Beyond Contextualization: Toward a Twenty-first-Century Model

for Enabling Mission

R. Daniel Shaw

I n one course I taught recently, I had forty-two students

from thirteen nations, with a combined 313 years of mis-
sion experience in forty-six countries. Such prior knowledge of
intrinsically cross-disciplinary, drawing from a multiplicity of
sources, including theology, the social sciences, and religious
studies.2 Having moved beyond the dated boundaries of colo-
the world generates an expectation of rich classroom participa- nial paradigms, missiology seeks to integrate perspectives and
tion and dialogue. Managing the interaction is both reward- data from social, political, economic, and religious spheres long
ing and challenging for professors who seek to ensure that all held separate.
voices are heard. Such a teaching experience is symptomatic of With more missionaries coming from the non-Western world,
our contemporary world and reflects the shifts taking place in Ajith Fernando’s call for changing the missionary job description
the nature of mission. How can we build maximally on these must be taken seriously. He argued that local people must be
changes to reflect the glory of God throughout the earth? These allowed to do what they best know how to do, while outsiders
shifts signal the need for a new approach in the way we teach should assist in ways that reflect their strengths.3 Fernando’s
missiology, as well as in how we approach the challenging task and Massey’s observations underscore an increasing need for
we call world mission. missiologists also to incorporate the contributions of recent
In the circumstances of our post–9/11 and increasingly post- psychological, linguistic, and anthropological explorations into
Christian world, what resources does missiology as a discipline “mind-brain” processing. The implications of this growing cog-
have for responding to current challenges? A decade ago Doreen nitive discipline place new emphasis on the processes involved
Massey, in an article reflecting on the state of affairs throughout in mission and raise questions about appropriate ways to equip
the social sciences, emphasized the need for crossing disciplin- future “message bearers.”4
ary boundaries.1 Missiology, itself a very young discipline, is Global understanding of what mission is has shifted; height-
ened awareness of contemporary world conditions is called for.5
R. Daniel Shaw, Professor of Anthropology and At the same time, the heart of mission hears the call to discern
Translation, School of Intercultural Studies, Fuller God’s intent for human beings and to consider how we who go
Theological Seminary, Pasadena, California, served in Christ’s name can enable people everywhere to understand
with the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Papua what that intent might mean for their spiritual well-being.6 These
New Guinea (1969–81). He is the author of ten books two—the conditions of our world as disclosed by the human
on culture and translation, folk religion, and herme- sciences and God’s Good News that Christ is the source of our
neutics, including two ethnographies of the Samo. reality—form twin points of reference as I seek to apply recent
—[email protected] cognitive models of cultural understanding to mission practice.7

208 International Bulletin of Missionary Research, Vol. 34, No. 4

Twentieth-Century Colonial Models to God. Using their own understanding, they can connect with
the message that clearly impacts them and do so in ways that
From William Carey through most of the twentieth century, the outsiders, in large measure, cannot fathom.14 More attention
Protestant approach to missions can be viewed in large measure began to be paid to the fact that Scripture emphasizes incarna-
as one of cargo. It was perceived as a matter of conveying the tion instead of communication. God demonstrated the concept in
Gospel, however defined, as a product from Christendom to poor the Garden of Eden, and the theme extends all the way through
benighted heathen. Though largely altruistic and well-meaning, the canon to Revelation. Christ’s sojourn on earth was the ultimate
this approach to mission coincided with expansive Western colo- expression of “God with us” (John 1:14, 1 John 1:2), but the entire
nization as well as with burgeoning Western business enterprise canon is about God’s desire to interact with human beings, who
around the globe.8 As a result, a Western understanding of God are viewed as the crown of creation (Ps. 8:5), among whom God
became hegemonic, one that had been developed over centu- seeks to dwell (Exod. 6:7).
ries by wedding Hellenistic logic to the scholastic method. As
Westerners, missionaries assumed a realist perspective, that held The Need for a New Model
truth (God’s truth) to be timeless and culture-free. Any contex-
tualization attempted was culturally conditioned to fit Western A revolution in the social sciences began in the mid-twentieth
categories and was relevant to the colonial powers rather than century. Following the philosophical developments of Jean Piaget
being connected to local cultures. and Lev Vygotsky in psychology, Noam Chomsky in 1959 spoke
In the mid-twentieth century the work of Eugene Nida took out strongly against the behaviorist approach to understanding
Protestant mission theory a step beyond this product-oriented human experience (language, culture, and emotion).15 Chomsky’s
model. Nida adapted communication theory to develop a Source- work—which sought to isolate the underlying triggers of meaning
Message-Receptor (S-M-R) model of mission.9 The S-M-R model that can be expressed in a myriad of ways, linguistically as well
focused on codes presented by a communicator that receptors in as culturally—excited anthropologists and psychologists. Ward
turn had to process in order for them to
make sense. To the extent that the forms
used by receptors matched the meanings
presented by the source, the message
was deemed communicative. The com- Source Encode Message Decode Receptor
municator, however, retained control of
the content, and Western assumptions
were almost always operative. The
S-M-R model yielded a picture, in effect, Feedback Loop
of theologically trained missionaries tak-
ing the message of the Gospel to people of
differing cultures and circumstances and Each link is dependent on the one before it. Focus is on product or result.
telling them to follow the missionary’s
way to God. This largely prescriptive Figure 1. Serial Processing of Codes
approach to communicating the Gospel
placed the emphasis on what the Gospel is (especially what it is Goodenough redefined culture, not as the sum total of human
for the communicator) and the results it brings rather than on experience but as what people need to know in order to behave
the nature of the relationship between people and God. correctly.16 Prototype theory in linguistics, advanced by Eleanor
Taking its cue from Nida, the communication model for Rosch, focused on categories that reflect psychological reality.
mission that prevailed during the second half of the twentieth She began with color but the concept was quickly applied to
century focused on clearly presenting the codes and ensuring that kinship and all manner of linguistic and cultural categories that
the message as decoded was the “closest natural equivalent.”10 impact how human beings process information. These studies
Conceptually, this encoding/decoding model focuses on the
sequential linkages between elements in a “serial processing
structure,” with each link dependent on the one before it (see
figure 1).11 The model was extremely helpful in enabling mis-
Despite having “dynamic
siologists to develop the concept of contextualization, as well as equivalence” in its name,
making a vital contribution to Bible translation.12 Despite having
“dynamic equivalence” in its name, however, the model was
the model was relatively
relatively static and product oriented: the goal was to present static and product oriented.
the Gospel properly, as understood in the West, in a new context
and thereby enable people to have God’s Word in their environ-
ment so that they could be enriched by knowledge that those contributed to George Lakoff’s work on metaphor.17 Anna
in the West had already acquired. Mission became a matter of Wierzbicka’s work on semantic primes and the early work of
knowledge transfer, and it remained embedded in an essentially the cognitive linguists helped in developing a new understand-
colonial approach to communicating God’s truth.13 By default, ing of mental processes as “connectionist networks” by which
the meaning of what God has to say was viewed as bound to the the mind processes information.18 In 1995 Roy D’Andrade laid
text, in the possession of the communicator, rather than being out the development of this revolution, particularly focusing on
relevant to the context where the receptor lived. the concept of schemas.19
A transition began in the late twentieth century, exemplified Connectionist network theory reflects an entirely different
by David Bosch: people must be allowed to find their own way model of how the human brain works. As ideas enter awareness,

October 2010 209

individuals process information based on their experience with should mission theorists engage those findings in developing
the schema the information elicits. Incoming information is new mission approaches? Not just cognitive studies, but all fields
assessed by comparing it with what the mind-brain already of endeavor in our rapidly changing post-Christian world are
knows. While processing new information, individuals uncon- undergoing development. How should mission teachers respond
sciously seek to expend the least amount of effort for the greatest so as to equip their students for effective service as Gospel mes-
gain. Their perception of value or benefit is directly correlated sage bearers in reaching the world for Christ? These questions
with what is considered pertinent within a particular context. dominate the remainder of my discussion.
But what is considered pertinent is culturally conditioned, which
means that all kinds of information—psychological, linguistic, Seeking Cognitive Balance
and cultural—are forced to interact simultaneously.
The implications of this approach are vast. The S-M-R, or According to relevance theory, communication is always designed
code, model is linear and focused on the result, that is, the deliv- to change the “mutual cognitive environment” by precipitating
ery, in as intact a fashion as possible, of a prepackaged product. transformation that results in a new balance.23 The mental-
Connectionist network theory, by contrast, directs attention to neurological network is always seeking balance, which, when
the processes by which recipients construct meaning in their achieved, is not the same as it was before the new information
contexts. The diagram in figure 2 attempts to represent a con- came in. The scope of relevance theory goes far beyond the
nectionist network. The complex process shown in the diagram impact of speech and includes all the senses, which are con-
is actually slower than the serial processing of earlier linear stantly enhancing human experience and triggering adjustments
models, but it more clearly represents how human beings process relevant to understanding.24 Cognitive study encompasses all
information.20 This process-oriented model can be related directly aspects of human understanding: cognitive, evaluative, and affec-
to Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson’s
“inferential model,” or relevance theory
of communication.21 The starting point Cognitive Environment
for relevance theory is the intent of the
communicator. For Sperber and Wilson,
effective or “relevant” communication
takes place when an audience infers the
intent of the presenter and both the intent
and the inferences more or less match. As Feedback
anyone who has traveled knows, there is
Schema
much room for mismatch and therefore individual
miscommunication. How much energy and
people are willing to expend on process- collective Inference
ing information is largely a product of
the perceived benefit. Changes come Connectionist/
about from a desire to build relationship Network
Ideas Approach
through the communication process. The
greater the shared experience, the greater
the likelihood of effective exchanges that Least effort for maximum understanding. Focus is on processing of ideas.
will create mutual understanding and
relationship. Communication needs to
capture the conceptual awareness that Figure 2. Parallel Distributive Processing of Ideas
begins with a communicator’s intent,
but it is simultaneously dependent on the knowledge-base of tive. The intent of the source of the communication and the infer-
the people in the new audience and on their experience with the ences an audience makes regarding that intent jointly seek a
new ideas being introduced. path of least resistance to achieve maximum understanding for
It is important to take note of the feedback loop present in mutual benefit. Through interaction both the source and the
both the S-M-R model and the inferential model. Feedback is audience expand their mutual but different understandings.
crucial to communication, and how people respond is critical Both the message bearer and the receptor are changed; neither
to ongoing communication in either model. The difference is cognitive environment is left unaltered. Each arrives at a new
the focus of the two models, either on the surface forms and balance that provides insight regarding the entire experience.25
meanings (words, grammar, and all the trappings of communi- When this understanding of the communicative process is
cation and culture) or on the deeper, cognitive understanding applied to communicating the Gospel, the stakes grow larger. If
of intended meanings. Kraft had it right when he emphasized the intent of Gospel communication is to enable people to become
“receptor-oriented communication.”22 In mission theory we must more like God intended them to be, that is, to display God’s im-
move to a new model that emphasizes the process rather than age, then transformation in those who bring the Gospel and in
the product. The code model asks, “How is an understanding of those who hear and “receive” it will move both toward that goal.
God translated or transmitted from one set of cultural forms and This understanding has important theological implications for
meanings to another?” The inferential model asks, “How does long-established missiological themes surrounding God’s will,
God’s intent become cognitively relevant to and understood by the incarnation, the role of the Holy Spirit, the nature of the mes-
human beings?” sage, how the message works itself out in a new environment,
The findings of cognitive studies have significant implications and how new disciples will themselves be missional. By implica-
for our understanding of effective cross-cultural mission. How tion, theological development is respective to the environment in

210 International Bulletin of Missionary Research, Vol. 34, No. 4

which people think about God, that is, in which they theologize. economic changes represented by globalization, tribalization,
Mission practitioners must strive to foster development of a bibli- and cultural upheaval engulf our world, we find ourselves in a
cal theology in the new context that is perceived by the receptors Kuhnian period of adjustment.29
to be relevant and that brings change.26 The precipitated change Because cognitivist network theory posits incremental read-
should impact those who receive the Word without leaving the justment (people are being constantly bombarded from every
message bearers who initiated the process untouched. angle with new input and are in quest for a new steady state), the
I found this to be the case in my experience as a Bible trans- model would seem to be at odds with the Kuhnian picture of revo-
lator among the Samo in the jungles of Papua New Guinea’s lutionary rather than evolutionary paradigm shift. But gradual
Western Province.27 I entered their environment with my theologi- accumulation of small-scale changes is what Kuhn characterizes
cal boxes set, all systematized and ready to be communicated. as an era of “normal science.” The period since the Enlightenment
The problem was can be viewed
that the Samo did as one such era.
not have boxes Descriptive— Cognitive— Then comes an
similar to mine. Delivery Mission Discover Meaning event or set of cir-
It was only as (Doing) (Being) cumstances that
they enabled me raises challenges
to see the world • Great Commission • Relationship and to the status quo
t h ro u g h t h e i r Mission (McGavran) Shift from Transformation (Lingenfelter) so significant
eyes that I was • Largely Individual Product • Increasingly Group Oriented that suddenly the
able to translate • Static and Largely Orientation (teamwork) normalcy of the
God’s Word and External (telling) to • Dynamic and Largely Internal old paradigm be-
introduce it into • Contextualization Process (enabling) comes problem-
their context. My (make Christianity Orientation • Beyond Contextualization atic. Whatever the
cognitive envi- like culture) (knowledge transforms— fate of arguments
ronment changed • Local Theology (from Doing focus on knowing God) that we are now
as I gained new • Church Growth to Being) • Biblical Theology in Context in the throes of a
perceptions of (numbers) • Interactive Hermeneutical wholesale para-
things I thought Community (discipleship— digm shift, clear-
I knew about God missional/emerging church) ly considerable
but that, in reality, transformation
the Samo under- Figure 3. Contrasting Models of Mission is taking place.30
stood better than The world envi-
I did. I learned to think from within their categories, or “boxes,” ronment is now markedly different from what it was even a few
and am so much more aware of God because of it. The reality of years ago, posing probing questions both for the world at large
the spirit world around them is a case in point. My view cast a and for missiology as a multidisciplinary field.31
disparaging eye on the presence of the hogai (bush spirits), but For mission theory the question becomes one of how to move
their perspective enforced the need for protection at every turn, from a sending or transmittal approach to transformational mission
leading to camouflage, amulets, and rituals to keep spirits at bay. with a focus on relationships.32 Furthermore, how can those who
They would not let me walk a forest trail without an escort—“in are being transformed be encouraged to go beyond themselves
case hogai appear.” These were committed Christians who knew and to become missional, that is, sent by God to others who also
and understood Scripture and applied their cultural awareness to need transformation? Here we find a need for the old paradigm,
interpreting what the Scriptures say about spiritual beings. I have as well as a new model. It is a case of both-and, not of either/or.
found that these spiritual forces are very real and that they impact To insist on a rigid choice between the old and the new would
our lives whether we realize it or not. I have learned so much! itself be to cling to the old model. The code model and the infer-
ential model are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Our desire
Implications of Developing a New Model should be to complement the old by adding the strengths of the
new, thereby reducing the weaknesses of both.
What effect does incarnation—or the theological concept of God New approaches for communicating the Gospel need to
with us, which permeates the whole of Scripture—have on the take into account equipping and encouraging members of the
human condition? How can missiologists incorporate insights local community to be missional among their own people, for
from contemporary academic research into their thinking so as to they best understand their own cognitive environment and
make adjustments in present-day approaches to mission? Figure intuitively possess an awareness of how inferences made within
3 presents an oversimplified attempt to contrast the assump- it will effect a response to God’s intent. The dynamism of such
tions of the code, or S-M-R, model with those of the inferential an approach is superior to having message bearers tell people
model, or relevance theory, and to adumbrate a new approach what outsiders think insiders need to know. A transition is
for contemporary mission. For such an effort the concept of para- needed from preaching the Gospel to living the Gospel within
digms as used in the social sciences is helpful. Manifestations the context where people live.
will vary with every context, but, following Thomas Kuhn, we This point demands that we reexamine our understanding of
can understand paradigms as reflecting assumptions, values, contextualization. Instead of outsiders reconfiguring local cultural
symbols, and representations of ideas that drive human inter- forms to fit the shape of Christianity with which they are familiar,
est. Kuhn maintained that paradigms do not evolve slowly over we need—following the theological implications of the incarna-
time; instead they change rapidly within a discipline because of tion—to allow local people to contemplate the implications of
the buildup of unforeseen pressures.28 As social, political, and God-in-their-midst. Agbonkhianmeghe Orobator addresses this

October 2010 211

concern in Theology Brewed in an African Pot, where he highlights be interactive, modeled on God’s communication with human
the important role of community in theological reflection. When beings. It is relational, with a focus on being rather than doing.
situated in the experience of the community, theology enables It is primarily enabling and encouraging rather than static and
people to bring biblical understanding to the process of living.33 knowledge-focused. It envisions a biblical theology in context
The matter cannot be given the extended discussion it deserves rather than a contextual theology.
here, but new approaches require the humility to recognize that What does a missional approach for the twenty-first century
where Gospel message bearers now dare to go, God has always look like? From the discussion so far, it must be dynamic and
been. interactive, intentional, relevant, global, and transformational. I
now present each of these in turn.
Toward a New Missional Perspective
• Dynamic and interactive. Meaningful relationships with
How might a contemporary mission approach be defined? human beings emanate from a vibrant relationship with
David Bosch and Paul Hiebert help to point the way for us. God. Who will cross our path today, and how can we be
Bosch discussed paradigm shifts with their accompanying used by God to touch them?
shifts in epistemological approach as being critical to theologiz- • Intentional. Understanding God’s intention to communi-
ing. He cautioned against a monolithic approach to theology, cate, we follow God’s example as we intentionally com-
represented by the old paradigm, and advocated a “critical her- municate in ways that recognize the need to be relevant
meneutic” that recognizes the biblical text, by its very nature, and appropriate in specific contexts.
as contextual. God has interacted with human beings through • Relevant. In order to be relevant, missional message bearers
time and space and in multiple contexts so as to communicate must be appropriate from the perspective of those with
God’s intent and God’s desire to be in relationship with human whom they interact. Being relevant demands consider-
beings, wherever they are found.34 able anthropological research to bring to light things that
In discussing contextualization, Paul Hiebert also used people in other cognitive environments simply assume.
the term “critical,” pointing out the dangers of uncritically con- Their perspective is reality for them, and the only way
textualizing from a strictly local perspective.35 Sadly, he was the message can make sense to them is by connecting
not understood, and contextualization became a catchword for with their assumptions.
“localization.” For Hiebert, “critical” implied a standard, so the • Global. Because the world is dynamic and integrated—
Bible, not another cultural context, must be the standard for connected via 24/7 media coverage, real time Web-
judging relevance. Contextualization forces interactive reflec- streaming, and reality TV—there is little isolation.40 But
tion, and it is from the interplay between people’s understand- globalization is much more than media coverage; almost
ing of God’s intention for all human beings as well as for their any activity affects others half a world away. Local wars
particular environment that transformation takes place, that is, become international incidents, the world is awash with
transformation that is both true to God’s intent and also relevant migrants, disease in one place impacts every place, and
within the context. personal issues become the business of multitudes. We
A contextualized biblical theology reflects God’s intention are each other’s neighbor, regardless of where on the
for the people of a particular time and place and enables those planet we find ourselves.
involved (both insiders and outsiders) to be transformed more • Transformational. Relevance theory demonstrates that
fully into the image of God. At this point, cognitive studies become transformation is directly intertwined with cultural,
highly significant for contemporary mission: we must value the linguistic, and psychological factors. When processed in
“receptional apparatus” God has created. Human beings every- light of new information, the familiar is reframed, and
where were created by God with a mind-brain for processing, new understandings arise within the community so that
through language and psychosocial awareness, all manner of transformation “makes sense.” In this dynamic interaction
human experience, including new transculturated conceptual- all parties are transformed. Relationship is always a two-
izations.36 It is necessary to move beyond contextualization, as way street; local people come to see things from a different
previously conceived, to recognition of God’s presence in the perspective as do message bearers; everyone comes away
midst of people everywhere and to recognition of the ways that changed. Transformation is not a case of one-size-fits-all
presence enables people to “know God.”37 for everyone in a context. If anthropology has established
This new missional model reflects God’s intention for people anything, it is the fact of variation within any community,
“from every race, tribe, nation, and language” (Rev. 7:9 CEV). As even though at one level successful interaction depends
a statement of purpose, that wording may not seem new, but the on having people in a society agree on what they hold
emphasis the model places on the relevance of every context is to be true. Transformation takes place only when the
quite different from twentieth-century approaches to mission. As community reaches a decision that what they have held
God’s Word enlightens people of every cognitive environment, to be true needs adjustment based on some standard to
it transforms people’s experience in each specific context.38 We which they collectively agree. As Oswald Chambers so
must constantly juxtapose the general and the specific. As Charles clearly states, “Reality is Redemption, not my experience
Van Engen notes, we must recognize both the “Church” (God’s of Redemption; but Redemption has no meaning for me
people) and churches (God’s representatives in a particular place), until it speaks the language of my conscious life.”41
“Theology” (God’s intent for human beings) and theologies (God’s
revelation as processed by particular communities of believers), In sum, being missional encompasses the “essential nature
“contextualization” (God with us) and what Van Engen calls and vocation of the church as God’s called and sent people,”
“re-contextualization” (people knowing God in their midst).39 which, in turn, enables God’s people to represent God’s intention
As noted earlier, the new model for mission accents a both- in the world.42 The more complex our world becomes, the greater
and approach rather than an either/or perspective. It seeks to the number of options for being missional. What is critical is that

212 International Bulletin of Missionary Research, Vol. 34, No. 4

SELECTED TITLES FROM
WILLIAM CAREY LIBRARY
Telling God’s Stories Is Hearing Enough?
with Power Literacy and the Great
Storytelling in Oral Cultures Commandments
Paul F. Koehler Don Edwards
ISBN: 9780878084654 ISBN: 9780878084623

2009 WCL | 250 pages | paperback 2010 WCL | 145 pages | paperback
Our price ........ $14.39 Our price ...... $11.19
3 or more ......... $9.89 3 or more ....... $7.69

This is a complete and practical introduction to storying. This new book makes the case for including literacy
Tracing the movement of the biblical stories across multiple in evangelism and discipleship efforts in developing
generations of tellers and listeners, storytelling is found to be nations like India. Don Edwards looks at the crippling
superior for knowledge transfer and for bypassing resistance effects of illiteracy, examines Scripture’s view of literacy,
to the gospel in oral contexts. and explains literacy’s value as a door-opener in
communities that are resistant to traditional evangelism.

This valuable resource is a global overview of world Christianity that analyzes, interprets,
and evaluates the country-by-country data reported in the two-volume 2001 World Christian
Encyclopedia. This “third volume” still stands on its own. Special features include the first-ever
statistical survey of evangelism/evangelization, a statistical survey of persecution and Christian
martyrs, and projections to AD 2200 about Christianity and world religions. Includes glossary,
bibliography, color maps and a CD-ROM.
There are many updates in the newly published Atlas of Global Christianity, but the analyses in
this Trends volume remain current and useful. In fact, this book contains analyses not found in
the original Encyclopedia, the new Atlas, or even the online World Christian Database! Unique
discussions include:

• GEOSTATUS: 70 Global Diagrams

• COSMO-CHRONOLOGY: Chronology of world evangelization from Creation to
New Creation
• MARTYROLOGY: The demographics of Christian martyrdom, AD 33-AD 2001
• GEO-RENEWAL: Four mega-typologies analyzing empirical global Christianity
• INDEPENDENCY: Post-denominationalism
• GEO-TRENDS: Statistical trends over 2,000 years
World Christian Trends, • WHO’S WHO: Names and biographies
AD 30-AD 2200 • GLOBALISTICS: Quick-reference global statistical index on 4,200 subjects
• MONITORING: Monitoring global Christianity and world evangelization
David Barrett & Todd Johnson • MISSIOMETRICS: Science of mission: counting, measuring, and interpreting global
ISBN: 9780878086085 Christianity
• GEO-SCRIPTURES: Global distribution and density of Christian scriptures, AD 30-
2001 WCL | 928 pages | hardcover AD 2025
Our price: $79.99 • FINANCE: The finances of global Christianity, AD 1900-AD 2001
• EVANGELIZATION: Evangelize in 420 dimensions; its historical development
3 or more: $54.99 • GEO-STRATEGIES: 1,500 global plans to evangelize the world

In so many subject areas of world evangelization, World Christian Trends still represents the
most comprehensive analysis ever done!

www.missionbooks.org • 1-800-MISSION
mission emerges from an attitude of heart that God uses to do The implications of transformational development are
God’s work in the world at large. God is about the business of multitudinous and must always be weighed within a context.
drawing human beings to God’s self, and they, in turn, desire to The exact manifestations of transformation in various contexts,
draw others to God. academic and otherwise, are relative to the time and place and
to the needs of the people with whom we interact. Working out
Missiological Implications those details is part of the ongoing task placed before the wider
missiological community. As a professor, my desire is for students
The systems of the world at large—sociocultural structures, to go from my classes prepared to reenter the environments from
political relationships, interdependent financial arrangements, which they came, challenged and encouraged to develop new and
and even manifestations of increasing religious fundamentalism contextually relevant applications of missiological perspectives.
—all indicate that radical changes are afoot. Old ways of interact- My prayer is for them to bring change to the church in those
ing with and becoming knowledgeable about these world sys- places and, in the process, send others forth to be a witness in
tems no longer work. Similarly, we have begun the transition other places.
to a new missiological model that radically reshapes how we As an anthropologist, I realize there is much that I can learn
go about connecting human beings with the Gospel. Relevance from every sociolinguistic group. Others know so much about
theory is more than a theory of communication. It is a philosophy spiritual power, about relationships, about what it means to be
of how we are to relate to each person we meet. Relevance theory human.43 If as message bearers we are to communicate with people
offers a fresh understanding of the Gospel, with its potential to everywhere, we first must truly hear their voices and allow them
transform both those who bear the message and those who hear to move us beyond what we already know. Reconceptualizing
it. As we reach out missionally, we, like Paul, are blessed (1 Cor. the praxis of mission on the basis of relevance theory and an
9:23). But our attitude as we connect with the world at large is inferential understanding of cognition calls for a major overhaul
critical. God gives us relationships with believers (for training of traditional missiological models. Jesus came to connect with
and equipping for further ministry), as well as with nonbelievers real people who expressed human need. To do so, he entered
(for being Jesus in the midst of needy people). We must follow their world, took up their language with its implicit categories,
the example our Lord set in sending his disciples to the ends of learning the shapes and contents of their mental and conceptual
the earth. He encouraged them, as well as us, to connect with “boxes.” We who call ourselves by his name must, as he did, go
people wherever they might be found, to build them up in the beyond our context, learn from those with whom we interact,
faith, and to encourage them in turn to do the same for others and become God’s intention to them—the Word in their midst.
(Matt. 28:18–20).

Notes
1. Doreen Massey, quoting Immanuel Wallerstein, states that “‘defining 12. Charles R. Taber, “Is There More Than One Way to Do Theology?”
a discipline defines what lies beyond it’ . . . [seeing] identity as Gospel in Context 1 (1978): 4–10; Charles H. Kraft, Christianity in
constituting itself, through counterposition; through a process of Culture: A Study in Dynamic Biblical Theologizing in Cross-Cultural
differentiating itself from what it is not” (“Negotiating Disciplinary Perspective (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1979).
Boundaries,” Current Sociology 47, no. 4 [1999]: 6). 13. See Paul G. Hiebert, The Missiological Implications of Epistemological
2. A half century ago Donald McGavran noted the fact of missiology’s Shifts: Affirming Truth in a Modern/Postmodern World (Harrisburg, Pa.:
cross-disciplinary character. See Donald A. McGavran, ed., Church Trinity Press International, 1999).
Growth and Christian Mission (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 14. Bosch, Transforming Mission, pp. 307–8, 362.
p. 239. 15. Jean Piaget, The Psychology of Intelligence (London: Routledge and
3. Ajith Fernando, “Missionaries Still Needed: But of a Special Kind,” Kegan Paul, 1951); Lev Vygotsky, Thought and Language (Cambridge,
Evangelical Missions Quarterly 24, no. 1 (1988): 18–25. Mass.: MIT Press, 1972); Noam Chomsky, Syntactic Structures (The
4. Ryan S. Shaw uses the term “message bearer” in place of the word Hague: Mouton, 1957) and review of Verbal Behavior, by B. F. Skinner,
“missionary.” See his Waking the Giant: The Resurging Student Mission Language 35, no. 1 (1959): 26–58.
Movement (Pasadena, Calif.: William Carey Library, 2006), p. 8. 16. Ward Goodenough, “Componential Analysis and the Study of
5. Jehu J. Hanciles, “Migration and Mission: Some Implications for the Meaning,” Language 32 (1956): 195–216.
Twenty-first-Century Church,” International Bulletin of Missionary 17. Eleanor Rosch, “Natural Categories,” Cognitive Psychology 4 (1973):
Research 27 no. 4 (2003): 146–53. 328–50; George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By
6. R. Daniel Shaw and Charles E. Van Engen, Communicating God’s (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1980).
Word in a Complex World: God’s Truth or Hocus Pocus? (Lanham, Md.: 18. Anna Wierzbicka, Semantic Primitives (Frankfurt: Athenaum, 1972);
Rowman & Littlefield, 2003), pp. 11–21. Ronald W. Langacker, “The Form and Meaning of the English
7. For the language of Christ as the source of our reality, see Oswald Auxiliary,” Language 54 (1978): 853–82, and “Space Grammar,
Chambers, My Utmost for His Highest (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1935), Analysability, and the English Passive,” Language 58 (1982): 22–80.
entry for December 21. 19. Roy D’Andrade, The Development of Cognitive Anthropology
8. David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995).
Mission (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1991), pp. 302–13. 20. James L. McClelland and David D. Rumelhart, eds., Parallel Distributed
9. In his Message and Mission: The Communication of the Christian Faith Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition (Cambridge,
(New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960), Eugene A. Nida adapted Claude Mass.: MIT Press, 1986).
E. Shannon, Mathematical Theory of Communication (Urbana: Univ. of 21. Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson, Relevance: Communication and
Illinois Press, 1949), to develop a theory of missional communication. Cognition, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995; orig. pub., 1986).
10. Eugene A. Nida and Charles R. Taber, The Theory and Practice of 22. Charles H. Kraft, Communication Theory for Christian Witness
Translation, 2nd ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1981; orig. pub., 1969), p. 12. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1983), p. 25; also Christianity in Culture:
11. A schematic model of telecommunications (e.g., the sending and A Study in Dynamic Biblical Theologizing in Cross-Cultural Perspective
receiving of TV signals) would present a similar serial processing (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1979), p. 394.
structure. 23. Sperber and Wilson, Relevance, p. 38.

214 International Bulletin of Missionary Research, Vol. 34, No. 4

24. Edward T. Hall, The Silent Language (New York: Doubleday, 1959). 33. Agbonkhianmeghe E. Orobator, Theology Brewed in an African Pot
25. On the relevance of communication style, see Paulo Freire, Pedagogy (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 2008), pp. 5–6.
of the Oppressed, 30th anniv. ed. (New York: Continuum, 2008). 34. Bosch, Transforming Mission, pp. 421–25.
26. The point cannot be elaborated here, but it should be noted that 35. Paul G. Hiebert, “Critical Contextualization,” International Bulletin
fostering the “development of a biblical theology in the new of Missionary Research 11, no. 3 (1987): 109–10.
context” differs significantly from developing theologies in a locality 36. R. Daniel Shaw, Transculturation: The Cultural Factor in Translation and
as suggested by Robert J. Schreiter, Constructing Local Theologies Other Communication Tasks (Pasadena, Calif.: William Carey Library,
(Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1985). 1988), p. 5.
27. R. Daniel Shaw, Kandila: Samo Ceremonialism and Interpersonal 37. Shaw and Van Engen, Communicating God’s Word, p. 214.
Relationships (Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press, 1990); From 38. By extension, the new missional model also applies within our society
Longhouse to Village: Samo Social Change (Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt (not just cross-culturally) to bring renewed spiritual regard for those
Brace, 1996). who suffer cognitive difficulties. In this theoretical configuration the
28. Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd ed. biologically and cognitively handicapped become an entirely new
(Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1996; orig. pub., 1962). mission field. See Henri Nouwen, The Wounded Healer: Ministry in
29. Discussion of tribalization is beyond the scope of this article, but it Contemporary Society (New York: Doubleday, 1972). What would the
should be noted that globalization and tribalization are not mutually implications be if the model were applied to the homeless as well?
exclusive phenomena. 39. Charles E. Van Engen, “Critical Theologizing: Knowing God in
30. Mike Featherstone, ed., Postmodernism (London: Sage, 1992; reprint of Multiple Global/Local Contexts,” in Evangelical, Ecumenical, and
Theory, Culture, and Society, 1988); Barry Smart, Modern Conditions, Anabaptist Missiologies in Conversation, ed. James R. Krabill, Walter
Postmodern Controversies (London: Routledge, 1992). Sawatsky, and Charles E. Van Engen (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books,
31. On globalization and the development of a post-American world, 2006), pp. 88–97.
see Fareed Zakaria, The Post-American World (New York: Norton, 40. In the age of cyberspace, boundaries focus more on ideological and
2009; orig. pub., 2008). psychological boundaries than on geography.
32. Sherwood Lingenfelter’s work on transformation utilizes Mary 41. Chambers, My Utmost, entry for December 21.
Douglas’s “grid and group” model for understanding people in 42. Charles E. Van Engen, “Mission Described and Defined,” in
society. As Lingenfelter shows, this model from anthropology offers MissionShift: Global Mission Issues in the Third Millennium, ed. David
much of value for missional concerns. See his Agents of Transformation J. Hesselgrave and Ed Stetzer (Nashville: B&H Academic, in press).
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996) and Transforming Culture: A Challenge 43. To be truly alive in the fullest sense of the word is a gift of the Spirit.
for Christian Mission, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998; orig. pub., See Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, Becoming Human Together: The Pas-
1992). toral Anthropology of St. Paul (New York: Hyperion Books, 1983).

October 2010 215