As nothing else is identified as a “gospel issue” in the Cape Town Commitment nor in the Lausanne Covenant and Seoul Statement, the ambiguous statement makes creation care a strange outlier. Importantly, this statement is likely to hinder, rather than help, the cause of creation care within evangelicalism, as it can be interpreted as associating creation care with a different gospel. Thus, the laudable intention of the Cape Town Commitment authors to encourage creation care is in fact being undermined.
The distinction between the gospel and good works is clearly affirmed in the Lausanne Covenant’s teaching that “social concern” is distinct from “evangelism,” but both are “necessary.” Aligned with the Lausanne Covenant, then, we are arguing that the relationship between creation care and the gospel should be understood and taught in a similar way.
In view of the confusion which this statement has caused and its tension with the Lausanne Covenant, we would like to request The Theology Working Group of the Lausanne Congress to issue a correction, amendment, or a clarification of this ambiguous statement in the Cape Town Commitment.
We are open for dialogue and to hearing more from you concerning the above issue. Yours in Christ,
Andrew Ter Ern Loke, Ph.D. Theology (King’s College London)
Associate Professor, Hong Kong Baptist University (author of this letter), East Asia
Wilson Jeremiah, Ph.D. Theology (Trinity Evangelical Divinity School)
Faculty Member, Southeast Asia Bible Seminary, Malang, Indonesia, Southeast Asia
Kevin Muriithi Ndereba, Ph.D. Theology (University of South Africa)
Head of Department of Practical Theology, St. Paul’s University, Kenya, Africa
Christian Maureira, Th.M. (Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary – USA) Director and Professor, Martin Bucer Seminary, Chile, South America
%20are%20part%20of%20the%20gospel,%20which%20they%20are%20not.){kind=link}