POST‐MODERN MISSION: A PARADIGM SHIFT IN DAVID BOSCH'S THEOLOGY OF MISSION?

Abstract

KIRSTEEN KIM [*] A PARADIGM SHIFT IN DAVID BOSCH'S THEOLOGY OF MISSION? In his renowned Transforming Mission, [1] David Bosch delineates what he calls post-modem (p. 349) for mission. Magnificent in its clarity, scope and depth, the book has understandably fulfilled Lesslie Newbigin's prediction that it would become indispensable foundation for the teaching of missiology for many years to come (back cover). However, without doubting its value and usefulness for teaching missiology, this paper questions, in some important respects. Bosch's claim that his missiology is post-modern. The weakness of Bosch's emerging ecumenical consensus on mission was apparent in its very year of publication (1991) when the seventh assembly of the World Council of Churches (WCC) in Canberra famously failed to find a consensus. [2] The assembly took a pneumatological theme with a missionary thrust based on a creation theology: Come, Holy -- Renew the Whole Creation. Canberra was particularly influenced by the work of the Justice, Peace and the Integrity of Creation 'process' (JPIC) which evidenced at Canberra particular concern for feminism, ecology, and spirituality -- and the Spirit of life theology of J[ddot{u}]rgen Moltmann. [3] In his chapter outlining post-modernity, Bosch recognizes its eco-feminist dimensions when he notes briefly that it involves a basic reorientation: One should, again, see oneself as a child of Mother Earth and as sister and brother to other human beings. One should think holistically, rather than analytically, emphasize togetherness rather than distance, break through the dualism of mind and body, subject and object, and emphasize 'symbiosis' (p. 355). He suggests such a change of worldview would have profound and far-reaching consequences for the epistemology of mission but these are not worked out in his book. Creation theology and its attendant concerns at Canberra are hardly mentioned in Transforming Mission. As far as feminism is concerned, although he does allude to women, nowhere does Bosch mention feminism as a theological or philosophical movement. [4] Bosch hardly touches on ecology or on the perceived global environmental crisis, which fuelled the IPIC process. [5] Thirdly, the related interest in indigenous or spiritualities of Indigenous People is missed. [6] This lack of interest is surprising in view of Bosch's own direct experience of peoples during his formative years as a missionary in Transkei (1957-71). [7] By its very nature, Transforming Mission is retrospective; it documents what has already been resolved, not the debates of today. [8] In that sense it was inevitably already out of date by the time of its publication. However, its lack of reference to these contemporary issues is remarkable when we consider that Bosch was a section leader at the San Antonio meeting of the Conference for World Mission and Evangelism of the WCC at which the influence of JPIC was clearly evident. Though preparation of his book was in its final stages in 1989, Bosch does refer to the San Antonio meeting six times (pp. 389, 429, 460-61, 467,487, 489) but never with reference to JPIC themes. When he concludes that San Antonio contained no new missiological reflections, [9] it is hard to avoid the conclusion that what falls outside his paradigm has simply been ignored. The of mission The fact that Bosch passes over feminism, ecology and spiritualities raises the question of whether Bosch's paradigm can be described as a truly post-modem one, even by his own criteria above. In the light of Canberra, it reveals both Bosch's lack of a creation theology and suggests also the limited nature of his pneumatology. Bosch has been praised for his emphasis on the work of the Holy in mission. [10] In highlighting the Orthodox contribution to the theology of mission and the theology of Luke, Bosch draws attention to the of mission (especially pp. …