The Use of the New Testament in Mission:
Methodological and Hermeneutical Reflections
JOHANNES NISSEN
This paper is an attempt to carry on my reflections on
New Testament and mission from a methodological and hermeneutical perspective.
This means that part of the material can be found in my book New Testament
and Mission: Historical and Hermeneutical Reflections (1999; 2nd. ed. 2002)
as well as in some recent articles. The hermeneutical problem, however, is
presented in a new way, and a number of new insights have been added.
My contribution has three parts. In an introductory
part I am giving some preliminary discussion of motivation and methods. Part II
is a survey of various ways of motivating mission. Part III will focus on some
hermeneutical problems.
It should be noticed that my reflections are
provisional and tentative. References are usually put in the brackets with a
list of literature at the end. In some case, however, I have not given the full
bibliographical information (in order to reduce the length of the bibliography
at the end).
The hermeneutical task can be described in different
ways. Some would speak of "biblical foundations" or ¡°biblical basis¡±;
others of "point of orientation", or "biblically inspired
perspective". ¡°Biblical groundings¡± is another term which is used
particularly by evangelicals. By contrast, some catholic missiologists would
rather operate with a systematic philosophy of religion or theology alongside
the Bible. The latter might criticize the former for using the Bible improperly
as just such a book of doctrine containing a system of truths (Spindler 1995:
126).
Following Spindler (1995: 126) one can distinguish
between three kinds of questions that must be asked:
(1)
Why mission. That is, the reasons that make mission possible and
necessary.
(2)
How must the church carry out mission? That is, the methods of
missionary activity in and according to the Bible.
(3)
What is mission? That is the essence of mission.
All of these questions are relevant for this study.
The motivation, the method and the essence of mission will
all be considered in what follows.
Biblical scholars and missiologists tend to define
¡°mission¡± in different ways. This might be illustrated by the following points:
a. It is often argued by historians that a definition
of a missionary religion must include the factors of both intentionality and
activity. In an article dealing with the understanding of Jewish mission R.
Riesner claims that one has to make a clear difference between the active
mission of a religion and its passive attraction. He therefore proposes to
define mission as an activity intended to win converts (Riesner 2002:
221-223). Such a narrowly construed use of the term mission has its advantages. However, a broader
definition is needed. Most missiologist would argue that mission or attraction
is not an ¡°either-or¡± (cf. below on the comprehensive understanding of
mission).
b. Biblical scholarship has tended to focus on the
issue of Gentile mission.
It is evident that this issue is of great importance from a historical point of
view (cf. the recent collection edited by J. Ådna & H. Kvalbein 2000). But
what is its hermeneutical relevance – apart from the question of Christian
mission to the Jews? One aspect of the answer might be what has been called
¡°the cultural mandate¡±: it means ¡°to make the principle of ¡°neither Jew nor
Gentile¡± the touchstone for our thought and to make the apostolic practice the
paradigm for our action as we seek to apply the Good News of new life in Christ
Jesus to the various cultural issues of life today¡± (Longenecker 1984: 44).
c. Other scholars are asking more broadly than just
the Jew-Gentile issue. Their starting point for reflection is the universal
gospel. So, for instance, D. Senior & C. Stuhlmueller emphasize ¡°the
universal mission of the church¡± (1983: 315). ¡°To be universal, capable of
embracing and being expressed by all cultures and all peoples, is essential to
the gospel. The god-given mission of the church is to all nations¢¥¡± (1983: 2).
No wonder that this approach is confirmed by many systematic theologians, e.g.
C.E. Braaten: ¡°Mission is the process of exploring the universal significance
of the gospel in history¡± (Braaten 1977: 2). ¡°Nothing less than the universal
gospel will meet the needs of the human condition we experience today¡± (p. 2).
These examples indicate that the focus on the universal gospel is important in
both a historical and hermeneutical perspective. The main problem here is how
to combine the universal perspective with the local or contextual expression of
the gospel (cf. Nissen 2002b, on the problem of Christology in relation to the
global and the local see Nissen 2000).
d. A number of scholars have taken as their starting
point the issue of ¡°sending¡±. This includes a recent collection of
articles edited by W.J. Larkins & J.F. Williams. "In the Bible,
"mission" is the divine activity of sending intermediaries whether
supernatural or human to speak or do God¢¥s will so that God¢¥s purposes for
judgment or redemption are furthered" (Larkin/Williams 1998: 3).
As to methodology three steps are proposed: a)
investigation of historical background, 2) analysis of the New Testament
documents, 3) synthesis of findings. This book seeks evidence for the writer¢¥s
view of the theme of mission. Word studies of apostello, pempo, erchomai,
poreuomai, kerysso, euangelion, ethnos, basileia, and cognates are considered
to be the starting point (Larkin/Williams 1998:4).
The
missiologist DuBose in a similar way have taken the issue of ¡°sending¡± as his
starting point. He pleads for ¡°a hermeneutic built around one central idea,
such as the concept of the sending¡± (DuBose 1983: 150). In effect, however, he declares
one verb to be the key verb in the Bible, at the expense of other verbs which –
given the same methodological approach – could with equal justification claim
to be key verbs. The results are twofold: there is at tendency to see ¡°sending¡±
everywhere in Scripture, and to harmonize the meaning of the verb ¡°send¡± as
though it means the same in every book of the Bible (Bosch 1986: 68).
The perspective in the work of Larkin & Williams
is broader than that of DuBose. Nevertheless their focus is also restricted to
one aspect of mission. Furthermore, their approach seems to presuppose the
traditional historical approach to the text: it is the task of biblical
scholars to establish the exact original meaning(s) of the term ¡°sending¡± and
then ¡°apply¡± these to our understanding of mission or use them as a checklist
to ascertain whether or not our missionary enterprises are ¡°biblical¡±. This
approach, however, should be replaced by a more dialectical conversation
between the interpreter and the text (see part III).
Furthermore, a more comprehensive definition is
needed. To be sure, a distinction should be made between mission and the
related term ¡°evangelism¡± Although mission and evangelism are linked together
and inextricably interwoven in theology and praxis, mission has a broader
meaning (Bosch 1991: 409-419; Klaiber 1997: 24-27). Mission is the church sent
into the world, to love, to serve, to preach, to teach, to heal, to liberate.
This comprehensive understanding of mission is often defined by the threefold
task of the church: witness (martyria), the service (diakonia)
and communion (koinonia). At least four aspects of mission can be
discerned (Nissen 2002: 18):
1)
mission as being sent out
(especially John),
2)
mission as making disciples
of all nations (Matthew),
3)
mission as deliverance and
emancipatory action (Luke),
4)
mission as witness (Acts;
John).
If we chose only one of these concepts (the list is
not exhaustive; see below), our focus is bound to lead to reduction, since the
New Testament comprises a variety of missionary approaches. We should avoid
what I would call a genre-reductionism, and not only use "sending"
texts in our understanding of mission.
In this part I shall try to categorize different types
of using the New Testament in mission. The different categories need not be
exclusive of each other. Thus, there might be an overlapping between different
types of motivation.
1. Mission as a command
The mission command of the resurrected Christ is known
in four different versions. In addition, there is a reference to a missionary
mandate in the pre-Easter material of the synoptic gospels (e.g. Matth
10:5-16). In these texts mission is conceived of as obedience. The so-called
¡°Great Commission¡± of Matth 28:16-20 remains to this day the most important
element of motivating missionary paraenesis. However, to label it the ¡°Great
Commission¡± is a value judgment. This designation is not part of the biblical
text. It might be more appropriate to call it "the final commission",
"the last mandate¡± or ¡°the mission charge¡± (Arias 1992: 16).
Matth 28 is sometimes seen as an isolated proof-text -
answering the question "Why Christian mission?" This idea must be challenged
for several reasons. First, as pointed out by many scholars (e.g. D.J.Bosch, L.
Newbigin, H. Boer) it was not until the 18th century that Matth
28:16-20 became the primary mission text.
Second, the text has been misused and/or used out of
context. The text is mostly understood to be about sending people out in order
to bring people into the community of faith. But the accent of the command is
not on going out. ¡°Make disciples¡± is the imperative and carries the main
emphasis (Kasting 1969: 36). The commandment bears on the formation of the
disciples, not on their departure.
Third, it is pointed out by scholars (e.g. Boer 1961:
109-110) that nowhere in the New Testament does the Great Commission play a
role concominant to the role it played in modern Western mission. The decisive
initiating factor for mission in the early church was not obedience to a
command, but the activity of the Holy Spirit since Pentecost (Boer 1961:
109-110). Formally Matth 28 is a command, but Protestant mission has often
emphasized in a one-sided manner obedience as a motive for mission
(Bosch 1983: 219-220; Soares-Prabhu 1994: 272-273). If the last commission is
interpreted in this way, it is easily placed in the context of legalism.
Mission is then depersonalized and the "command" becomes a marching
order of Christian militia, engaged in a holy war.
This critique of the use of Matth 28 has been voiced
in particular by scholars from the South. In the past – it is said - Matth 28:16-20 has been understood as
mandate to an aggressive militant mission, as a ¡°crusade¡±. It was imaged as a
¡°conquest¡± – winning ¡°souls¡± for Christ (Soares-Prabhu 1993: 85-86). Moreover,
it is claimed that ¡°military
imagery and language has not yet fully been exorcized out of the vocabulary of
Christian mission. Hymns, writings and speeches continue to use militaristic
imagery, which promotes the idea of mission in subtle ways¡± (Thangaraj 1999:
10). Such a militant understanding should be replaced by a cruciform
responsibility which will not allow us to see others as simply enemies of
the gospel who must be conquered and subdued. Evangelism is ¡°a rightful and
legitimate activity of the local church. But it has to be a cruciform activity¡¦
to be done in a spirit of vulnerability and humility¡± (Thangaraj 1999: 82).
Acts 1:8 does not belong to the category of a
missionary charge in the strict sense of the word. But it has often been
considered in this way. Jesus¢¥ words - ¡°You shall be my witnesses to the end of
the earth¡¦¡±) – have commonly been read as an imperative. But both in Acts 1:8
and in Luke 24:48 there is an ambiguity between promise and task. In the future
tense of Acts 1:8 the main emphasis is on promise. It is not primarily a
¡°command¡±. As Schneider notes: ¡°Das dritte
Evangelium und die Apostelgeschichte stellen indessen nicht ein Missionsbefehl
in den Vordergrund, sondern die Gottgewolltheit der Weltmission und die
Zuversicht, dass das Christuszeugnis alle Welt erreichen wird¡° (Schneider 1982:
74). Bosch in a similar way states: „Luke¢¥s pneumatology
excludes the possibility of a missionary command; it implies, rather, a promise
that the disciples will get involved in mission¡± (Bosch 1991: 114).
Acts 1:8 reminds us that ¡°witness (one can say:
mission) will simply be ¡°a matter of being¡±. And one does not have to be
obedient in order to be, as being precedes obeying. Our being as Christians is
therefore a being as witnesses in mission; there is no need to take a decision
first to be obedient to the Great Commission¡± (Kritzinger & Saayman 1994:
2).
To speak of mission as a mandate or a command is
certainly an important aspect of the New Testament. However, if mission is
interpreted in that way, it will easily be become a legalistic obedience.
At this point we might learn from Paul¢¥s hermeneutic.
It is interesting to see how he interprets a saying of the Lord in 1 Cor 9:14:
¡°In the same way the Lord gave instruction that those who preach the Gospel
should earn their living by the Gospel¡± (cf. Matth 10:10).
In the chapter as a whole Paul defends his working to
support himself in spite of his right as an apostle to be supported by the
communities (9:1-5). Now the point is that he renounced this right. Strictly
speaking it was not only a right, but a duty. The important thing,
however, is that Paul interpreted it as a privilege which he did not
take advantage of. In other words, he did not interpret the words of the Lord
in a literal sense. But he did capture their essence, their spirit: the
missionary should not be a hindrance to the gospel (Nissen 1984: 47-49).
A distinction must be made between external and
internal compulsion (e.g. Klaiber 1997: 193ff.). The deepest root of the
missionary calling is gratitude, wonder at the miracle of God¢¥s grace (Kritzinger/Saayman
1994: 1-2).
Perhaps the most beautiful expression for the inner
necessity for missionary proclamation is found in Peter¢¥s words in Acts 4:20:
"We cannot keep from speaking what we have seen and heard". One¡¯s own
experience provides the unavoidable urge to communicate the message of God¢¥s
salvific action in Christ. Many who were healed by Jesus behaved accordingly.
They made public - often despite explicit prohibition to do so - what Jesus had
done for them (Mark 1:45; 5:19-20; 7:36). It is the same with the content of
Paul¢¥s justification of his missionary activity in Rom 1:14-17: He is under
obligation to share with all people the message of salvation which has touched
him personally in his encounter with Christ. So it is that for him the urgent
command of the Lord Jesus (the ananke of 1 Cor 9:16) and his inner urge
to preach are one (Klaiber 1997: 194-195).
It is worthwhile noticing that a similar idea can be
found in the orthodox tradition. Here God¢¥s love for humankind is a foundational
motive of the missionary enterprise (Stamoolis 1986: 81). Furthermore,
particular emphasis is laid on the motive of inner necessity. This differs
somewhat from the Great Commission motive in that the obligation is
internalized by the missionary and becomes part of one¢¥s very being. The
question of the motive of mission can be studied from several angles: love for
God and men, obedience to the Great Command of the Lord, desire for the
salvation of souls, longing for God¢¥s glory. All these, surely, are serious
motives. However according to Stamoolis the real motive of mission, for both
the individual and the church, is something deeper. It is inner necessity.
¡°Necessity is laid upon me¡±¡¦¡°Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel¡± (1 Cor
9:16). All other motives are aspects of this need, derivative motives
(Stamoolis 1986: 84).
Paul¡§s understanding of mission can be seen under the
headline of ¡°Constrained by the love of God¡± (Nissen 2002: 99ff.) A sense of
gratitude constitutes the deepest level of Paul¢¥s missionary motivation. ¡°In
his letter to the Romans he
establishes an intimate relationship between ¡°grace¡± or ¡°gratitude¡± and
¡°duty¡±; put differently, Paul¢¥s acknowledgement of indebtness is immediately
translated into a sense of gratitude. The debt or obligation he feels does not
represent a burden which inhibits him; rather, recognition of debt is
synonomous with giving thanks. The way Paul gives thanks is to be a missionary
to Jew and Gentile (Bosch 1991: 138; cf. Kritzinger/Saayman 1994: 2).
3. Missionary discipleship
Discipleship as an important aspect of mission is
underlined by all gospels. The gospels of Matthew and Mark may serve as
examples.
Matthew: The content and conditions of
discipleship in the lifetime of Jesus are illustrated most clearly in the
mission discourse in Matth 10:1-42. The mandate given to the disciples in this
chapter includes a call for poverty and simple lifestyle. What is demanded from
Jesus is an attitude: freedom from acquisitiveness and a trust in providence so
absolutely that it can wholly dispense with even the minimum of material
resources. Poverty and powerlessness are for Matthew an absolutely
indispensable part of Christian Mission (Soares-Prabhu 1993: 80-81).
The church is called to follow Christ¢¥s example. Mission
in Christ¢¥s way means that we must read Matth 28:18-20 together with such texts
as Matth 27:41-42 (the temptation on the cross) and with Matth 16:24-25 – where
Jesus tells his disciples: ¡°If any want to become my followers, let them deny
themselves and take up their cross and follow me¡±. It means that the ¡°crusading
mind¡± has to be replaced by the ¡°crucified mind¡± (Koyama 1979: 54; cf. Nissen
2002: 31).
Mark: The call to discipleship is
also an important aspect of Mark¢¥s gospel. ¡°The way of Jesus is the way of the
disciples, and discipleship consists in walking the way of Jesus. This is the
meaning of akolouthein, to follow, in the gospel of Mark¡± (Blount 1998:
128). ¡°The members of Mark¢¥s community would easily read themselves into his
portrait of the disciples on their way up to Jerusalem¡± (Marcus) (Blount 1998:
141).
Discipleship is a learning process: The call to
discipleship is a call to open oneself to a model of learning. This model is
based on simply ¡°being with Jesus (Mark 3:14), accompanying him, experiencing
his authority, receiving his teaching and sharing his way to the cross
(Klaiber). In that sense ¡°the story of Jesus is also to be the story of his
followers¡± (Donahue). His way was flowed into their way. And their way has
become the way of discipleship (Pesch; see Nissen 2002: 43).
The hermeneutical question is: To what degree can this
radical ethos of discipleship inform and inspire later Christian missionaries.
This question was already addressed in the Pauline communities. As I have
indicated above there seems to be a conflict between two types of missionaries
in 1 Corinthians 9.
The different ways of understanding the missionary
have been elaborated by G. Theissen (1975). He considers the Hellenistic urban
churches as reflecting a less radical, more middle-class society over against
the wandering prophets from Palestine. Thus, according to Theissen the radical
ethos is replaced by a more moderate ethic that appears above all in the
Deutero-Paulines as a conservative ¡°patriarchalism of love¡±. Does that mean
that in the long run the radical discipleship had to be limited to a small
group of Christian missionaries?
The issue of itinerant missionaries has recently been
discussed by H. Marshall. His question is: Was evangelism a responsibility for
every Christian, for the local churches, or only for individuals with a special
commission from Christ, as for example the apostle Paul? A consideration of the
New Testament evidence confirms the collective responsibility of the church for
evangelism (in my terminology: ¡°mission¡±). According to Marshall itinerant
evangelism and local evangelism were carried on side by side. ¡°All this means,
finally, that the church today can learn from the Pauline pattern without being
tied to it, that it needs to recover the charisma of the evangelist but that
the witness of the local church remains an obligation that cannot be avoided
simply because it is present in somewhat rudimentary form in Paul¡± (Marshall
2000: 263).
Instead of highlighting the imperative (command,
commission, mandate, obligation) one can turn to the indicative. In this case
the main focus will be on God¢¥s action – not on the action of the church or the
disciples. This way of thinking is underlined in modern theology by means of
the missio Dei. Mission is considered to be a movement from God to the
world; the church is seen as an instrument for that mission. There is church,
because there is mission, not vice versa. To participate in mission is to
participate in the movement of God¢¥s love toward people, since God is a
fountain of sending love (Bosch 1991: 390). Here I shall point to three aspects
of this insistence on God¢¥s mission.
First, one of the most important aspects of Johannine
mission is its emphasis on the theological or even trinitarian aspect of
mission (Nissen 2002: 90-91). ¡°If the missiological idea of missio Dei
as the foundation of all mission applies anywhere, then it is in the Johannine
writings¡± (Klaiber 1997: 61). According to the orthodox theologian Mar
Osthatios mission is the ontological nature of God which is love. Hence God
Himself is Love or Mission. It is the outreach of his love that prompted God to
create all things visible and invisible and also prompted Him to send His only
begotten Son for the salvation of the world and to send the Holy Spirit for the
consummation of salvation (Mar Osthatios 1995: 87).
Secondly, another example is the Book of Acts which insists on the sovereign work of
the Holy Spirit in mission. In Acts mission is not just church extension. It is
the action of the Holy Spirit who in sovereign freedom both convicts the world
and leads the church toward the fullness of truth which it has not yet grasped
(cf. John 16:8-15). ¡°Mission is not essentially an action by which the church
puts forth its own power and wisdom to conquer the world around it; it is
rather, an action of God, putting forth the power of the Spirit to bring the
universal work of Christ for the salvation of the world nearer to its
completion¡± (Newbigin, quoted in Nissen 2002: 69).
Thirdly, one can also accentuate Jesus¢¥ ministry
as depicted in the synoptic gospels. One of the most characteristic aspects of
Jesus¢¥ mission is his compassion with the needy. It is this compassion that
constitutes the basis of his mission (e.g. Matth 9:36). No wonder, then, that
¡°compassion¡± has become a key word in missiological thinking, in particular
among theologians from the Third World (see also Nissen 1984: 153-167 on ¡°Spirituality
as sharing in God¢¥s compassion¡±). Sugirtharajah indicates that Jesus¢¥
disagreement with his contemporaries was about how one interprets the Torah –
whether it has to be interpreted from the perspective of holiness or from the
perspective of compassion. Their propagation of a holy and righteous God
resulted in the separation and isolation of the community. For Jesus, holiness
meant reaching out and accepting people, not segregating them and erecting
boundaries. Jesus opened up a fresh aspect of the God of Israel – God as
merciful (Sugirtharajah 1992: 4-5).
The hermeneutics of Jesus is a hermeneutics of
compassionate solidarity with the disadvantaged. The uniqueness of Jesus was
his boundless compassion. It was this that distinguished him from all
other Jews. And it was this that constituted the real basis for his mission
(Bosch 1980) – If this compassionate solidarity with the needy can be seen as
the clue to understanding the mission of Jesus, the same should be valid in
relation to his followers.
2. The gospel as narrative
Another type of arguing is to draw attention to the
gospel genre. It is well-known that the earliest version of Mark¢¥s gospel has
no mission command. This however, does not mean, that it is without mission
perspectives. The Gospel itself can be seen as a "Great Commission".
It is a creation of a new literary genre the aim of which is to communicate the
good news of Jesus in narrative form. Jesus and his message are dynamic, not
static. Mark tells a story which is ongoing. It is a communication,
involving invitation and response. "The basic story Mark offers his
readers is the account of a man driven to communicate a message to others and
excersing power on their behalf even in and through his death" (Senior
1983: 214; cf. Arias 1992: 38).
From its very beginning the gospel of Mark has a
¡°missionary¡± character: It is a story about of a great spreading of the gospel
and a great effect (Stock 1984: 131). ¡°Das
Markusevangelium ist in seinem Gesamtcharakter missionarisch, und zwar
universal-missionarisch ausgerichtet¡± (Stock 1984: 143).
3. Visions as motivation for mission
Closely related to the previous point one could argue
that the reflections on the missionary task must take as it starting point a
vision: The Kingdom of God.
D. Senior argues that one of the most vital functions
of the Scriptures is to suffuse the mind and heart of the church with a vision.
¡°The biblical stories and metaphors become the language of Christian hope. We
long for "the new Jerusalem", a home "without tears", a
people who are "neither Jew nor Greek, male or female, slave or free, but
all are one in Christ¡± (Senior 1983: 343).
Scholars from the South in particular focus on the
Kingdom of God as the crucial motivation for mission. Thus, M. Arias describes
the Jubilee and the proclamation of the Kingdom as the essence of Luke¢¥s
paradigm for mission. This is considered to be a holistic approach
(Arias 1992: 56ff.). E. Castro argues that ¡°in the perspective of the kingdom
the church is called to be and to go. To be an anticipation of the kingdom; to
show in its internal life the values of justice and supportive love; to develop
a priestly servant vocation in interceding, in Abrahamic tradition, for the
whole human community; ¡¦ and then to be the missionary people of God, called
and sent all over the world to proclaim and serve, announcing and manifesting
the coming of the kingdom of God¡± (Castro 1985: 69).
According to J. Ukpong, the goal and vision of the
Church¢¥s mission is the renewal of the earth. Jesus inaugurated a new age of
God¢¥s kingly rule on earth and has called the Christian Church to participate
in the actualization of that kingdom
until its eschatological realization. The challenge the church faces in
its mission then is how to proclaim this kingly rule of God in a world full of
oppression, violence and disregard for creation. Its message, just as Jesus¢¥
message must be liberating, life-affirming and prophetic (Ukpong 1992: 146).
In a similar way W. Saayman says that the biblical
story provides us with a powerful vision of new heavens and a new earth (Is
66:17-25; Rev 21). Our expectation of new heavens and a new earth should
inspire us to proclaim the good news that the old has passed away and that the
new has come. Proclamation in this sense should be understood as the
announcement of a deed, not a doctrine; the deed performed by Jesus Christ in
his incarnation, death, resurrection and exaltation. In the light of the
certainty as well as the expectation of new creation, Christian mission can
only be properly understood if it is understood as hope in action (Saayman
1993: 89).
The concept of witness may be seen as another way of
using the New Testament in mission. This category has the advantage of
combining the two aspects that has been considered so far: It is a testimony to
what God is doing (the theological motivation for mission). But at the same
time it underlines what we should do.
1. Mission as bearing witness
There is no doubt that the witness was an important
mode of mission in the early church. This is evidence by a number of writings,
e.g. 1 Peter (witness of hope), Revelation (prophetic witness), Colossians and
Ephesians (witness to powers and authorities). The testimony was not merely one
of words, but demanded a total engagement of speech and action. ¡°The testimony
of citizenship lived with integrity (1 Peter) or even of prophetic refusal to
compromise by withdrawing from certain societal functions (Revelation) were
considered genuine testimony to the good news of universal salvation¡± (Senior
1982: 310).
It is worthwhile noticing that witness in word and
deeds also played a significant role in the second and third century. The love
of neighbours was a distinctive factor of the church as a whole; such behaviour
was noticed by the gentiles. It had an effect of recruitment (Hvalvik 2000
284-285). One of the most probing stories from the early church about a
community living in ¡°two worlds¡± is a famous passage from the letter to
Diognetus, e.g. 5:5: ¡°They reside in their respective countries, but only as
aliens; they take part in everything as citizens, and put up with everything as
foreigners; every foreign land is their home; and every home a foreign land¡±.
The passage gives us a picture which is highly idealistic. But it is most helpful in
the sense that it reminds churches and Christians to their commitment to
witness in context, while it at the same time suggests that the source
of their witness is from beyond. As pointed out by Holtrop e. al. (1996:
59): ¡°To witness is to proclaim a different reality, God¢¥s reality, that
is: this reality turned upside-down as the outcome of God¢¥s
rule. Today as in the past, it opens up new ways of understanding¡±
Genuine Christian witness is witness in context.
This is also accentuated in the passage of 1 Pet 3:15, the importance of which
could not be overestimated (cf. the section ¡°The mission of hope¡± in Nissen
2002: 153-154). It is interesting to notice that this passage has been chosen
as background for the coming IAMS-conference: ¡°The integrity of Mission in the
Light of the Gospel: Bearing the Witness of the Spirit¡±. The importance of this
theme is underlined by S. Bevans. On the one hand, this means the witness that
we bear cannot be compromised by any allegiance to a particular context or
ideology, whether that be local culture, or social location, or philosophical
presuppositions. On the other hand, however, the integrity of the Gospel means
that mission cannot be limited to one kind of activity (Bevans 2002: 4-5).
The significance of witness in modern missiology is
also illustrated by the concept of the missional church . D. Guder
speaks of being the witness, doing the witness, and saying the witness. Being
the witness is representing the reign of God as its community. Doing the
witness is representing the reign of God as its servant. Saying the
witness is representing the Reign of God as its messenger (Guder 1998:
102-109).
2. Mission as invitation
The centrifugal aspect of mission should be
supplemented by a centripetal aspect. The Christian community lives in
gathering and scattering, in being called together and being sent forth. This double aspect of gathering and
sending is reflected in several New Testament writings.
The gospel of Matthew is one example. As H.-R. Weber
points out, Matthew conceived world mission not as a course of indoctrination
but as an incorporation of ever new members into the learning community. The
main point is to bring people into discipleship, with all that this implies:
vicarious poverty, a greater righteousness, and the way to the cross by
acknowledging and following he one who lives and interprets the will of God. In
short: mission is to issue to all the invitation to discipleship (Weber 1971: 98).
The centripetal mission is by definition mission as invitation. It is
¡°evangelization by hospitality¡± (Arias). It is an invitation to share the
blessings of Christ and it is for all. ¡°Come to me, all you that are weary and
carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest¡± (11:28).
Matthey has pointed out how the focus on the magi¢¥s
pilgrimage (2:1-12) can shape our understanding of Matthew¢¥s concept of
mission. He argues that Matthew¢¥s specific theses on Christian mission are much
more subtle than is usually presupposed on basis of Matth 28. The Gospel of
Matthew ¡°gives arguments, directly
as well as indirectly, for a balanced understanding of mission and the relation
between Jesus¢¥ disciples and people of other religious convictions¡± (Matthey
2002: 120).
The Gospel of John is another example of this double
aspect. It is well known that this gospel has a strong emphasis on the sending
aspect. Sometimes the other aspect is overlooked. However, the Fourth Gospel is
centripetal in its call to "come and see", a call made not only to
the initial disciples (1:39.46), to the Samaritans (4,29), and to Jesus
contemporary addresses (5:40; 6:35.37), but to all the potential readers as
well. This centripetal emphasis of the evangelistic invitation is intimately related
to an incarnational revelation that is located and "to be seen". This
revelation is a center of universal attraction, cf 12:32. One might speak of a
„hospitality Christology¡± (Nissen 2002: 84).
Throughout centuries mission has been understood almost
exclusively in the centrifugal sense. However, today we should realize that the
¡°Christian¡± countries have become ¡°mission areas¡± themselves. Thus, there is a
strong need that the centrifugal aspect of mission is supplemented by a
centripetal understanding. ¡°Es geht um ¡°Grenzüberschreitung¡° und
Präsenz der Christen in der Welt¡° (Schneider 1984: 92). At this point Protestants have much to learn from the
Orthodox tradition with its insistence on the doxological motive for mission
(cf. Stamoolis 1986; see also Thangaraj 1999).
3. Community as witness
Mission can be defined also as community witness.
Evidence of this concept can be found in various New Testament genres.
a. The gospels. In keeping with this understanding Matth 5:13-16 has been taken as
starting point for missiological reflections on Matthew¢¥s gospel. According to
G.M. Soares-Prabhu this passage can be sees as a corrective to a widespread
reading of the great commission. Mission is not just Christocentric (making
disciples of the risen Lord) but theocentric (giving glory by building up God¢¥s
kingdom), and the way to this mission is not so much individual proclamation as
community witness (Soares-Prabhu 1994).
While the alternative Christocentric-theocentric is
questionable, the other part of this suggestion should be accepted. The church
ought to see itself as Matthew saw it: as a distinct and appealing
counter-culture, a city set on a hill that makes visible the reality of God¢¥s
reign in the midst of the old order: a community concerned not so much to root
out the weeds in its midst as to cultivate wheat of such quality that others
will see it ¡°and give glory to your Father in heaven¡±, cf. 5:16 (Donaldson; see
Nissen 2002: 32).
Community witness plays a significant role in John¢¥s
Gospel. As Jesus has loved them until the last second of his life, so the
disciples are to love one another (13:34-35; 15:12). In and through their love
for each other they are called to give public witness to the life-giving power
of God¢¥s love in Jesus. By this praxis of agape all people will know
that they are Jesus¢¥ disciples (Fiorenza; cf. Nissen 2002: 81). ¡°The life of
love in the community of disciples becomes the trademark and the credential of
the missionary community: ¡®If you have love for one another, then everyone
will know that you are my disciples`(13:35)¡±(Arias 1992: 93).
b. The Book of Acts. The missionary character of the community is evidenced also by Luke¢¥s
description of the first Christians in Jerusalem (Acts 2:41-47; 4:31-37). The
basic characteristics of this community were the close relationship between the
unity in heart and soul, the sharing of goods, and the witness to the
resurrection (4:32-33). It is obvious that the transformed economical
relationships among the first believers is closely related to ¡°the phenomenal
evangelistic outreach¡± (Sider; cf. Nissen 1984: 88).
M.T Tangaraj speaks of mission as kerygmatic
presence. ¡°This is one of the earliest models of mission in the history of
the church. The church in the New Testament saw itself as just being a
community of faith at a given place. Look at the account of the early church at
the end of Acts 2. The life of the church is described as the prophetic way.
¡°Being sent¡± – the meaning of the term ¡°mission¡± – was practiced more as
¡°being¡± than by ¡°being sent¡± After all, the first few chapters of Acts
do not describe much going at all. The disciples were where they were in
intentional and specific ways. As one notices, the marks of this community were
kerygma, koinonia, diaconia, and martyria. ¡¦Thus I call the
mission of the early Christians ¡°kerygmatic presence¡± because it was their way
of living out the kerygma they announced¡± (Tangaraj 1999: 1o2-1o3).
c. The letters of the New Testament contain practically no explicit missionary
teaching. Nowhere do we find admonishment to the congregation and their members
to actively carry forth the good news. However, the congregation was missionary
in its effect simply by virtue of its existence. The congregation is to be
"a letter of Christ...acknowledged and read by all people (2 Cor 3:2f.).
This corresponds to Matt 5:13-16. Even here the talk is at first strongly
indicative: "The city built on a hill cannot remain hidden" (Klaiber
1997: 194).
It should be noticed that the missionary effectiveness of the congregation does not derive from a simple accomodation to the society in which it finds itself, but fro