세계 선교를 위한로잔 운동의 기여방향

Abstract

The Lausanne movement was born out of a sense of crisis that the missionary movement that was centering on evangelism was seriously undermined. Born in this concern of world evangelization, the names of Lausanne are The International Congress on World Evangelization or Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization. Both names appear for the purpose of world evangelization. In other words, the identity and core task that Lausanne movement can never yield is world evangelization. That is why the two major agents of mission, WCC and Lausanne, originally showed different concerns in their mission. However, since 2000, the two have revealed almost similar tendencies. From that time, the Lausanne movement has followed the World Council of Churches (WCC) by conceding the priority of evangelism and prioritizing a humanitarian or Shalom aspect of missions. The WCC will be able to contribute some of the world's shalom. As a result, this movement is almost ignoring the most important beginning of world transformation ― evangelism itself. The churches that accept the WCC theology are getting weaker and weaker. This will make it impossible for the church to work for the world, and the WCC, which operates with the support of the churches, will also weaken. This paper will investigate the traits of the Lausanne movement and provide some suggestions on how it can contribute to the development of world mission. For this purpose, I divided the 40-year history of the Lausanne movement into 3 periods: 1) its birth, 2) its time of wonder, 3) its integration period. This paper analyzes the traits that are appearing in the flow. The evolution as follow: Lausanne gradually has lost the primacy and urgency of evangelism and become similar to WCC pursuing the holistic mission theology. If the Lausanne movement keeps pursuing the direction of WCC, it will lose all of its original enthusiasm for evangelism, resulting in the loss of Christianity's core mission effectiveness. This paper suggests the Lausanne movement refocus on evangelism, rebuild a clear concept of mission, recapture the primacy of evangelism, and become a center of information for world evangelization. This might be the best contribution of Lausanne for world mission. Of course, the Lausanne movement is already embracing a holistic view of mission and is moving forward with the view that it is the best alternative. However, mission should contribute to building a strong church. After the death of the church, mission itself cannot be discussed. Established churches, even if they consider all things holistically, still need to prioritize evangelism. The movement originally started by claiming this and should rethink their commitments.