Achato Elizabeth Solomon is a postgraduate student at the University of Jos, Nigeria, where she studies the Interaction of Religions, with a focus on World Religions as a cross-cultural movement. Over the years, she has pursued her passion for trauma healing and caregiving ministry, particularly from a biblical perspective on healing, given the growing persecution of Christians in northern Nigeria.

I often wonder whether faith is a contextual concept or merely a product of our biblical studies, and what it truly means in the real world as we cope with persecution, suffering, and violence. Is faith individual or communal? My daily interactions are filled with these questions.

Living in a society where disputes are commonplace, especially when they attack the church, which ought to be safe by default. Theology has always been a concept that church leaders and clergy have used and practiced, and as members, we do as we are told. I have come to understand theology as a living, everyday experience in the deepest thoughts and choices, as a participant in the Princeton Theology digital course on Lived Theology and World Christianity.

As part of the digital course and learning that has shaped my understanding, I began questioning my understanding of the interplay of faith and suffering, how darkness can obstruct our path to faith, and whether we should cultivate our own faith or rely on that of others. These thoughts are supported by longstanding accounts from both individuals and communities that describe faith as a criterion for living theology. Marsh opines that, “religious Practices are inherently communicative both communal and individual,” making them both sacred and theological.

Finding God when the world feels lone

In a community of common, persecuted believers, I carry out my vocation as a caregiver, a calling fulfilled not in institutional settings but through the holy practices of teaching and listening. This ‘lived theology’ course has shed light on how God’s truth transcends any particular social or physical context and is revealed through other people’s experiences.

Photo Credit Victoria Avi extract from a survivor

Being able to listen and help survivors develop resilience and find God in the face of wounds and uncertainty is the cornerstone of caregiving. This enables me to bridge the divide by addressing theology as a call for all Christians and a charge to be our brothers’ keepers, rather than merely as a straight line of an intermediary or clerical call, and by turning gloom and suffering into the voice of faith.

Therapy as theology: Support group as sacred

My understanding of theology has been redefined as a continuous process that is never static because it extends from everyday experience. For this reason, Sabrina Muller’s position on lived theology is that it is “experience and life reality of humans.” She continues to shed light by stating that it becomes fully theology when it is expressed with reflection and has resonance in the public domain. This is reinforced by Meredith McGuire, who concretely embodies the everyday activities and experiences of people, implying that lived religion is ever-changing, adapting, and growing in the modes in which individuals experience it, confirming my conviction that theology emerges from tales of happiness, suffering, and the development of resilience.

As shown in the image above, Marsh made a clear distinction between religion and theology. While religion uses symbols, such as taking our suffering to the cross and then burning it, and relies on beliefs and objects to understand human phenomena, theology examines other people’s beliefs and practices to understand God’s presence in human experience. The question of why we suffer if God loves us has dominated theological discussion of suffering. The theology of hope emphasizes trust and perseverance in the face of suffering.

Lived experience and comfort

“He heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds.” Psalm 147:3 NRSVUE

The sense of loss, anguish, and pain in the present better represents the human experience. God is present in our lives and provides consolation by embracing and transforming our brokenness. No matter how commonplace their theology may be, engaging with the church and emphasizing theology through people’s lived experiences matters. Our daily lives are infused with the spiritual practice of discernment through listening, which is known as lived theology.

Concluding Reflections

Lived theology suggests that God is purposefully present in people’s everyday lives, which are unquestionably sacred and ought to be consistent with doctrine and faith. My participation in this online course reminds me that theology remains part of daily life. Listening is the first service one owes others because God’s love begins with hearing his word. As one of the survivors I spoke with once said, “I feel God closely when I share my experience.” Learning to listen to others is the first step toward loving brethren. I am not complaining of pain when I am pushed aside. Thus, God continues to speak, and there remains a sense of holiness in every encounter we have.

References

1. Ammerman, Nancy Tatom. Studying Lived Religion: Contexts and Practices. New York: New York University Press, 2021.

2. Müller, Sabrina. “Religious Experience and the Genesis of Lived Theology” and “The Public Realm of Lived Theology—Digital and Analog.” In Lived Theology: Impulses for a Pastoral Theology of Empowerment, 25–62. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2021.

3. McGuire, Meredith B. “Everyday Religion as Lived.” In Lived Religion: Faith and Practice in Everyday Life, 3–13. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

4. Phan, Peter C. “Lived Theology: A Way of Doing Theology Today.” Georgetown University, 8–12.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Victoria (Yun-Ching) Shen is a doctoral candidate in Historical Studies in Theology and Religion in the Graduate Division of Religion at Emory University. Shen’s work focuses on East Asian Christian political activism since the 1950s, especially in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. She is a Lamin Sanneh Research Grant recepient.

On any Sunday, if you walked into one of the Taiwanese churches in North America, there is a good chance you would be greeted by a church member in Taiwanese Hokkien, Mandarin, or English, most of the time by an elderly Taiwanese woman. They will start asking about your life, your faith, and your career. After the service, they will hold your hands and insist that you stay to enjoy lunch with them. Then they will bring out the most authentic Taiwanese dishes from the church’s “magic kitchen,” which they either pre-make at home or make there. Nevertheless, none of this will make you think that many of these women experienced Taiwan’s authoritarian era and immigrated to the US, and that they not only endured those times through their Christian faith but also, because of that faith, participated in transpacific political activism to fight against the Kuomintang (KMT) authoritarian regime from the 1970s.

However, if you intentionally ask them about their experiences and work during their faith-driven activism, most of them will smile humbly, wave their hands, and say they did not do much and that what they did was just small things. As a student who received all the above warm treatment from people and Taiwanese women in many Taiwanese churches in North America, I decided that, as an historian, I could not and do not want to let their stories disappear over time; therefore, I dedicate my doctoral dissertation to recovering the stories and voices of Taiwanese and Taiwanese American Christian women in North America and their active faith-driven political activism.

Photo by Gian Paul Guinto on Unsplash

My dissertation explores how Taiwanese and Taiwanese American Christian women helped shape Taiwan’s democratization movement and Taiwanese communities across the Pacific between the 1970s and 2000. My research draws on many archival materials, but because these sources offer limited coverage of women’s roles in the activism, I traveled across North America to conduct oral history interviews, which serve as the major sources for my dissertation. Taiwanese and Taiwanese American political histories often focus on well-known male leaders during the democratic movements and sometimes portray women as little more than supporters or followers of their male counterparts. However, in the oral history interviews, I found that many women quietly organized activist events in churches and local spaces, translated speeches, mobilized overseas communities, raised funds, wrote newsletter articles, and advocated for democracy and human rights. When I asked them why they dared to challenge the authoritarian government, many, surprisingly, replied that they were not afraid. They said they could not bear to see fellow Taiwanese suffering under the KMT government and believed it was right to bring the justice and righteousness of God to people. The Taiwanese and Taiwanese American Christian women were never “just” supporters of the Taiwanese democratic movements across the Pacific; they were active participants and organizers whose contributions significantly advanced Taiwanese democratization.

The stories of these women not only matter deeply to Christian history but also remind us that many aspects of the Christian faith around the globe remain unrecorded or unrecognized. Their stories challenge us to broaden our understanding of Christian leadership in World Christianity, as many never held formal positions within church hierarchies, yet their faith shaped church communities on both sides of the Pacific and influenced Taiwan’s democratic transformation. These women reveal that Christian activism inspired by faith is not carried out only by ordained pastors or professional missionaries. Christian mission and activism also happen through ordinary Christians whose faith inspires them to seek justice, build communities across cultures, and care deeply about both their local congregations and their homelands. I am deeply grateful for the Lamin Sanneh Research Grant, which gave me the opportunity to travel across North America for my archival research and oral history interviews. Without the Grant’s support, I would not be able to recover and record the forgotten voices of Taiwanese and Taiwanese American women. The next time you walk into a Taiwanese church, and if an elderly woman comes to greet you, I hope you will remember that she was not only someone’s mother or someone’s wife, but also a faith-driven Christian activist who dedicated herself to transpacific political activism and to seeking the justice and righteousness of God for the people of Taiwan. Listen, the forgotten voices are speaking, and the stories of faith continue!

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Please don’t forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the OMSC’s Roundtable YouTube channel today for more insight, questions, and meaningful conversation on World Christianity and Mission Studies.

#omsc #worldchristianity #missionstudies #omscroundtable

Sr. Ngoc Nguyen, LHC, is a doctoral candidate in Theology at Marquette University. Her work focuses on women’s liberation theology in a Vietnamese context.

The UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, told the Security Council in 2016 that despite the vital role of women in preventing conflict and helping to forge peace, they are far too often prevented from participating fully in peacemaking processes.^[1] Asian feminist theologian Chung Hyun Kyung argues that “Asian women are oppressed economically, socially, politically, religiously, and culturally in specific ways just because they are women.”^[2] Patriarchal societies can leave women marginalized and facing discrimination in all aspects of life. Women in Asia are often treated as inferior, especially in family life, society, and education. Likewise, women are often victimized by economic, sexual, and social practices that leave them searching for a source of hope.^[3] Unfortunately, these same factors also leave women excluded from the structures and systems of peace processes.

One reason why women are excluded from most formal peacebuilding activities and negotiations is that they are also denied access to male-dominated political spaces. Men have more control over policy and decision-making. Women, however, are essential peacebuilders and must be included at all levels for peacebuilding to succeed. Failing to include women’s voices means that those most affected by war do not have a voice, those with special skills to promote peace are marginalized, considerations specific to challenges faced by women in war are often neglected, and the process fails to meet the criteria of including all stakeholders.

It is not only negative things that can be avoided by including women, but positive things that can be added. Women typically bring specific assets to peacebuilding, such as inclusivity and a commitment to justice shaped by compassion and forgiveness. Their disadvantaged role in patriarchal societies helps them to recognize the effects of structural violence. This helps draw together those who are disempowered and, thus, suffer the brunt of suffering from war.

The Sisters of the Lovers of the Holy Cross have been a model of how women can contribute to peacebuilding through their courage and bravery, and as a source of comfort and compassion for those who are suffering and persecuted. During a time of persecution of the Church in 18^th-19^th century Vietnam, the sisters continued to approach and contact people in need of their help. Although their opportunities were limited because society did not allow girls to learn to read and write, the sisters used their abilities to teach women. The sisters also visited and consoled patients, especially children. The sisters actively worked to counter the oppression, as well as visiting prisons to console and encourage the prisoners. The sisters consistently exhibited bravery as they were arrested, imprisoned, and tortured, but nothing could break their will.^[4] Amid this persecution, they not only inspired others for their actions against the oppression, but for their steadfast faith in God.

Today, the sisters of the LHC continue to demonstrate their strength and bravery. Although the persecution against Christians has relaxed and there is not a current war, the patriarchy and many societal struggles persist. The sisters inspire others through their achievements and persistence. Vietnamese people, when they have troubles, come to the sisters to ask for counseling and advice. Many of the sisters now have leadership roles in the Church, while also providing input for a variety of social issues. They are images of modern women who are confident, self-respecting, loyal, good at a variety of qualities, and skills suited to modern society; they can contribute their talents, knowledge, and strength in building and developing their nation.

Photo by Anh Tuan Thomas on Unsplash

Religious peacebuilding seeks to protect and promote human dignity and address the root causes of conflict. In Asia, as with much of the rest of the world, women are often excluded from the peacebuilding process. The reasons for this include social norms that prevent women from positions of authority or decision-making at almost every level and an emphasis on a political peace that includes only senior military and political leaders – positions dominated by males.^[5]

Examining the peacebuilding criteria adopted by religious and civil society peacebuilding organizations illustrates the value and necessity of women peacebuilders.^[6] A primary aspect of peacebuilding is to address the root causes of violence. The LHC sisters sought justice in their support for the persecuted in Vietnam. The sisters provided comfort and solace to the poor and marginalized, with a focus on human dignity. Likewise, they embody a remarkable commitment to hope, justice, and courage to promote and preserve the dignity of all persons. Two methodological aspects of peacebuilding are a long-term commitment and engagement at all levels of society, including all possible stakeholders. The Lovers of the Holy Cross demonstrate persistence and sustained effort, as well as engagement at all levels, from the grassroots to the global. What is particularly relevant is that these women offer an example of female leadership and authority amid a patriarchal society.

The example of these women religious is important for demonstrating that women can – and do – contribute to peacebuilding, and that their contributions are often irreplaceable – they exhibit qualities that are often missing from peace processes – which is a significant reason why peace is rarely sustainable or just.

References

^[1] United Nations, “Women Must Have Their ‘Rightful Place’ at the Heart of Building Peace and Security – UN Chief,” UN News, October 25, 2016, https://news.un.org/en/story/2016/10/543712#:~:text=%E2%80%9CWomen%20have%20a%20vital%20role,in%20peacemaking%20and%20peacebuilding%2C%E2%80%9D%20Mr.

^[2] Chung Hyun Kyung, Struggle to Be Sun Again: Introducing Asian Women’s Theology (Orbis Books, 2001), 24.

^[3] Ngoc Nguyen and Joseph Evans, “The Virgin Mary as a Source of Strength, Comfort, and Hope for Asian Women: Our Lady of La Vang (Vietnam) and Our Lady of Health (Vailankanni, India),” Maria: A Journal of Marian Studies 3, no. 1 (2023): 2.

^[4] Cf. AMEP, vol. 693, P. 1059 – 1060.

^[5] Ashleigh Subramanian-Montgomery et al., “20 Years After Resolution 1325: Why Are Women Still Excluded from Peace Processes?,” Partners Global, October 1, 2020, https://www.partnersglobal.org/newsroom/20-years-after-resolution-1325-why-are-women-still-excluded-from-peace-processes/.

^[6] “The Power of Women Peacebuilders,” UN Women, October 28, 2019, https://www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2019/10/compilation-the-power-of-women-peacebuilders#:~:text=Women’s%20inclusion%20in%20peacebuilding%20processes,and%20lasting%20peace%20after%20conflict.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Carlos André Silva de Moura holds a postdoctoral degree in History at the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP, Brazil), where he also received his Ph.D. in History. He completed a Senior Visiting Research Fellowship at the University of Lisbon (Portugal).

The Sanctuary of Our Lady of Fátima is one of the principal pilgrimage sites established in Europe during the first half of the twentieth century, attracting thousands of devotees. These pilgrims travel there inspired by the narratives associated with the Marian apparitions that began in May 1917. Together with the devotional environment of Lourdes, the region contributed to the decentralization of Catholic worship away from Rome and Jerusalem, which had been historically significant centers of Christianity.

Despite the existence of several Catholic devotions in Portugal during the first decades of the twentieth century, Fátima became a principal discursive element in the process of the nation's recatholicization. The impact of the apparitions was reflected in the movement of pilgrims, clergy, politicians, and curious observers, following the testimonies of the visionaries: Lúcia de Jesus (1907–2005), Francisco Marto (1908–1919), and Jacinta Marto (1910–1920), who reported the apparitions between 13 May and 13 October 1917 at Cova da Iria.

Photo by Mateus Campos Felipe on Unsplash

Following the initial announcements, the June 1917 religious gatherings were attended by approximately fifty visitors; then, in July, the attendance increased to between one and two thousand people; in August, between five and six thousand pilgrims were recorded; in September, approximately twenty thousand attended; and then, in October 1917, between seventy and one hundred thousand people gathered in October 1917. The documentary sources indicate that the legitimacy of the events in Portugal was consistently linked to the apparitions reported in France from 1858 onward. For many Catholics, Fátima was understood as the Portuguese Lourdes, reinterpreting the events that inaugurated a new pattern of Marian narratives in the contemporary world.

Through its discursive, visual, and religious construction, Fátima became one of the pillars of the reconfiguration of Catholicism in Portugal. Although the apparitions initially lacked the support of part of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Roman Curia began the official recognition process in 1922, accompanied by the development of the site as a devotional center. Bishop José Alves Correia da Silva (1872–1957), Bishop of Leiria, led the ecclesiastical procedures regarding the Church’s position on determining the veracity of the miraculous appearance. The criteria that were used to recognize the manifestations at Fátima were transnational and contributed to the construction of a visionary culture in the Western world.

As Marian apparitions gained legitimacy within the clergy, the actions, practices, and discourses surrounding these events would also take on political meanings. New interpretations of these Marian events gained strength from the 1930s onward, particularly amid the political crisis in Spain, and gained momentum when Portuguese bishops organized a pilgrimage against communism. Furthermore, members of the Catholic Church in the Americas embraced this new agenda of Fatimist devotion. In 1946, American religious leaders established the Blue Army of Our Lady of Fátima in opposition to the Soviet Red Army. The use of the messages against left-wing thought became fundamental in opposing progressive sectors of the Catholic Church in Latin America, including Liberation Theology. This interpretation and practice of the devotion to Our Lady of Fátima became influential in several South American countries (Maunder, 2016, p. 29).

Although conflict with communism was not present in the earliest messages attributed to Fátima. The secrets and recommendations focused on obedience to doctrine, the preservation of faith, the protection of the clergy, the end of war, and other concerns that, in specifics, do not establish a political dualism between communism and anti-communism. In this context, two interpretations of Fátima can be identified: the theological Fátima and the political Fátima. The first was associated with the process of rechristianization, while the second involved the internationalization of the cult and the struggle against left-wing ideologies and so-called “atheistic communism” (Barreto, 2003, p. 412).

The Marian messages that contributed to the internationalization process gained further strength through the Pilgrim Fátima project, especially as they took root in the Global South. Beginning in 1946, a 101-centimeter statue traveled to many places to disseminate the Marian messages and popularize devotion to Fátima. This initiative reversed the traditional pilgrimage process, as the sacred image itself visited devotees and not the other way around. The pilgrimage project contributed to the establishment of Fátima as among the most popular Marian apparitions of the twentieth century worldwide.

Route of the Pilgrim Statue

Source: Cónego Barthas. The Promises of Our Lady of Fátima. Fátima 50, Lisbon, Year I, nº. 8, December 13, 1967, p. 13.

Documentation from the Archive of the Sanctuary of Fátima contains records of part of the route the image followed until the late 1960s, demonstrating that Marian devotions extended far beyond Portugal and Europe. As illustrated by the map of the pilgrim image’s route, the statue reached all continents, making it one of many traceable forms of Catholic expansion during the twentieth century.

The expansion of the messages given at Fátima contributed to discussions regarding the sanctity of its protagonists and the sacredness of the places where the events occurred. Although official recognition depended on the requirements established by the Roman Curia, the legitimacy conferred by the faithful was fundamental to the debates that emerged in different spheres of the Catholic Church. The expansion project reinforced the discourse of recatholicization and provided political meanings to ecclesiastical actions. One of the popular ideas being defended was the idea that if other nations joined Portugal, “there certainly will be no other war, communism will be defeated, and the followers of Mohammed will embrace the religion of Christ en masse” (Archive of the Sanctuary of Fátima, Jan.–May 1953). The narratives of political Fátima diverged from the original proposals, which were originally focused on the preservation of the faith, and instead turned to combating other religions and expanding Catholicism, which proved fundamental to the dissemination of political form of Catholic ideas throughout the Global South.

References

Archive of the Sanctuary of Fátima. Serviço de Estudos e Difusão. Santuário de Nossa Senhora do Rosário de Fátima. Espólio de Maria Terêsa Pereira da Cunha. nº. 14 (Brazil, Jan.–May 1953).

Barreto, José. A Brotéria e Fátima. In: Rico, Hermínio; Franco, José Eduardo (eds.). Fé, Ciência, Cultura: Brotéria – 100 anos. Lisbon: Gradiva, 2003.

Cónego Barthas. The Promises of Our Lady of Fátima. Fátima 50, Lisbon, Year I, nº. 8, December 13, 1967, p. 13.

Maunder, Chris. Our Lady of the Nations: Apparitions of Mary in Twentieth-Century Catholic Europe. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Moura, Carlos André Silva de; Marroquim, Dirceu Salviano Marques. The Making of a Visionary Culture: Connected Histories among Marian Apparitions in the Portuguese-Brazilian World (1917–1936). Revista del CESLA, Warsaw, v. 26, p. 161–178, 2020.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Please don’t forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the OMSC’s Roundtable YouTube channel today for more insight, questions, and meaningful conversation on World Christianity and Mission Studies.

#omsc #worldchristianity #missionstudies #omscroundtable

Gabriel Stephen is an Assistant Professor of Practical Theology and Society at the Norwegian School of Leadership and Theology (HLT) in Oslo, Norway. He completed his Ph.D. in Religion and Theology at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. His research focuses on migration, ecclesiology, integration, lived theology, and church life in modern society.

Christian unity is often easiest to preach and hardest to recognize after the benediction. Churches confess one body, one Spirit, one baptism, yet migrants entering many Western congregations often encounter something quieter and more painful than theological disagreement: distance. Not open hostility. Not a formal rejection. Just the slow realization that unity can be proclaimed publicly while remaining absent relationally. My doctoral research, Living Narratives, Living Ecclesiology, forced me to wrestle with this tension repeatedly through the stories of migrant Christians in Norwegian churches.[1] Again and again, migrants revealed a troubling contradiction at the heart of modern ecumenical imagination: churches may speak the language of reconciliation and unity while still struggling to embody it in ordinary church life.

This contradiction matters because the modern ecumenical movement emerged with admirable intentions. Throughout the twentieth century, churches gathered through councils, conferences, commissions, and theological dialogues in pursuit of visible Christian unity. The goal was serious and necessary: overcoming historical division so that the church might be true to its self-understanding as being one body of Christ.[2] Yet much of this ecumenical imagination emerged within relatively stable Western ecclesial frameworks. It assumed denominations with clear theological borders, institutional authority, and predictable cultural identities.[3] Unity, therefore, was often imagined as something negotiated doctrinally between ecclesial institutions. Thomas Rausch rightly notes that Christianity is no longer centered within the Western structures that shaped much of this ecumenical vision.[4] Migration exposes this shift with unsettling clarity. Migrants arrive with complex histories, fragmented identities, and faith shaped by displacement, challenging Christian unity and raising ecumenical questions, as migration exposes the fragility of Christianity when lived experience diverges from theological doctrine.[5]

Photo by Palden Gyamtso on Unsplash

What stood out in my research was that many migrants did not first experience division through doctrinal disagreement. They experienced it socially, relationally, and emotionally. The fracture often emerged not through theological debate but through silence, hesitation, and withheld presence. The story of Deborah captures this painfully well. Coming from an Asian Baptist context shaped by communal participation, she assumed the church in Norway would naturally function as a spiritual home regardless of denominational or cultural difference. Instead, she encountered suspicion and relational distance almost immediately. Reflecting on her experience, she explains, “Some were skeptical of us” because of the visible differences despite their shared faith.[6] As a result, “Those who are skeptical … just do not talk to us.”[7]

There is something profoundly revealing about ecclesial silence. Deborah was not expelled from worship. Nobody publicly rejected her faith. No doctrinal statement excluded her from the body of Christ. Instead, those from the majority culture, Baptist or not, seem to simply withhold relational presence. Silence itself became ecclesiological. The problem was not theological heterodoxy but relational absence. Yet what makes Deborah’s narrative remarkable is not merely the exclusion she experienced, but her response to it. Rather than withdrawing, she remained present. “Sunday in and Sunday out, we were present… I sat with them during church coffee… I did not understand anything… but I sat there and listened.”[8] There is a quiet theological depth in that persistence. Deborah’s story reveals that unity is sustained not primarily by institutional declarations but by embodied practices of patience, vulnerability, and presence. Long before ecumenical reconciliation becomes official, it often becomes relational. Church coffee sometimes reveals more about Christian unity than formal theological dialogue ever can.

Peter’s story sharpens the critique further. Coming from an Orthodox African background, he entered a Baptist congregation expecting refuge during his journey. Instead, he encountered subtle reminders that he remained outside the social imagination of belonging. “There were occasions… from [native Norwegian] Christians [in the church] that say ‘no,’ this is not your space, it’s not your place, you don’t belong here.”[9] That statement exposes something many churches are uncomfortable confronting directly: theological inclusion does not automatically produce relational inclusion. Peter was welcomed while remaining socially distant. Theologically, he was called a brother. Socially, he was treated as a stranger.

What makes this especially uncomfortable is that the tension was not fundamentally caused by doctrinal disagreement (although it could very well have been). The exclusion emerged from the presence of difference itself: accents, habits, cultural instincts, unfamiliar forms of social interaction, and inherited anxieties about belonging. Migration exposes how easily churches can proclaim universality while quietly protecting cultural familiarity. Kristine Suna-Koro argues that ecumenical reflection must confront these social and structural sins embedded within earlier foundations, even when those exclusions remained unspoken.[10] Migrant experiences force churches to confront precisely these unspoken realities. They reveal that unity can easily become rhetorical while remaining thin in practice.

This is why migration becomes both a disruption and a gift for the church. It disrupts inherited assumptions about what unity looks like, but it also creates possibilities for renewal. Migrants expose the distance between claims and embodiment, yet they also reveal pathways toward a richer and more robust ecumenism. The future of ecumenism cannot survive as institutional diplomacy alone. Nor can it dissolve into vague celebrations of diversity detached from theological depth. What migration reveals is the necessity of embodied ecumenism: a unity practiced before it is perfected. Hospitality, translation, shared leadership, mutual vulnerability, and patient presence are not secondary acts orbiting theology—they are theology embodied socially.

Considering this, Michael Root’s warning rings louder. Ecumenism requires patience “for the long haul.”[11] Christian unity cannot be reduced to emotional immediacy or romanticized multiculturalism. Institutions still matter. Doctrine still matters. Theological truth still matters.[12] Yet migrant narratives reveal with unsettling force that doctrine loses credibility when churches fail to embody its implications relationally. Churches cannot proclaim one body while quietly reproducing distance in everyday life.

Perhaps this is where the future of ecumenism is already unfolding—not first in councils, declarations, or carefully negotiated statements, but quietly in ordinary spaces where Christians choose presence over distance. At church coffee tables. In translated conversations. In awkward acts of hospitality. In communities where migrants continue showing up despite exclusion. In these fragile moments, unity becomes visible not as an abstraction but as a practice. The influx of people from the global south, therefore, is not about standing at the edges of ecumenism waiting to be included by the Western institutional church. They are exposing what Christian unity was meant to look like all along, beyond these frameworks.

[1] Gabriel T. Stephen, Living Narratives, Living Ecclesiology: Migrant Voices Reframing Norwegian Baptist Ecclesiological Perspectives (PhD diss., Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 2026), https://doi.org/10.5463/thesis.1743.

[2] Antonia Pizzey, Receptive Ecumenism and the Renewal of the Ecumenical Movement: The Path of Ecclesial Conversion (Leiden: Brill, 2019), pp. 31-32.

[3] Jeremy Morris argues that modern ecumenism has often assumed clear denominational boundaries, stable ecclesial cultures, and institutional forms that could be negotiated toward convergence. Jeremy Morris, “Imaginative Ecumenism—Rethinking the Paradigm from an Anglican Perspective,” Religions 14, no. 11 (2023): 1410, 4–5.

[4] Thomas Rausch, “A New Ecumenism? Christian Unity in a Global Church,” Theological Studies 78, no. 3 (2017): 596–613.

[5] Phillip Connor, Immigrant Faith: Patterns of Immigrant Religion in the United States, Canada, and Western Europe (New York: New York University Press, 2014), p. 19.

[6] Deborah, interviewed by Gabriel Stephen, p. 3.

[7] Ibid., p. 3.

[8] Ibid., p. 2.

[9] Peter, interviewed by Gabriel Stephen, pp. 6-7.

[10] Kristine Suna-Koro, “Toward Decolonizing Penitential Rites: A Diasporic and Ecumenical Exploration of Worship on (Still) Colonized Land,” in Decolonial Horizons: Reimagining Theology, Ecumenism and Sacramental Praxis, ed. Raimundo C. Barreto and Vladimir Latinovic (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2023), 259–79.

[11] Michael Root, “Normal Ecumenism: Ecumenism for the Long Haul,” Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology 28, no. 1 (2019): 61.

[12] Larry Crabb, Real Church: Does It Exist? Can I Find It? (Nashville, Tenn: Thomas Nelson, 2009), p. 126.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Stephen Di Trolio is a PhD Candidate in the Department of History and Ecumenics at Princeton Theological Seminary, specializing in “Religion in the Americas.” Stephen was born in Costa Rica and grew up in Argentina, where he returned after graduating from university in the United States. He is writing his dissertation on Protestantism, Catholic Nationalism, and political history in Argentina in the 20th century. As a native Spanish speaker, he is an active translator of various books, essays, and chapters in edited volumes. Stephen is the managing editor of The Occasional.

Living between languages has been central to my life and work. I was born in Costa Rica to American parents and moved to Argentina before I turned one. Like many, I grew up in a bilingual world, navigating between English and Spanish, where home was one language and everywhere else was Spanish. This gave me the opportunity to easily access two linguistic worlds and appreciate the beauty of both. These languages became tacit and part of me, enabling me to engage comfortably in these spaces. I have spent over a decade in academic settings, from my master’s degree to my PhD experience, and being bilingual has helped me in many ways. I remember taking master’s courses at a public university in Argentina, where a professor assigned readings in three languages—French, English, and Portuguese—alongside Spanish.

At first, I was surprised by the expectation that we should know these languages for a master’s program, and later I learned that this was because many seminal texts had not been translated into Spanish. This became a point of inquiry for me, as I realized that those with limited language skills struggled not only with the material but also with the idea that language sometimes creates barriers to access across cultures and countries. Were we confined by our own knowledge worlds because materials were not available in our language? I remember taking a seminar with Dr. Eduardo Restrepo on Stuart Hall’s work, where he offered that, instead of a final, those of us who were bilingual could choose an essay by Hall not in Spanish and translate it. I thought this would be an easy way to avoid a final paper, but it turned out to be both painful and deeply rewarding. This experience shaped my desire to do my best to build bridges across the gaps created by language barriers in materials. Since then, I have translated chapters, journal articles, and books, hoping to foster a larger dialogue across the field of world Christianity.

Photo by Carlos Santos on Unsplash

Decolonial theorists such as Aníbal Quijano and Nelson Maldonado discuss, respectively, the “coloniality of knowledge” as the privileging and silencing of certain languages and knowledges over others. This condition is only made more widespread by the lopsided emphasis on works produced in North American and European academia. In our field, how can we move past this? Since the earliest days, scholars like Lamin Sanneh and Andrew Walls have emphasized the importance of the “translation principle.” Christianity’s ability to “vernacularize” or “translate” across cultures, regions, and places has allowed it to interweave and transform over time. If translation is central to the field, how can we foster more dialogue and conversation? Is translation one possible path?

Important efforts trying to mend this issue of the siloed nature of world Christianity have been made such as that by the OMSC with the English Translations of Christian Scholarship, which has translated works from Spanish, Portuguese, Japanese, Greek, and other languages into English for wider audiences. This initiative offers a modest grant to “to amplify these voices for the benefit of the world Christian movement. This initiative will invest in the professional translation of articles and essays from Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, Latin America, the Middle East, and Oceania from any field in the theological curriculum.”

This is just one effort to try to bridge the boundaries of language, but many still remain untranslated due to a lack of funding, and thus, access across linguistic fences continues to contribute to the ongoing isolation of academics across continents.

Recently, I have been encouraged to see key World Christianity conferences offering multiple languages to facilitate dialogue and presentations. In 2025, in São Paulo, Brazil, where the Yale-Edinburgh Conference held sessions in English and Portuguese with translations, progress continued. Now, in 2026, the World Christianity Conference in Recife, Brazil, organized by the OMSC and the Faculty at Princeton Theological Seminary, has announced that it will feature sessions in English, Portuguese, and Spanish with translation. This is not just about the future but a necessity of the present. Although the logistics are complicated, they reflect the richness and diversity of the world we live in.

I am interested in exploring what connections can be made when translating from South-South relationships, such as Bahasa-Spanish, Portuguese-Swahili, Hindi-French, and countless other combinations. If we truly live in a “polycentric” world, as Klaus Korschorke suggests, we must recognize that the diversity of languages and their entanglements are essential to the field's future.

While we might argue that tools like DeepL and other AI technologies could help address these challenges, I question whether they are a secondary rather than a primary solution. First, these tools do not nurture the rich tradition of the translator’s craft, which demands careful thought, selection, and curation of how stories or research are conveyed across different cultures. This process is flattened into merely an equation to be solved. Second, does availability equate to visibility and circulation in various journals, magazines, conferences, or other academic platforms?

For this purpose, I hope to continue laboring, where we can, in our own work and in the work of others, to rethink and see how we can prioritize translation in World Christianity. Where possible and feasible, we should continue the long and difficult task of translation.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Please don’t forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the OMSC’s Roundtable YouTube channel today for more insight, questions, and meaningful conversation on World Christianity and Mission Studies.

#omsc #worldchristianity #missionstudies #omscroundtable

Sérgio Albuquerque Damião holds a Ph.D. in Theology from the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro. He is a professor in the Postgraduate Program in Theology at the Catholic University of Pernambuco, Brazil. He is a member of the Research Group on Theologies, Interpretations, and Praxis. He specializes in Theology, with an emphasis on Systematic Theology. He is the author of the book Theology of Happiness: Letting Love Heal the Fear.

Every human being desires to be happy, regardless of the meaning attributed to the term or the means employed to attain it. The question of happiness emerges as a fundamental inquiry into all human existence. Marked by an intrinsic restlessness, human life is characterized by a persistent unease that continually displaces us into the unpredictable, further beyond. We find ourselves, even unwillingly, drawn into something that lies in the excess of living. The bread of daily subsistence is not enough; we also long for the wine of celebration and joy. We see ourselves inserted into a dynamic that, within our desire, reveals only a glimpse of a powerful horizon of life.

Although it remains a universal aspiration, happiness is, par excellence, a personal and singular experience. It resides profoundly within the subject as an irreducible dimension of the self. Its personal dimension is reaffirmed insofar as it touches the very core of existence, conferring upon each human life a unique and irreplaceable feature. The desire to be happy reaches the core of who we are and what we seek. Even when not explicitly articulated, it persists as an underlying aspiration that orients and fuels the individual search for fulfillment. Thus, it is possible to affirm that happiness is, at the same time, for all and for each one, since everybody seeks happiness, but each longs to be happy in a distinct manner.

We do not satisfy ourselves with the conceptual determinations that arise from our sociocultural, religious, and circumstantial contexts. They provide guidance and suggest possible paths, yet inevitably encounter the limits of their own frameworks and definitions. Pope Paul VI, in the Apostolic Exhortation Gaudete in Domino, acknowledges happiness as a universal human longing and affirms that this natural inclination, which impels the human person toward happiness, ought to be discerned as a manifestation of the presence of God.

Photo by Malte Michels on Unsplash

Christianity affirms that God’s great passion is for humankind. This theme permeates the biblical narrative, expressed in the promise of the full realization of the human being and in the establishment of the tone of the relationship between God and all creation. The Christian faith proclaims a God who is not indifferent to the existence of his children but who acts continuously in humanity so that it may be guided by fraternity, justice, and happiness. This divine concern is made manifest in the personal experience of Jesus Christ. Indeed, the life of Jesus and his proclamation of the Gospel reveal a God who is mercifully attentive and engaged, who does not remain distant but turns toward humanity, desiring to be encountered, experienced, and known.

Jesus proclaims a God who relativizes all things in light of human life. His message reveals the salvific will of God and underscores that, for God, what ultimately matters is that human beings may experience life in its fullness (cf. John 10:10). Human happiness thus emerges as a central concern of his ministry, presenting an essentially positive proposal that rejects any portrayal of God as opposed to the human desire to be happy. The God proclaimed by Jesus does not intend to foment fear, provoke panic, or announce a threatening end of the world. On the contrary, divine proximity is presented as a source of celebration, joy, and happiness, especially for those who suffer, mourn, and live on the margins of society.

Contemporary society has stripped happiness of its transformative vitality, trivializing it by reducing it to a commodified product alongside many others. In its deepest meaning, happiness itself becomes a burden to be endured. According to the philosopher Byung-Chul Han, this imprisonment removes its transcendent meaning and reduces human life to the idea of the living dead, in which everyone “is too alive to die, too dead to live.”

Christian faith has the capacity to recover the profound meaning of happiness, liberating it from discursive prisons and restoring it to the human person. The happiness that emerges from faith cannot be confined to emotional or discursive expressions, even though it may include them. Nor can it be reduced merely to an ethical framework, even though it requires one. It is a happiness sustained by an experience that invites each human being to dive into the immensity of God’s love, the type of love that surrounds them as a tender closeness that welcomes, protects, and loves.

Human happiness lies in the intensity of life, touched by God’s love, which experiences peace and joy. In this way, a mode of existence is formed by growth in authenticity, making it capable of withstanding life’s adversities because it is grounded in the infinite love that encompasses, sustains, and strengthens all things. Thus, Christian happiness reconfigures human existence and enables a renewed perception, allowing one to discern, within the subtleties of everyday life, the presence of God in all things.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Please don’t forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the OMSC’s Roundtable YouTube channel today for more insight, questions, and meaningful conversation on world Christianity and mission studies.

Ken Miyagi is a PhD student in History and Ecumenics at Princeton Theological Seminary. His dissertation explores Japanese Protestant migrants in the transpacific region from the late nineteenth to the mid-twentieth centuries, with a special focus on race and empire.

This report reviews the World Christianity Conference 2026, which was held from March 9–13, 2026, at the Universidade Católica de Pernambuco and the Fundação Joaquim Nabuco (Fundaj), Brazil, under the theme “Boundary-Making, Local Entanglements, and Conviviality in World Christianity.” With approximately 200 presentations by scholars from around the world, the conference featured three keynote lectures by Andrea Bieler, Devaka Premawardhana, and Tara Hyun Kyung Chung; two honoring sessions dedicated to Ana Maria Bidegain and Dale Irvin; and three thematic panels and one graduate student panel. As the seventh World Christianity Conference, this gathering marked the first time the conference was held in Latin America, engaging the conference theme through five days of scholarly discussion and exchange.

Boundary-Making, Entanglements, and Conviviality in Brazil local churches

One of the captivating aspects of the conference was Brazil itself. The Brazilian context—particularly the local churches—prompted us to reflect deeply on the conference theme. Before attending the conference, I personally visited Mata de São João in Bahia to see a church founded in the 1960s by Japanese migrants from my home church in Japan. The church was originally organized by Japanese members and ministers and developed largely within their ethnic boundaries. Over time, however, it has transformed into a Brazilian church: its current pastor is Brazilian, and the congregation no longer includes members of Japanese descent. Because my home church is affiliated with the Cumberland Presbyterian Church in the United States, the church in Mata de São João still formally belongs to the same denomination. Yet its worship style no longer follows the North American mainline liturgical style that my home church in Japan has adopted from the denomination. Instead, the congregation now practices a more Brazilian contemporary style of worship. At the same time, however, the church building itself still bears traces of its Japanese origins; for example, a map of Japan is embedded in the chapel as a memorial to the founding Japanese members. In this way, the sacred space and worship practices create a Brazil–Japan entanglement that transcends ethnic boundaries. I was able to witness this rich religio-ethnic entanglement thanks to the convivial hospitality of the church’s Brazilian pastor, who hosted me at his home and personally guided me on a tour of the church.

Embodying the Conference Theme: Lecture and Performance by Tara Hyun Kyung Chung and Presentation by Haruko Nawata Ward

The conference theme was crystallized by Tara Hyun Kyung Chung’s keynote lecture, “Christ Salim: Reweaving Mission from the Hang and Amazon Rivers,” which included a performance. The lecture began with her provocative performance accompanied by a beautiful film of the Hang and Amazon Rivers, prompting reflection on the transboundary echoes between Asia and Latin America. Asian theology has long emphasized the river as a key concept and symbol, representing the origins and connections of life for all creatures. Similarly, her film encouraged us to reconsider the Amazon River’s role in shaping theological imagination. Moreover, while wearing the funeral costume of a Korean female shaman, she conducted her performance and lecture, representing not only multi-religious identities but also mourning for victims of contemporary wars worldwide, including the 2026 Iran war. This performance beautifully echoed the conference’s central theme: “In the context of Christianity’s demographic shift towards the Global South, new questions about boundary-making, entanglements, and conviviality or convivência […] must address structural injustices and challenges faced by marginalized groups.”

Haruo Nawata Ward’s paper presentation, “Learning from Blessed Araki Susana and Her Underground Sisterhood in Extreme Persecution,” in the “Women and Boundary-Making in East Asia” panel likewise resonated with this theme. She compellingly examined the case of Araki Susana, a Japanese Kirishitan (Christian) woman in seventeenth-century Japan. I found it striking because it pushed me to rethink women’s agency within the patriarchal structures of early modern Japanese society, as well as within ecclesiastical historiography, which has often focused on male subjects. Ward’s meticulous work sheds light on Susana’s remarkable leadership within women’s confraternities, thereby recovering marginalized voices from both their socio-political context and contemporary historiographical frameworks.

Embodiment of Conference Theme through honoring Dale Irvin

The conference theme—particularly that of conviviality—was also well demonstrated in the panel honoring Dale Irvin. Stephanie Wong, one of the panelists, highlighted Irvin’s contribution to framing the field of World Christianity as a multidisciplinary endeavor. While his work has been grounded primarily in historical methodology, he has consistently embraced interdisciplinary approaches, incorporating insights from theology and the social sciences. Furthermore, another panelist, Aaron Hollander, emphasized Irvin’s role in building international and inter-institutional networks that have enriched the field. These reflections pointed to Irvin’s convivial character. Irvin himself remarked on the importance he places on listening to people’s voices, recalling his experience of lunch gatherings for international students while he was a student at Princeton Theological Seminary. This reflection encouraged the audience to consider not only what a founder of the field of World Christianity looks like, but also what the next generation of scholars in the field should emphasize from the perspective of conviviality.

Embodiment of Conference Theme through the conference itself

In the closing session, many participants shared their takeaways from the conference, highlighting the theme of conviviality as they experienced the staff’s hospitality and the presenters’ friendship across disciplinary boundaries and ecclesiological positions. Finally, it was announced that the next World Christianity Conference will be held in Asia. I strongly believe that the conviviality embodied in Brazil will continue to characterize the conference and its participants in Asia.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Itohan Idumwonyi (PhD) is an Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Gonzaga University in Washington State. She earned her Ph.D. in Religious Studies from Rice University in Houston. An accomplished and interdisciplinary scholar, she has authored several works, including her most recent monograph, Crashed Realities?: Gender Dynamics in Nigerian Pentecostalism (2024).

Introduction

This analysis highlights the transformative influence of Archbishop Benson and Margaret Idahosa in shaping Nigerian and global Pentecostalism. As founders of Church of God Mission International (CGMI), their dynamic leadership, inspired by T.L. Osborn’s evangelistic principles, propelled Nigerian Pentecostalism onto the international stage through innovative outreach, media evangelism, and church planting (T.L. Osborn, 1995, 67-69; B.A. Idahosa, 1995, iv-vii). Their strategic focus on evangelism, social engagement, and media outreach—making Benson Africa’s first televangelist—fostered rapid growth, expanding CGMi to over six thousand churches domestically and beyond, and exporting Nigerian Pentecostal leadership worldwide (Garlock, 1998, 148; Matthew Ojo, 2006, 61). Their pioneering efforts not only transformed Benin City into a Pentecostal hub but also laid a foundation for a global movement that continues to impact World Christianity, producing prominent leaders and shaping the trajectory of Nigerian Pentecostalism across nations (Idumwonyi, 2023; Olayinka Latona, 2016).

Lived Mission: Pioneers of Local and Transnational Evangelistic Crusades[1] and Church Planting

Benson and Margaret Idahosa profoundly shaped the global spread of Nigerian Pentecostalism and world Christianity. Their pioneering evangelistic approach was inspired by T.L. Osborn’s Soul-winning: Out Where the Sinners Are, which fueled their missionary zeal and crusades (T.L. Osborn, 1996, 67-69; B.A. Idahosa, 1995, iv-vii). Drawing on this, Benson introduced “crusades” to Benin City—an unfamiliar concept there—and emphasized personal salvation and relationship with Jesus, a novel idea for many locals (Personal Interview with elder Joseph Akioya). This strategy led to rapid growth and the exponential expansion of the CGMi. Their outreach also included intercessory prayer, dedicated evangelism, and miracles performed by the Holy Spirit, which attracted congregants and fostered community transformation (Uzamere, 2008, 2; Obadan, 1998, 13).

Their ministry aimed to transform Benin City for Christ by offering practical solutions during an economic recession, enhancing their appeal (Usman Habib, 2014, 64). Idahosa's approach—merging social services such as education, healthcare, and job creation with gospel preaching—rendered their ministry highly relevant and impactful (Idumwonyi, 2023, 63-64). After Benson’s return from the United States in 1972, they focused on church planting, establishing satellite churches across Nigeria. This strategy elevated Benson and Margaret as prominent Pentecostal leaders, culminating in the construction of major edifices such as the Miracle Center in 1973 and the Faith Miracle Cathedral in 1981, which seats over 10,000 (Matthew Ojo, 2006, 61; author’s Personal observation).

Photo by Holy Spirit River on Flickr

The CGMi’s growth was exceptional. Their leadership, centered on evangelism and church growth, resulted in over six thousand churches across Nigeria and beyond, laying the foundation for “reverse missions,” in which they export ministers globally (Adelagan, 2013, xxix; Olayinka Latona, 2016). His pioneering media outreach—television, and radio—made him Africa’s first televangelist, reaching millions across the continent and beyond (Garlock, 1998, 148). His “Redemption Hour” broadcast and programs like “Idahosa and You” revolutionized Nigerian televangelism, establishing a model adopted worldwide (Habib, 65; Personal Interview with Archbishop Ojo, 2016).

The influence of Benson and Margaret extended beyond Nigeria. Their ministry not only grew domestically but also exported Nigerian Pentecostalism globally. Many prominent leaders, including Bishop Nicholas Duncan-Williams, Bishop Charles Agyin-Asare, and Bishop Christianah Doe Tetteh, are alumni of the All Nations for Christ Bible Institute, founded by Idahosa (Idumwonyi, 2023, 92). Bishop Joseph Ojo agrees that:

Most of today’s ministries are derivative of Idahosa's [evangelistic effort]. It will be an injustice to his effort to limit the works God used him to do to only CGMi. The works of Ayo [Oritsejafor], [David] Oyedepo, and Felix Omobude are CGMi’s subsidiary.’ It may be correct to include, to some extent, the Redeemed Christian Church of God because many contemporary RCCG pastors were members of the CGMi…. I cannot acquit myself; my ministry is an offshoot of CGMi. When Mama Idahosa came here, and she said CKC is an extension of CGMi, I agreed. The world still feels the footprint of Idahosa. It is increasingly evident that Benin City’s CGMi is destined to play a vital role not just in liberating Nigerians but mainly in exporting the Gospel “to the ends of the earth,” as commanded in Acts 1⁸ (Personal Interview with Archbishop Ojo).

Benson and Margaret Idahosa's only son, Bishop. FEB Idahosa, who is presently the mission’s “head of cabinet,” had this to say in response to a question by a journalist:

Every great ministry in Nigeria today can trace its roots to the Archbishops Benson and Margaret Idahosa, whose focus on preaching and evangelism brought Christianity and the Pentecostal Movement to prominence. That is just to show the influence of what [these husband and wife] from Benin City, Edo State, had on the State, Nigeria, and Africa as a whole. Benin City is set up as a trigger point for change in the rest of Nigeria. “Nigeria ... is also a place from which God will make a difference in all of Africa... Out of Benin came Archbishop[s] Idahosa, and [t]he[y] changed Nigeria and the gospel ministry in Nigeria”(Anonymous, 2013).

Indeed, it is clear that the Idahosas’ and the CGMi changed the face of NP and beyond. Little wonder, then, that so many, like Osazee Osawaru, says of [them]: “I so much love and [reverence] th[ese] [wo/]/man of God; I am proud that such [people] mightily used by God came [out] of B[e]ni[n], it makes [me] proud to be a B[e]ni[n] man” (Osawaru Osazuwa. 2016).

Their impact is evident in the rise of Nigerian pastors leading major churches worldwide, with Benny Hinn affirming that the most prominent churches today globally are run by Nigerian pastors—many originating from Idahosa’s movement (Adelagan, 2013; Latona, 2016). Margaret Idahosa acknowledged that those who started with Benson became pillars in the global Pentecostal movement (Adelagan, 2013; Olayinka Latona, 2016).

Conclusion

This analysis underscores the transformative influence of Archbishop Benson and Margaret Idahosa in shaping Nigerian and global Pentecostalism. Their pioneering evangelistic strategies, rooted in charismatic leadership and innovative outreach, propelled CGMi from a local church to a dynamic, transnational movement. Their emphasis on evangelism, media ministry, social engagement, and church planting established a legacy that continues to inspire and shape contemporary Pentecostalism worldwide. Moreover, their contributions facilitated Nigeria’s emergence as a key exporter of Pentecostal leadership and evangelism, influencing numerous prominent ministries and leaders across Africa and beyond. The enduring impact of their visionary leadership affirms their pivotal role in the expansion and globalization of Nigerian Pentecostalism and World Christianity.

[1] The term “Crusades” carries diverse connotations depending on perspective, but generally signifies a proactive, zealous effort to spread faith. In Pentecostal discourse, it denotes energetic, large-scale missionary and evangelistic campaigns to promote the Gospel of Jesus Christ through passionate preaching, outreach, and conversion efforts, often characterized by urgency and fervor. Notable examples include Benson and Margaret Idahosa’s crusades, which were significant evangelistic events and outreach initiatives.

References

Adelegan, Femi. Nigeria’s Leading Lights of the Gospel: Revolutionaries in Worldwide Christianity. Bloomington, IN: West Bow Press, 2013.

Garlock, R., Fire in His Bones: The Story of Benson Idahosa, (Tulsa, OK: Praise Books, 1998).

Idumwonyi, M. Itohan. Crashed Realities?: Gender Dynamics in Nigerian Pentecostalism. (Brill), 2023.

Obadan, P., The Legend: Archbishop Prof. Benson Idahosa 11th September 1938 – 12th March 1998, (Benin City, Nigeria: Glopet Limited, 2006).

Ojo, M. A., The End-Time Army: Charismatic Movements in Modern Nigeria, (Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, Inc., 2006).

Osborn, T. L., Soul-winning: Out where the Sinners Are, (Tulsa, OK: Harrison House, 1966).

Usman I. Habib, A New Paradigm of Leadership Development of the Church of God Mission International. A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities, School of Arts, Languages and Cultures, 2014.

Internet Resource

Anonymous, “Idahosa, Benson Andrew (1938 to 1998) Church of God Mission Inc. Nigeria,” accessed on August 3, 2017

Anonymous, “Welcome to my Testimony [’s] Blog! Rev 12:11” https://mytestimonys.blogspot.ca/2013/05/bishop-feb-idahosa-testifies_20.html (posted Monday, May 20, 2013), accessed on July 17, 2020.

Latona, Olayinka “I am Amazed by What Pastor Adeboye, Bishop Oyedepo, others are doing– Benny Hinn” in Vanguard Newspaper (November 19, 2016), accessed September 8, 2017.

Osawaru Osaze responded to a Facebook post by Lewis Akpogena on January 5, 2016, cited https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesCommunityDevelopmentInitiativesPcodi/posts/123933324434141, accessed on August 3, 2020.

Uzamere Osaheni, Nigeria: 10 Years After Archbishop Idahosa, in Leadership, All Africa https://allafrica.com/stories/200805010120.html 2. (May 1, 2008) <Assessed 02/27/2026>

Personal Interview

Akioya Joseph, (elder and chairman of the Marriage Counseling Committee in CGMi, died 2025) in Benin City on June 30, 2015.

Joseph Ojo (one-time bishop in CGMi, now founder and Archbishop of Calvary Kingdom Church (CKC), Lagos), in Lagos on July 13, 2016.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Please don’t forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the OMSC’s Roundtable YouTube channel today for more insight, questions, and meaningful conversation on world Christianity and mission studies.

Nicolás Panotto is a theologian and holds a PhD in Social Sciences. An Argentine residing in Chile, he serves as a professor and associate researcher at the Institute for Ecumenical Studies and Religious Education at the University of Oldenburg (Germany), and as a professor at the Evangelical Faculty of Theology in Chile. He is the founder and director of the civil organization Otros Cruces.

2. Interculturality in Theological Education

In many evangelical and Protestant institutions in Latin America, interculturality remains marginal. Its absence can be seen in two main areas: theological content and pedagogical practice.

In terms of content, there is often little recognition of the intercultural nature of both the Bible and theology. Scripture itself emerges from complex cultural interactions, marked by dialogue, conflict, and negotiation. Likewise, theology has always developed through encounters across cultures. Ignoring this dimension limits our ability to engage key questions about truth, subjectivity, and the relationship between the universal and the particular.

On the pedagogical level, many institutions continue to rely on Eurocentric models that prioritize abstract knowledge over lived experience. Knowledge is often transmitted rather than constructed collectively. Even when institutions adopt critical or liberative language, their methods may still reproduce hierarchical and exclusionary patterns.

A recurring issue is the way “others” are framed. The concern is often how to reach them, include them, or translate theology for them. But rarely do these approaches ask how these encounters might transform our own identities and theological assumptions. As a result, what is presented as intercultural engagement often remains at the level of adaptation rather than genuine dialogue.

In work with Indigenous communities, three general models can be observed. Some initiatives begin from Indigenous practices and seek to reinterpret theology in light of them. Others aim to build bridges between different cultural worlds through translation. Still others operate within a framework of inculturation, adapting theological language without questioning its underlying assumptions. While each of these approaches has value, all risk falling short if they do not address deeper epistemological and power dynamics.

Photo by Martin Sanchez on Unsplash

3. Toward an Intercultural Theological Education

In light of all that has been said, I would like to propose two central premises. First, interculturality is not merely about how we approach other communities and groups, but about recognizing the historical, cultural, and therefore transient nature of our own identity, which arises from our encounters with others. Let us not make interculturality just another item on our agendas, focused on those “others.” Let us speak of interculturality as an exercise in radical critical hermeneutics regarding our own contexts. Let us embrace an intercultural identity.

Second, to build a genuine intercultural dialogue between institutions and churches with diverse groups, the logic of interculturality must not be centered solely on a mechanism for reaching out to the other, but on a space for mutual reinterpretation of our own theology in theological terms. To transform the boundaries of theological formation and production, the starting point must also be theological. This has several implications:

• Embracing the intercultural dimension of theological work and biblical interpretation—that is, its historical, contextual, and communal nature.

• Recognizing dialogue as the starting point for both mission and knowledge production.

• Developing participatory pedagogies that integrate diverse forms of knowledge.

• Creating spaces of encounter among different communities.

• Rethinking public engagement through an intercultural lens.

Interculturality is not simply an appeal to contextual theologies but to the contextuality of theology itself. It is not descriptive pluralism but a recognition that diversity shapes even our most basic theological assumptions.

This calls for a renewed sensibility grounded in three attitudes: self-critique, discernment, and openness to the disruptive presence of the other.

The challenge, then, is not only educational but also political and ecclesial. Interculturality offers a way to confront both the crisis in theological education and the broader tensions shaping our societies. It invites us to decolonize our practices and deepen interreligious dialogue.

This raises a series of pressing questions. How do we speak of God in ways that engage multiple spiritual traditions? How do we navigate the boundaries between religion and culture? What would it mean to build pedagogies where interculturality is not a topic but a foundation? How can churches rethink their identities in light of these challenges? And how might intercultural dialogue contribute to more inclusive forms of democratic life?

The task before us is demanding. It requires more than acknowledging diversity. It asks us to allow these encounters to unsettle us—to reshape how we think, believe, and live. Only then can interculturality become not just a concept, but a transformative practice.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Nicolás Panotto is a theologian and holds a PhD in Social Sciences. An Argentine residing in Chile, he serves as a professor and associate researcher at the Institute for Ecumenical Studies and Religious Education at the University of Oldenburg (Germany), and as a professor at the Evangelical Faculty of Theology in Chile. He is the founder and director of the civil organization Otros Cruces.

I come from an Argentine family that, like many in my country, idealized its European roots—especially Italian and Basque. Many of the “family traumas” we recount are tied to migration: stories of my great-great-grandparents fleeing World War I in search of a new life. But this idealization is not only personal. It reflects a broader cultural narrative in Argentina, one that still imagines its origins in European migration while treating the extermination of Indigenous peoples as a marginal footnote.

In my ecclesial, theological, and political journey, encounters with other voices—particularly Indigenous communities—forced me to confront this inherited worldview. What began as exposure gradually became a process of recognition, discernment, and struggle. I came to see how deeply colonial and modern frameworks had shaped my thinking, not only in my family history but in my education, my daily life, and even my faith.

From this experience emerge two guiding concerns. First, how can we develop a critical understanding of our cultural location—one shaped by colonial and Eurocentric assumptions—while remaining open to transformation through encounter? Second, why do theological institutions, even those that present themselves as critical or progressive, continue to reproduce these same frameworks in both their content and their pedagogies?

In this context, interculturality is often invoked, but rarely clarified. It is frequently reduced to engaging “others,” integrating diversity, or combining perspectives. Yet these uses risk emptying the concept of its critical force. Moreover, interculturality itself is not neutral: it emerges from modern frameworks and cannot fully escape them. For this reason, we must approach it with caution and self-awareness.

The key question, then, is simple but demanding: Why do we speak of interculturality at all? Are we seeking to include others, or to be transformed by them? Without this distinction, interculturality easily becomes a superficial gesture.

Photo by Martin Sanchez on Unsplash

1. On Interculturality

Interculturality can be understood as a response to three dominant ways of thinking about culture.

First, it challenges the modern notion of culture as fixed, homogeneous, and hierarchical—a view historically intertwined with colonialism. Second, it resists the logic of acculturation, which assumes that supposedly “universal” elements can be transferred into different cultural contexts without recognizing their embeddedness. Third, it goes beyond multiculturalism, which values diversity but often treats cultures as separate, self-contained units that coexist without truly engaging one another.

In contrast, interculturality sees cultures as dynamic, relational, and constantly changing. It is not simply about coexistence but about mutual learning and transformation.

In this sense, interculturality is best understood as a practice: an ongoing process of communication and relationship-building among different cultural perspectives. It requires more than recognition—it calls for openness, dialogue, and the willingness to be changed. No culture is complete in itself; each is shaped and reshaped through encounter with others.

This process also has a critical dimension. Interculturality questions the structures—social, political, and epistemological—that prevent equitable relationships. It exposes how power operates within cultural exchanges and challenges the hierarchies that sustain exclusion.

What some call “critical interculturality” makes this explicit. It involves, at a minimum, two dispositions. The first is self-critique: an awareness that our identities are neither fixed nor pure, but shaped by historical and cultural forces. The second is a decolonial stance: the recognition that colonial patterns continue to shape our ways of thinking and relating, often in subtle ways.

In Latin America, these insights have significantly influenced philosophy and pedagogy. They have led to critiques of dominant models of knowledge that present themselves as universal while excluding other ways of knowing. In their place, intercultural approaches emphasize collective knowledge-building and the coexistence of multiple epistemologies.

For this reason, interculturality is not a matter of political correctness. It is a demanding commitment. It requires humility, openness, and a willingness to let encounter unsettle our assumptions.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Please don’t forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the OMSC’s Roundtable YouTube channel today for more insight, questions, and meaningful conversation on world Christianity and mission studies.

Please don’t forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the OMSC’s Roundtable YouTube channel today for more insight, questions, and meaningful conversation on world Christianity and mission studies.

Dr. Kip Elolia was born in Kenya, studied in Canada, and later moved to the United States. He earned his PhD from Trinity College at the University of Toronto and is Professor of Theology and World Christianity at Milligan University. His research engages theology of mission, African pneumatology, postcolonial theology, religion and civil society, and theological ethnography. He is the editor of Religion and Politics (2013) and the author of Marakwet Ethnography (2024), which reflects his sustained engagement with African Christianity and lived theology.

As a central Christian practice, the eucharist plays a key role in the preservation of memory, resilience and endurance. In other words, the act of remembering and not forgetting is a critical imperative for building up enduring Christian communities. My goal in this paper is to showcase the eucharistic ritual from the perspective of African indigenous Churches and their departure from the Mission Churches. Notably, the eucharistic elements in the mission-founded churches still reflect colonial, capitalistic, and uniformity and therefore deserve a postcolonial critique and imagination.

Incidentally, the eucharist and the memory it represents have often been perceived as a threat by those who wield and abuse political power. Indeed, they have a reason to be worried because the Eucharist has resisted violence by the way it is enacted through the social body of the visible community. For them, it is a subversive acclamation that Jesus’ death and resurrection are forms of resistance.[1] In this regard, the eucharist is a public performance of telling the story from the point of view of people who were colonized.[2] Contrary to maintaining uniformity, the eucharistic elements of the early Christians were diverse, localized, and pluriform. It involved sharing fruits, vegetables, fish, and bread. Similarly, other liquids such as water, milk, and oil were used instead of wine.[3] This goes to show that the Gospel traditions indicate non-unified or normative practices of the eucharist.[4]

Photo by Wilson Stratton on Unsplash

The early Church understood healing and salvation as one and the same. In fact, the primary Greek verb 𝜎𝜔𝜁𝜔 and the noun are used interchangeably for physical healing and spiritual salvation, implying a holistic restoration of body, soul, and spirit or well-being. In the same way, African Indigenous Churches understand this broadly to include the healing and the well-being of all things, including people, creatures, trees, and the land.

In 1991, the Association of African Earthkeeping Churches, a grassroots environmental and tree-planting movement composed of 180 African-Independent denominations, adopted a yearly tree planting Eucharist in the rainy season. The Churches chose to rally under the politically loaded term Chimurenga, which means “struggle” or “revolution”. The term was originally used by freedom fighters in their struggle for political independence from colonial rule. However, in this context it is used for ecological justice. Planting the seedlings is an act of reconciliation between God, humankind, and creation. As in all AIC faith healing ceremonies, confession of sins is paramount. In this case, it is primarily the confession of ecological sins such as overgrazing, felling trees without replacing, exploiting the soil without reverence, and killing animals for sport. The primary goal is to commit to restoring creation as a sign of true repentance. The prophets who receive the confessions are guided by the Holy Spirit and are trusted to discern the unrepentant.

Assembled on the eucharistic table are bread, wine, and seedlings. Dance and song bring a sense of celebration. The missiologist Marthinus Inus Daneel, who lived among the Zionist churches in Zimbabwe, observed a eucharistic ritual led by a Zionist minister, Rev. Sauro Masoro. As he delivered his sermon under the shade of a sacred tree, he stated that the people before him and the tree under which they sat were one, and without the tree, the people wouldn’t breathe. God’s act of creation, therefore, implies total interdependence between humans and trees.[5] In AIC's interpretation, Adam and Eve do not appear as the crown of creation or dominating the other creation in the garden, but as equals with the other animals and plants for whom they identify and serve as ecological stewards.[6] On another occasion, another Bishop officiated the sacrament of bread and wine, followed by a public confession of ecological sins, before the seedlings were distributed. The communicants then proceeded to the lot where the holes had been dug and before they drop the seed in the holes, the bishop walks through and sprinkling the consecrated water on the ground and on the seedlings saying “This is the water of purification and fertility, we sprinkle it on this new acre of trees, It is a prayer to God, a symbol of rain, O that the trees will grow, So that the land will heal…You tree my brother … my sister. Today I plant you in this soil, I shall give you water for your growth. Have good roots to keep the soil from erosion. Have many leaves and branches, so that we can breathe fresh air, sit in your shed, and find firewood.”.[7] Afterwards, the people return to the assembly for the formal conclusion of the service. This is repeated in many member Churches, and some of the mission-founded Churches are taking note.

The Eucharist assists the Christian community in acknowledging the presence of God in the world and the presence of the world in God. Jürgen Moltmann is probably one of the leading theologians in the West whose expansive work on the Spirit resonates with African Pneumatology. He argues that all divine activity is pneumatic in its manifestation, and by extension, everything that exists does so through the inflow of the cosmic potency.[8] This implies that the Spirit-centered theology perceives God’s imminence in the world of nature.

At the ritual table, the historic concept of perichoresis is interpreted to underscore the relationship of the mutual indwelling of the social trinity. In this interactive, all things are united in heaven and earth, soul and body, all united in one life-giving entity. This affirms the African communitarianism in which nothing is solitary, self-existing, or individualistic. Through the same common spirit, humans and other life forms are united.

[1] William T. Cavanagh, Torture and Eucharist: Theology, Politics, and the Body of Christ (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), 280).

[2] HyeRan Kim-Cragg, “Postcolonial Practices on Eucharist” in

Kwok Pui-lan & Stephen Burns (eds) Postcolonial Practice of Ministry: Leadership, Liturgy, and Interfaith Engagement, Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books, (2015)77

[3] Andrew McGowan, Ascetic Eucharists: Food and Drink in Early Christian Ritual Meals (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), chapter 3

[4] Christopher Grundy, “The Grace of Resilience: Eucharistic Origins, Trauma Theory, and Implications for Contemporary Practice,” NAAL Proceedings, 50-51

[5] Daneel, African Earth keepers: Interfaith Mission in Earth Care, Vols. 1-2 (1998, 2000) 158-159

[6] Daneel, African Earth keepers: Interfaith Mission in Earth Care, Vols. 1-2 (1998, 2000)159

[7] Daneel, African Earth keepers: Interfaith Mission in Earth Care, Vols. 1-2 (1998, 2000)159

[8] Jürgen Moltmann, The Church in the Power of the Spirit, New York: Harper and Row, 1977.

Learn more about other articles like this one:

Stephen is a PhD Candidate in the Department of History and Ecumenics at Princeton Theological Seminary, specializing in “Religion in the Americas.” Stephen is the managing editor of The Occasional.

Since its inception in the 1950s, the International Bulletin of Mission Research has aimed to lead in the study of missions and world Christianity. After various name changes, such as the “Occasional Bulletin,” to its current title, it has expanded its scholarship across multiple disciplines and practices. It was started in the 1950s by then-OMSC director Dr. R. Pierce Beaver as the Occasional Bulletin from the Missionary Research Library, providing summaries and resources for missionaries, mission agencies, and churches with relevant information and metrics on missionary activities both in the U.S. and globally. Named because it was an “occasional” publication, this concept was reformed by Dr. Gerald Anderson in January 1977 as the Occasional Bulletin of Missionary Research to emphasize academic study related to missions, missiology, and the field as it was evolving at the time. While it had various names over time the Occasional Bulletin from the Missionary Research Library (1950–1976) and the Occasional Bulletin of Missionary Research (1976–1980), International Bulletin of Missionary Research (1981–2015). In 2015, it adopted its current name, the International Bulletin of Mission Research, and has remained at the forefront of the field, including a diverse range of global voices and traditions. Recent issues have explored African indigenous spirituality, Indonesian evangelical practices, and the historiographical challenges of missionary narratives. To stay at the cutting edge of mission and world Christianity studies, editor Dr. Soojin Chung has invited two renowned scholars to join the editorial board: Dr. Deanna Ferree Womack (Emory University) and Dr. Kyama Mugambi (Yale Divinity School). Below, we introduce them and welcome them to this new endeavor.

OMSC Director and IMBR Editor Dr. Soojin Chung extends the welcome, “Kyama brings his expertise in African urban Christianity, and Deanna in Middle Eastern Christianity and Christian-Muslim relations. Both are renowned historians of Christianity, and the IBMR continues its legacy with a strong focus on history while broadening its scope to be increasingly multidisciplinary.”

We have welcome the new editors to tell readers of the Occasional a little more of their work and grasp of the field of World Christianity.

Dr. Deanna Wommack is Associate Professor of History of Religions and Interfaith Studies at Emory University’s Candler School of Theology. From 2022 to 2025 she directed Candler’s Master of Arts in Religion and Leadership program, and she served from 2015 to 2020 as director of the Leadership and Multifaith Program (LAMP), established with the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts at Georgia Tech. Womack came to Candler from Princeton Theological Seminary, where she earned her MDiv, ThM and PhD. She is an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (USA).

Womack’s research focuses on Middle Eastern Christianity, Christian-Muslim relations, and mission history. She is the author of Protestants, Gender and the Arab Renaissance in Late Ottoman Syria (Edinburgh University Press 2019), Neighbors: Christians and Muslims Building Community (Westminster John Knox Press, 2020), and Re-inventing Islam: Gender and the Protestant Roots of American Islamophobia (Oxford University Press, 2025). She is the editor of Christianity in the Contemporary Middle East: Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant Communities in Context (Brill, 2025); co-editor with Raimundo Barreto of Alterity and the Evasion of Justice: Explorations of the “Other” in World Christianity (Fortress, 2023); and co-editor with Thomas Seat, Christie Chow, and John Boopalan of Disciplinary Tensions in World Christianity: Methodology, Power Dynamics, and the History of Religions (Fortress, 2026). Her current research project, funded by the Louisville Institute, examines the history and contemporary life of Middle Eastern immigrant churches in the Americas.

How do you understand the field of World Christianity today, and what do you see as its most important contributions—or challenges—at this moment?

World Christianity as a field of study has offered a way to study mission history while attending to indigenous Christian voices and the field has elevated the importance of studying Christian communities around the globe within their distinct local contexts and in relationship to one another without centering Western missionaries. That is to say, the field challenges euro-centric and colonial-imperialist impulses in the study of Christianity, especially when focusing on Asian, African, and Latin American contexts. Among other emphases, the field’s attention to marginalized Christians (including those whose histories and present-day realities have been marginalized within academia itself) is particularly compelling to me. This has included efforts to recognize how central women, and particularly Global South women, have been to the growth and vitality of Christianity around the world. I still see attention to gender as a growing edge within the field. At the present moment, as the field has become well established in several European and American universities, the challenge remains to continue looking to the margins and ask: What histories of Christianity have been neglected within the field? What contemporary communities receive less attention in studies on World Christianity? I believe the field could grow, for example, through the participation of more scholars with expertise on Christianity in the Middle East and on Orthodox Christianity more broadly.

Could you briefly describe your current project and what you see as its main intervention—methodological, theoretical, or empirical—within World Christianity studies?

My current book project, funded by a grant from the Louisville Institute, focuses on Middle Eastern Christianity in the Americas. It covers the history of Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant migration from the Middle East beginning in the mid-nineteenth century and brings us up to the present with oral history interviews conducted in Arab, Syriac, and Armenian Christian diaspora communities in Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Mexico, the US, and Canada. It contributes to World Christianity because the Middle East is still rarely a common focus in the field, and in particular, it sheds light on a diversity of Eastern Catholic and Orthodox traditions that have been largely neglected in World Christianity literature on contemporary Christianity. By showing the networks of Middle Eastern familial, ecclesial, and spiritual connections across the Americas, this book also models a way of studying Christianity in the (single) continent of America.

Kyama Mugambi (PhD) is Assistant Professor of World Christianity at Yale Divinity School. His research explores focusing on indigenous agency, mission, culture, social transformation, communality, and oral liturgies in urban African and World Christianity contexts. His most recent book, Christians in the City of Nairobi: An African City and the Future of World Christianity (Bloomsbury Academic, 2025), co-authored with Prof. Mark Shaw, examines how the diverse Christian traditions in Kenya’s capital engage with and respond to the secularizing forces of the modern city. His earlier work, A Spirit of Revitalization: Urban Pentecostalism in Kenya (Baylor University Press, 2020), traces the development of Pentecostal Christianity in Kenya from 1920 to 2020. He is on the editorial team of several publications including Church History: Studies in Christianity and Culture. He has also conducted grant funded research work in Africa. Dr. Mugambi is faculty lead for the Yale MacMillan Center’s Project on Religion and Society in Africa, which promotes critical inquiry religion’s role in societal wellbeing.

Could you briefly describe your current project and what you see as its main intervention—methodological, theoretical, or empirical—within World Christianity studies?

His current research project examines oral liturgies in charismatic Christian movements across Africa. The work enhances methods in World Christianity studies by incorporating indigenous agency into worship practices. It combines contemporary social history with ethnographic approaches to liturgy. This effort aims to strengthen World Christianity studies through interdisciplinary methods that provide fresh insights into the lived experiences fueling Christian growth in the twenty-first century.

How do you understand the field of World Christianity today, and what do you see as its most important contributions—or challenges—at this moment?

World Christianity studies emphasize telling Christian history over time—a story about religious experience with a vision for the world from a global perspective. By its very name, World Christianity critiques dominant narratives and highlights a new way of thinking about Christianity’s trajectory. Scholars in this field strive to find stories from the margins of traditional narratives. They focus on both the details and the larger themes emerging from grassroots efforts that have been overlooked in previous accounts. They make a conscious effort to include stories from the global south—covering regions such as Africa, Asia, the Mediterranean, Oceania, and Eastern Europe—recognizing that contributions from these areas were not always driven, organized, or centered on the global north. Additionally, World Christianity scholars aim to uncover stories from within the global north that have been marginalized or overshadowed by prevailing narratives.

The result has been an ever-growing corpus of work that tells the story from the perspective of primary actors: the local people. This body of research seeks out the questions, the categories, and the experiences that matter to these constituencies. It surfaces these to open new dimensions of discourse that stand on their own or challenge existing narratives.

World Christianity scholars’ most easily identifiable contribution, especially at the turn of the century, was to call attention to the radical change in the demography of Christianity that had been slowly but surely occurring, hidden under the gaze of prevailing, powerful narratives. But beyond calling out this important change was the critical reexamination of mission studies and church history—a fresh attempt to reevaluate the legacies of empire and the missteps of historical mission, but this time with care not to erase their critical yet complicated role in the story of Christianity. This important contribution offers pathways to understand the complex legacies that attend Christian expansion over time.

World Christianity’s counter-narratives and correctives complement the intertwining narratives of the trajectories of Christianity across the disciplines of church history, history, and the study of religion. It offers new ways to reflect on the legacies that these disciplines have carried with them as they have relied on global north categories and priorities of the modern period.

As the demographics continue to change in the 21st century and as new milestones emerge, world Christianity studies will continue to demand a broader vision. Scholars will need to prepare themselves to engage with multiple dimensions of indigenous initiatives that translate and retranslate the Christian message to an ever-changing context. As has been the case throughout the 2,000-year history of Christianity, what was marginal may become dominant, while what was dominant risks marginality.

Scholars of world Christianity have begun to, and will continually have to, grapple with the tension of remaining true to the field’s roots in history, theology, and mission studies while actively seeking discourse with other disciplines. They will have to contend with the theoretical and methodological import from these disciplines that arose under the very legacies that world Christianity seeks to challenge. The ever-changing demographics of Christian history will need to be ever more attentive to research and scholarship from the global south that reflects on the trajectories of Christian expansion there. In this regard, interdisciplinarity and transnational collaborations will need to increasingly take center stage in this ongoing discourse.

For more on the IBMR, see its publication website.

Learn more about other articles like this one: