로잔운동에 나타난 전도와 사회적 책임의 관계

Abstract

The study is to examine the historical development of the relationship between evangelism and social responsibility in the Lausanne Movement. The premise of Lausanne movement was expressed as the "primacy of evangelism" as appeared in Lausanne Covenant. From the beginning of this movement, there was an inner tension between those who emphasized the evangelism as the priority over all other activities of the church, and those who stressed socio­political involvement also as the important duty of the church. The declaration of socio­political involvement as the duty of the church in article 5, and "the primacy of evangelism" in article 6 was, in fact, a painful solution to prevent a split between American­based conservatives, and European­based progressive evangelicals with the supports of Latin America's radical discipleship group. John Stott played a key role in this burdening consensus. The relationship between article 5 and 6 has triggered heated debate and in 1980, and different views became obvious in two consultations. While the High Leigh Consultation has emphasized importance of social responsibility, the Pattaya Consultation declared the primacy of evangelism. The new in­bridge attempt was made in 1982 in Grand Rapids Consultation, by announcing the primacy of evangelism as the logical one. Such view has continued in Manila Congress in 1989. However, subtle changes occurred during these consultations, and gradually, new view has emerged during the late 1990s. In 2001, Micah Network has been formed within evangelical camps and became the representing view of social participation as the essential duty of the church. And this formation gave an impetus to raise the voice of European and Latin American evangelicals. Finally, in 2004 Pattaya Consultation has proposed Holistic Mission instead of the primacy of evangelism. In 2010, the third congress was held in Capetown, South Africa, and produced the official statement called, ‘Capetown Committment.’ In this statement, the officials changed view was obvious. Under the subtitle of 'integral mission', the statement officially supports integral mission. The omission of primacy of evangelism in the statement clearly shows the changed view in Lausanne Movement. Now, in Christian mission, social involvement and evangelism are both the duty of the church, and there is no primacy of such over the other. After all, this change creates another tension within Lausanne camp now. To some, this change was more cautious one, while to others it was fervently welcomed.