‘QUO VADIS MISSIOLOGY?’ A RESPONSE

Phil Robinson

Abstract


The first issue raised by Dr Simon concerns the place and role of Missiology within the
theological curriculum. As a matter of fact, this is not a new question. It is rather the
resurgence of a long-standing debate within theological education/training which did
receive lengthy treatment in several introductions to theology.1 The same is true of all
introductions to Missiology (Science of Mission) which all attempted to clarify the
place of their discipline within the theological curriculum.2 However, what seems to be
clear from all these presentations is that the position of Missiology was seldom clear.
Due to this uncertainty the discipline often had to alternate between Church History,
Systematic Theology and Practical Theology. Depending on the self-indulgence or
expansionist fever of the hosting discipline, Missiology could retain something of an
own character in a relationship of twin disciplines or more negatively almost disappear
in a number of obscure fragments. It was not until late in the 19th century that Missiology
gained the status of a full-blown sixth discipline in the theological curriculum. The
direct result was an explosion in the number of chairs in Missiology all over the world.

Full Text:

PDF


DOI: https://doi.org/10.7833/100-0-658

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.



ISSN 2305-445X (online); ISSN 0254-1807 (print)

Attribution CC BY-NC-ND 4.0


Powered by OJS and hosted by Stellenbosch University Library and Information Service since 2013.


Disclaimer:

This journal is hosted by the SU LIS on request of the journal owner/editor. The SU LIS takes no responsibility for the content published within this journal, and disclaim all liability arising out of the use of or inability to use the information contained herein. We assume no responsibility, and shall not be liable for any breaches of agreement with other publishers/hosts.

SUNJournals Help