An Inappropriate Use of a Theory from Natural Science: A Review of David J. Bosch's Use of Paradigm Shift in Theology of Mission

An Inappropriate Use of a Theory from Natural Science: A Review of David J. Bosch's Use of Paradigm Shift in Theology of Mission

Chun-wah KWONG

David J. Bosch was regarded as a preeminent Protestant missiologist. His magnum opus, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission, became a standard reference for studies of Christian world mission. Bosch, in this book, adopted Thomas Kuhn's paradigm shift theory to demonstrate the transformations of the understanding and practice of mission during almost twenty centuries of Christian missionary history. He also shared his vision of Christian mission's historical development, ie, the construction of an ecumenical missionary paradigm, for the twenty-first century.

Most critics endeavored to find out what dimensions were missing from the paradigms that Bosch put forward for different periods of Christian missionary history. Little attention was paid to the methodological issues in Bosch's study. This article probes into a methodological question: is Kuhn's paradigm shift theory an appropriate hermeneutical framework for interpreting Christian missionary history?

Bosch was inspired by Hans Küng's discussion about the historical development of Christian theology with the perspective of paradigm shift. Küng served as a medium in introducing the paradigm shift theory into Bosch's study on Christian mission. This article demonstrates the intellectual relationship of these three scholars from three different fields: natural science history (Kuhn), Christian theology (Küng), and Christian mission (Bosch).

Paradigm shift, as a theory of interpreting the historical development of natural science, emphasizes the total replacement of the old paradigms by the new one. It is an irreversible process that marks the characteristic of revolutionary changes in the historical development of natural science. Paradigm shift may also be seen as a process repeating itself like a cycle throughout the historical development of natural science. Christian theology, a discipline defined by historicity, does not show the same kind of total replacement in its historical development; rather it branches off when new paradigms appear. This essential difference makes using paradigm shift theory in the discussion of the historical development of Christian theology inappropriate, more so when it was adopted by Bosch into his study of the historical development of Christian mission, for the Christian theology of mission has been marginalized throughout Christian history. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to reconstruct an independent historical development of the Christian theology of mission, and it is not evident in Bosch's study. Without its own independent historical development, the Christian theology of mission followed the tides of Christian theology to branch off throughout Christian history. A repeated pattern of cyclical changes in the historical development of natural science could not take place in the historical development of Christian theology of mission since it did not move forward on its own track. In summary, the author argues that Kuhn's paradigm shift theory is not an appropriate hermeneutical framework for interpretation of Christian missionary history.