Methodology of empirical missiology

Dr. Johannes Reimer and Dr. Vladimir Ubeivolc

Introduction

Missiology is a classic interdisciplinary area of theological studies. It covers both theory and praxis of God’s mission in the world, the missio Dei, and consequently also the missions of the Church, the missio ecclesiae. The father of modern day missiology, the German professor Gustav Warneck (1834–1910) defined missiology as mission theory which includes the theological foundation of mission as well as a systematic evaluation of the missionary praxis.[1] He speaks of „praxis which reflects itself, founds and norms itself and describes itself“.[2] Warneck understood missiology as an interdisciplinary science with components in theology as well as in history and social science.[3] This is until today a widely accepted frame in which missiology works.[4]

The interdependency of theological studies with classic empiric disciplines such as sociology, communication studies and or anthropology forces a whole set of epistemological questions on the discipline. Traditionally theology on the one hand and empiric approaches to knowledge on the other mutually excluded each other. The solution seems to be found in empirical missiology, which follows the paradigm of empirical theology.

Empirical Theology

Empirical theology is a relatively new discipline in theological studies. It developed around the growing interest in the so called “lived religion”.[5] In theology, the interest in empirical studies goes back to the beginning of the 20th century. Douglas Macintosh (1877–1948) of the Chicago School of Theology driven by his interest in religious experiences of the people, developed a scientific approach which he called „Theology as an Empirical Science“.[6] In Europe it was the Estonian German theologian Werner Gruehn (1888–1961) who first used the term ‘Empirical Theology’ for his studies of personal religious experiences.[7] Gruehn wrote: “Whoever once gained insight into the vivid life of this reality, will understand why whole areas of theology are foreclosed to contemporary people and must remain foreclosed…he will understand, that theology ought to be terribly nearer to reality, terribly more focused and essential concerning its questions and answers in order to become inevitable for human beings of today.”[8]

Gruehn’s Empirical Theology seeks to bring life back to theological theory, to bridge the gap between academic theology and everyday reality. He encouraged to research facts of religious experience, thus enabling the theological science to go beyond pure assumptions of a living relationship between God and humans. Empirical research identified as Tatsachenforschung (reality research) would allow to present Grundtatsachen of faith (basic facts) and foster a deeper understanding of the nature of faith. Gruehn, being a Lutheran theologian could have referred to Martin Luther’s famous dictum: “Experientia facit theologum” (Experience makes a theologian).[9]

Macintosh and Gruehn were by far not the only ones seeking to bridge the growing gap between academic theology and life. Names like Adolf Schlatter (1852–1938), the German systematic theologian, or Anton Boisen (1886–1965), the father of modern pastoral care,[10] stand in a long range of other theologians. Adolf Schlatter, for example, claimed that „the first and the most important function of a dogmatician in his scientific work must be observation of reality in which God reveals Himself to us and draws us near to Himself.”[11] He proposed a systematic theology as empirical theology.[12] Others, especially Paul Tillich (1886–1965), warned about the uncritical use of empirical methodologies: “It is not a sound procedure to borrow a method for a special realm of inquiry from another realm in which this method has been successfully used. It seems that the emphasis on the so- called ‘empirical’ method in theology has not grown out of actual theological demands but has been imposed on theology under the pressure of a ‘methodical imperialism’, exercised by the pattern of natural sciences. This subjection of theology to a strange pattern has resulted in an undue extension of the concept ‘empirical’ and the lack of a clear distinction between the different meanings of ‘experience’ in the theological enterprise.”[13]

Tillich pleads for a method of correlation, which allows the empirical science to collect data and theology to build on it. It is the Roman-Catholic theologian Karl Rahner (1904–1984) and his two-phase model of integrating social sciences and theology which elaborates on Tillich’s ideas. In his handbook on Pastoral Theology,[14] Rahner suggested to leave the social analysis of reality to social sciences completely and allow theology to reflect the results against the propositions of faith.[15] The two-phase-model could not, however, satisfy the urgent needs of the theological community. It seems difficult to match social sciences with its philosophical premises with theological perspectives. A social scientist will research reality from a social perspective; a theologian asks questions transcending the social space, going far beyond the social perspectives only. Theologians will ask different kinds of questions and are interested in issues of different kind than social sciences would. The two-phase-model leaves at the end more questions than answers. Different other solutions to correlate social sciences and theology were suggested.[16] All of them seem to offer limited base for an adequate theological work.

The Dutch Roma-Catholic theologian Johannes A. Van der Ven goes beyond Tillich and Rahner and suggests an intradisciplinary approach, which implies a development of a true empirical theology, which uses the instruments of social research and integrates them into a theological frame of thinking.[17] Instead of building theology on results of social analysis, the theologian himself conducts the empirical analysis. Van der Ven published his approach in 1990.[18] The central element of his theological method is the empirical-theological cycle (ETC) which implies five steps:[19]

(1) Development of the theological problem and goal focusing on faith in God. This and only this makes empirical studies for theological research, theological. Other sciences may develop there perspectives – theology focuses on faith and aims towards faith in God.

(2) Theological Induction includes an examination of theological randoms and systemic perceptions. Random stands for a non-systematized observation, and systemic for an observation inside a system by use of standardized observation instruments. Examining perceptions follows by theological reflection and leads to the formulizing of a theological research question. Such questions may be descriptive, explorative or hypothesis-testing. Finally, a research design is adopted which may then use methods of social quantitative or qualitative analysis, depending on the topic of investigation.

(3) Theological Deduction refers to a theological conceptualization, which follows the scientific theory as stipulated by Karl Popper (1902–1994). Popper’s epistemology includes: 1) logical consistency, with the use of clear conceptual terms; 2) mutual independency of statements, i.e. they are not derived from one another and situated on the same logical level; 3) sufficiency, in the sense that theories “must contain a sufficient amount of information so that empirically testable consequences can be derived from them”; 4) necessity, by which is meant that theories must not contain superfluous information.[20] The scientific theological approach determines the operational method to be used in a given study as well as the analytical technique. The approach will contain: concepts or variables, relationships between the variables, and research units. A theological-conceptual model contains at least two variables, one of which functions as the principle variable and is theological in nature. From this model hypotheses can be derived. This is followed by theological operationalization, which bridges the gap between the theoretical concepts and the empirical reality. Instruments used to measure hypotheses must be valid and reliable.

(4) Empirical-theological testing samples and evaluates data collection by means of questionnaire survey. The data is sampled, checked, and cleaned. The empirical-theological data analysis includes the phases of: 1) description of research population, 2) construction of theological and other attitudinal scales, 3) determination of the holders of theological attitudes, 4) determination of the context of theological attitudes, and 5) explanation of the theological attitudes.

(5) Theological evaluation contains the theological interpretation of the results of the empirical analysis, aimed at answering the theological question, in light of the theological problem and goal, and with particular emphasis upon theological conception. The evaluation is followed by theological reflection of the interpretation. It is concerned with the discussion of the meaning and relevance of the results of the theological interpretation and the adequacy of the study.

Van der Ven’s approach overcomes the implicit methodological atheism of any kind of interdisciplinary cooperation between theology and social sciences and brings an explicit theological perspective into the debate on empirical theological studies. Others, particularly F. Schweizer in his “Theology as Life Cycle”[21] and H.-G. Ziebertz in his Empirical-Theological Praxis-Cycle[22] bring the discussion further. The Roman-Catholic Ziebertz, of the University of Würzburg, Germany, sets the criteria of an adequate empirical research in modern day Practical theology.[23] Empirical missiology developed in close cooperation with Empirical theology.

Empirical Missiology

Missiology is the youngest theological discipline and has from its beginnings aimed for interdisciplinarian research.[24] In his encyclopedia of missiology, the Dutch missiologist Jan Jongeneel[25] constitutes missiology out of science, philosophy, and theology of mission. This includes for him mission history, statistics, geography, and pedagogics to mention some. Some even argue the strong empirical orientation of missiology locates the discipline “outside theology, perhaps within the department of religious studies”[26]. Hans-Werner Gensichen (1915–1999) even suggested to establish missiology as an independent discipline in correlation to theology.[27] And David J. Bosch (1929–1992) following Gensichen, pleads for integration of missiology into theology, simply because missiology concerns itself with God’s mission in the world.[28] Samuel Escobar puts it in proper words by defining Missiology as “…an interdisciplinary approach to understand missionary action. It looks at missionary facts from the perspectives of the biblical sciences, theology, history, and the social sciences. It aims to be systematic and critical, but it starts from a positive stance towards the legitimacy of the Christian missionary task as part of the fundamental reason for the church’s ‘being.’ A missiological approach gives the observer a comprehensive frame of reference in order to look at reality in a critical way. Missiology is a critical reflection on praxis, in light of God’s Word”.[29]

Firstly, missiology seeks to understand God’s revelation in the world and will therefore ask for hints coming from sociology, cultural anthropology, ethnology and so on. Secondly, it looks for historical developments of God’s mission in the world and will, therefore refer to history. And thirdly, it seeks to determine ways to communicate God’s word as revealed in Scripture to the different social contexts and here it will draw from communications sciences.[30]

It is, therefore, understandable that a search towards an empirical missiology is by no way new. Missiology highly profited from utilization of knowledge developed by other academic disciplines. But the results were seldomly well-based from a scientific point of view. In fact, most of the missiological studies in the past were conducted without any serious proof of accuracy and applicability of social data to missiological research, which by nature is theological. Enoch Wan calls such an approach “applied pragmatic”.[31]

References to social and empirical studies without any theological perspectives in collecting data too often left mission theologians unsatisfied. This led to experiments of some missiologists with social science. The Dutch missiologist Van Engelen, for instance, attempted as far as in 1952 to apply methods of social research to his missiological field studies.[32] The Missiological Institute at the Radboud University in Nijmegen, Netherlands consciously searched since 1972 for ways to conduct missiological studies in cultural anthropology by developing an approach in empirical missiology parallel to what their colleague Johannes van der Ven did at the department of Practical Theology.[33]

The emergence of contextual theologies with their strong praxis orientation boosted the search for an adequate methodology which includes proper context analysis. Methodologically, contextual theologians were promoting what became the classic Latin-American Formula for a praxis-relevant and contextual theology introduced by the third General Conference of Latin-American Roman-Catholic Bishops in Pueblo/Mexico 1979: See-Decide-Act, or: a) Analyze the context-given reality, b) interpret this reality according to the criteria of faith, c) determine themes for the praxis of the church.[34] The missionary praxis cycle as developed by Madge Karecki at the university of South Africa is an example. Karecki defines the first step of missiological research as involvement into the context in which mission is to be done, followed by a context analysis.[35] JNJ Kritzinger follows Karecki and pleads for a well-researched context.[36] None of them elaborate on how such analysis needs to be properly and missiologically done.

It is the German missiologist Tobias Faix, who first consequently discussed and applied empirical-theological methods to the science of mission. In his doctoral dissertation he describes the main propositions of an empirical-theological praxis-cycle (ETP).[37] He follows basically the developments in Empirical Theology. His ETP describes seven basic steps of research divided into three major epistemological parts as presented by Karl Popper (1902–1992) – the context of discovery (1–2), the context of justification (3–5) and context of application (6–7).

The context of discovery by Faix does not just lay a prescientific spur of an idea to be explored as Popper suggested. Faix follows H.-G. Ziebertz and lays all basic decisions theological and missiological into this phase of research.[38] This warrants the nature of a missiological study in both next phases of the study:

  • Research idea – the researcher formulates his or her basic research interest, naming the issues and problems to be addressed.
  • Area of Praxis – the researcher names his missiologically defined area of praxis and formulates clearly the missiological research question to be answered. The validity of the question is tested in an exploratory test. In the context of justification, in Poppers epistemology, the core of scientific research, the researcher defines his problem and the goal to be achieved, names the instruments of research and acts upon them.
  • Conceptualization – the researcher describes the missiological problem and names the proposed goal of his/her research.
  • Research planning – the researcher reflects the discovered problem area missiologically and designs a research plan.
  • Data sampling – the researcher decides for instruments of empirical data sampling and follows it in a field study. In the context of application, the researcher analyses the results of his field study and interprets the results missiologically as a contribution to further studies on the issue and its problems.
  • Data analysis – the research uses adequate data, analytical instruments to analyze his data, strongly following his missiological research interest. The results must then be critically and missiologically reflected and evaluated.
  • Missiological Interpretation – the researcher interprets his/ her findings missiologically and presents his outcomes to further scientific discussion.

Faix agrees with Ziebertz that empirical studies in theology and in his case in missiology must be conducted cyclically.[39] ETP is in any regard a cycle which allows going back and forth between the contexts to secure a maximum of knowledge on reality being researched.

Since the publication of ETP, a whole number of studies following this cycle have been done at the University of South Africa (UNISA), both on a master and doctoral level. The cycle proves to secure the scientific validity of missiological studies being true to both the mission theology rooted in theology and missionary praxis accessed by social research of different empirical disciplines. Popularized ETP has become also a powerful tool to help the local Church to conduct its own Context analysis.[40]

Bibliography

  1. Boisen, Anton T. The Exploration of the Inner World. A Study of Mental Disorder and Religious Experience. (Chicago & New York: Willett, Clark, 1936).
  2. Boff, Leonardo. Aus dem Tal der Tränen ins gelobte Land: Der Weg der Kirche mit den Unterdrückten, (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1982).
  3. Bosch, David J. Transforming mission: Paradigm shifts in mission theology. (Maryknoll. NY: Orbis Books, 1991).
  4. Escobar, Samuel. Evangelical Missiology: Peering Into the Future at the Turn of the Century. In: William D. Taylor (Ed.). Global missiology for the 21st Century: The Iguassu Dialogue. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000).
  5. Faix, Tobias and Reimer, Johannes, eds. Die Welt verstehen. Kontextanalyse als Sehhilfe für die Gemeinde. Transformationsstudien Bd. 3. (Marburg: Francke Verlag, 2012).
  6. Faix, Tobias. Gottes Vorstellungen bei Jugendlichen. Eine qualitative Erhebung aus der Sicht empirischer Missionswissenschaft. (Münster: LIT, 2007).
  7. Faix, Tobias. The Empirical‐Theological‐Praxis cycle (ETP) as a methodological basis für missiology”. In: Missionalia, Vol. 35, 1/2007.
  8. Gensichen, Hans-Werner. “Missiology as a Theological Discipline”. In: Karl Müller, Mission Theology: An Introduction. (Nettetal, Germany: Steyler Verlag, 1987).
  9. Gruehn, Werner. Empirische Theologie. In: Archive fort he Psychology of Religion, 10/1/1936.
  10. Jongeneel, A. B. Philosophy, Science and Theology of Mission in the nineteenth and twentiest centuries: A Missiological Encyclopedia. (Frankfurt a.M.: Lang, 1995).
  11. Karecki, Madge. Teaching to change the world: Missiology at UNISA, in Saayman, Willem A. & Karecki, Madge (Hg.): The making of an African person: Essays in honour of Willem A. Saayman. (Menlo Park, South Africa: Southern African Missiological Society, 2002).
  12. Kritzinger, JNJ. A question of Mission – a Mission of questions. In Saayman, Willem A. & Karecki, Madge (Hg.): The making of an African person: Essays in honour of Willem A. Saayman. (Menlo Park, South Africa: Southern African Missiological Society, 2002).
  13. Macintosh, Douglas Clyde. Theology as an Emprical Science. (New York, NY: Macmillan, 1919).
  14. Neuer, Werner. Adolf Schlatter. Ein Leben für Theologie und Kirche. (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag,1996).
  15. Rahner, Karl. Handbuch für Pastoraltheologie. (Freiburg: Herder, 1964).
  16. Reimer, Johannes. Mission im Pastoralen Dienst. Zur Bedeutung der Missiologie in der theologischen Ausbildung. In: Wilfrid Haubeck/Michael Schroeder, (eds.) Lernen, Begegnen, Senden. 100 Jahre Theologische Hochschule Ewersbach. (Witten: SCM Bundes-Verlag, 2012).
  17. Rommen, Edward & Corwin, Gary, eds. Missiology and the Scial Sciences: Contributions, Cautions and Conclusions. EMS Series Nr. 4. (Pasadena, CA: WCL, 1996).
  18. Schlatter, Adolf. Das Christliche Dogma. (Calw & Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1911).
  19. Schweizer, F. Postmoderner Lebenszyklus und Religion. Eine Herausforderung für Kirche und Theologie. (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2003).
  20. Tennent, Timothy C. Invitation To World Missions. A Trinitarian Missiology For The Twenty-First Century. (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Pub., 2010).
  21. Tillich, Paul. Systematische Theologie. Bd. 1. (Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk, 1956).
  22. Van Engelen, J. Langs een anderer weg. Zoekdocht naar een empirische missiologie van het Rijk Gods. (Nijmegen: Valkhof Pers, 1996).
  23. Van der Ven, Johannes A. Entwurf einer Empirischen Theologie. (Kampen: Kok, 1992).
  24. Van der Ven, Johannes A. Practical Theology: an Empirical Approach. (Leuven: Peeters, 1998).
  25. Wang, Enoch. Rethinking Missiological Research Methodology: Exploring a New Direction. In: Global Missiology, Research Methodology, Oct. 2003, www.globalmissiology.net (1.02.2018).
  26. Warneck, Gustav Evangelische Missionslehre. Edition AfeM. Band 1 (Bonn: VKR 2015).
  27. Werner, Usdorf. Rethinking Missiology: A Western Perspective. In: A. Houtepen & A. Ploeger, eds. World Christianity Reconsidered. (Zoetermeer: Meinema, 2001).
  28. Wijsen, Frans & Schreiter, Robert, eds. Global Christianity: Contested Claims. Amsterdam-New York, NY: Rodopi B.V., 2007).
  29. Wijsen, Frans. Seeds of Conflict in a Heaven of Peace. From Religious studies to interreligious studies in Africa. (Amsterdam-New York, NY: Rodopi B.V., 2007).
  30. Ziebertz, H.-G. Normativity and emprical research in Pra Ctical Theology. In: Journal of Empirical Theology, 15/1/2002.
  31. Ziebertz, H.-G. Kalbheim, Riegel, B. U. Religionssignaturen heute. Ein religionspädagogischer Beitrag zur empirischen Jugendforschung. (Freiburg: Herder Verlag, 2003).
  32. Ziebertz, H.-G. Religion, Christentum und Moderne. Religionspräsenz als Herausforderung. (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1999).

[1] Gustav Warneck, Evangelische Missionslehre. Edition AfeM. Band 1 (Bonn: VKR 2015), p. 20.

[2] Warneck, Evangelische Missionslehre, p. 13.

[3] Ibid., pp. 77, 99, 218–219.

[4] See for instance: Hans-Werner Gensichen. “Missiology as a Theological Discipline”. In: Karl Müller, Mission Theology: An Introduction. (Nettetal, Germany: Steyler Verlag, 1987); Timothy C. Tennent. Invitation To World Missions. A Trinitarian Missiology For The Twenty-First Century. (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publ., 2010).

[5] There are various examples of such studies. See for instance: Boston project “Studying Congregations” (Ammerman et al 1998); Bertelsmann, “Monitoring Religion 2008”.

[6] Douglas Clyde Macintosh. Theology as an Emprical Science. (New York, NY: Macmillan, 1919).

[7] Werner Gruehn. Empirische Theologie. In: Archive fort he Psychology of Religion 10/1/1936, pp. 1–6.

[8] Gruehn, 1936, XII my in: Hans-Günter Heimbrock. Practical Theology as Empirical Theology. In: https://www.uni-frankfurt.de/40697817/Vortrag_BU_ 2008.pdf (18.01.2018), p. 5.

[9] WA TR, pp. 1, 16, 13.

[10] See Anton T. Boisen. The Exploration of the Inner World. A Study of Mental Disorder and Religious Experience. (Chicago & New York: Willett, Clark, 1936).

[11] Adolf Schlatter. Das Christliche Dogma. (Calw & Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1911), p. 12.

[12] Werner Neuer. Adolf Schlatter. Ein Leben für Theologie und Kirche. (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag,1996), p. 44.

[13] Paul Tillich. Systematische Theologie. Bd. 1. (Stuttgart: Evangelisches Verlagswerk, 1956), p. 74.

[14] Karl Rahner. Handbuch für Pastoraltheologie. (Freiburg: Herder, 1964).

[15] Johannes A. Van der Ven. Entwurf einer Empirischen Theologie. (Kampen: Kok, 1992), p. 2.

[16] See Van der Ven, Entwurf einer Empirischen Theologie, pp.89–130.

[17] Ibid., pp. 117–130.

[18] Ibidem. See the English Edition in: Johannes A. Van der Ven. Practical Theology: an Empirical Approach. (Leuven: Peeters, 1998).

[19] Ibid., pp. 138–179.

[20] Karl Popper cited in Van der Ven, Entwurf einer Empirischen Theologie, p. 148.

[21] F. Schweizer. Postmoderner Lebenszyklus und Religion. Eine Herausforderung für Kirche und Theologie. (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2003), 161–191.

[22] H.-G. Ziebertz, B. Kalbheim, U. Riegel. Religionssignaturen heute. Ein religionspädagogischer Beitrag zur empirischen Jugendforschung. (Freiburg: Herder Verlag, 2003), p. 9.

[23] See especially H.-G. Ziebertz. Normativity and emprical research in Pra Ctical Theology. In: Journal of Empirical Theology, 15/1/2002, pp. 5–18.

[24] Edward Rommen & Gary Corwin, eds. Missiology and the Scial Sciences: Contributions, Cautions and Conclusions. EMS Series Nr. 4. (Pasadena, CA: WCL, 1996).

[25] A. B. Jongeneel. Philosophy, Science and Theology of Mission in the nineteenth and twentiest centuries: A Missiological Encyclopedia. (Frankfurt a.M.: Lang, 1995).

[26] Werner Usdorf. Rethinking Missiology: A Western Perspective. In: A. Houtepen & A. Ploeger, eds. World Christianity Reconsidered. (Zoetermeer: Meinema, 2001), pp. 74–76.

[27] Hans Werner Gensichen, 1985, p. 20.

[28] David J. Bosch, 1991, pp. 489–498.

[29] Samuel Escobar. Evangelical Missiology: Peering Into the Future at the Turn of the Century. In: William D. Taylor (Ed.). Global missiology for the 21st Century: The Iguassu Dialogue. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000), p. 101.

[30] Johannes Reimer. Mission im Pastoralen Dienst. Zur Bedeutung der Missiologie in der theologischen Ausbildung. In: Wilfrid Haubeck/Michael Schroeder, (eds.) Lernen, Begegnen, Senden. 100 Jahre Theologische Hochschule Ewersbach. (Witten: SCM Bundes-Verlag, 2012), pp. 119–142.

[31] Enoch Wang. Rethinking Missiological Research Methodology: Exploring a New Direction. In: Global Missiology, Research Methodology, Oct. 2003, www.globalmissiology.net (1.02.2018).

[32] J. Van Engelen. Langs een anderer weg. Zoekdocht naar een empirische missiologie van het Rijk Gods. (Nijmegen: Valkhof Pers, 1996), p. 72.

[33] See Frans Wijsen & Robert Schreiter, eds. Global Christianity: Contested Claims. Amsterdam-New York, NY: Rodopi B.V., 2007), pp. 8–10; Frans Wijsen. Seeds of Conflict in a Heaven of Peace. From Religious studies to interreligious studies in Africa. (Amsterdam-New York, NY: Rodopi B.V., 2007), pp. 49–51.

[34] Leonardo Boff. Aus dem Tal der Tränen ins gelobte Land: Der Weg der Kirche mit den Unterdrückten, (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1982), p. 184f.

[35] Madge Karecki. Teaching to change the world: Missiology at UNISA, in Saayman, Willem A. & Karecki, Madge (Hg.): The making of an African person: Essays in honour of Willem A. Saayman. (Menlo Park, South Africa: Southern African Missiological Society, 2002), pp. 138–141.

[36] JNJ Kritzinger. A question of Mission – a Mission of questions. In Saayman, Willem A. & Karecki, Madge (Hg.). The making of an African person: Essays in honour of Willem A. Saayman. (Menlo Park, South Africa: Southern African Missiological Society, 2002), pp. 148–150.

[37] Tobias Faix. Gottes Vorstellungen bei Jugendlichen. Eine qualitative Erhebung aus der Sicht empirischer Missionswissenschaft. (Münster: LIT, 2007), pp. 64–67. See also: Tobias Faix. The Empirical‐Theological‐Praxis cycle (ETP) as a methodological basis für missiology”. In: Missionalia, Vol. 35, 1/2007.

[38] H.-G. Ziebertz. Religion, Christentum und Moderne. Religionspräsenz als Herausforderung. (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1999), p. 10.

[39] H.-G. Ziebertz. Religion, Christentum und Moderne, pp. 11–12.

[40] See in this regard: Tobias Faix and Johannes Reimer, eds. Die Welt verstehen. Kontextanalyse als Sehhilfe für die Gemeinde. Transformationsstudien Bd. 3. (Marburg: Francke Verlag, 2012).

Related Articles

Contact

Thank you!

Welcome to the club,  – you’ll be one of the first to know about the new issues of our magazine.