download the pdf - St.Francis Magazine
download the pdf - St.Francis Magazine
download the pdf - St.Francis Magazine
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>St</strong> <strong>Francis</strong> <strong>Magazine</strong> Vol 8, No 4 | August 2012<br />
reach Muslims. For ano<strong>the</strong>r, later, response to Parshall (1998b), see<br />
also Winter (2009).<br />
<strong>St</strong>ill in this same issue of EMQ, Gilliland (1998: 415) took issue<br />
with “a tone of defensiveness” he sensed in Parshall’s comments,<br />
even while conceding some of Parshall’s concerns as being justified.<br />
In particular, Gilliland questioned Parshall’s conclusions drawn<br />
from <strong>the</strong> results of <strong>the</strong> unpublished ‘Islampur’ research, which had<br />
examined <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ological beliefs and priorities held by some<br />
MBBs. 10 Gilliland stressed “<strong>the</strong> critical issue of context” and called<br />
for more time in interpreting C5 ministries, since <strong>the</strong>y were still in<br />
progressive development (Gilliland 1998: 416; similarly Travis<br />
1998b: 412). 11 Travis also took issue with Parshall’s interpretation,<br />
most notably Parshall’s claim that “45 per cent [of MBBs in <strong>the</strong><br />
study] do not affirm God as Fa<strong>the</strong>r, Son and Holy Spirit” forms part<br />
of “<strong>the</strong> down side” of C5 (Parshall 1998b: 406). For Travis (1999:<br />
660) it was “actually astounding” that “over half” affirm <strong>the</strong> Trinity.<br />
12<br />
This particular statistic, drawn from <strong>the</strong> ‘Islampur’ study, subsequently<br />
became a football for both sides of <strong>the</strong> debate. Woods<br />
(2003: 194-195) interpreted <strong>the</strong> 55% figure in a negative light,<br />
whereas Massey (2004c: 297-298) and Brown (2006d: 131) drew<br />
10 Details of <strong>the</strong> ‘Islampur’ study need to be pieced toge<strong>the</strong>r from <strong>the</strong> glimpses<br />
available in different commentaries upon it. Parshall (2003: 69-70) provides<br />
perhaps <strong>the</strong> most comprehensive description of it.<br />
11 Schlorff (2006: 87) identifies Gilliland as <strong>the</strong> “research director” of <strong>the</strong> Islampur<br />
study.<br />
12 Travis (1999) states that it is Travis (1998b), ‘used by permission’ from <strong>the</strong> original<br />
publisher (p.660). However, a close reading of <strong>the</strong> two texts indicates a differing<br />
introduction to <strong>the</strong> section entitled ‘The Islampur case study’, with <strong>the</strong> variation<br />
running for over a paragraph in length (compare Travis 1998b: 411 with<br />
Travis 1999: 660). It is impossible to tell in which order <strong>the</strong> two versions were<br />
written, or <strong>the</strong> rationale for <strong>the</strong> changes, but it is interesting to note <strong>the</strong> varying<br />
versions, especially at this crucial juncture where – in both instances – <strong>the</strong> writing<br />
is in response to Parshall’s criticisms and is concerned with <strong>the</strong> assessment of <strong>the</strong><br />
Islampur study. I have not made wider parallel readings of <strong>the</strong> two versions of<br />
Travis’ article, nor of o<strong>the</strong>r documents claiming to be reproduced from elsewhere<br />
in <strong>the</strong> 1999 volume. Thus, I cannot assess <strong>the</strong> extent to which such revisions occur<br />
elsewhere.<br />
<strong>St</strong> <strong>Francis</strong> <strong>Magazine</strong> is a publication of Interserve and Arab Vision 457