Initial Thoughts toward an Orthodox Foreign Mission
Anastasios, Archbishop of Tirana and of all Albany
Athens 1969, pp. 4- 24
The subject of Orthodox Mission abroad, which until lately had been only a wish and dream of relatively few persons, and had remained a moot question for theological debate, a “theologoumenon” in most church circles, has by now been formally placed on the agenda of the Church of Greece (1) . But this opening in our Church's horizon has brought to the fore many problems both theoretical and practical, which call for deeper theological study and research in Comparative Religion, along with soberly planned action. By way of an introductory contribution to dealing with such a many-sided issue, we would like to emphasize the following points:
In order render the ecclesiological need for external mission manifest, and avoid creating the impression that it is merely a matter of some “new course”, a “dessert” after ecclesiastical activity, persistent theological enlightenment will be needed to make us aware of a matter which in theory stands forth as self-evident. There still is no little confusion unfortunately and it has not been understood well enough that: inertia in the field of mission means, in the last analysis, a negation of Orthodoxy, a backslide into the practical heresy of localism. We are reduced without suspecting it to a theological schizophrenia, when on one hand we stress the apostolicity and ecumenicity of our Church, as we constantly repeat that we “believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church”, and the Bishops publicly pledge it in the presence of the militant and of the triumphant Church at the assumption of their duties; but on the other we are exclusively absorbed in the several local concerns, which we judge and decide on the basis of “our own needs” narrowly interpreted.
We shall need to reiterate “again and again”, that it is unthinkable for us to speak of “Orthodox spirituality”, of “a life in Christ”, of emulating the Apostle Paul, founder of the Greek Church, while we stay inert as to mission; that it is unintelligible to write about intense liturgical and spiritual living of the Lord's Resurrection by us, while we abide slothful and indifferent to the call of ecumenical mission, with which the message of the Resurrection is interwoven (Mt 28:18, Mk 26:15) (2) .
The consciousness that the Church is “His Body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all” (Eph 1:23), and that God's plan is to “unite all things in Christ, things in heaven and things on earth” (Eph 1:10) — these are not theoretical concepts for discussion by theologians at conferences, but the life to live for the Orthodox, which should unfailingly free him of localism and small-heartedness, prompting him to live with the desire of gathering all things in Christ; a desire that does not stop at the stage of emotional well-wishing and passive expectation, but seeks to express itself as active participation in the world's daily life and in its history. Though ontologically “nothing can be added to the Church — its fullness is that of Christ himself — the manifestation and the communication of this fullness constitute, on the other hand, the very life of the Church in this ‘eon” (3) .
Only when it is realized that worldwide ecumenical mission is an initial and prime implication in a fundamental article of the “Credo”, elemental for the Orthodox comprehension of what the Church is (4) , and that what is termed “foreign mission” is not an “external” matter but an inner need, a call to repentance and aligning ourselves with the spirit of the Gospel and the tradition of our Church, only- then shall we have the proper and hope-bearing theological start for what comes next.
The needs of mission — spiritual, administrative and financial — cannot be met by groups of people; they must be met by the Church as a whole. The call is not answered by setting up some Mission Societies or Boards. Their role (very significant as a start, it is true) counts solely as a pioneer step for “preparing the way” that is their function. The quandary is how the Church's full membership shall be mobilized in a vision of “catholic”, worldwide, apostolic responsibility.
Participation by every believer in this ecumenical sacred mission must be pursued with the same persistence and emphasis as his sharing in the life of worship; as conformity with the “Credo” confessed in solemn wise at. every gathering for devotions, as the sequel to conscientious living of the Divine Eucharist, whose abiding axis poles are: the elevation heavenward, the ascension to behold the Presence, and in turn the move to re-enter the world. «‘We have seen the true light, we have enjoyed life eternal', but this Life this Light, are given us in order to ‘transform' us into Christ's witnesses in this world... The Eucharist, transforming the ‘Church into what it is' transforms it into mission» (5) .
The entire Church is responsible and duty- bound to work for the coming of God's Kingdom on earth. The particular form of assistance and mobilization is in part a matter of organization: the Russian Church's experience in organizing her missionary undertaking toward the end of the 19th century in order to mobilize her faithful, must be studied closely (6) ; an essential step shall certainly be to set apart a day or week for Mission, acquaint the flock of believers with the purpose, and urge them to support the cause in every way.
This issue is not for the Church of Greece to face by herself. In today's ecumenical; apostolic endeavour , cooperation by the Orthodox Churches is binding. It is excluded that Orthodoxy appear disjointed within a world growing into “one neighborhood” more and more. Happily, the need has already been officially highlighted “to form and build up not a Greek Orthodox only, but a pan-Orthodox awareness of Mission; so the field shall not be thought of as one of rivalry, instead of close concurrent action by Churches of the same creed” (7) . Such a perspective no doubt brings along hurdles enough in its first steps of application. Just that, however, should induce us the soonest to a methodical and sober assumption of initiative; any ostrich-like playing blind to it being shunned.
Severe criticism is directed in our time at the tendency of many missions to found religious colonies or chapters of their Church, rather than create new, living Churches, rooted in the soul and traditions of a people. It is a blessing that the Orthodox line on this has been very lucid: Sincere regard for the personality of individuals and the character of the several peoples, consecration of their typical traits to evolving their own spiritual being. That was the case in christianizing the Slavic world (8) , and the same course was followed later by Orthodox missioners working amid populous nations, as Nikolas Kazatkin did in Japan (9) , or among small, primitive tribes as happened with Innocent Veniaminoff in Alaska (10) . Such practice was not the outcome of “strategic tactics”; it was an Orthodox theological consistency walking in the steps of Him who was sent by the Father, “dwelt among us” ( Jn 1:14), and became one with His people.
The “incarnation” of God's Word in the language and customs of a country has been and must be the first concern of all Orthodox mission. Its intent is the planting and growth of a native Church, self-powered and self-governing, able to turn to account all the genuine strands of national tradition, transforming and hallowing them in harmony with the people's nature, to the glory of God. Missionaries are expected to make other Christian nations' cultures known to new converts, even help them approach and understand their fellow- Christians; but that in no way is allowed to aim for a passive imitation of what is foreign; it should serve to offer models for an original, creative Christianity. The example of the Thessalonian brothers Cyril and Methodius endures as an ever timely beacon (11) .
Just as every believer within the body of the Church has his own personality, which is consecrated without being absorbed and lost to view, so each nation can keep its particular group physiognomy, developing by itself, but always on the basis of the One Church's tradition.
The transition period and the crisis of re-adjustment in which Christian Mission finds itself, the new ecumenical climate constantly expanding in the relations among the various Christian Confessions creates peculiar problems of inter-relationship among the several missions. Regardless of cautions extant and at times voiced about many of them, it would be unfair to generalize on such a crisis and overlook the fact that throngs of faithful workers have for centuries served in the cause of evangelizing non-Christian peoples with touching self-denial. We are not to ignore or underestimate their striving and achievement, presenting ourselves as “appraisers” a posteriori, or even as antagonists.
Our presence ought to be positive, not aggressive against others. A valuable directive is laid down by Nikolas Kazatkin , the great Orthodox missionary to Japan and expressed as follows by his successor Sarge Tychomiroff : “The mission message is positive (not apologetic). Christ has said, ‘Believe, if you will'; without any polemics, or critique of the other Confessions, or attacks, not even against Buddhism and Shintoism. Christ himself, the fullness of truth, did not win souls save in peace ” (12) .
The evil caused by opposition and polemics among Christian Confessions is too well known for any comment at present (13) . It is self- evident that there is no proselytism when many people turn toward Orthodoxy freely and of their own will. Naturally, the proposition of peaceful co-existence and much more that of cooperation (in areas of social service or national exertion), is fraught with a great many most delicate situations, which can be faced properly with due knowledge of conditions, purity of aims, light from above and the fear of God.
But apart from such questions, the role of Orthodox mission today on no account must be the addition of one more fanatic missionary team, to increase the number of conflicting Churches; it can only be the dignified offer of the intrinsic, unknown treasures in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church: her life in worship, her ecclesiastical conscience, her communion in Christ with those gone before, the meaning of sanctification and transfiguration of all — yea of Creation itself — in Christ, that is, the true event of salvation. The Orthodox Church's theological perspective and the richness of her life are of immense significance, as acknowledged by many Asian and African intellectuals plus even more Western missioners and theologians, in the spiritual ferment now going on and the seeking out of the peoples in question; failure to make this offer would be a crime.
In the narrow limits of the present article we cannot expand on topics like Orthodox catechism, preaching, work for youth, training for clergy and staff, our stand on national or racial issues, avoidance of political expediency and so forth (14) .
We solely indicate in the section following and by way of general suggestion, a few of the manifold problems within the topics under study and in particular those connected with the task of translation, as well as of worship.
The event of Pentecost (Acts 2:6-11), when “each one heard them speaking in his own language... the mighty works of God”, has been the fundamental principle of Orthodox missionary tactics ever since: translating Holy Scripture and the divine Liturgy into the speech of each people was a continuous tradition in the Byzantine Church; the Russian missioners followed the road carved out and devoted themselves to rendering the sacred texts into the idiom of even the smaller tribes of Siberia, the Kamtchatka peninsula and Alaska (15) . When at a certain interval that practice was neglected in the interior of Russia, missionary endeavor came to a standstill. Nowadays, despite the gigantic accomplishment of the various large Bible Societies, there are still one thousand or so tongues and dialects, into which Holy Writ has not been translated. The contribution of Greek linguists versed in the original Language of the New Testament can prove most momentous in what is cardinal to Christian Mission, i.e. completing the task of rendering the Sacred Scriptures into the tongues of Mankind. Only in Africa today more than seven hundred languages and dialects are spoken (16) . Nor can it be expected that their use and utility may recede, at least in this century. Linguistic work keeps on being an essential part of missionary activity. But transmission of Christian concepts and thinking is a more composite labour than is usually reckoned (17) especially worth noting is the experience of the Russian mission to Kazan, in the scholarly translation output of the great linguist Ilminsky (1821-1891) (18) .
Orthodox worship, as many scolars observe atmosphere, ever rendering vivid the mystery of the Word's incarnation and of man's theosis (becoming divine), affects man's whole being. As the recent instance of the Kenya Orthodox communities bears witness, it is a primary power in disseminating and consolidating Orthodoxy. But how shall this sacramental life be conveyed rightly, so as to become a possession of other peoples, e.g. those of Africa?
It is not merely the barrier of language touched on above; the mentality in toto of a people is to be taken into view. Many races, which in our lack of knowledge we call primitive, have a very long internal evolution in civilization (19). They possess a code of custom by which their dispositions, experiences, modes of living are expressed; it is a most complex and most meaningful one. That must have our respect, be studied, analyzed and turned to good use for expressing the new life. No recurrence can be brooked of what regrettably occurred in the case of several western missioners, who rejected everything as “idolatrous”, thus depriving the race of its wealth in customs of generations, to foist on it alien intellectual concoctions.
In the words of the Apostle Paul, God “did not leave himself without witness, for he did good and gave you from heaven rains and fruitful seasons, satisfying with food and gladness” the hearts of the nations (Acts 14:17). Hence care is peremptory to seek out the component parts of this witness of God among each people. Perhaps the correlation of “did not leave himself without witness” and “satisfying with food and gladness” will aid us to realize more deeply the importance of certain ancestral festive traditions, that have been woven into the life of the various races through the ages; so that we may turn them to avail in conveying the mystery of redemption in Christ, and making it their new life. Sincere regard shall be held toward all elements of their tradition which do not stand opposed to the Gospel. The variety which may perchance arise in the practice of worship from the adoption of time- honoured values among the races taken singly, is not a risk or a disadvantage, if the integral Orthodox ecclesiastical conscience is fittingly fostered. The unity of the Orthodox Church does not center in a superficial uniformity, but in one faith and one sacramental life. It is of paramount interest too from a missionary viewpoint, that during the first centuries of the One Church differing Liturgies were in use, with considerable variants and in dozens of various languages. The moot point is not how the utilization of a variety of voices shall be avoided; it is how such varying voices shall blend in a harmonious glorification of God.
All the above may be easily accepted theoretically, yet they bring up many a query when it comes to missionary action. What exactly should an Orthodox community draw from its background? What should it reject? Which customs, which symbolisms are inseparably identified with the old cult, and which are simply a manner of expressing experience (a) or (b), for example, the start of a new era in a people's life? The need for systematic study in the field of Ethnology and Comparative Religion is apparent, if we are to fathom the other civilizations aright.
In general, serious inquiry into non- Christian peoples' religious life is a sine qua non for our understanding them and our realistic approach to human beings, who for ages have evolved in their cult. This is not only valid in the case of Asia's great religions, but applies even to the simplest cults of races living close to nature. How deep and strong the roots of their “primitive” piety are, let the endurance, the amazing adjustability and vitality shown in Africa bear witness, after so many decades of Christian mission efforts (20)
Research in Comparative Religion will do more to deepen our knowledge and yield a preciser definition of the differences making for a distinction between the Old and the New in Christ. The limits of this article do not admit touching on the “Theology of Religions”, an issue that has so harassed the western Churches (21), but as a rule is ignored by Orthodox theological thinking with few exceptions (22).
We should like to stress however that the subject in itself is no less than a fundamental problem for present day Orthodox theology. And that, not just for the right orientation of mission abroad, more broadly also, for the Church's stand in various spheres of life today. The proposition basically consists in comprehending mankind's course and World History theologically. That is of local moment also in facing contemporary currents of theories, ways of thinking about the Kosmos which move close about us.
The above observations betoken once again that good intentions and vague enthusiasm alone will not do; formation in the matters already before us, persons fit and means enough, methodical exertion and faith are called for, if we would avoid starting on abortive undertakings and comfort ourselves with generalities or illusions of ephemeral success.
In the latest accounts of revived interest in Mission there is no lack of simplification and embellishment. Indeed, making an impression and arousing “enthusiasm” for Mission is oft pursued by inflating the facts. It is high time for us to learn how to look at the data as realists, mark the concrete stage in each case, and call the A an A and the B a B.
With God's'' grace and the hard work of a few dedicated people some noteworthy steps have been made these last years; that is certain. But those exaggerated reports about “triumphs of Orthodoxy” in Uganda, for instance, or “a conversion of Africans from idolatry to Christ by the thousands” via the Orthodox Mission, a.s.f ., a.s.o ., the releases set in circulation offhand at times profit us nothing. Worse than that, they prove untoward in more ways than one. It is not solely a matter of risking to become an international laughing-stock by such Orthodox self-praise resting on tales which others can easily check, nor even of the disappointment felt by sincerely interested people at the confusion of reality with pious wishing; but mainly of this: that the God of truth, Whom Mission aims to serve, is not pleased with enthusiastic inaccuracies, even if these are used with good intent, and for His glory! Regard for truth in any form is worship of God, therefore a “must” in mission. To transform an actuality into life in Christ, we need to know it first as it is, become deeply conscious of it, “take it to ourselves”; if we insist on ignoring it, we shall incur its revenge.
This does not at all imply a mood of pessimism, but plain soberness toward life and the Church.
Optimism for success and securing new calls to Christ cannot rely on everything being rosy, “a little work and all have turned Orthodox”; rather on the single inward assurance that He who said, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations”, added, “and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age' (Mt 28:20). The desire to follow Jesus, the Lord's reassurance, “He who abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears forth much fruit” ( Jn 15:5), are the safest source of enthusiasm — the sole, and perfectly sufficient guarantee!
In conclusion, there is need to stress without let-up that the most decisive criterion in the whole cause will ever be the spiritual life of all who are to serve in the work of mission; everything ultimately depends on live persons, not on theoretical studies. God has sent people, men and women, rather than mere plans, for the world's transformation. We are most certainly duty-bound to employ modem ways and means, experience and all other resources available, in the best possible manner for extending God's Kingdom (“all things are yours” I Cor 3:21-23); without however being drawn into the temptation of an administrative-economic mentality and a shallow activism. Our loftiest concern must continue to be how we may abide a living witness to the presence of the Lord within this concrete, evolving world.
Inasmuch as the missioner's task is to continue the Lord's mission, only by proceeding in the steps of Him who “came not to be serv ed unto, but to serve” (Mk 10:45), and “empti ed himself, taking the form of a servant” ( ΡΜΙΛ 2:1), can it be made a reality. “Kerygma' in love a nd hope, the humble, patient service in ΡΐοΗΝ of unstinted self-sacrifice, these as irreplaceable surety for missionary success. As the Lord “dwelt among us” ( Jn l:14)u ΑΛί bore witness to God's glory, in the same is the missionary called to bear witness to W mystery of the Incarnation, to the glory of thin Lord.
Constant personal touch with the One Sent First into the Church is a sine qua non for a life of such quality to endure. The truth of “apart from me you can do nothing” ( Jn 15:5) holds here more than elsewhere. Before defining His disciples' apostolic work as the direct continuance of His own ( Jn 20:21), the Lord laid special emphasis on His relationship with His Father. His work, His Gospel preaching are most directly bound up with the Father and depend on Him: “I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the Father taught me” ( Jn 8:28). His mission is no other than what He has “heard” and “seen” ( Jn 8:26, 8: 38; cf. 12:49, 10:25); His “will” is the Father's will ( Jn 5:30; cf. 6:36). The Apostles share in the relations of Father to Son: “he who receives any one whom I send, receives me; and he who receives me receives him who sent me” ( Jn 13:20).
Since in the last analysis Mission means the continuation of Christ's work on earth, participation in life, love of the Holy Trinity, the most vital bond in the missionary's lifework is preserving the living communion with the Trinity in the life of the Church, which is the Body of Christ; the continual transfiguration of his whole being in Christ by the Holy Spirit; for through that is the glory of God veritably revealed in the sameness of daily existence. Beyond all preoccupation with training, be it technical or scientific, and all co-ordination with the pace of modern living, there must throb in the deeper recesses of his heart the yearning of those who love the Lord: the soul's cry of the Saints, “Thou knowest that I love Thee and seek Thee with the whole of my being; reveal Thyself and appear to me” (St Symeon , the new Theologian). Thus, wherever he may find himself - in the African jungle, or the jungle of concrete, glass, and passion, of the West's huge cities, his presence there shall be a mystic Revelation of his beloved Lord's Epiphany.
Our Church's inner problems are admittedly perplexing, most so at present and we cannot afford to pass them by. Yet, the revived issue of mission abroad is neither untimely, nor to be regarded as an “item of luxury”. Nay, it may prove to be redeeming for her inner life. Widening our horizon by realizing our ecumenical responsibility is in principle of vital import to ourselves, for a rebirth of our spiritual being; and parallel wise for those “outside”, to whom our missionary ministry shall be directed. The movements of a physical body in an open area enhance its respiratory and circulatory capacities. Prolonged lying down in a closed, stifling space aggravates the lack of zest and the deterioration. The crucial “internal” challenge always facing us is whether we are ready “to observe all that I have commanded you” (Mt 28;20) with consistency; or are we to interpret the Gospel in our own fashion now and then, adding or cancelling commandments according to our personal views on the needs of our times. The summons asks whether we believe or not that Christ is “the Way, the Truth and the Life” for the whole world, which is drawing ever closer to its own self all the time, and is living as one world.
Any so-called Christian country may be a large field for mission today; true enough. But that is not an excuse for our staying snugly withdrawn in our town or parish, doing nothing worthwhile even there; this fact, on the contrary, emphasizes the new dimensions of our missionary duty in all directions: “and you shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Staff plans of missionary action must simply be freed of old tactics for trench warfare on a single front, and be readjusted with resolution, realism and vision to new demands forming in the spiritual conflict of the present day — a worldwide contest.
(1) IERONYMOS, Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, Σχέδιον αναδιοργανώοεως της Εκκλησίας της Ελλάδος (Organization Plan for the Church of Greece) (Athens 1967), pp. 110-111. For parallel action by the Archdiocese of the Americas see “Office of Foreign Missions, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America”, Porefthendes — Go Ye 9 (1967), pp. 37-38.
(2) For a more analytical treatment of these points see A. YANNOULATOS, “The Purpose and Motive of Mission”, International Review of Missions 54 (1965), pp. 281-287; revised, Porefthendes — Go Ye 9 (1967), pp. 2-9, 34-36. By the same author, “Orthodoxy and Mission”, St. Vladimir's Seminary Quarterly 8 (1964), pp. 139-148; “Missions orthodoxes”, Parole et Mission 8 (1965), pp. 5-18.
(3) A. SCHMEMANN, “The Missionary Imperative in the Orthodox Tradition”, in The Theology of the Christian Mission, ed. H. Anderson (New York 1961), p. 254.
(4) More fully by N. NISSIOTIS, “The Ecclesiological Foundation of Mission”, Orthodox Theological Review (Boston 1962), pp. 22-52.
(5) A. SCHMEMANN, o.c ., pp. 255-256.
(6) J. GLAZIK, Die russisch-orthodoxe Hei - denmission seit Peter dem Grossen ( Müinster 1954).
(7) IERONYMOS,Archbishop of Athens, o.c ., p. 110.
(8) F. DVORNIK, Les Slaves, Byzance et Rome au IX siècle (Paris 1929). G. KONIDARIS, II ' Ελληνική ' Εκκλησία ώς πολιτιστική δνναμις εν τη ιστορία τής χερσονήσου τον Αίμου (The Greek Church as a Civilizing Force in the History of the Haemus Peninsula ) ( Athens 1948). A. YANNOULATOS, " Βυζάντιον — Εύαγγελιστικόν εργον” ( Byzantium : Evangelizing Work ), Θρησκευτική και Ηθική Εγκυ κλοπαιδεία ( Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics ) ( Athens 1964), vol. IV, pp. 19-59.
(9) OTIS CARY, A History of Christianity in Japan (New York - London 1909), pp. 375-425.
(10) N. STRUVE, “The Missionary Activity of the Russian Church”, Porefthendes — Go Ye 3 (1961), pp. 22-24.
(11) Fr. GRIVEC, Konstantin und Method, Lehrer der Slaven (Wiesbaden 1960). Ecclesia 43 (1966), pp. 373-512, Κυρίλλω και . Μεθοδίῳ τόμος εόρτιος επί τη χιλιοστή και εκατοστή ετηρίδι (To Cyril and Methodius a festive volume on their eleven hundredth Anniversary), publ. by the Metropolitan See and the Theol. School of Thessaloniki, ed . J. Anastasiou (Thessaloniki 1966).
(12) Lettre de 1' archevêque Serge ( Tychomiroff ) in “Missions orthodoxes du Japon et des Perses”, Irenikon 5(1931), p. 21.
(13) As a single typical case (to be avoided!) of the clash between Anglicans and Roman Catholics in Uganda at the first stage of mission, we note the following incident: In 1878 the Anglican missioner Mackay, among other arguments against “Papism and Mariolatry” adduced to prevent the establishment of French Roman Catholic missionaries there, used this as more persuasive to Mutesa , king of the Baganda : “The French in particular do not love kings; they put their own to death some years ago. I do not vouch for anything, if you let them settle here in your mighty Kingdom”. Abbe NICQ, Le Pere Simeon Lourdel (Alger 1932), p. 107. For more on the antagonism between the two missions see P. GALE, Uganda and the Mill Hill Fathers (London 1959), p. 16.
(14) For further views on mission deontology see CHRYSOSTOM, Metropolitan of Myra, “The Lord's ‘Go Ye' and Theology”, Porefthendes — Go Ye 3 (1961), pp. 19- 20 .
(15) E. SMIRNOFF, “Russian Missions” Porefthendes — Go Ye 7 (1965), continued in 8 (1966). J. GLAZIK, o.c ., and his, Die lslammission der russisch-orthodoxen Kirche (Munster 1959).
(16) E. G. JACOB, Grundziige der Geschichte Afrikas (Darmstadt 1966), p.15. Specifically on African languages see J. H. GREENBERG, Studies in African Linguistic Classification (New Haven 1955). L. HOM- BURGER, Les Langues Négro-africaines et les Peuples qui les parlent (Paris 21967).
(17) C. SCHUMANN, “Wie sind biblische Begriffe in eine heidnische Sprache zu iiber - tragen ?”, Evangelisches Missionsmagazin 60 (1962), pp. 95-104. C. MEINHOF,“Christliche Gedanken in afrikanischer Sprache”, Neue allgemeine Missionszeitschrift 14 (1937), pp. 212-221, 244-253, 279-286. E. VOULGARAKIS, “Language and Mission”, Porefthendes — Go Ye 4 (1962), pp. 42-44. E. NIDA, Towards a Science of Translating. With Special Reference to Principles and Procedures Involved in Bible Translating (Leiden 1964).
(18) Ε . SMIRNOFF, o.c . Porefthedes - Go Ye 8 (1966), pp. 11-15
(19) D. WESTERMANN, Geschichte Afrikas . Staatenbildungen südlich der Sachar (Köln 1952), where 64 great states which flourished in Africa are enumerated. G. P. MURDOCK, Africa's Peoples and their Culture History (New York — Toronto — London 1959). H. BAUMANN — E. RITTER, Afrika , Abriss der Geschichte aussereuropäischer Kulturen I Bd. Teil II ( Münster 1961).
(20) V. E. W. HAYWARD (ed.), African Independent Church Movements (London 1963). E. BENZ ( Hrsg .), Messianische Kirchen , Sekten und Bewegungen im heutigen Afrika (Leiden 1965). G G . SUNDKLER, Bantu Prophets in South Africa (London 1961). D. B. BARETT, Schism and Renewal in Africa. An Analysis of six thousand Contemporary Religious Movements. (Nairobi 1968).
(21) K. BARTH, “Das Christentum und die Religionen”, Junge Kirche 24 (1963), pp. 436 ff. E. BENZ, “Ideen zu einer Theologie der Religionsgeschichte”, Mainzer Akademie der Wissenschajten und der Literatur — Abhandlungen der Geistes - und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse . (Wiesbaden 1960), pp. 421-496. A. J. GUTTAT, La rencontre des religions (Paris 1953). F. HEILER, “Christentum und die Religionen”, Sonderdruck aus Einheit des Geistes ( Jahrbuch der Evangelischen Akademie der Pfalz 1964). J. DANIELOU, “Le problème théologique des religions non-chrétiennes”, Archivo di Filosofia , Metafisico et esperienza religiosa (Roma 1956). K. GOLDAMMER, “Die Bibel und die Religionen”, Fuldder Hefte 16 (1966), pp. 55- 135. H. R. SCHLETTE, Die Religionen als Thema der Theologie (Freiburg — Basel— Wien 1963).
(22) L. PHILIPPIDES, Πρωτογόνων θρησκευτική ζωή (Religious Life of Primitive Peoples) (Athens 1964), pp. 117-140, particularly pp. 127-128. Also His, ' Ιστορία της εποχής της Καινής Διαθήκης εξ επόψεως παγκοσμίου καί πανθρησκειακής (History of New Testament Times from a Worldwide and All-Religions Point of View) (Athens 1958), pp. 882 ff. 956 ff. N. ARSENIEV, Revelation of Life Eternal. An Introduction to the Christian Message. (New York 1965).