로잔운동과 동반자 협력 -로잔운동과 중국 교회의 만남 = Lausanne Movement and Partnership in global mission -A meeting of Chinese Church and Lausanne

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Some 200 Chinese Church leaders were unable to attend The Third Lausanne Congress in Cape Town in October 2010 due to the Chinese government prohibiting them from leaving China. It not only was a shock to the Lausanne leadership who had been working tirelessly to ensure their participation but also left behind the issue of how the Lausanne Movement would partner with the Chinese Church in going forward. Since the Chinese Communist Party, which advocated socialism, seized state power in 1949, two churches have coexisted in the People’s Republic of China, a state-sponsored church that followed the government’s administrative system and a non-sponsored church that resisted government’s religious interference. In 1978 as Deng Xiaoping administration enacted the policy of reformation and opening, the leftist religious policy that attempted to forcefully wipe out religion from China dissipated. In its place, the center piece of policy of religion established in China was one where the state provided a certain function in the society for religion to fulfill and thereby participate in different sectors of the society for the country’s development. The Lausanne Movement included“Partnering in the body of Christ for unity in mission”in its Call to Action part of the Cape Town Commitment. The Lausanne Movement must restore its partner cooperative relationship with the Chinese Church. In order for this to occur, the Lausanne Movement must acknowledge the dual structure of the church in China, the state-sponsored and non-sponsored, and work to develop a prudent cooperative relationship with both sides. First, the Lausanne Movement must restore partner cooperative relationship with the state-sponsored church side in China. The basic principle of the policy of religious freedom implemented by the current Chinese government is that of three-self principle. The central point of the three-self principle is to“strictly exclude foreign forces.”Therefore, the Lausanne Movement must endeavor to work with the Chinese church for her to overcome her bias of traditional understanding of missions and partner with the church worldwide based on Lausanne Movement’s understanding of“wholistic missions.” Second, the Lausanne Movement must develop a partner cooperative relationship with the non-sponsored church side in China. Most of the participants who were prevented from attending The Third Lausanne Congress in Cape Town were from the non-sponsored side. They are requesting continued cooperative relationship with Lausanne Movement. Both the Asian Church Leaders Forum in 2014 and the first Mission China 2030 Conference in 2015 convened in Hong Kong are models showing creative cooperation between Lausanne Movement and the non-sponsored church in China. Both the theology and the spirit of Lausanne calls for it to practice partnership cooperation without excluding any of its partners. Therefore, the Lausanne Movement must not be hindered by the dual structure of state-sponsored and non-sponsored, but must endeavor to overcome all existing theological and spiritual barriers to develop a partner cooperation for world missions with the Chinese Church.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 신경규, "통전적 관점에서 본 두 선교신학의 합치성 모색" 세계선교연구원 (29) : 195-224, 2012

2 최형근, "케이프타운 서약" Ivp 2014

3 장훈태, "칼빈의 복음신앙과 로잔복음화 운동의상관성 고찰" 한국복음주의선교신학회 22 (22): 45-81, 2013

4 김광성, "중국특색의 사회주의 신학을 통한 현장최적화(Contextualization) 신학의 모색" 한국복음주의선교신학회 21 (21): 9-44, 2013

5 왕주오안, "중국의 종교문제와 종교정책" 한중국제교류재단 2014

6 정기묵, "제3차 로잔대회의 케이프타운 서약에 나타난미디어 선교와 한국 교회의 전략" 한국복음주의선교신학회 22 (22): 83-111, 2013

7 최형근, "제3차 로잔대회 케이프타운 서약의 특징과 의의" 한국복음주의선교신학회 22 (22): 113-150, 2013

8 서정운, "제2차 로잔대회의 신학적 동향" 5 : 1989

9 김영동, "전도와 사회봉사" 7 : 2001

10 임희모, "에반젤리칼 선교신학의 에큐메니칼 대화" 13 : 1999

11 변창욱, "아시아 복음화를 위한 새 마음" 미션아카데미 2007

12 조종남, "세계 복음화를 위한 로잔운도의 역사와 신학" 선교횃불 2013

13 신경규, "선교신학에 있어서 본문과 상황의 통전성: 한국의 선교학자가 본 서구의 두 선교신학" (21) : 2014

14 김명혁, "복음주의 운동과 한국교회" 5 : 2000

15 임희모, "복음주의 선교신학의 변화와 포스트모더니즘" 12 : 2003

16 김명혁, "복음주의 선교신학의 동향과 신학적 주제-복음화와 사회 참여" 1986

17 신경규, "복음주의 관점에서 본 에큐메니칼 선교신학 ―로잔대회 이후를 중심으로 한 거시적 평가" 한국복음주의선교신학회 25 (25): 103-158, 2014

18 박영환, "미래를 위한 WCC 선교와 로잔 선교의 이해와 협력" 한국선교신학회 25 (25): 73-117, 2010

19 장남혁, "로잔운동에 나타나는 지역사회개발선교에 대한 고찰―로잔 문서를 중심으로" 한국복음주의선교신학회 24 (24): 115-148, 2013

20 한국로잔연구교수회, "로잔운동과 선교신학" 한국로잔위원회 2015

21 한국로잔연구교수회, "로잔운동과 선교" 한국로잔위원회 2014

22 정흥호, "로잔운동과 상황화에 관한 논의에 대한 연구" 한국복음주의선교신학회 26 (26): 113-147, 2014

23 나용화, "로잔언약과 한국교회의 과제" 7 : 2007

24 홍기영, "로잔세계복음화운동의 선교신학적 고찰 (상) ―로잔언약, 마닐라선언, 케이프타운헌신을 중심으로" 한국복음주의선교신학회 22 (22): 151-194, 2013

25 김성욱, "로잔세계복음화대회에 나타난 선교신학연구" 32 : 2013

26 박보경, "로잔복음화운동과 한국교회-로잔운동에 나타난 전도와 사회적 책임의 관계" 한국복음주의선교신학회 22 (22): 9-43, 2013

27 조종남, "로잔대회와 복음주의의 선교신학" 5 : 2000

28 노봉린, "로잔대회 이후의 복음주의 선교운동" 5 : 2000

29 Tizon, Al, "로잔 이후의 변화" 주안대학원대학교 2015

30 안희열, "로잔 운동이 세계 선교에 끼친 공헌과 한국 교회가 나아가야 할 방향" 세계선교연구원 (27) : 109-141, 2011

31 김은수, "로잔 운동에 나타난 복음주의 선교학" 15 : 1999

32 김은수, "로잔 복음화 운동의 흐름과 과제 ―1989년 마닐라대회 이후를 중심으로" 한국선교신학회 22 (22): 11-40, 2009

33 신경규, "기독교 선교에 있어서 사회참여" 한국대학선교학회 (14) : 249-293, 2008

34 "LOP 6 Christian Witness to the Chinese People"

35 "LOP 39 The Local Church in Mission: Becoming a Missional Congregation in the Twenty-First Century Global Context and the Opportunities Offered through Tentmaking Ministry"

36 "LOP 33 Holistic Mission"

37 "LOP 24 Cooperating in World Evangelization: A Handbook on Church/ Para-Church Relationships"

38 "LOP 22 Christian Witness to the Urban Poor"

39 "LOP 21 Evangelism and Social Responsibility: An Evangelical Commitment"

40 "LOP 20 An Evangelical Commitment to Simple Life-style"

41 "LOP 16 Christian Witness to Traditional Religionists of Asia and Oceania"

42 김은수, "2010년 케이프타운 로잔3차대회의 의미와 과제" 한국선교신학회 26 (26): 37-67, 2011