The Biblical Narrative of the Missio Dei: Analysis of the Interpretive Framework of David Bosch’s Missional Hermeneutic Girma Bekele his article examines David Bosch’s missional herme- ment. The life and agenda of Jesus of Nazareth is the standard Tneutic, using it as an entry point into his understand- for authentic Christian mission. The task of the church in every ing of the biblical foundation of mission. Until his tragic death generation and in every sociopolitical and historical context, in 1992 in a car accident, Bosch was chair of the Department of then, is “to test continually whether its understanding of Christ Missiology at the University of South Africa. He studied New corresponds with that of the first witnesses.”4 Testament under Oscar Cullman at the University of Basel. The In formulating his case for the emerging postmodern mission development of his theological thought was also shaped by his paradigm, Bosch presents a missiological reading of Jesus and experience as an Afrikaner, as an ordained minister of the Dutch his followers as an absolutely necessary hermeneutical key to Reformed Church (DRC), and as a missionary in the Transkei. comprehensively unlocking the biblical foundation of mission. The sociopolitical and theological setting of South Africa during A variety of missions can be found in the New Testament, but apartheid was, as it were, the anvil against which he hammered the authors spoke about the same Jesus to people within the out his ideas of the vocation of the church within the world. His specific contexts of their own communities. Likewise, our task, vision of missionary self-understanding and of the church as the within our context, is to speak about Jesus—but not in just any “alternative community” is rooted in a strong conviction that the way we might choose. The “speaking” is limited, not only by our New Testament must be read as a missionary document. own context, but also and “fundamentally by the community’s Bosch follows the same general outline in both Witness to the ‘charter of foundation’, the event of Jesus Christ. The events at World (1980) and Transforming Mission (1991): first, a discussion the origin of the Christian community—the ‘agenda’ set by Jesus of mission crisis (this section is brief in the latter work), followed living, dying, and rising from the dead—primarily established by a scriptural foundation of mission, an overview of historical the distinctiveness of that community, and to those events we too perspectives on mission, a presentation of the emerging mission- have to orientate ourselves.”5 The integrity of our mission must ary paradigm, and development of a relevant theology of mission. be judged against this background. Thus Christocentrism, as A certain understanding, interpretation, and application of the Bosch’s former student Charles Fensham observes, is embedded Scriptures characterize each paradigm of Christian missionary in Bosch’s hermeneutic as he describes the missionary founda- history as it engages with its own particular context. Bosch is tion of the church.6 convinced that the task of each generation is to unlock, as if with Bosch argues that this does not mean establishing a one-to-one its own time-conditioned key, the biblical foundation of mission correspondence between the lives of Jesus and his followers and and the biblical narrative of the missio Dei. He insists that, since our contemporary lives in order to define mission and attempt the New Testament is “essentially a missionary document . it to solve our current problems. Quoting Gustavo Gutiérrez, he is incumbent upon us to reclaim it as such.”1 argues that to adopt such one-to-one literalism “would be to succumb to ‘the temptation of concordism, which equates the Missional Hermeneutics: An Ecumenical Task social groups and forces within first century Palestine with those of our own time.’”7 While recognizing that there are “no immutable and objectively correct ‘laws of mission’ which exegesis of Scripture [can] give The Bridge us,” Bosch argues that a faithful reading of the New Testament prevents any church in any historical context from seeing itself How do we bridge the gap between “mission then” and “mis- apart from the missionary enterprise, for “the history and theology sion now”? How do we begin to build our biblical foundation of early Christianity are, first of all, ‘mission history’ and ‘mission of mission—do we start from the Bible itself and adapt it to our theology.’”2 If the theology of Karl Barth “offers a much-needed situation, or do we work in the other direction? There is no uni- purification of Christian thinking,”3 given the liberal context to versal answer; each generation must answer this for itself. Bosch which he had to respond, Bosch offers in comparable fashion a proposes what he calls a creative critical hermeneutic, which is rediscovery of missionary hermeneutics of the New Testament, based on the following three assumptions. First, we must admit in response to the postmodern missionary crisis. Bosch affirms that a single, universally valid missionary policy is impossible to Martin Kähler’s famous saying that “mission is the mother of construct—the attempt not only would be naive but also would theology.” He traces the roots of mission to the very person, be unfair to an authentic reading of the Bible, for it would involve life, mission, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and the seeking biblical precedents to justify everything that the church community that he established, as recorded in the New Testa- calls “mission” in the contemporary world. Bosch argues that “we usually presuppose far too readily that we may summon the Bible Girma Bekele, a mission and church leadership consul- as a kind of objective arbitrator. In this way we are blinded to 8 tant who grew up in Ethiopia, is Adjunct Professor of the presuppositions lurking behind our own interpretations.” Missions at Wycliffe College, University of Toronto. For Bosch, the Bible remains fundamental, and the quest to find He lives in Toronto with his family. its deeper message on mission remains a never-ending task for —[email protected] every church in every generation. Christian disciples need to be vulnerable, to lay aside all forms and ideals about mission, and to genuinely retain the will to be challenged, to repent, and to grow continually. July 2011 153 Second, our attempt to understand the self-definition of the Senior and Carroll Stuhlmueller, who argue against a perception biblical authors and their first readers is tinted by our own socio- of the New Testament as merely a “confessional” history or col- political, cultural, and economic context. As Bosch commented to lection of documents on internal Christian doctrinal struggles and his students, “Every one of us reads the Bible from a particular in favor of the view that “the mission question is intrinsic to the vantage-point which colours our interpretation. Factors include: Bible.”13 On this premise, Bosch seeks to bridge the gap between (a) our church tradition; (b) our culture; (c) our personal experi- the art of theological/biblical scholarship and the missiological ences and the way we experience religion; and (d) our social vocation of the community of faith. His goal can be described as position, such as whether we belong to the privileged or the under- the homecoming of wandering theology, for theology has long privileged sector of society.”9 That is, one cannot read the text sought to establish itself independently from the missional life of the Bible impassively, nor approach it as a neutral reader and of the community of faith. For him, theology has “no reason to objectively claim to know the mind of the author. Theo Sunder- exist other than critically to accompany the mission Dei.”14 At the same time, Bosch wants to bring scholarship to mission study in order to free it from overly specific articulations of mission on Bosch argues persuasively the basis of “particularity and preference.” Biblical scholarship can fail to see the missionary mandate of the Bible, but “com- that an authentic pared to biblical scholars, missiologists in particular will have to hermeneutics is always acknowledge that they tend to let the texts say what they want them to say.”15 Both disciplines—biblical and missiological—are missional. necessary. Biblical scholarship guards against the tendency to read one’s own preconceptions into the text without regard for its original meaning, while missiology pushes biblical studies meier provides a personal elucidation of Bosch’s view, saying that away from a fixation on the ancient context so as to be open to such a task is “intrinsically impossible. No matter how far I what the Bible means today. advance in understanding, I always encounter my understand- While recognizing that there is no easy or fixed way to move ing of the text. I never find the plain, irreducible meaning of the from the New Testament to contemporary missionary practice, text.”10 The fact that there is one Bible but many traditions attests Bosch proposes what he calls “a critical hermeneutic” in under- to the fact that there are various interpretive frameworks, with standing the always-relevant event of Jesus as it is recorded in varying degrees of validity, but each with its own blind spot! the New Testament. In doing so, he recognizes that there will Third, the only hope for Christian unity lies in continuing to always be a plurality of self-definitions both in the Bible and in seek proper enlightenment from the Bible itself as the common the history of the church. “The critical hermeneutic approach ground for ecumenical dialogue. The Bible tells us about missio Dei; goes beyond the (historically interesting) quest of making explicit without it, we have no mission.