Missiology as Science: Missiometrics Discussion Continued

Missiology has commonly been defined as "the science of the cross cultural communication of the Christian faith," as "preeminently the scholarly discipline underlying the task of world evangelization," and as "the field of study which researches, records and applies data relating to the biblical origins and history of the expansion of the Christian movement to anthropological principles and techniques for its further advancement."[1] Ivan Illich describes missiology as “the science about the Word of God as the Church in her becoming.”[2] In his classic missiology textbook, Alan Tippett calls it “the science of missiology” and posits that social anthropology plays an integral part in it.[3] Although David Hesselgrave qualifies his definition of missiology, he still calls it the “science of mission.”[4] These definitions identify missiology as a science and thereby expose it to scrutiny of the scientific method.

Since science is a “systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory-building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena,”[5] any systematic observation, measurement and theorizing based on those observations in missions can be classified as scientific. All scientific results must be validated, and consistent quantification of observations allows for this validation. Missiometrics is not only the act of measurement, but it also entails logic and strategy based upon what is being measured.

            Missiologists have long used such enquiry for validation of their observations.

The starting-point in the investigation is, as with any scientific enquiry, the noticing of a common form and a common pattern in a chance collection of apparently disparate events in totally different circumstances. Out of this kind of massing of instances and delineation of surprising parallels among seemingly diverse materials, something quite new has always emerged.[6]

The scientific method entails making general observations, testing those observations against a single test group to measure for a preliminary analysis and then drawing conclusions that might relate to the whole larger body. This is not only consistent with the nature of science, but it also provides ongoing evaluation for its validity. Using scientific measurements is what has helped missiologists dialogue with other social sciences.

The results of these scientific tests provide a basis for understanding missiological history, current evangelical status and potential future scenarios. David Barrett of the former Foreign Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention completed missio-scientific studies in Africa to analyze

to what extent these bodies represent unrelated and autonomous religious changes, the products of exceptional and unique circumstances and personalities which are completely explained by local and regional factors, and whose further expansion is therefore largely unpredictable; or to what extent they are explicable, and therefore predictable, in terms of common sociological categories based on their particular social contexts and histories.[7]

If these statistical expressions of missiology can be validated by the scientific method, then statistics can also provide validity to missiology as a science. The rationale for this validation is reinforced by biblical, historical and theological perspectives.

---

[1] A. F. Glasser, “Missiology,” BELIEVE Religious Information Source web-site (2007). Cited 17 February 2009. Online: http://mb-soft.com/believe/txo/missiolo.htm.

[2] Ivan Illich, Mission and Midwifery: Essays on Missionary Formation (Gwelo: Mambo Press, 1974), 6 in David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis, 2007), 493. 

[3] Alan R. Tippett, Introduction to Missiology (Pasadena, Calif.: William Carey Library, 1987), 120. 

[4] David Hesselgrave contributed the preface to Edward Rommen and Gary Corwin, eds., Missiology and the Social Sciences: Contributions, Cautions and Conclusions (Pasadena, Calif.: William Carey Library, 1996), 1. He posits that “’science’ in this case is being used in the more classical sense of that body of knowledge related to the understanding and carrying out of our missionary task in the world.”

[5] Emphases added. Dennis Overbye, “Philosophers Notwithstanding, Kansas School Board Redefines Science,” New York Times (15 November 2005). Cited 19 February 2009. Online:  http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/science/sciencespecial2/15evol.html?_r=1.

[6] David B. Barrett, Schism and Renewal in Africa: An Analysis of Six Thousand Contemporary Religious Movements (Ely House London W.I.: Oxford University Press, 1968), xviii.

[7] Barrett, Schism and Renewal, 5.