Editor’s note: This article is part of forum discussing the fourth Lausanne Congress. It is not an official Lausanne Movement forum but an opportunity for Lausanne delegates to share their thoughts about the fourth Lausanne Congress, the Seoul Statement, and the future of the mission. You can read the entire series, from diverse voices around the world here.
To the Theology Working Group of the Lausanne Congress,
We would like to raise a concern regarding the statement
creation care is…a gospel issue within the Lordship of Christ
which is found in the Cape Town Commitment.1 This statement is ambiguous and the two possible interpretations are problematic. It can be understood as either: (1) conflating the gospel with good works (caring for creation) that should be part of the fruits of the gospel; or (2) saying that everything under the Lordship of Christ is a “gospel issue,” thus causing the term to lose its distinctive meaning since everything is under Christ’s Lordship.
If the statement is understood as conflating the gospel with good works, this is a serious error (Galatians 1:8-9). It is true that the gospel affirms that Jesus is Lord over all creation and that the scope of the gospel does not merely extend to human souls but also to the liberation and reconciliation of creation (Romans 8:21; Colossians 1:20), just as Christ’s kingdom extends beyond human souls and impact other realm of existence. Indeed, as the theological introduction to the Seoul Statement notes, it is important to understand the gospel within the larger biblical narrative of God’s work from creation to new creation. Nevertheless, an essential element of the gospel is that God has saved us by his grace through faith and not a result of works (Romans 1:16-17; 3:21-28; Ephesians 2:8-9). To say that creation care is part of the gospel would be to imply that good works (caring for creation) is part of the gospel, which it is not. It should be regarded as an important fruit of the gospel which is in line with the scope of the gospel, and it can work together with the proclamation of the gospel as part of integral mission2 and can help to open doors for the gospel, but it is not part of the gospel.
Our concern reflects more than just a hypothetical risk, as indicated by the fact that some have understood this part of the Cape Town Commitment statement as including good works within the gospel. For example, based on this statement, an article published on the Lausanne movement website states
We believe that creation care is a part of that gospel.3
Similarly, an article published in Evangelical Missions Quarterly in 2023 about this part of the Cape Town Commitment states:
Unless we are preaching and practicing evangelism, social action, and care for God’s wider creation, we are presenting an incomplete and less-than-biblical gospel.4
While the presentation of the gospel should be connected with social action and care for God’s creation, to say that the gospel itself is incomplete without these actions implies that these actions (good works) are part of the gospel. Thus, we believe that there is a serious risk that the gospel is being undermined by the ambiguous statement in the Cape Town Commitment.
1 https://lausanne.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/The-Cape-Town-Commitment-%E2%80%93-Pages-20-09-2021.pdf. Page 33.
2 https://lausanne.org/network/integral-mission
3 https://lausanne.org/about/blog/how-creation-care-became-a-gospel-issue
4 Ed Brown, “Is Creation Care Really a Gospel Issue?” EMQ April-June (2023), pp. 8-12; at pages 11-12.
%20are%20part%20of%20the%20gospel,%20which%20they%20are%20not.){kind=link}