From Conversion to Conversation: Rethinking Christian Mission Through Comparative Theology and the Praxis of the Steyler Missionaries (Societas Verbi Divini)

Abstract

This article examines the paradigm shift in Christian mission from conversion-centered models toward dialogical and justice-oriented praxis. Taking the Steyler Missionaries as a case study, this approach engages post-Vatican II theology, postcolonial critique, and Comparative Theology to demonstrate how mission can embody epistemic humility, contextual sensitivity, and theological hospitality. Based on qualitative interviews and textual analysis, the study highlights how dialogical mission reshapes Christian identity through mutual transformation rather than doctrinal transmission. The findings indicate that Comparative Theology provides a significant methodological and theological resource for interreligious engagement, enabling missionaries to move beyond hegemonic proclamation toward relational and ethically grounded witness. By integrating theological reflection with empirical insight, the article demonstrates how dialogical mission contributes to a reconfiguration of Christian witness in pluralistic and postcolonial contexts and offers a constructive framework for the future of mission practice.

1. Charting the Shift: From Conversion to Dialogical Mission

Over the past century, Christian mission has undergone a profound transformation, moving from a primarily conversion-oriented approach to a dialogical and intercultural praxis. Traditionally, mission was conceived as a unidirectional effort aimed at converting non-Christian populations, often disregarding the cultural, religious, and epistemic integrity of local communities. This conversion-centric model, rooted in exclusivist soteriologies and expansionist ecclesiologies, has increasingly been critiqued for its entanglement with colonial power structures and its limited capacity to address the pluralism of contemporary religious landscapes (Antunes da Silva 2021; Tauchner 2023).

The mid-20th century marked a decisive turning point, particularly through the reorientation of mission theology at the Second Vatican Council. Mission was reconceived not as unilateral transmission of doctrine but as a transformative encounter characterized by solidarity, mutual ethical responsibility, and interreligious engagement (Tauchner 2023).

Subsequent developments within intercultural theology and postcolonial critique—and in parallel, the rise of Comparative Theology—have further emphasized epistemic humility and theological hospitality as foundational principles that also resonate with contemporary missiological debates. Nevertheless, tensions persist regarding the balance between maintaining doctrinal identity and fostering genuine interreligious dialogue.

Against this backdrop, the present article investigates the praxis and theological frameworks of the Steyler Missionaries (Societas Verbi Divini) as a case study. Using qualitative interviews and textual analysis, the study examines how this missionary society responds to cultural plurality, ecological challenges, and the imperatives of interreligious dialogue. Particular attention is given to the role of Comparative Theology as a methodological tool that facilitates engagement with religious alterity without collapsing difference into homogenization.

By analyzing these practices, the article contributes to ongoing debates on the future trajectory of Christian mission. It proposes a model grounded not in hegemonic proclamation but in dialogical presence, contextual discernment, and prophetic responsibility—offering insights for theologians, practitioners, and scholars of religious pluralism alike. To understand how these theological shifts manifest in practice, the following section examines the historical evolution of the mission concept.

This study is conducted from the perspective of a scholar whose primary discipline lies in religious education and systematic theology, with a focus on pastoral care, spiritual identity, and dialogical theological praxis. Rooted in a post-Vatican II Catholic framework and situated at the University of Bonn’s Faculty of Catholic Theology, the research is informed by both academic and practical pedagogical commitments. This positioning shapes the selection of theories, sources, and the methodological approach, particularly the use of qualitative interviews within missionary contexts.

I critically acknowledge that much of the theoretical framework and references rely on Western, male-dominated scholarship due to disciplinary conventions and the accessibility of literature. While this has informed the construction of the argument and analysis, the study openly recognizes the limitations of such a perspective and emphasizes the necessity of including voices from the global South and marginalized communities in future research. This reflexivity is intended to enhance the dialogical and decolonial ambitions of the project, aligning academic transparency with theological humility.

2. The Evolution of the Mission Concept

2.1. Mission Before and After Vatican II

Building on the historical overview outlined in Chapter 1, the Second Vatican Council constitutes a pivotal moment in the development of Christian mission theology. Through its decree Ad Gentes (Zweites Vatikanisches Konzil 1965), mission was redefined from a predominantly unidirectional, conversion-focused enterprise—historically entangled with colonial power dynamics—to a dialogical and incarnational process grounded in the principle of inculturation. This principle emphasizes that the Christian message must be authentically expressed within the cultural languages, symbols, and worldviews of diverse peoples, fostering genuine encounter rather than mere religious replacement (Bosch 2011). Stephen B. Bevans, in his seminal yet unpublished manuscript A Comprehensive Overview of the Paradigms of Mission Today, underscores how Ad Gentes recasts mission as reciprocal: proclamation is inseparable from theological listening and respectful engagement. The Church ceases to act as a sovereign transmitter of absolute truth and instead becomes a participant in mutual theological and cultural enrichment (Bettschneider 2002, pp. 209–11).

Following this foundational reorientation, contemporary missiologists such as Bevans and Roger P. Schroeder have further developed a holistic and prophetic understanding of mission. In Constants in Context and Prophetic Dialogue, they argue that authentic Christian witness must respond to pressing global ethical challenges—including poverty, injustice, interreligious tensions, and ecological crises—as integral to mission praxis (Bevans and Schroeder 2004, 2011). This shift from conversion-centric to context-sensitive missiology thus represents both a theological renewal and a critical reckoning with mission’s complex historical legacy. Today, mission merges as accompaniment, solidarity, and prophetic responsibility within an increasingly pluralistic and interconnected world (Bettschneider 2002, pp. 206–31).

While Vatican II laid the foundation, contemporary challenges call for methodological tools that can guide dialogical mission today.

2.2. State of Research: Mission Theology, Postcolonial Critique, and Comparative Theology

This article draws on three distinct intellectual traditions to frame its approach to Christian mission: post-Vatican II theology, Comparative Theology, and postcolonial critique. Post-Vatican II theology serves as a denominational tradition and contextual hermeneutic lens that informs this study’s understanding of mission, emphasizing ecclesial developments and dialogical openness. Comparative Theology, emerging in response to global religious pluralism and intercultural engagements, seeks a constructive and respectful dialogue between faith traditions, informed by leading scholars such as Francis X. Clooney (2010). A thorough engagement with postcolonial critique in this article includes foundational thinkers like Edward Said (1978) and Gayatri Spivak (1988), complemented by perspectives from Global South scholars such as Lamin Sanneh (2003), Mercy Amba Oduyoye (2001), and M. Shawn Copeland (2013), as well as classic handbook literature to address colonial legacies and power asymmetries relevant for mission studies. This articulation situates the contributions of each tradition while acknowledging their limitations and the complexities in synthesizing their insights for mission praxis.

While Comparative Theology has emerged as a distinctive mode of interreligious engagement—most notably through the seminal works of Francis X. Clooney, James L. Fredericks, and Paul F. Knitter (Clooney 2010; Fredericks 1999; Knitter 2002, 2015)—its systematic integration into missiological frameworks remains underdeveloped. Clooney’s method of deep learning across religious borders (Clooney 2010) fosters theological transformation through intensive textual encounter, yet refrains from articulating a comprehensive theology of mission. Fredericks (1999), emphasizing interreligious friendship, deliberately distances Comparative Theology from traditional missionary paradigms, advocating instead for a relational approach that eschews programmatic missiological concerns (Knitter 2002, 2015), though attentive to questions of justice and mission, primarily operates within the discourse of pluralistic theology of religions, rather than within the methodological contours of Comparative Theology.

Despite the significance of these contributions, a coherent theoretical model in which Comparative Theology serves as a constructive resource for reimagining mission from within remains largely absent. Even in contexts where dialogical mission is actively practiced—such as within the Society of the Divine Word (SVD)1—the theological and methodological underpinnings often remain implicit and under-theorized.

This article situates Comparative Theology within concrete missiological praxis, showing how it can reconfigure Christian mission as dialogical, hermeneutical, and theologically generative. In doing so, it contributes to an emerging conversation at the intersection of missiology, interreligious theology, and postcolonial critique, advancing a framework in which mission is no longer defined by proclamation alone, but by mutual transformation and ethical responsibility (Noack 2017, p. 98).

In response to these gaps, Comparative Theology offers a structured framework to deepen dialogical engagement.

2.3. Reframing Mission Through the Lens of Comparative Theology

While Christian mission theology has undergone significant transformations in recent years, the explicit and systematic integration of Comparative Theology into mission discourse remains limited. This article explores this underdeveloped connection and highlights the potential contributions of Comparative Theology to contemporary mission reflection. This plurality and contextual diversity are underscored in Sonea (2017), who examines missiological reception in Eastern Orthodox and Global South churches.

Emerging as a vital interdisciplinary field at the intersection of theology, religious studies, and philosophy, Comparative Theology is characterized by its internal vantage point, contextual methodology, and micro-analytical focus (von Stosch 2012, p. 156). Rooted in particular confessional commitments, it discerns overarching and existentially pertinent themes across religious traditions while cultivating sensitivity to pluralistic heterogeneity and epistemic complexity.

A key contribution of Comparative Theology to mission discourse is its insistence on doctrinal and epistemic humility: an acknowledgment of the intrinsic limits of human cognition and the provisional character of theological constructions, without succumbing to relativism (Käbisch and Philipp 2017, p. 245). Dialogical engagement with other religious traditions catalyzes the deepening and refinement of one’s faith. Von Stosch emphasizes that Comparative Theology sharpens rather than dilutes Christian identity through constructive confrontation with the other (von Stosch 2012, p. 324). Consequently, the mission is reframed from a unilateral proclamation to a mutual encounter that fosters reciprocal theological enrichment.

This paradigm resonates deeply with the missionary praxis of the Steyler Missionaries, whose ethos is informed by epistemic humility, empathetic engagement, and theological hospitality. Their praxis rejects the imposition of doctrinal certainties in favor of transformative encounters, particularly visible in their longstanding interreligious dialogues in Asian and African contexts. Here, the religious other is not only respected but considered capable of challenging and expanding Christian self-understanding.

Moreover, Comparative Theology introduces the imperative of a “Third Instance”—an external critical perspective transcending one’s immediate confessional horizon. This evaluative stance, drawn from other religious traditions, philosophical reflection, atheism, or agnosticism (von Stosch 2012, p. 330; Käbisch and Philipp 2017, p. 246), disrupts self-referential frameworks and invites openness to constructive critique beyond Christian doctrinal boundaries. The Steyler Missionaries’ engagement with Indigenous epistemologies and non-Christian wisdom traditions exemplifies this openness in theological and pastoral praxis (Piwowarczyk 2008).

Foundational to Comparative Theology are five key attitudes: epistemic humility, confessional rootedness, the assumption of commensurability, empathetic engagement, and theological hospitality (von Stosch 2012, p. 164; Engel 2015, p. 325). These collectively curtail absolutism, secure faithfulness without abandonment, acknowledge common theological ground alongside irreducible difference, foster deep experiential encounter, and welcome enriching contributions from the religious other. The missiology of the Steyler Missionaries harmonizes with this vision, demonstrating how mission can transcend historical expansionist models to become an act of theological hospitality—simultaneously proclaiming and listening, teaching and learning.

Methodologically, Comparative Theology commits to sustained theological engagement with religious diversity. As von Stosch highlights, it neither naively harmonizes traditions nor ignores divergences but cultivates attentiveness to both (von Stosch 2012, p. 164). This attentiveness requires a shift from monological to dialogical understanding of mission.

A particularly transformative element is the six modes of learning outlined by Catherine Cornille (2019): intensification, retrieval, reinterpretation, appropriation, rectification, and reaffirmation (von Stosch 2021, pp. 21–26). These modes facilitate reconceptualizing mission beyond traditional paradigms:

• Intensification deepens theological self-understanding through other traditions;
• Retrieval rediscovers neglected aspects of one’s tradition;
• Reinterpretation reevaluates theological concepts in new interreligious light;
• Appropriation integrates elements from other traditions sensitively, avoiding colonialist pitfalls (Roebben and von Stosch 2022);
• Rectification challenges stereotypes and misunderstandings;
• Reaffirmation allows faith commitment to be strengthened with nuanced self-criticism (von Stosch 2021, pp. 21–26).

These principles reposition mission as a theological inquiry and ethical engagement, rather than unilateral proclamation. This orientation aligns mission with broader social and ecological responsibilities, acknowledging shared roles in addressing global challenges. Contemporary approaches to mission increasingly emphasize moving beyond exclusivist perspectives to foster constructive ethical discourse in areas such as peacebuilding, environmental ethics, and interfaith solidarity (Bettschneider 2002, pp. 209–11). Comparative Theology contests the idea that religious identity formation occurs in isolation. Exposure to diversity can deepen rather than weaken faith (Roebben and von Stosch 2022), with direct implications for mission theology. Authentic mission thus flourishes through mutual transformation rather than rigid boundary reinforcement.

In sum, Comparative Theology offers a substantive reorientation of Christian mission, emphasizing relationality, humility, and theological hospitality. Integrating interreligious dialogue into mission theology provides an intellectually rigorous and ethically responsible framework, ensuring mission today resists religious dominance and embraces shared theological and ethical reflection.

The following chapter illustrates how these principles are enacted concretely by a longstanding missionary society.

2.4. Embodying Comparative Theology: The Missionary Praxis of the SVD

The Society of the Divine Word (SVD), commonly known as the Steyler Missionaries, was founded in 1875 by St. Arnold Janssen in Steyl, Netherlands (Rivinius 2019, pp. 11–17). The early history of the Society is embedded within the broader context of European missionary expansion and colonial dynamics.2 Over time, the Steylers have adjusted their mission praxis to place greater emphasis on intercultural dialogue, education, and social justice. They are active in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Oceania, engaging local communities through listening, learning, and collaboration (Bettschneider 2002).

Their theological and pastoral praxis has evolved to place greater emphasis on respectful engagement with diverse cultural and religious contexts (Narth 2019, pp. 32–33). Instead of viewing non-Christian traditions chiefly as challenges to overcome, the Steylers increasingly recognize these traditions as valuable interlocutors and contributors to mutual understanding. This approach corresponds with contemporary missiological perspectives like prophetic dialogue (Bevans and Schroeder 2011), which frame mission as a reciprocal and transformative interaction rather than a one-sided transmission.

The congregation’s involvement in education, healthcare, and ecological responsibility points to a broader and more holistic understanding of mission—one that integrates proclamation with social solidarity and justice concerns. In particular, their commitment to ecological sustainability reflects a growing awareness within mission theology of environmental issues as fundamental ethical and theological concerns (Helm 2024). The Steylers’ participation in sustainable development initiatives addresses immediate socio-economic challenges while advocating long-term ecological responsibility, thereby corresponding with the ecological vision promoted by the Catholic magisterium in Laudato Si’ (Pope Francis 2015).

Through their intercultural and interreligious praxis, the Steyler Missionaries illustrate a model of mission that is relational, socially engaged, and increasingly open to theological plurality. Their approach exemplifies a shift from mission as unilateral proclamation towards a dialogical and justice-oriented practice.

To further understand how these principles are enacted in contemporary missionary praxis, the following chapter presents insights from interviews with members and scholars of the Steyler Missionaries.

3. Interviews: Insights into the Practices and Perspectives of Steyler Missionaries

3.1. Methodological Framework and Research Design

To investigate contemporary perspectives on the evolution of Christian mission and its role in intercultural and interreligious dialogue, six expert interviews (Meuser and Nagel 1991) were conducted. These included two interviews in English and four in German, engaging interlocutors with extensive experience in either missionary praxis or academic research from diverse European and American contexts. The English-language interviews were held with Stephen B. Bevans3 and Roger P. Schroeder4, both renowned scholars in mission theology. The German-language interviews involved Franz Helm5, Alexander Rödlach6, Christian Tauchner7, and Martin Üffing8, all of whom are members of the SVD or have close professional ties to the congregation. Participants were selected based on their scholarly contributions, active involvement in public theological discourse, and through professional referrals within the author’s academic and ecclesial networks (Robinson 2014).

A semi-structured interview format was employed, guided by an interview protocol designed to explore the key thematic axes outlined in the preceding theoretical chapters. The main objective was to elicit nuanced expert reflections on shifting paradigms in mission theology—especially regarding interreligious engagement—and to discern their practical and scholarly implications. Two interviews took place in person at the Steyler Mission headquarters in St. Augustin, near Bonn, Germany, while the remaining four were conducted virtually during August 2024.

While expert interviews provide insights into missionary self-understandings, they inherently carry the risk of reproducing institutional narratives and maintaining asymmetrical power relations. This study primarily draws on missionary insiders from Western contexts but explicitly recognizes the vital importance of including Indigenous and marginalized voices from the Global South in future research. Incorporating these perspectives is a planned central component of forthcoming studies, as they challenge dominant institutional narratives and offer alternative epistemologies. The singular but impactful critique from an African American interlocutor exemplifies the kind of insights that such diverse perspectives can bring. Future research should therefore actively integrate these voices through inclusive research designs and deliberate theoretical sampling, ensuring that the perspectives of communities directly impacted by missionary activity—particularly in the Global South—are systematically represented and inform analysis.

To enhance clarity regarding coding and hermeneutic procedures, this study follows an iterative, qualitative hermeneutic method rooted in thematic analysis and hermeneutical cycles. Interpretative rounds were conducted sequentially, selecting and re-examining relevant excerpts to identify emergent themes, contradictions, and novel insights. Theoretical sampling guided the selection of passages, aiming to generate critical perspectives rather than confirm normative theological frameworks, and to critically engage with institutional and ideological narratives in the data. By surfacing ambivalences and unresolved tensions, the analysis moves beyond affirmation toward a reflexive hermeneutics that questions power asymmetries and hegemonic discourse within missionary praxis.

Practically, the interpretative rounds entailed three cycles: an initial open reading and coding of transcripts, a selective focus on emergent themes, and a final synthesizing round where interpretations were critically reviewed and refined. Repeated engagement with the data and analytical notes allowed for continual adjustment of themes relative to the overall mission discourse. Consultations with co-researchers provided an external check, enhancing credibility and reflexivity. This approach draws on established hermeneutical theories (Gadamer [1960] 1975; Kvale 1996), emphasizing recursive understanding and meaning negotiation as central to interpretative qualitative analysis. Methodological transparency counters critiques of qualitative research as a “black box,” explicating the logic and sequential procedures underpinning coding and analysis.

A discourse-analytical perspective further critically assesses the constructed nature of expert narratives, recognizing them as performative acts shaped by institutional frameworks rather than neutral accounts. Departing from traditional comprehensive software-based analyses, this study adopted a focused interpretive strategy: selected statements pertinent to the core research questions were extracted for in-depth examination, enabling concentrated analysis of salient viewpoints without the methodological demands of full transcription or extensive coding procedures (Helfferich 2011).

All participants provided informed consent for participation and explicitly authorized the disclosure of their names in the publication. The German-language excerpts were translated with the assistance of the AI-based tool DeepL and meticulously reviewed and refined by the author to ensure both semantic accuracy and the preservation of subtle nuances.

These reflections highlight the limitations of the current study, particularly the small number of interviewees, selected through academic and ecclesial networks. Future research with broader empirical grounding should include marginalized and Indigenous perspectives from the Global South, enriching the analysis, challenging dominant narratives, and providing critical insights beyond the views of Western missionary insiders.

3.2. Interview Findings and Analysis

3.2.1. Understanding Mission from the Viewpoint of the Steyler Missionaries

To establish a foundational understanding of Christian mission as it relates to the Steyler Missionaries, it is important to first consider how the concept of mission is articulated by individuals involved in contemporary theological and intercultural exchanges. As articulated by Martin Üffing (Interview Üffing, August 2024), the biblical concept of mission is grounded in the idea of being “sent,” a fundamental aspect of Christian identity and the Church’s role in the world. Üffing emphasizes the concept of missio Dei, asserting that mission originates with God, who sends individuals to embody and proclaim God’s message. For him, mission is not a one-sided imposition of religious beliefs but participation in God’s ongoing action in the world: “Mission is participation in this mission of God today, in our time; for us Christians, the content of this mission of God emerges above all from the Gospel, the message of Jesus. The message of Jesus, which is above all the message of the kingdom of God, is the central content of God’s mission.” This perspective aligns with a broader shift in mission theology beyond colonial, conversion-centered models, embracing a more dialogical and relational approach. Mission, as Üffing suggests, “is about living out the message of the kingdom of God, which emphasizes love, community, and living in harmony with God’s will.”

Further illustrating the personal and professional dimensions of mission, Alexander Rödlach (Interview Rödlach, August 2024) offers a more individualistic understanding. Reflecting on his role as a teacher, he states: “I try to reach the students on their emotional and value basis, and then I also try to challenge them to think about life and what the meaning of it all is... this is certainly not an equal encounter because I am a professor; but in such trusting conversations about faith, the power differential is then reduced.” Rödlach’s experience highlights how mission can be enacted in everyday professional and interpersonal relationships, especially through genuine dialogue about faith.

In addition, Franz Helm (Interview Helm, August 2024) provides a personal account of how his early exposure to mission work shaped his vocation. Reflecting on his childhood and his uncle’s missionary work in the Congo, Helm notes: “Yes, that certainly developed for me; when I think back to my childhood and youth, mission was associated with a specialist task of priests and also religious brothers ... it was very clear to me that mission to people in other countries, actually people in the Global South, was something I wanted to do.” Helm’s story reveals how early life experiences and family dynamics, alongside the broader missionary history of the Church, influence understandings of mission.

Together, these personal and theological reflections from members of the Steyler Missionaries illustrate the transformation of Christian mission from a one-sided act of conversion to a dynamic, dialogue-centered approach. The interviews demonstrate that contemporary mission is understood not only theologically as participation in the missio Dei, but also practically as relational and pedagogical engagement, and biographically as shaped by personal history and vocational calling. In this way, mission today emerges as a multidimensional practice integrating divine sending, interpersonal dialogue, and lived experience, emphasizing mutual transformation, empathy, and ethical responsibility in intercultural and interreligious contexts.

3.2.2. The Evolving Role of Faith

The understanding of faith in the context of Christian mission has undergone significant evolution, particularly in response to broader cultural and theological transformations over the past century (Polak 2011, pp. 98–112). Stephen B. Bevans (Interview Bevans, August 2024) reflects on his spiritual development, noting that his faith has become increasingly complex, embracing a more holistic approach to mission: “My own faith has grown and has become more sophisticated in the sense that I have adopted a more holistic view and approach of mission over time.” This marks a clear departure from earlier missionary paradigms, which were often shaped by fear and colonialist agendas—elements consciously rejected by contemporary mission practitioners. Today, many missionaries prioritize dialogue and collaboration across diverse faith traditions rather than imposing a singular religious worldview.

Alexander Rödlach (Interview Rödlach, August 2024) further underscores this transformation, articulating the contemporary missionary’s role: “In the spirit of peace and the preservation of creation, we meet with others and reflect on what we have in common; we can work together, but we bring in our perspective, which distinguishes the missionary from a social worker.” Rödlach highlights that modern missionaries contribute a distinct spiritual dimension that differentiates their work from secular social services, while simultaneously engaging with others in pursuit of shared human concerns.

Martin Üffing (Interview Üffing, August 2024) offers a nuanced reflection on faith’s evolving role in mission, emphasizing its dynamic development in tandem with individual growth. Drawing on James Fowler’s Stages of Faith, Üffing notes: “Faith always plays a central role, but of course, there are also developments when it comes to faith; there is a book by an American psychologist and theologian, James Fowler, entitled ‘Stages of Faith’, where he makes it clear that faith develops just like people and how life develops.” This perspective reinforces faith’s centrality to missionary endeavor, while acknowledging that its interpretation and expression have become increasingly sophisticated in light of pluralism and interreligious engagement.

Roger P. Schroeder (Interview Schroeder, August 2024) elaborates on the increasing complexity of contemporary mission, aligning with Bevans in advocating for a deeper and more inclusive understanding of mission. He posits that “proclaiming, serving, witnessing justice” constitutes a core dimension of mission today, particularly in an increasingly multifaceted global context. Schroeder emphasizes that faith’s role is no longer confined to Catholicism or Christianity alone, but encompasses a broader spiritual awareness that honors contributions from other religious traditions: “One is open and aware of spirituality outside the Catholic Church/Christian faith, and personal development has happened, too, as faith is stronger after engaging with other religions.”

Finally, Christian Tauchner (Interview Tauchner, August 2024) provides insight into the shift toward pluralism and the rejection of monolithic understandings of mission: “In short, it’s this library (points to all the books); yes, it has evolved; firstly, I don’t think you can talk about mission in the singular, only in the plural, because there are too many different complementary or contradictory approaches to mission.” Tauchner’s reflection underscores the need for a differentiated, pluralistic approach, which has gained prominence as global religious and cultural dynamics continue to evolve.

Together, these perspectives demonstrate that faith in contemporary mission is increasingly recognized as dynamic, relational, and contextually sensitive. Mission today integrates personal spiritual development, interreligious engagement, and ethical responsibility, emphasizing mutual enrichment and collaborative action across diverse cultural and religious contexts.

3.2.3. Postcolonial Context

Contemporary missionary engagement must contend with both personal and societal challenges stemming from the colonial legacy. Alexander Rödlach (Interview Rödlach, August 2024) aptly summarizes this shift: “The way I understand mission today is very different from how I understood it when I was younger. I have such an understanding that mission is dialogue, but you have something to offer in this dialogue.” His reflection captures the movement away from a monolithic, unilateral missionary paradigm toward an ethos of dialogue, mutual respect, and critical self-reflection. As Rödlach further emphasizes, “the seed of God’s word is to be found across diverse cultures and religious traditions,” even as biblical and Christian revelation retains a distinctive primacy.

This evolution in mission theology is not purely conceptual but entails a process of conscientization, especially for missionaries from Western contexts. Mission has historically been entangled with colonialist projects and the mental colonization of Indigenous peoples. Stephen B. Bevans (Interview Bevans, August 2024) acknowledges the ambivalence of this colonial legacy: while colonialism caused immense cultural destruction, it also produced certain positive outcomes, such as the translation of the Bible into local vernaculars, which contributed to the preservation of many Indigenous languages. This dual legacy—both destructive and preservative–continues to complicate contemporary missionary praxis.

Individual experiences further illuminate engagement with this postcolonial reality. Roger P. Schroeder (Interview Schroeder, August 2024) recounts a poignant encounter upon returning from Papua New Guinea, where an African American woman challenged him: “Don’t bring your (White) answers to our (Black) questions.” This statement encapsulates the imperative for mutual learning in postcolonial contexts, emphasizing cultural exchange and heightened awareness of the intertwined histories of colonizer and colonized. Schroeder stresses the necessity of addressing colonial legacies not only interpersonally but also within educational frameworks that invite diverse student perspectives.

Moreover, the term postcolonialism itself is increasingly problematized, given the persistent effects of colonial domination. Mission work today must actively engage these enduring legacies through a process of “truthful listening.” In contexts such as Native American reservations, Truth and Healing Commissions have sought to create spaces where all voices are authentically heard. Schroeder highlights the importance of inclusivity and the active incorporation of Indigenous authors, perspectives, and histories. Such an integrative approach also requires conscious acknowledgment of one’s positionality, particularly for those occupying places of privilege, such as a white European missionary.

The historical legacy of colonialism continues to shape mission praxis both overtly and subtly. Martin Üffing (Interview Üffing, August 2024) notes that the Steyler Missionaries, like many religious orders, were founded at the height of European colonial expansion. He observes that residual sensitivities toward European intervention persist in many regions, particularly regarding both state and ecclesiastical affairs. Respect for local autonomy and identity remains paramount as formerly colonized societies seek to articulate their own religious and secular voices.

Finally, accelerating secularization in many Western contexts introduces an additional layer of complexity for mission today. Christian Tauchner (Interview Tauchner, August 2024) reflects on the diminishing religious framework in Germany, noting that the waning presence of such a frame renders engagement with theological concepts increasingly difficult. He emphasizes “that meaningful discourse on mission necessitates a thorough engagement with history, particularly the religious history that has shaped the modern intellectual milieu. Absent this historical consciousness, discussions of mission risk become disconnected and superficial.”

3.2.4. Social Justice and Development

In contemporary mission, it is crucial to adopt a holistic approach that recognizes the interconnectedness of spiritual and social realities. This perspective, as emphasized by Roger P. Schroeder (Interview Schroeder, August 2024), understands that mission is not solely about spiritual growth; it must also address the pressing social issues of our time. A critical aspect of this approach involves questioning the very concept of development: “Development into what? Rather than promoting the idea of others becoming like us, the focus should shift to making the margins the center, prioritizing the wisdom and agency of Indigenous peoples.” This shift suggests that mission should embrace two core principles: dialogue, in which people collaborate to create a better world, and catholicity, emphasizing awareness of and respect for the diversity of cultures and peoples globally.

This paradigm shift is not only a theological concept but has been shaped through practical engagement in regions such as the Philippines, Zimbabwe, and Latin America. These trends resonate with observations by Adedibu (2013) concerning the missionary challenges and symbolic mapping of migrant Black majority churches in the Global North. Missionaries and activists in these contexts recognize the need for a significant decentralization of power. Historically, Europe has held disproportionate influence in missionary endeavors, and even today, there is resistance to the vision advocated by former Pope Francis, who calls for a more inclusive, decentralized approach to mission. As Martin Üffing (Interview Üffing, August 2024) notes, contemporary mission involves challenging people to “take up their own agency and relinquish power,” a crucial step toward creating a more just and equitable world.

Decentralizing mission and social justice work also entails acknowledging that the majority of missionaries today are local actors, although foreign missionaries continue to contribute significantly to education and project funding. It is essential, however, to avoid the trap of viewing missionaries merely as “rich benefactors bringing help to the poor,” a lingering colonial mindset. Stephen B. Bevans (Interview Bevans, August 2024) emphasizes that genuine development must be grounded in empowerment rather than paternalism.

On a personal level, mission should foster the creation of “seeds of everybody’s home,” promoting a sense of collective identity while simultaneously respecting and negotiating one’s own cultural narratives. Missionaries must remain sensitive to issues such as anti-racism and understand the broader social justice implications within their operational contexts. This sensitivity extends to the Church itself, particularly when engaging with first- or second-generation Christians whose complex cultural and social identities shape their understanding of faith.

A critical component of contemporary mission involves engaging with local perspectives on social justice rather than imposing a European or Western framework. As Martin Üffing notes, “many Western missionaries have built social works such as agricultural cooperatives in places like South America and Asia, but these projects have often collapsed once the missionaries left, highlighting the need for sustainability and local ownership.” Successful mission work today, therefore, emphasizes empowering local communities to manage and continue development initiatives in culturally and socially relevant ways, addressing practical needs such as improved agricultural practices and access to financial resources, which tangibly enhance social security.

Mission’s engagement with social justice further extends to infrastructure and human rights concerns, including access to clean water and medical care. Christian Tauchner (Interview Tauchner, August 2024) underscores the importance of addressing these concerns within mission praxis, highlighting that projects such as drilling wells or providing healthcare are integral to improving the quality of life in mission communities. These initiatives contribute to a broader understanding of mission as serving both spiritual and material well-being.

Finally, contemporary mission is increasingly tied to ecological consciousness. Franz Helm (Interview Helm, August 2024) recounts his involvement in an eco-social transformation initiative, illustrating how ecological concerns intersect with social justice. In Vienna, he participated in a protest against the construction of a road through an ecologically sensitive area, demonstrating the capacity of mission work to engage with environmental activism. This intersection of ecology and social justice is increasingly recognized as part of the mission’s responsibility to care for creation and ensure the well-being of future generations.

3.2.5. Decolonization and the History of Culpability

When viewed through the lens of colonial history, the missionary work of the Society of the Divine Word (SVD) reveals deep interconnections between religious expansion and imperial power. Historically, missionary efforts were closely entangled with colonial systems, yet these entanglements have not always been subjected to rigorous critical reflection. The transformative shift initiated by the Second Vatican Council redefined mission from a unilateral endeavor of conversion into a dialogical and reciprocal exchange. Mission is thus increasingly conceptualized as a shared journey of discovery and mutual transformation rather than a mere imposition of Christian values on non-Western cultures.

A central feature of this transformation within the Steyler Missionaries’ praxis is personal engagement with non-Western spiritualities. Such encounters foster not only a broadening of worldview but also a deepening of Christian faith itself. One missionary recounted his experience in Zimbabwe with Indigenous healers and their spiritual practices, which catalyzed profound personal transformation. These dialogues reshaped his understanding of health and spiritual well-being in local communities while simultaneously enriching his Christian faith through a respectful stewardship of creation inherent in animistic worldviews. As Alexander Rödlach (Interview Rödlach, August 2024) notes: “… and you learn a lot from it about your own Christian faith; for example, if everything is alive, inspired, if every plant, every animal has a spirit as in animism, then you respect the rest of creation more; especially when you think about Pope Francis, about Laudato Si’ and Laudate Deum, in the encounter you learn how to live in harmony with creation.” This personal transformation among missionaries contributes to a more holistic and integrated approach to mission that embraces dialogue and mutual enrichment. Recognizing that Christianity is only one facet of a broader spiritual landscape opens new pathways for conceiving mission as a collaborative and intercultural endeavor.

Concomitantly, this process entails a collective reckoning with the historical culpability of missionary work within the colonial context. Missionaries acknowledge that their predecessors and the institutional Church benefited from colonial structures of domination and exclusion. This self-awareness is not merely intellectual but engenders a practical commitment to responsibility, ongoing reflection, and ethical action. Rödlach critically observes: “In the past, missions profited a lot from colonialism, because colonialism opened up borders; people profited from the privilege of colonialism as whites, as Europeans, as North Americans in non-Western societies, enjoyed the protection of colonial powers and partly accepted the arrogance of the colonial rulers, integrating it into missionary life; this is seen as very problematic today.”

Such acknowledgment requires contemporary missionary praxis to confront the colonial legacy directly, engaging in dialogues about reparations, apologies, and restorative justice. Roger P. Schroeder emphasizes the challenges inherent in this process: “White folks’ recognition means: ‘Don’t ignore but work/go through it,’ and be prepared that some people, who might be former victims, may not be ready; so, in the past, confrontations like ‘What do you do here? Who do you think you are?’ have occurred.”

Decolonization is thus understood not as a finite event, but as an ongoing commitment to engaging marginalized voices that have been excluded from dominant historical narratives. Practically, this involves reassessing missionary collections accumulated during colonial periods and critically reconsidering the display and provenance of cultural artifacts. Martin Üffing (Interview Üffing, August 2024) explains: “There is currently a big discussion about practical considerations for so-called missionary museums; the question is, how do we continue with these collections, what is exhibited, and where do the items come from?”

Beyond historical and museological concerns, contemporary missionaries recognize the necessity of addressing global power imbalances that persist, particularly regarding environmental degradation and systemic economic inequalities. Franz Helm (Interview Helm, August 2024) highlights how these global dynamics relate directly to ongoing injustices experienced by the Global South: “What is happening in the Global North, and continues to happen through its centers of power, destroying the atmosphere and causing global warming, is also a consequence and continuation of the inequality present; this continues to produce death worldwide due to the ongoing economic system, which is very dependent on fossil fuels.” This growing awareness within the SVD expands the remit of decolonization to encompass ecological and economic dimensions.

In sum, the reflection and transformation taking place within the Steyler Missionaries represent a crucial paradigm shift in Christian mission. Decolonization is not merely an academic exercise, but a lived reality that demands critical self-awareness, active repentance, and practical reparation. The challenges and insights shared by these missionaries call on the Church and mission practitioners alike to listen attentively to the voices of the oppressed and to reconfigure mission as a force for healing, justice, and reconciliation in the contemporary world.

3.2.6. Future Directions

It is necessary to acknowledge existing and persisting global inequalities and, in doing so, to take responsibility for changing the situation for the better within one’s own sphere of influence, while reinforcing collaboration and cooperation. As Alexander Rödlach (Interview Rödlach, August 2024) states: “We live in an unjust world, a world full of inequality, in which some enjoy more privileges than others, that’s the reality. As a person motivated by faith, I have to do something about it. Of course, you can’t save the world, but you can make a difference at a local or political level, for example. Then faith also becomes more credible. Seeing global problems, identifying them, and then working together is the future. Living justice, overcoming polarization, emphasizing the relationship with creation, and working for sustainable development without oppressing others, is implementing Pope Francis’ Laudato Si’.”

Future directions are characterized by a paradigm shift. According to Stephen B. Bevans, a former member of the Commission of World Mission and Evangelicalism at the World Council of Churches (Bevans 2002), the fundamental consensus is: “From the center to the margins” and “not just objects of mission but subjects.” Insofar as people recognize their own power, there is a kind of liberation in itself, as there is the will to struggle and hope.

As Martin Üffing (Interview Üffing, August 2024) emphasizes, it is also important to note that long before theologians, social scientists were working on globalization and decoloniality issues. These topics, evolving over the past 20 years, include not only the abstract terms “culture, race, nationality,” but, in their applied sense, “respect, mutual understanding, and collaboration.” For the Church today, this means that women, youth, and marginalized members of society and parish communities—such as migrants, racialized persons, and LGBT+ communities—must be more fully included. This inclusion should rely on a dialogue that is respectful and extends to other religions as well. If necessary, one must educate oneself first to do so. Hence, interculturality, in the broad sense, emerges as a paradigm to be adopted.

Missionaries working in collaboration with developing countries, particularly in the Global South, can obtain information first-hand and contribute to mutual respect by conveying the encouraging message: “You’ve got a voice in this too, and I want to hear it!” (Rödlach, Interview August 2024). This approach is particularly vital in times of global crises and conflicts, where partnership and understanding—including intra-religious faith—have become not optional but necessary. Additionally, budget constraints and shared theological facilities foster synergies and innovative solutions, as Roger P. Schroeder (Interview Schroeder, August 2024) explains.

The future direction is also oriented toward greater inclusivity, as Martin Üffing (Interview Üffing, August 2024) illustrates: “I was surprised myself that people were upset about a depiction that reminded them of Da Vinci’s Last Supper; I asked myself why they were upset, what was supposed to be blasphemy or something. Firstly, Da Vinci’s Last Supper is not a photograph; it corresponds to his imagination, his fantasy. Secondly, the scene depicted can be interpreted either way, whether it has something to do with the Last Supper or with Greek gods. Thirdly, if it were the Last Supper and you think it’s LGBT people or someone else, then it would certainly be in the spirit of Jesus for such people to come together and celebrate together, for example. That was the claim of the Olympics, and I think in this sense … it may sound naive, but I think the essence of the Christian message is to work for it. That would achieve a lot for me when it comes to mission.”

Ecology and sustainability, in combination with an emphasis on interculturality, are integral to contemporary mission. Christian Tauchner (Interview Tauchner, August 2024) remarks: “I think that we are on the right track with the principle of dialog; that it is about encounters, living and experiencing faith together, and that is where interculturality comes into play—learning from others; that we learn from each other and give other cultures a different approach, e.g., to ecology and nature or animals, and then learn something from that. I would see mission in that direction. So far, it has been the case that when there are non-European priests and sisters in Germany, they have to fit into a German system, and then the learning opportunity is hidden. The German understanding of the church also changes through the intercultural encounter—that would then be mission, but a lot still has to happen for this.”

These principles translate into concrete actions and innovative approaches. Franz Helm (Interview Helm, August 2024) reports: “We are going to try a new form of service, a station service at the oil refinery, OMV, the largest oil company we have in Austria. We want to hold a station service there, mourn the victims of global warming on-site, lament about it, and pray for a change in the system. For me, that is a lived mission today, to try to combine faith and commitment in this direction. It is a small thing, maybe we are only 50 people, but it is important to us to do this.”

Finally, on a more global scale, the interreligious dimension is crucial. Helm (Interview Helm, August 2024) outlines: “For me, the desirable future of global mission would be for people to join together, not just Catholics, but people of the most diverse faiths and worldviews in their commitment to an eco-social global transformation. Reverence for life should be decisive, and we Christians should serve life and the future of humanity based on the belief that God has entrusted us with this, his creation. That the word ‘and he saw that it was good’ continues to apply, and that our task is to preserve and promote what is good. The goal of interreligious and other dialogues is to serve life and the future of life on this planet earth.”

In sum, the future direction of mission emphasizes a paradigm shift toward inclusivity, dialogue, ecological responsibility, and interreligious collaboration. It calls for active engagement with global inequalities, mutual learning across cultures, and practical initiatives that embody faith in action, ensuring that mission remains relevant, transformative, and responsive to contemporary challenges.

3.3. Thematic Synthesis: Transformations and Continuities in Missionary Praxis

The qualitative interviews with members of the Steyler Missionaries reveal a marked shift in missionary self-understanding and praxis, moving away from a conversion-centered model toward a dialogical approach. Across the interviews, mission is no longer conceived as a unidirectional effort aimed at doctrinal imposition, but as a reciprocal engagement grounded in respect for cultural and religious alterity. Participants describe missionary praxis today as an openness to encounter that demands ongoing self-reflection, epistemic humility, and negotiation of theological identity in relation to the integrity of interlocutory communities (Bevans 2002; Bevans and Schroeder 2004). The complexity of this process underscores that dialogical mission is not a resolved paradigm but a dynamic and unfinished practice. The interviews also highlight the integration of ecological and social concerns, extending mission beyond the strictly spiritual toward a prophetic commitment to justice and care in response to global challenges. This broadening signals a holistic vocation attentive to both human and environmental flourishing (Bosch 2011; Habel 2000).

The excerpts illustrate how missionary discourse both embodies and problematizes dominant normative frameworks. The hermeneutical method allowed uncovering latent tensions, particularly between traditional authority claims and dialogical openness advocated by Comparative Theology. These tensions question unilateral mission assertions and invite reconsideration of theological assumptions. Rather than reinforcing post-Vatican II mission theology uncritically, the analysis lays bare empirical complexities demanding ongoing theoretical refinement. This corresponds with qualitative research’s aim to develop—rather than merely confirm—theory by embracing contradictions and unexpected findings.

Taken together, these insights illustrate a missiology marked by dialogical presence, contextual sensitivity, and ethical responsibility (Bevans and Schroeder 2011; Bosch 2011), while at the same time exposing the enduring tensions of holding together theological identity and pluralism. They also resonate with the broader missiological discourse that emphasizes cultural plurality, ecological urgency, and the complex demands of interreligious engagement (Tennent 2007).

These insights from the interviews set the stage for a comparative theological interpretation, examining how empirical practices illuminate dialogical and interreligious mission.

4. Reframing Practice: Comparative Theological Reflections on Missionary Experience

Building on the methodological foundation described above, this chapter pursues a critical hermeneutical interpretation explicitly aimed at challenging rather than confirming normative missiological ideas.

The analysis applies iterative hermeneutical rounds and thematic reflections to selected excerpts, uncovering tensions and ambiguities within missionary self-understanding. Such an approach reveals how praxis is shaped by normative assumptions rooted in post-Vatican II theology but constantly re-negotiated in light of lived intercultural experience. The data reveals persistent tensions between denominational rootedness and the call for genuine interreligious openness. These tensions invite ongoing theological reflection that transcends affirming received paradigms, advocating instead for a mission theology that embraces pluralism and mutual transformation as normative principles rather than exceptions. Consequently, argumentation here moves beyond assertoric restatement of theological positions toward analytical reflexivity, demonstrating how empirical data problematize, nuance, and advance missiological theory. This enables a dialogical, dynamic engagement privileging emergent insights over predetermined doctrinal affirmations.

Drawing on the theological framework and principles of Comparative Theology established in the previous chapter, this section offers a comparative theological interpretation of the missionary perspectives and practices explored earlier, seeking to reframe contemporary mission as a dialogical engagement shaped by interreligious encounter. It examines how these principles reshape missionary praxis—both conceptually and concretely—through a rearticulation of theological identity, purpose, and relational stance. From a comparative theological perspective, the principles underlying Steyler missionary praxis appear consonant with the dialogical and interreligious orientations advocated by Comparative Theology, suggesting a conceptual alignment that remains theoretically speculative rather than empirically established. This opens the way for a closer examination of theological alterity in shaping missionary encounter.

Central to this transformation is the recognition of theological alterity as a constitutive, not incidental, feature of religious engagement. Rather than viewing difference as an obstacle or deficiency, Comparative Theology reframes it as a site of mutual vulnerability, critical reflection, and spiritual deepening. This reframing requires moving beyond the classical image of the missionary as an authoritative herald of salvific truth, inviting instead a self-understanding grounded in dialogical hospitality, confessional rootedness, and epistemological humility.

This posture is perhaps most powerfully expressed in the kenotic ethic of presence, rooted in the Christological kenosis yet extended beyond it (Bevans 2002). The missionary vocation becomes one of self-emptying, receptive presence, marked by openness to transformation through encounter. Within the Steyler context, this kenotic ethos translates into a practical shift: from proclamation-as-dominance toward accompaniment, listening, and co-witnessing (Bevans 2002).

Rather than framing interreligious engagement as a preparatio evangelica or a strategic prelude to proclamation, the dialogical approach cultivated by Comparative Theology regards dialogue itself as a locus theologicus (Wiesenhütter 2025, p. IX)—a privileged space of divine disclosure and theological reconfiguration. Several missionaries emphasized that such encounters challenge assumptions while enabling the retrieval of neglected dimensions of one’s tradition—cosmological visions, spiritual practices, or overlooked theological motifs.

This learning is not incidental; it is embedded in the six modes of theological engagement central to Comparative Theology: intensification, retrieval, reinterpretation, appropriation, rectification, and reaffirmation. These modes encourage a theology-in-motion, a faith capacious enough to hold tension and ambiguity without collapsing into relativism (Cornille 2019). As Bevans and Schroeder argue, missionary faith in this paradigm is not weakened by exposure to difference; it is deepened through dialogical risk and hermeneutical humility (Bevans and Schroeder 2011, pp. 9–18, 156).

At the same time, Comparative Theology urges vigilance toward structural asymmetries shaping interreligious and intercultural engagement. The Steyler Missionaries increasingly commit to decolonial awareness, emphasizing Indigenous theological agency, reciprocity, and intercultural leadership (Bevans and Schroeder 2011). These commitments do not diminish the missionary impulse but transfigure it—from triumphalist proclamation to a shared pursuit of justice, peace, and eschatological hope.

In sum, Comparative Theology does not render mission obsolete; it radicalizes its possibilities. Proclamation is not eliminated but repositioned as a potential fruit of encounter. Faith is not diminished by relational exposure; it is animated by it. Mission is not reduced to dialogue but reconceived as an eschatologically charged journey into God’s ever-unfolding mystery—where the stranger is a teacher, and difference is a divine invitation rather than a deficit.

Grounded in these theological reflections, the final chapter examines the prospective trajectories of mission in an interreligious context.

5. Conclusions: The Future of Mission in an Interreligious Context

The evolving landscape of global mission, exemplified by the Steyler Missionaries, points to a future in which interreligious engagement is not a peripheral strategy but a constitutive dimension of missionary identity and practice. This trajectory challenges paradigms of unilateral proclamation and ecclesiocentric triumphalism, calling instead for a posture of epistemological humility, dialogical openness, and ethical accountability.

At the same time, profound tensions remain. Structural inequalities—rooted in colonial legacies, economic disparities, and epistemic asymmetries—demand sustained critical vigilance and proactive engagement. For the Steyler Missionaries, this entails a commitment to decolonial praxis, the empowerment of Indigenous theological voices, and the cultivation of intercultural leadership that moves beyond hierarchical and Eurocentric models. The complexity of contemporary religious pluralism likewise requires navigating the delicate balance between fidelity to one’s own tradition and openness to the religious other—a balance that calls for both theological sophistication and pastoral sensitivity. This transformative development is further analyzed in Otiso (2022), highlighting the evolving expression of missio Dei in Global South contexts.

Within this horizon, Comparative Theology offers valuable resources. Its Six Modes of Learning encourage missionaries to engage religious alterity as a source of theological deepening rather than threat, fostering a missiology that privileges listening, discernment, and shared inquiry over doctrinal assertion (Cornille 2019; Bevans and Schroeder 2011). Mission thus becomes less an act of conquest and more a kenotic presence—a humble accompaniment marked by receptivity and mutual transformation.

In sum, the future of mission in an interreligious context will be defined by its capacity to hold the creative tension between tradition and transformation, conviction and openness, proclamation and accompaniment. Reimagined through the lens of Comparative Theology and grounded in the fragile grace of encounter, mission can serve as a prophetic witness to reconciliation and the possibility of shared flourishing in a fractured world. Here, mission no longer operates under the logic of domination but becomes a seedbed in which glimpses of God’s coming kingdom may take root in history.

Building on these reflections, this study highlights a significant shift in contemporary Christian mission from a unilateral transmission of doctrine toward mutual dialogue and transformation, drawing on the praxis of the Steyler Missionaries (SDV) as a vivid example. Mission today is conceived less as conversion and more as interreligious engagement characterized by humility, openness, and contextual awareness. This re-framing, undergirded by Comparative Theology, expands the theological and ethical framework for mission praxis. Beyond academic debates, these findings offer actionable insights for practitioners and communities aiming for constructive and respectful intercultural encounters, while future research should continue to integrate diverse voices from marginalized contexts to enrich and democratize mission theology and practice.

Practically, these findings challenge missionary institutions to embed postcolonial and comparative theological insights into their training and praxis, fostering epistemic humility and ethical relationality. Institutions should proactively cultivate diverse leadership and critically reflect on inherited power structures, while developing dialogical methodologies that amplify marginalized voices, contributing to a more equitable and contextually sensitive mission praxis.