Contextual Theologies — Some Salient Features

by A. Maria Arul Raja Sj,

As the servants of the victims stigmatized by casteism, battered by the Hindutva, massacred by semi-feudalism and eliminated by globalisation, we seek to evolve viable liberative alternatives. This venture is imposed on us as an historical imperative at once to demolish the life-destroying powers and to nourish the life-promoting potentials. In this task, the victims, as the subjects of history, should determine their own destiny in the face of the hegemony of the self-appointed custodians of culture, religion and society. This is bound to bring about new changes in the domains of politico-economic structures.

In the process of enabling the spontaneous release of the life-affirming energies from the flesh-and blood personhood of the victims of today’s context, every one is called upon by the crying silence of the high-handedness of the powers that be and the cry, to the dynamic restlessness of the battered humanity of the subalterns.

Our role in this task of evolving new liberative alternatives in the lives of the people is only sub-ordinate and supportive, for the people concerned whom we seek to serve and the main agents bringing about the transformation of ‘the miseries of oppression into beatitudes of liberation’. All our contributions by the way of systematic articulation of their apparently inarticulate aspirations with our intellectual expertise are but the catalysts for the furtherance of people’s on-going journey towards life in abundance. In this process of identification and articulation of the liberative potentials embedded in the very lives of the people, we cannot afford to be the ‘oursiders’ to their socio-cultural and politico-economic world. It is only by genuine solidarity with repeated attempts at sharing the vulnerabilities and sensibilities of the people do we become the ‘organic participants’ in their joys and sufferings.

The recurring questions of life and death emerging from the struggles of people in constant dialogue with the resources of the liberative energies from the Mythos of a people in a particular region (along with those of the other victimised peoples across the globe) will open new avenues in encountering their own life-situations with fresh impetus. This process is facilitated by these organic intellectuals in the following manner:

• The questions emerging from the life-experience of the silenced subalterns are analytically sharpened by the tools provided by the human sciences.
• These sharpened questions related to the situations of oppression are made into issues related to ultimate questions of ‘to be human or not to be human’.
• The question of ultimate nature are made to dialogue with the life-affirming streams found in the religio-cultural world of other people struggling for liberation elsewhere are brought as the dialogue-partners.
• The osmosis taking place between the liberation-seeking life questions and the liberation-oriented cultural energies will result in the evolution of the newer possibilities for further encountering the life-situations, however hostile they might be.

This on-going process of liberative hermeneutical dialogue can be called theologising. The ‘organic intellectuals’ involved in this process can be called the theologisers as the organic continuum with the subaltern people. They should theologise primarily with the people by virtue of their solidarity with them with no pretension. And eventually because of their training and expertise they should theologise for and on behalf of the people. These organic theologising intellectuals, in spite of their privileged training and expertise, should consciously choose to play the role of the mid-wife serving the marginalised in the labour-pain of giving birth to their own brand of contextual theology. That is to say, contextual theology is the product born out of the concrete cultural ingredients of the struggling people seeking to recapture and celebrate life. In other words, contextual theology is people’s theology. Its delivery can be smoothly conducted by the active solidarity of the organically functioning theologising agents closely attending on the people groaning with the labour-pain seeking the birth of new liberated life.

The discussion on contextual theology, here in this write-up, is presented under the following three headings: Originary impulsion, Operative mechanism and Open-ended search. While not claiming to be exhaustive, this brief essay, seeks to delineate some of the salient features of contextual theology through three aphoristic statements under each of the above headings.

1.0  Originary Impulsion

This section dwells upon the impetus and the milieu conducive to the birth of contextual theology.

1.1 Contextual Theology Is Born Out Of People’s Spontaneous Response To Situations Of Threat To Life

Struggle for survival is the ‘daily bread’ of the subalterns. And life as such is further assaulted by way of dis-regarding their human dignity and legitimate social/national identity. The denial of equal opportunities for the people thrown to the lower strata of the society is construed as the ‘natural order’ and even as the ‘divine order’. This mode of utter contempt of justice is executed and justified by the evil of hierarchy at all levels. This hierarchy is not only legitimised but also perpetuated as the ‘immutable and indispensable’ world-order by the religio-cultural ideologies of the ruling elite. The living persons are commoditised and exploited by these ideologies. These oppressive ideologies are ratified by the mind-sets of purity-pollution, sacred-profane, honour-shame, skilled-unskilled etc, - operative through the mechanisms of patron-client relationship, ingroup-outgroup dynamics, gossip net-work, status degradation ritual, deviance labelling etc.

Contextual theology radically questions all these mechanisms, overtly or covertly operative in enslaving the people. While seeking to eliminate every trace of injustice and of ushering in just sharing in fraternal love, it explicitates people’s latent thirst for new life-affirming alternatives. Contextual theology spares no effort in further probing into these life-affirming concerns of the oppressed in the face of the onslaught of the life-negating designs of the oppressors. While delving deep into these concerns, it also seeks to locate the life-affirming religio-cultural resources (Word of god, Ideals Classless Society, Casteless Society, Mukti-liberation, etc.) for engaging in a meaningful dialogue with them. Whenever life is threatened and destroyed, contextual theology applies itself to promote and restore it. All these are undertaken from the location of the victims whose life and dignity are at stake.

1.2 Sprouting Out Of Particular Chronos, Topos And Laos, Contextual Theology Addresses The Context With Particular Response

Particularity is the hallmark of contextual theology. The cultural elements coloured by the given geographical-social location (Topos) and the interior realm of meaning network enabling the particular community to live concretely as the group of flesh-and-blood persons (Laos) in the given historical moment (Chronos) together constitute the womb giving birth to a particular contextual theology. These ingredients made of the factors of time, place and people (Chronos, Topos and Laos) have to be different from time to time, place to place and people to people. And Obviously one can easily perceive the mergence not of one contextual theology but of contextual theologies.

For instance, the concerns of Dalit communities, no doubt, converge into the pursuit primarily of human dignity which has been denied. But the ‘textures’ of the Dalit theology of Tamilnadu should not be the same as those of Bihar in North India or of Andhra Pradesh in South India. And still further, the Dalit Theology emerging from the militant Pallars of South Tamilnadu (tilling the soil) need not be as same as the Dalit Theology from the aesthetically tuned Parayars of North Tamilnadu (drum beating) or from the artistically tempered Arunthathiars of West Tamilnadu (leather works).

Chronos (time) and topos (place) alone do not make contextual theology. The so-called Indian theology evolved by a group of educated Brahmin converts to Christianity during the time of independence movements against the British imperialism in India (19-20 C.E) cannot be counted as contextual theologies. What is essential in the making of the contextual theology is the incorporation of the conflict situation prevailing in the cultural realm and world-views of a particular people of battered history. Their traditions, by and large, are primarily of the oral folklore traditions memorised and handed over to the next generations through performances of rituals or artistic expressions.

The particular life-threatening situation in a particular time of history, in a particular place of the particular people entails a particular response to it. The quality of this response may or may not be adequate. Genuine contextual theology attempts at an over-all response to encounter the life-threatening situation. This is how it becomes primarily the servant of the victims deprived of life and dignity. It interprets, promotes and defends life and dignity with particular response to the particular threat to life in a particular context. Hence particularity is emphatically underscored as the uniqueness of every contextual theology.

1.3 Contextual Theology Is Rooted In The Unambiguous Option For Those Relegated To The Periphery In The Given Context.

Theological enterprises with no solidarity with and commitment to the peripheral people have been entertaining a wide spectrum of agenda down the centuries. These could be enumerated as follows: defending dogmas, applying novel paradigms to theological thoughts explaining the ancient deposits of faith through traditional categories or elucidating them through the contemporary intellectual horizon, reconciling the demands of reason with the truth of faith in the face of skepticism, demythologising the ancient expression of faith to encounter the existential questions, emphasising on the articulation of faith experience through the framework of alien or native world-view, proving theology as science, retrieval of the original spirit of the resources of faith, co-relating religious traditions with immediate human experience in order to interpret them etc.

But in contrast with all these elements, the primary objective of any contextual theology is not to seek to defend either the religious traditions (dogmas, deposits and truths of faith) or the reasoning behind them. It rather upholds the agenda of affirming the concrete people in their cry for a new humanity which is denied them. It seeks to defend the people in the face of dehumanisation and to support them in their ongoing struggle. While closely walking with them, it applies its imagination in dreaming dreams and seeing visions. But it takes care that these futuristic dreams and optimistic visions while being truly eschatological are never built on the clouds.

With no ambiguity, contextual theology opts for a people. And hence it seeks to serve the people in their struggles as their servant. In order to realize this servanthood in an efficacious manner, it requires the servanthood of the religio-cultural traditions (Christian, Buddhist, popular, flok etc.) as well as that of reason. The people who are kept illiterate in order to be served by reason. The people who are not counted to be of the retainer-class preserving the cultural deposits are to be served by the religio-cultural deposits of faith preserved through the written scriptures. In other words, the conviction behind any contextual theology demands that the Church, the Bible, the Traditions, the learned, the theologians are supposed to be the servants of the marginalised.

2.0 Operative Mechanism

In this section we focus on the mechanisms operative in the functioning of contextual theology.

2.1 Contextual Theology Functions Both As Critique And As Alternative

The situation of marginalisation rightly generates righteous anger in the minds and hearts of the victims of history. This anger is anchored upon the deprivation of life that the oppressed are subjected to. It seeks to replace the prevailing order bearing out the status quo of the rulers with an entirely new one. The wrath of the oppressed against dehumanisation while functioning as the critique of the means and mechanisms of all the oppressive measures looks for alternatives to them.

For instance, Dalit theology critiques the caste hierarchy and proposes a casteless society with an absolute adieu to any hierarchy supposedly imposed even by gods and goddesses. Any Indian brand of Feminist Theology critiques the sexist hierarchy based on patriarchy in collusion with caste hierarchy and proposes a model for sharing of power and resources by all with no trace of sexist bias. Tribal Theology has the common orientation of egalitarianism against the invading sense of profit-oriented nature-destroying mechanistic world-view of ruthless consumerism. While evolving new alternatives, each group of Tribals will have its determine cultural milieu with its own history of traditions and beliefs in the midst of their particular types of neighbours. For instance, the north Indian Tribal theologies will have more of the counter-cultural elements against their immediate ‘neighbours’ (i.e. the invading Hindutva forces) than their South Indian counterparts.

Since contextual theology emerges out of the groaning sights of the dispossessed, it cannot be satisfied merely with the function of critiquing. If it does not propose creative alternatives for their integral liberation, it runs the risk of being alienated from them sooner or later.

2.2 Contextual Theology Rejects Any ‘Law And Order’ Imposed From Above

Claim for universal validity is an anathema for contextual theology. Any demand even for uniformity strikes the chord of dissonance with contextual theology. The concept of universality advocated by overt or convert expansionist ideology in the backdrop of colonialism or neo-colonialism and monolithisation of cultural through globalisation is the type of ‘order, world order’ imposed ‘from above’. This ‘above’ is nothing but the centres of powers clinging onto centralisation. Very often, in actual terms, they deny democratic rights and nationalistic identities due to the sub-altern people even while engaged in mouthing slogans of equality in an apparently impressive democratic fa�ade.

The spirit of contextual theology runs counter to these orientations of universality born out of the spirit of centralisation. Contextual theology clearly articulates its option for those people relegated to the periphery. It does not shy away from professing to be partial and provisional in its truth-claims because of its ongoing nature. It holds the view that faith is not something that is extrinsic and alien (‘above’) to the ‘ground’ of culture and context. Rather faith grows out of the ‘soil’ from below. In the gradual unveiling of God’s ongoing salvific process through concrete liberative events, the truth-realization can modestly be claimed as ‘our’ insights but cannot be claimed to be of permanent importance or absolute significance. Rather each moment of growth is unique. On this count, the partial and provisional nature of contextual theology is not its weakness but its ‘unique strength’. Imposition of universal validity upon others is not at all the fixation of the sub-altern people nor of their contextual theologies. Obsession with universal validity and olderly uniformity may be the spirit of those who lord it over others. But the vocation of the contextual theologians demands that with no sense of superiority they re-create the battered lives of the people seeking new alternatives towards liberation.

2.3 Contextual Theology Identifies Harmony In The Midst Of Anarchy

Reality has its own internal structures. Every context has its own brand of systems. But the problem arises when the learned theologians, in the name of systematic articulation, try to categorize any reality or context into the pigeon-holes of their own epistemological systems or structures.

First of all, lives of the people are thrown out of gear into anarchical conditions by the oppressive elements. This multifaceted anarchy is manifested through their socio-cultural planes. Everywhere confusions prevail in the face of repeatedly enacted violent atrocities in the streets of the slums and cheris, on the bodies especially of women and children and on the psychological selves of the poor people. Consequently, one cannot expect harmonious reasoning or poised behaviour from the poor people. Contextual theologians try to empathetically delve deep into the minds and hearts of the oppressed who are at once having both the liberative thoughts inherently active in them and life-negating ideologies internalised often through the media and socialization. One can identify the presence of the mutually incompatible blends of the sense of community along with individualism, liberative feminism with patriarchy, self-giving with self-centred consumerism, acute sense of historical responsibility with otherworldly outlook, the sense of self-determination along with determinism etc., Indeed, the individuals and the families of the poor are haunted by this reality of anarchy and apparent hopelessness.

But in the midst of all these tumultous criss-crossing of divergent thoughts and emotions, people clearly experience the sense of hope of a better tomorrow springing up from their own interior depth. That is the sub-stratum upon which they elicit much of their fortitude required for hard manual labour and daily struggles and also for the extraordinary courage in resolutely confronting the escalation of violence against them. This indeed is the harmonious thread running through the tumultous anarchy in the midst of oppression and self-assertion. Any theology which fails to grapple with this interior strength of the people, cannot be counted as a contextual theology. Secondly, the religio-cultural resources of these people are very often found in the oral traditions. It is not so easy to handle the oral traditions for any systematic articulation of theology on a par with working with the critical editions of the written traditions with well-defined canons. Contextual theology has the additional responsibility of undertaking the challenging task of interpreting the oral traditions whose corpus is often not well-defined but ever dynamic.

The direct articulation of contextual theologies is not merely through theo-logos (only of words in print or speech). Frequently it is through theophony (noisy expression of performances or drumbeat in total abandon) theol-graphy (artistic expression of form, shapes, cartoons, theo-aesthetic (dramatic portrayals, rituals, celebrations, decorations, dances like kummy, kolattam, thappattam, oyilattam etc.) In addition to all these, one has to take cognisance of people’s expression of their just wrath against injustice. Very often this expression of their legitimate rage against unjust structures may not be always an organised affair because of their powerlessness. It might be in terms of giving humorous nicknames to the bosses, circulating certain code expressions among themselves about their enemies, pilfering the belongings of the landlords, deliberate delay or postponement in doing the imposed jobs etc.. Contextual theology has to be much sensitive to all these intricate dimensions of the people without pouncing on them with a moralistic frame of mind. Besides the spontaneous solidarity with these people of its option, contextual theology has to depend on the interdisciplinary probe into all these aspects of the people. Only then can it sufficiently address the complexities entailed in articulating people’s theology genuinely on behalf of and with the people. Such a genuine contextual theology is capable of assuming the prophetic role confronting the life-negating tendencies found even in the midst of the life-seeking subalterns. With their solidarity with the marginalised, the contextual theologians are authorized not as the aliens imposing ethical systems but as the acclaimed critical community from within. Rootedness among the poor empowers them with much-needed moral authority to serve them credibly.

3.0 Open-ended Search

The open-ended search of contextual theology is discussed in this section.

3.1 Contextual Theology Is At Home With The Divergent Critical Tools Of Human Sciences And Hence Eclectic In Approach

Since contextual theology seeks to promote life and the God-given human dignity of the marginalised, it is not riveting its attention upon defending any dogma or ideology. Instead, it looks forward to the ways and means with which the lives of the people are brought in to the diagnostic scrutiny by the tools of analysis offered by the human sciences. There may be the Marxian tools for analysing the politico-economic dimensions of the Doughlasan framework of purity-pollution for examining casteism, the Gramscian framework for probing into the conflict consciousness of the subalterns. These tools are employed by contextual theology to probe into the anatomy of the miseries the people are subjected to.

All these efforts are in view of sharpening the questions emerging out of the pathos of the victims of history. Obviously from mere informational questions of ‘what, when, where,’ contextual theology then moves on to analytical questions of ‘what exactly, when precisely, where accurately,’ taking into account the complexities of the issues involved in the problems of life and death of people. In the background of these well-perceived analytical questions and explanations offered by the human sciences, the ultimate questions of human life become the dialogue partner with the life-oriented religio-cultural energies enshrined in the myths, legends, folklore, poems or proverbs of the people.

Contextual theology does not a priori determine or prescribe the particular types of tools of analysis for the human sciences. It seeks to employ any tool of analysis from any discipline for the cause of the liberation of the people. That is why the prejudice of the conventional theologies of the establishment against certain types of analytical frameworks or tools of analysis (Marxian, Freudian or Nietschean) will not be entertained by contextual theology. At the same time it does not dogmatically cling on to only a few sets of tools of analysis for all time. Contextual theology, by and large, deploys divergent tools of analysis in an eclectic manner. Hence awareness of various insights obtained through interdisciplinary approach is an indispensable element in the construction of any contextual theology, because of the complexities involved in the problems of the people.

3.2 Contextual Theology Is Congenial To Dialogue With Other Contextual Theologies

Contextual theology is not the prisoner of a few chosen tools of analysis with their corresponding ideological frameworks. That is to say the favourite ideologies or tools of analysis are not going to decide the anatomy of contextual theology. Rather the deciding factor in the contents and direction of contextual theology is the people’s passion for seeking new life of liberation in the conflictual conditions of the concrete context.

If ideology is made to be the deciding factor in employing human sciences, then there will be endless verbal warfares between groups. For instance, there seems to be no convergence in the midst of those upholding the ideology of Dravidian Nationalism and others with Tamil Nationalism and yet others with Dalit Nationalism on the scenario of contemporary Tamilnadu.

But ideology is a vehicle for liberation. With the absence of such a realization very often the people’s journey towards liberation is disrupted by ideological controversies. In these moments, contextual theology, with its open-ended ideological positions, listens not only to the concerns of the immediate macrolevel complexities but also to the immediate macrolevel ones. While still being attuned to the details of the liberative process of the given context (say, the Dalits of south Tamilnadu), it will be open also to the liberative orientations of the ideological underpinnings of Tamil nationalism or Dravidian nationalism. If theology gets bogged down into ideological quagmire, then such a theology becomes the handmaid of the insulated sectarian interests.

In short, a genuine contextual theology of a particular people with the specific cultural milieu can positively vibrate with the liberative orientations of yet another one in a different region and eventually locate the points of convergence between them. This dialogical attitude helps each contextual theology in transcending the barriers of narrow regionalism or shortsighted nationalism.

3.3 Contextual Theology Opts Not For Role-Exchange With Oppressors But For Total Transformation

The uprising of the oppressed raises many an eyebrow with the question whether contextual theology is in support of the oppressed becoming the new oppressor, as the result of its liberative ventures. Will it justify the probable atrocities by the liberated (the formerly oppressed) against the former oppressors who are going to be on the receiving end in the future? The unambiguous answer of the contextual theology to this question is a definite ‘No’, True, the present victims of history are angry with their oppressors and legitimately so. But the true vision of the liberative struggles of the sub-alterns is not in terms of exchange of roles between the oppressing and the oppressed. The Dalits do not want to become the custodians of Brahminism fostering hierarchy. They do not want to annihilate the Forward Caste people or the Backward Caste people. What they want to destroy is the very evil of caste hierarchy. The exploited women do not want to destroy men – their fathers, brothers, husbands, priests practising patriarchy – but the evil of patriarchy internalised both by women and men.

Some among the proponents of liberative ideologies may advocate the role-exchange between the oppressing and the oppressed as the result of the struggle for liberation. Some might call it as necessitated by justice. Some even count such a role-exchange as the inevitable phase in the social dynamics of handling the emotionally charged polarisation between the oppressed and the oppressor.

But genuinely evolved contextual theology is not blood-thirsty just because it emanates from the victimised lots. These poor sub-alterns want justice based on promotion of the God-given life and human dignity but not the ‘pound of flesh’. The poor are uniquely gifted with the fine art of protecting lives even of their enemies. This is the strength of the spirit of the marginalised. Even when driven by the passionate enthusiasm of some of the oppressed to enact the role-exchange with the oppressors even for a brief phase of time for certain strategic purpose, contextual theology clearly differentiates the objectives from strategies. And there is no compromise in its objective in destroying the life-negating forces by way of protecting the life-affirming people.

4.0 Conclusion

While attempting to portray the salient features of contextual theology, we have identified its origin in its definite option for the marginalised people with their spontaneous response to the situation of dehumanisation in a particular context of time, place and socio-cultural sensibilities. While focusing on its function we have indicated its role as critique proposing new alternatives with the guest for harmony in the midst of anarchy and without claiming to be universally valid for all in every context. In its open-ended search, we also have recognised its eclectic approach in deploying the divergent methodologies of the human sciences, its openness towards the concerns of other ideologies and other contextual theologies and also its unwillingness to advocate the model of role-exchange between the oppressed and the oppressors.

With all these discussions and deliberations, how could one further understand contextual theology? When the victim, stripped and beaten up, was lying in the middle of the road to Jericho from Jerusalem, the Priest and the Levite just passed by without any qualms of conscience because of their theology. And this spontaneous action-oriented theology is nothing but the CONTEXTUAL THEOLOGY.