Search

Because missiology as a theological discipline has come under attack in the slip-stream of post-colonialism, Western guilt, and ongoing secularization, proposals have surfaced to change its name into, for example, ‘Mission Studies’ or ‘Intercultural Theology’. This article, while affirming that these proposals are valuable in themselves, advocates the retention of the theological discipline of Missiology. This discipline takes seriously the urgency of evangelization both within and outside Europe, an urgency that is affirmed time and again by Christians from the global South. Missiology’s place in the theological curriculum will increasingly be determined by the current turn to practices as the object of theology. In cooperation with other disciplines, especially the social sciences, it will contribute its own theological voice to the science of missions. Finally, as the living memory of Christianity’s own expansion, missiology will continue to be a rich resource for public theology in a secularizing and pluralizing society.

Secularization in the Netherlands has been a two-stage process. The differentiation ofsociety (starting around 1800) diminished the influence of the large national church.However, in this first stage numerous new denominations emerged that could adaptperfectly to this new situation. This resulted in a pluralistic, predominantly vital ecclesiallandscape. In the 1960s a second stage of secularization started: individualization orsubjectivization. This affected all the churches, and caused a massive decline of institutionalreligiosity. Within this context the development of a missional ecclesiology is of crucial importance. All churches have to reflect on their position within a largely individualizedsociety. This reflection should take place on the basis of ecclesiological discussionsin the previous decades and might best be structured along three axes: private vs. public, consumption vs. sacrament, and community vs. institute.

In this article we present the results of a Big Five personality test among 59 religious entrepreneurs (church planters) in Europe, and we compare these results with (a) a general database, and (b) existing research among secular entrepreneurs. Our study concludes that church planters are significantly more extravert and significantly less neurotic than the general population. Although our research also indicates that church planters are more agreeable and more conscientious than the general population, differences on these items were not significant. As to openness to experience, there was no difference between church planters and the general population. Comparison with research among secular entrepreneurs leads to rather ambiguous results. The only shared trait that can be established with some reliability is that both church planters and secular entrepreneurs are less neurotic than other people.