I came across a criticism of the so-called “new missiology”, a series of doctrinal points aimed at undermining the work of what I would consider those non-theological missiologists. In particular, three points are attributed to the “new missiology”:

1. You can keep your own religion (just add Jesus)
2. You can throw out the term Christianity
3. You can throw out the term Christian

I thought it obvious the degree of their experience when under point #1, they mention: “Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Mormonism — you just need to add Jesus to the equation.” Initially, I scoffed at the idea that Mormons by default have not added Jesus to their equation (the official title of the mainstream Mormon church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,” as most of us already are aware). But the nuanced views of Buddhists, Muslims, and to a certain extend Hindus toward Jesus cannot be so easily dismissed. In many ways, these religions do add Jesus to the equation, just not always in the Christian way.

I only list this example here as one of the pitfalls of being too tangled up in mission theology and calling it missiology, or of thinking of missiology only in terms of theology. The “new missiology” actually is the attempt to solidify missiology as a discipline, the very same project of Gustav Warneck and other foundational missiologists. Missiology had its roots in theological hermeneutics, and not necessarily strict academic ones, but the foundational figures of missiology nevertheless saw themselves as participating in a nuanced and scholarly discussion of mission involving not only theology but history and anthropology as well. Since then, students of mission have broadened the study with more probing questions relevant in our time. I argue that this is nothing new, though the questions that are being discussed are.

Personally, I believe missiology benefits from more rigorous intellectual work, be it theological or not. All too often, one’s theology can be so rigid that it makes little room for intellectual rigor, and if that brings me under fire for saying so, then I guess I concede that I’m not tangled up in mission theology enough to care.