describe the gospel and the mission
of the church. Consider what a group of Anglicans at
the 1949 Study Conference on Evangelism at Bossey, Switzerland
reportedly advocated:
What is envisaged is a real encounter with the cultural
and social structure and situation of the world,
in give, but certainly also in take, evolving in this
encounter a new idiom for expressing the Christian
faith, a prophetic witness of the biblical interpretation
of history, of the meaning of human life, and of the
Church as community...The aim has to be more to win
men for the ‘obedience in the world' than to win them
for the Church. The Church has to enter in such
a way in the life of the world that it becomes incarnated
in it. (101-102)
Despite the archaic language, this sounds more than
a little like current missional thinking about the church,
except that the report goes on to say how these Anglicans
found little room for evangelism as defined by verbal
proclamation of the gospel, preferring instead to gives
answers "to the burning questions of the world" (102).
A defining feature of this trajectory of ecumenical
evangelism is the desire for a "larger" evangelism, a "holistic" evangelism
that addresses not merely men's souls, but their bodies,
not merely individual men but the structures of society.
This "larger" and "holistic" evangelism construed salvation
not merely in terms of eternal life in heaven, but in
terms of "shalom upon the earth" (117). Thus "mission" was
to be understood not merely as proclamation but also
as "presence" (176); according to the new "larger" evangelism,
therefore, the church's mission was to address structural
injustice, care for the poor, and bring God's shalom to
bear on society every bit as much as it was to preach
the gospel and make disciples.
Yet the gospel the ecumenicals preached barely resembled
the biblical gospel. According to Johnston, this new
ecumenical theology of evangelism and mission was built
upon a low view of biblical inspiration and a Barth-inspired
incarnational universalism which taught that all people
have already been reconciled to God and will finally
be saved. Evangelism, then, was merely inviting people
to experience and realize what they already possess.
Man's state of lostness, far from being a state of condemnation
under God, was redefined as a "lack of involvement in
his earthly inheritance" (117).
The ecumenical trajectory in a nutshell? It departed
from understanding the church's mission as strictly evangelism
and discipleship and elevated social concern as an equally
constitutive component of the church's mission; and,
it moved from affirming the good news about Christ to
preaching an eviscerated, universalistic imposter of
the biblical gospel.
THE EVANGELICAL TRAJECTORY
The evangelical trajectory emerged as a response to
these developments in the ecumenical movement. Once the
International Missionary Council (whose theology is described
above) was officially integrated into the World Council
of Churches at New Delhi in 1961, evangelicals began
to make plans to offer a unified answer to this now thoroughly
compromised ecumenical evangelistic agenda. After several
years of planning, the World Congress on Evangelism held
in Berlin in 1966 presented to the world a unified evangelical
vision of missions in explicit contrast with the ecumenical
agenda. The presenters at the Berlin Congress articulated
solidly evangelical views on the authority of Scripture,
the nature of evangelism as verbal proclamation of the
good news about Christ, the reality of God's judgment
against sinners, and the need for people to repent and
believe in Christ in order to be saved.
Yet there was one crucial topic which the Berlin Congress
failed to adequately address: the World Council of Churches'
redefinition of mission. Johnston writes,
"Berlin 1966 also struggled…with the redefinition
of the word ‘mission' by the WCC theologians…The ‘mission'
became primarily the restructuring of society and ‘evangelism'
became primarily the means toward this accomplishment"
(176). While several presenters at the Berlin Congress
engaged this issue, the Congress as a whole did not articulate
a unified and decisive response to it. Hence, "Lausanne
1974 would address itself again to this issue and attempt
to reconcile the ‘insights' of nonevangelicals into the
theology of evangelicalism. The regional Minneapolis
1969 Congress, caught in the midst of the Vietnam conflict
and in racial and economic inequities, failed to discern
the WCC redefinition of mission because of Berlin's lacuna in
this area" (176).
Enter John Stott. Stott delivered the opening Bible
Study address at Lausanne 1974, was the lead author of
its covenant, and generally charted the course of Lausanne's
response to the WCC redefinition of mission. Back at
Berlin in 1966, Stott exhorted evangelicals to love,
serve, and identify with those whom they evangelized,
yet he believed that such deeds of love were not "an
integral partner with evangelism in the mission of the
church" (302). Rather, "at Berlin 1966 he argued that
the cumulative emphasis of the Great Commission texts
was on preaching, witnessing, and making disciples," such
that "one could conclude from his exposition that the
mission of the church is ‘exclusively a preaching,
converting and teaching mission'" (301-302).
Yet at Lausanne in 1974, Stott's theology of evangelism
took a drastic new turn. In his opening address "The
Biblical Basis of Evangelism," Stott explained his new
views in contrast to what he espoused at Berlin:
Today, however, I would express myself differently.
It is not just that the commission includes a duty
to teach converts everything Jesus had previously commanded
(Matthew 28:20), (sic) and that social responsibility
is among the things which Jesus commanded. I now see
more clearly that not only the consequences of the
commission but the actual commission itself must be
understood to include social as well as evangelistic
responsibility, unless we are to be guilty of distorting
the words of Jesus. (302)
Stott would express himself similarly in his book Christian
Mission in the Modern World, which was published
the following year by IVP:
This brings me to the third way of stating the relation
between evangelism and social action, which I believe
to be the truly Christian one, namely that social action
is a partner of evangelism. As partners the
two belong to each other and yet are independent of
each other. Each stands on its own feet in its own
right alongside the other. Neither is a means to the
other, or even a manifestation of the other. For each
is an end in itself. Both are expressions of unfeigned
love. As the National Evangelical Anglican Congress
at Keele put it in 1967 ‘Evangelism and compassionate
service belong together in the mission of God.' (para.
2.20). (27)
If this sounds like the definition of mission advanced
by the ecumenical movement, that's because it is. Throughout
his address Stott cites the various statements produced
by the recent ecumenical congresses as the sources
for his new way of thinking. He also explicitly recognizes
that this definition of mission is a new "development" brought
about by the WCC movement, yet he sees "no reason why
we should resist" it (301).
In other words, Stott took the ecumenical definition
of mission, which derived from a universalistic theology,
and attempted to transplant it into evangelical soil. It should be noted that Stott presented his views as a synthesis of the entrenched evangelical and ecumenical extremes (see his Christian
Mission in the Modern World, 15-21). Yet in elevating social action to the status of an equal partner with evangelism, he adopted the essential premises of the position the ecumenicals had articulated for several decades.
The Lausanne covenant bears some marks of Stott's redefinition
of mission, though it stops short of asserting that evangelism
and social action are equal partners in the church's
mission. For example, in point six, "The Church and Evangelism," the
Covenant reads, "In the church's mission of sacrificial
service evangelism is primary" (373). Here the covenant
appears to split the difference between the historic
evangelical understanding of the church's mission and
Stott's redefinition of the same. Evangelism is still "primary," but
the church's mission is construed as "sacrificial service," which,
following Stott's interpretation of the mission of Jesus
as one of "service" to the whole man, embraces social
action and caring for the poor (302).
While the Lausanne Covenant doesn't explicitly embrace
Stott's redefinition of mission, the Lausanne Continuation
Committee did: "The Committee voted that its basis would
be the newly defined mission of the Church as
evangelism and social responsibility" (344). Thus,
through the ongoing efforts of the Lausanne Continuation
Committee (later renamed the Lausanne Committee for World
Evangelization), the concrete legacy of Lausanne has
been the pursuit of a "holistic evangelism" that replicates
the practical agenda of the ecumenical movement (347-350).
THE TRAJECTORIES CONVERGE
And so the two trajectories converged. The new, larger,
holistic evangelism became not just the watchword of
ecumenicals, but the collective understanding and commitment
of a unified global coalition of evangelicals.[1]
To be sure, the two movements remained theologically
opposed to each other: while the ecumenicals rejected
Scripture's inerrancy and relativized its authority,
the evangelicals held firm to both; while the ecumenicals
universalized away the gospel, the evangelicals, by and
large, defended and proclaimed the biblical good news
about Christ and the necessity of faith in Christ for
salvation.
Yet mission is not so easily sealed off from theology.
Consider, for example, what John Stott writes in his Christian
Mission in the Modern World:
As for situations, there will be times when a person's
eternal destiny is the most urgent consideration, for
we must not forget that men without Christ are perishing.
But there will certainly be other times when a person's
material need is so pressing that he would not be able
to hear the gospel if we shared it with him. (28)
Clearly Stott's main point here is that people's physical
needs demand our compassionate consideration. But does
he really mean to say that there are times when a person's
material need is more urgent than his need to be reconciled
to God? If so, I would propose that Stott has adopted
a diagnosis of the human problem that materially differs
from Scripture's. This example suggests that one does
not adopt a new view of the church's mission without
first adopting a new assessment of man's problem and
God's solution to that problem.[2] That is
to say, one does not adopt a new definition of mission
without also necessarily adopting, at least on some level,
a new theology.
Through John Stott's leadership, Lausanne certainly
reasserted several foundational evangelical doctrines,
but insofar as it adopted the ecumenical redefinition
of mission, it inserted an alien, inconsistent element
into evangelical theology. On the crucial question of
the church's mission, the trajectories converged, and
the echoes of that convergence continue to reverberate
through evangelicalism:
"Incarnational ministry." "Holistic evangelism." "Proclaiming
the whole gospel to the whole person." "Doing justice
and preaching grace." "Bringing God's shalom to
the earth."
We've heard these definitions of the church's mission
before. But have we seen where they're from, where they
lead, and what theology drives them?
Bobby Jamieson is assistant editor for 9Marks.
1Reflecting on the definition of mission
developed by ecumenicals and adopted by some evangelicals
in the Lausanne movement, David Hesselgrave draws a similar
conclusion: "In sum, there are obvious parallels between
ecumenism at the beginning of the twentieth century and
evangelicalism at the beginning of the twenty-first century" (David
J. Hesselgrave, "Will We Correct the Edinburgh Error?
Future Mission in Historical Perspective" in Southwestern
Journal of Theology, Vol. 49, No. 2, [2007]: 134).
2 For more on the danger of diagnosing the
human problem in a way that differs from Scripture, see
Jonathan Leeman's article in the present eJournal.
January/February 2010
© 9Marks
Permissions: You are permitted and
encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material
in any format, provided that you do not alter the wording
in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost
of reproduction, and you do not make more than 1,000
physical copies. For web posting, a link to this document
on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the
above must be explicitly approved by 9Marks.
Please include the following statement on
any distributed copy: © 9Marks. Website:
www.9Marks.org. Email: info@9marks.org. Toll Free:
(888) 543-1030.
