Liturgy in Postcolonial Perspectives: Only One is Holy

256 Stephen Burns the kind of institutional context out of which it emerged invites much further reflection. This essay is an attempt to extend thought about the same issues as Christian Worship, while also enlarging optics from academic curricula to wider curricula matters that press upon seminaries. In what follows, I explore and elaborate notions of multiple and intersecting curricula that are at play in seminary communities. In particular, Maria Harris’s notion of explicit, implicit, and null curricula, recently put to good use in HyeRan Kim-Cragg’s own postcolonial explorations,4 have been important in my thinking. So, with reminders of other people’s good work, I sketch a few suggestions that invoke and expand the concerns of Christian Worship, not only in relation to the liturgical study and the liturgical environments that seminaries offer, but further across the expanse of their work and structures. No One Way to Be a Seminary At the beginning, it needs to be said that there is no one way to be a seminary, for although similar loyalties may converge and different “audiences”—the church, the academy, and wider publics—might overlap in them in some related kinds of ways, each term in the cluster “seminary,” “theological college,” and “divinity school” might mean somewhat different things in different places. All such institutions might see themselves as in some way responsible for theological education, some kind of spiritual discipline and aspects of practical training for ministries, but this can mean quite a range of things. To note just a few variables: seminaries configure their relationships with other seminaries, and with universities, as well as their relationships with enveloping and sponsoring churches, in a range of ways. They make different kinds of engagement with, and receive different levels of direction and oversight from, these partners. Some see themselves as more fully responsible for “theological education” than for “formation” or “training,” which they might regard as more in the trust of some other body within sponsoring churches—though this may entail a grave mistake of assuming that the explicit curriculum is foremost and most powerful among various curricula at work. Seminaries also may be more, or less, ecumenical in approach and in other ways situate themselves in relation to “catholicity.” Consequently, they take divergent approaches to the Christian tradition, to how it might be perused and represented. They may or may not be residential, leaning more or less deeply into monastic patterns of relating work, prayer, and place. They lay varying degrees of emphasis on fieldwork. They make different—sometimes very few—requirements about participation in chapel and other expressions of whatever is proposed as “common life.” Yet some (perhaps where there is more savvy about different curricula) are strenuous about attempting to integrate such things with academic study. And seminaries change rapidly,

When Seminaries Get Stuck 257 with significant turnover each year. Indeed, they can deteriorate very quickly, and languish, for instance, when leadership is difficult.5 For all of these reasons, besides others, seminaries, for all their differences, can be very consuming environments, and their intensity is amplified because they are often entangled with a variety of competing dynamics: many at least remain interested in scrutinizing persons entering representative and public roles.6 Moreover, no contemporary account of seminaries can ignore the fact that many of them are in crisis, even as others appear to be flourishing. Katherine Ragsdale points to the crisis: ““The survival of venerable and important institutions is at stake—but so are the mission and ministry of those institutions”.7 The problems in some seminaries are absorbed into narratives of larger, denominational-wide declines, and they can be ensnared with a broader sense of confusion about the church’s ministries, and how ordination might sit within wider ministries. These situations are, no doubt rightly, sometimes understood to require radically different kinds of training for ministers. And even when new patterns of training are not being promoted, and critical questions are not being asked about what was once more widely considered as the core business of preparation for ordination, seminaries may be scrambling to somehow reinvent themselves, perhaps by mixing in “innovative partnerships.” At the same time as these various challenges unfold, other places flourish, and in ways not unlike the wider churches. So it is sometimes because of an influx resulting from migration, and sometimes in communities of ethnic minorities (visible and otherwise), and again in communities that are able to become ethnically and in other ways diverse, that the bourgeoning occurs. Certainly, patterns relating to who attends seminaries as students are changing. Yet even as “the face of theology”8 among the student body is more diverse, the “face” of those teaching may be more uniform, if not predictable. In 2012, 38.2 percent of persons enrolled in the North American Association of Theological Schools, for example, were students of color. Statistics on ethnically diverse leadership are less encouraging.9 Opaque “Formation” This being said, diversity—perhaps not so much with respect to ethnic heritage, but of denominational affiliation—is one reason that understandings of “formation” can, in some seminaries, be notably thin. As already suggested, sometimes seminaries are much stronger on theological education than they are on the other two activities that are sometimes thought to be their core tasks: practical training and (ministerial, spiritual, personal) formation. This may be particularly the case in the dominant North American set-up through the Association of Theological Schools (ATS).10 An older book in which the current executive director of the ATS, Daniel

258 Stephen Burns O. Aleshire, was involved, Being There: Culture and Formation in Two Seminaries, 11 had “formation” as one of its keywords, but the same is hardly true of the ATS’s contemporary core accreditation document: 1. It speaks of “a theological school [a]s a community of faith and learning that cultivates habits of theological reflection, nurtures wise and skilled ministerial practice, and contributes to the formation of spiritual awareness and moral sensitivity” (para. 3). 2. It proposes a multifaceted approach to the curriculum as “the array of specific activities (e.g., courses, practica, supervised ministry, spiritual formation experiences, theses) explicitly required in a degree program” (para. 3.1.2). 3. It mentions formation in relation to faculty endeavoring to teach in such a way that enables students to “integrate their learning from the various disciplines, field education, and personal formation” (para. 5.2.3). 4. It also cautions that the use of electronic technologies in courses should ensure that “teaching and learning maintains its focus on the formation and knowledge of religious leaders” (para. 8.8). In these instances, the ATS document associates formation with “spirituality,” and also with religious leadership. But it gives little further clue as to what constitutes formation. Perhaps, though, indirectly, it communicates that formation is understood as non-coterminous with “knowledge”? And perhaps a certain opacity is intentional? In such a large, pan-denominational umbrella body as ATS, stretching across many ecclesial traditions— and commendably incorporating evangelical and charismatic traditions, as well as Catholic, Orthodox, and old-line Protestants—minimialistic depictions of formation may be wise and necessary. After all, not all churches understand ordination and ministry in the same ways, and recognition of the churches’ contemporary missional challenges requires reconsideration of the role of the churches’ leaders as well as retooling for their work. On the other hand, even as ministry and ordination are sometimes volatile ecumenical topics, a considerable convergence about where ordained ministry is centered—worship, proclamation, and pastoral care—also has to be acknowledged across traditions,12 even as in other ways the roles of clergy within wider cultures have proved remarkably adaptable.13 So ATS minimalism may be seen as an important way of being open to shifting cultural and ecumenical scenes, as well as hospitable to greater definition and emphasis on formation being brought by denominational bodies. All may be well if the wider denominational bodies do this. Yet: when ATSesque minimalism coincides with seminaries in some traditions operating with perhaps very weak levels of accountability and ecclesial oversight, and lack of investment and even a certain lack of interest from ecclesial bodies

When Seminaries Get Stuck 259 (who perhaps fail to realize that ATS is itself only one partner amongst other necessary ones), the crisis facing seminaries may be deepened. For this reason, perhaps the ATS itself is currently acknowledging a paradigm shift that many seminaries (at least in North America) are yet to make from a discipline-based model focused on academic curriculum shape, to a more integrative “formational” model.14 Of course, the literature from both ATS and its schools may already suggest things about “formation” even when not using the word itself. We next consider the Academic Handbook of one ATS-accredited institution15—one that, notably, considers itself to be a seminary “for” rather than “of” the Episcopal Church. The handbook: 1. locates formation in a “Conference System” of student small groups, which is described as a “peer context for academic advisement, dimensions of ministerial formation, and information” (p. 21); 2. sees formation in relation to “course competence,” which is defined in terms of eight dot-points, the last of which is “skills in developing a life-process of spiritual formation in communities of faith” (p. 27); 3. mentions a final integration paper that is concerned with students “integrating their academic competence, spiritual formation, and ministerial praxis” (p. 31); 4. identifies formation as part of a field education practicum, also integrative, that meets “approximately once per month to integrate their field education, academic studies, and ongoing formation for ministry” (p. 38). For students able to study abroad, they must also produce “a written 5-page, self-critical reflection paper on the nature of their academic and ministerial formation as a result of their study abroad” (p. 61). Further, two appendices also refer to formation “on a scale of one to ten” selfassessment measures. While their coverage constitutes a very small fragment of the 136-page handbook, spiritual and ministerial formation are at least mentioned in the document, and in ways that broadly cohere with the ATS document. But making a deeper assessment of the formational work of the institution would also involve noting at least: that there was no formation handbook to complement the academic one; that while selfdesignating as “for,” not “of,” the institution is related to an ecclesial body that does no accrediting of institutions but which (as much depends on local dioceses and bishops) sometimes assesses candidates for ordained ministry through a “General Ordination Exam”; and that according to Episcopal Church canons, oversight of the chapel is held by the president, not the academic faculty.16 A formational paradigm shift would need to take such factors into account, by way of accommodation or contest.

260 Stephen Burns Moving Toward a Formational Paradigm In his recent paper on moving into a formational paradigm, Daniel Aleshire from the ATS cites with approval Henri Nouwen’s idea of the minister [a]s the one who can make th[e] search for authenticity possible, not by standing to the side as a neutral screen or impartial observer, but as an articulate witness to Christ, who puts his own search at the disposal of others.17 He relates this idea to a number of factors that stretch beyond learning in the academic curriculum. Aleshire suggests that the formational model to which seminaries need to move involves “the development of religious leaders more than . . . the intellectual content necessary for professional practice”; that it “calls for educational goals that cultivate habits, perceptions, a way of being in the world, a kind of theological habitus, combined with a sense of personal wellness and growing spiritual maturity”; and that it “takes Christian character and spirituality seriously and gives considerable attention to integration. It engages a more personal form of learning.”18 However, Aleshire also finds a resonance with his more explicit identification of aspects beyond academic curriculum within the current accreditation document: In a theological school, the overarching goal is the development of theological understanding, that is, aptitude for theological reflection and wisdom pertaining to responsible life in faith. Comprehended in this overarching goal are others such as deepening spiritual awareness, growing in moral sensibility and character, gaining an intellectual grasp of the tradition of the faith community, and acquiring the abilities requisite to the exercise of ministry in that community. (para. 3.1.1)19 Here, again, the word “formation” is not used, but it is suggested in talk of an “overarching goal.” The important point should also be noted that the talk here is of an overarching goal for an institution, and not simply for individual students. So it might be understood to call attention to conditions for a community of formation. At the very least, it is evident from Aleshire’s elaboration of the “overarching goal” of seminary communities that they need attention and scrutiny that is wider than academic curriculum. And here is the challenge for persons committed to postcolonial perspectives: these cannot be left unrelated to whatever else that, in addition to academic curriculum, goes on in a seminary community. Postcolonial perspectives need to be thought through in relation to whatever practices are, or are not, understood to contribute to formation, right across the institution. Textured notions of plural curricula are necessary, and postcolonial optics need to be explicitly turned to each of them and their intersections.

When Seminaries Get Stuck 261 Intersecting Curricula Sometimes, in seminaries and other contexts, where language of formation is used, it is acknowledged as including at least academic, spiritual/ personal, and ministerial dimensions. Aleshire’s ideas are reaching toward the latter dimensions as much as the first, and in more deliberate ways than those found in his organization’s current documents. It must be stressed that such categories are not discreet and separate—they are intersecting20—yet unless they are separately identified, there is a risk that persons might be formed academically (or indeed in all kinds of ways “spiritually”) without this contributing anything in particular to ministerial formation. Arguably, this is the risk of formation discussed as opaquely as it is in the current ATS core document, and in turn, in one of its schools. Conversely, of course, persons might undertake certain kinds of ministerial training without being scrutinized academically, or without those persons being animated “spiritually.” For as Aleshire has sagely suggested in his book, Earthen Vessels, and in ways that already reach toward his appreciation of Nouwen’s view: People tend to assess the work of ministers and priests in terms of three broad questions: Do they truly love God? Do they relate with care and integrity to human beings? Do they have the knowledge and skills that the job requires? . . . Not only do people ask them, they tend to ask them in this order. If the answer to the first question is “no,” people don’t even proceed to the second and third questions.21 This point, apart from anything else, highlights the importance of making values associated with ministry central to seminary curricula. As I understand it, ministerial formation emerges out of complex, spiraling interaction between personal devotion, theological study, primary theology (communal worship), and pastoral practice.22 The interactions need to be constructed, tracked, analyzed, adapted, and always subjected to careful attention in relation to all kinds of particularities to do with denominational, ethnic, and other kinds of diversity. Persons in the midst of the interactions need to be monitored, and also to be mentored,23 with what ministry amounts to—love of God, care for persons, appropriate skills—modeled to them. In postcolonial perspective, this no doubt involves invocation of notions of divine “preferential options,” at the very least “hearing into speech” subalterns, and sometimes shrewd, contrapuntist pluck. This is clearly a much wider view than anything than can be housed in academic curricula, important as that must remain.24 What Harris calls implicit and null curricula also need to be exposed and subjected to agitation. If academic curriculum is the most obvious form of Harris’s

262 Stephen Burns notion of explicit curriculum, common worship in seminary chapels and the pastoral modeling by the seminary leadership are both important— and yet only—parts of what contributes to other kinds of what, for better or worse, is taught and learned in seminary institutions. However, seminary chapels are so often the focus of “non-conversation,”25 and so they easily fall into Harris’s latter categories. Just some of what is often not talked about is the role of the chapel in the life of a seminary; the chapel’s function as either or both formative and expressive arena; how integration is supposed to happen between it and classes on worship; and how it is or is not related to any kind of accreditation or assessment. I aver that not only do these things need to be talked about, but they also need to be subjected to postcolonial scrutiny, so that shared values and understanding—shared postcolonial practices—are created and celebrated around experience of worship in seminary. And I contend that seminary chapels need to welcome postcolonial liturgical enactment as part of their explicit raison d’etre. Christian Worship commended critical revisioning of symbols, contrapuntal narrative, disruptive gestures, and other things besides. But it was only a start, and it can no doubt be much developed: the liturgical ruckus suggested in our efforts needs to be enlarged, so that humanly inclusive leadership26 and collaborative decision-making27 before and after liturgy are clearly in play, and these among much else. Indeed, I hope that other contributions to this present collection suggest more postcolonial practices that Christian assemblies in (and beyond) seminaries can embrace. Otherwise, it must be said that postcolonial perspectives are part of the null curriculum of the seminary chapel, and that the curricula that is implicitly enacted and taught and learned may be a much stronger influence on seminarians than whatever passes in the explicit curricula environment of the classroom. Likewise, the behavior of individuals, particularly those in leadership positions, can have an immense impact upon what is, and is not, learned. Whether or not a seminary president ever teaches a class, s/he her/himself can be thought of as a curriculum, and, indeed, perhaps the most influential one. Because “it is often the president who becomes the symbol of the seminary,”28 great good or ill fixes to her/his role, and the style s/he enacts, and the values s/he depicts, matter. So how leadership listens, collaborates, cares—or communicates that it doesn’t—needs to be held up to postcolonial critique. The point here is that progressive academic curricula commitments will not of themselves symbolize a seminary, and it is the president’s role where the integrity of an institution may be manifest, or lack thereof exposed. And in the latter case, many problems can gather and coalesce when administration is detached from faculty; when trustees are disengaged or hoodwinked by administration; when administration lacks commitment to the faculty’s theological teaching; when a president is not leading because stakeholders are not following a “strategy” nor

When Seminaries Get Stuck 263 convinced by a style that conflicts with academic curriculum, with the institution’s public rhetoric, or with other aspects of its explicit witness. Given that “the only thing of real importance that leaders do is create and manage culture,”29 academic commitments need to find particular embodiment in the person of the leader, if either the leader or the academic curriculum are to be convincing. David Esterline speaks not of Harris’s implicit curriculum, but of an immensely powerful “hidden curriculum.”30 By this, he means “the ways the institution . . . conducts its affairs and organizes its common life”: we might add, how values are discerned and celebrated, how authority is exercised, how consent is evoked, or isn’t, and so on. All of this relates to chapel, as well as to style of leadership—and, of course, to much else besides. Not unlike Aleshire and his colleagues, Esterline very helpfully talks about “climate and culture” in a seminary, notably discussing this before discussing “learning and teaching” in the suite of academic offerings. Chapel and leadership are among the first things that need to be seen in relation—by way of either congruence or conflict, and not in ancillary relation—to whatever postcolonial study goes on in classrooms. All of this is part of an expansive understanding of curriculum. My discussion inevitably raises many questions of integration between different curricula operative in seminary life. At every turn, classroom teaching on liturgy is implicated, but so too is every discipline. Questions about how historical study engages, respects, and questions tradition, about how contemporary society is acknowledged, and so on, also press in on the chapel. Chapel is inevitably entangled with how the Bible is engaged as scripture. The style of seminary leadership cannot be divorced from how liturgical presidency is embodied. And so on. Mal-formation? It should be obvious by this point in my reflections that my own views do not correlate formation with any kind of “conformation,” of which postcolonial perspectives might rightly be highly suspicious. Rather, I affirm that formation always goes on in seminary, for better or worse, sometimes through under- or even unacknowledged (implicit, hidden, null) dynamics, maybe frustrating or misshaping what needs to be learned ministerially, spiritually, or academically. Malformation is possible, even likely, when the range of operative curricula is underestimated or denied. When seminaries (self-designating as progressive, or otherwise) get stuck, different curricula can contest one another in an enervating head-lock between classroom and chapel, faculty and president, or other combinations of embattlement. Or different curricula can collude with one another, when what Harris bravely names as null curriculum is denied and is, in one way or another, transmuted into some form of inert conciliation. Unless there

264 Stephen Burns is articulate talk about formation, the dynamics may not even be able to be named. So seminaries need to develop both a critical attitude toward, and apparatus for assessing how, they form members of their community. My reflections perhaps begin to suggest some clues as to how postcolonial perspectives, once expanded beyond the academic curriculum, will start to impinge upon the different curricula that intersect in seminary life. For sure, seminaries, like all human institutions, may lose their way, experiencing mission-drift, lackluster leadership, and mismatch and contradiction between their rhetoric and reality. And yet open, honest, recognition of issues discussed in this chapter can, I think, resist those turns for the worse. Postcolonial perspectives on liturgy need to be concerned with how different curricula—acknowledged, cared for, and continually scrutinized—may conspire with one another to enable compelling cultures of formation that vivify ministry, rich in postcolonial insight and deft in postcolonial practice. Notes 1. Michael N. Jagessar and Stephen Burns, Christian Worship: Postcolonial Perspectives (Oakville, CT: Equinox, 2011). 2. Jagessar and Burns, Christian Worship, 11. 3. Please note also Stephen Burns, Nicola Slee, and Michael N. Jagessar, eds, The Edge of God: New Liturgical Texts and Contexts in Conversation (Peterborough: Epworth Press, 2008). 4. Maria Harris, Fashion Me a People: Curriculum in the Church (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1989); HyeRan Kim-Cragg, Story and Song: A Postcolonial Interplay Between Christian Education and Worship (New York: Peter Lang, 2012), esp. Chapter 3. 5. This can be exacerbated when governing bodies fail to provide the oversight for which they exist—for example, becoming overdependent on a seminary president’s or small group of leaders’ perspectives and accounts of experience in the institution rather than inviting essential insights from all stakeholders. 6. For further thought on ministry and formation, see Stephen Burns, “Formation for Ordained Ministry: Out of Touch?” in Indigenous Australia and the Unfinished Business of Theology: Cross-Cultural Engagements, ed. Jione Havea (New York: Palgrave, 2014), 151–166; Stephen Burns, “From Women’s Ordination to Feminist Ecclesiology?” in Looking Forwards, Looking Backwards: Forty Years of Women’s Ordination, ed. Fredrica Harris Thompsett (New York: Church Publishing, 2014), 99–110; Stephen Burns, “Ministry,” in An Informed Faith, ed. William W. Emilsen (Melbourne: Mosaic Press, 2014), 34–67; Stephen Burns, “‘Limping Priests’ Ten Years Later: Formation for Ordained Ministry,” Uniting Church Studies 17 (2012): 1–16; Stephen Burns, “School or Seminary? Theological Education and Personal Devotion,” St. Mark’s Review 210 (2009): 79–96. 7. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale, “Disrupting Institutional Imagination: A Seminary for the Twenty-first Century” in What Shall We Become? The Future

When Seminaries Get Stuck 265 and Structure of the Episcopal Church, ed. Winnie Varghese (New York: Seabury Press, 2013), 87. 8. Clive Pearson, “The Face of Theology,” in Crossing Borders: Shaping Faith, Ministry and Identity in Cross-cultural Australia, ed. Helen Richmond and Myong Duk Yang (Sydney: NSW Board of Mission, 2006). 9. The Association of Theological Schools, Racial/Ethnic Students Represent largest growth area for theological schools, http://bit.ly/postcol5-141, accessed December 16, 2013. 10. Compare, for instance, the benchmarks as part of the new Common Awards of the Church of England, which are an ecumenical endeavor including benchmarks about ministry; http://bit.ly/postcol5-142, accessed December 16, 2013. 11. Jackson W. Carroll, Barbara G. Wheeler, Daniel O. Aleshire, and Penny Long Marler, Being There: Culture and Formation in Two Theological Schools (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). 12. For discussion, see Stephen Burns, “‘Limping Priests.’” Note most obviously Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry of the World Council of Churches (Geneva: WCC, 1981). 13. See Martyn Percy, Clergy: Origin of the Species (London: Continuum, 2006); Alan Billings, Making God Possible: The Task of Ministry Present and Future (London: SPCK, 2010). 14. Daniel O. Aleshire, “2030: A Theological Odyssey of the Work of the Theological Educator” (ATS, October 2013), http://bit.ly/postcol5-148. 15. Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Massachusetts. See http://bit.ly/postcol5 -147. 16. See Louis Weil, “Teaching Liturgy: A Subversive Activity,” in A New Conversation: Essays on the Future of Theology and the Episcopal Church, ed. Robert Boak Slocum (New York: Church Publishing, 1999). 17. Aleshire, “2030.” 18. Aleshire, “2030”, p. 7. 19. Ibid. 20. “It is [ ] important not to understand formation as being concerned solely with questions of spirituality and discipleship which is then added as a third element alongside ‘education’ (= academic study) and training (= learning skills for ministry). Rather ‘formation’ should be seen as the overarching concept that integrates the person, understanding and competence.” Church of England, Formation for Ministry within a Learning Church (http://bit.ly/postcol5-152). 21. Daniel Aleshire, Earthen Vessels: Hopeful Reflections on the Work and Future of Theological Schools (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008), 31. 22. For more, see Stephen Burns, “School or Seminary?” 23. Interestingly, David Ford talks about apprenticeship in “becoming a theologian”: David F. Ford, The Future of Christian Theology (Oxford: WileyBlackwell, 2011), 168–190. 24. In Christian Worship, Michael Jagessar and I praised Muse Dube, “Curriculum Transformation: Dreaming of Decolonization in Theological Studies,” in Border Crossings: Cross-Cultural Hermeneutics, (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2007), 121–138. 25. Todd Johnson, “Ora et Labora: Reflections on the (Non-)History of Seminary Chapels,” in Common Worship and Theological Education, ed. Siobhán Garrigan and Todd Johnson (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2010), 9.

266 Stephen Burns 26. For more on this, see Stephen Burns, “‘Four in a Vestment’? Feminist Gestures for Christian Assembly,” in Presiding Like a Woman, ed. Nicola Slee and Stephen Burns (London: SPCK, 2010), 9–19. 27. For more on this, see Stephen Burns, “From Women’s Ordination to Feminist Ecclesiology?” 28. Richard J. Mouw, William McKinney, and Brian Stiller, “The President’s Role as Symbolic, Culture-forming Leader,” in A Handbook for Seminary Presidents, ed. G. Douglass Lewis and Lovett H. Weems (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006), 186. 29. Edgar Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, [3] 2004), p. 2, cited in Richard J. Mouw, William McKinney, and Brian Stiller, “The President’s Role as Symbolic, Culture-forming Leader,” 180. 30. David V. Esterline, “Multicultural Theological Education For a Church Without Walls,” Shaping Beloved Community: Multicultural Theological Education, ed. David V. Esterline and Ugbu Kalu (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2006), 20.

20 The Cherokee St omp Dance: A C ase Study of Post colonial Native American Contextualization Corky Alexander Introduction In approaching the subject of postcolonial worship, it is impossible to move forward without considering Native Americans/First Nations peoples who have suffered extensively at the hands of colonists. There are ideas inherent in Native worldviews and languages that must be acknowledged at the outset. One pertains to time and spatiality. Native people don’t believe in starting until the people get there, and don’t stop until they are done. Additionally, no ceremonial activity can be separated from the land that it is celebrated on. Another issue that complicates the inclusion of Native ideas in regard to worship is that the word “worship” is not a favorite among the people. One First Nations leader has rightly pointed out that Native people do not include the idea of “bowing the knee” to a ruler. One will more likely hear them use the word “prayer,” although Christian Natives are not adverse to the term “worship.” Historically, Native leaders have tried repeatedly to inform EuroAmericans not to approach them in the “Spanish way”1 due to the difference in worldview. In these times, Native people are demonstrating their own approaches to “post-colonial worship” through what is known as the Native American Contextual Movement. Cherokee Stomp Dance Here, I examine a dance that has been and is being integrated into Cherokee life as Native peoples follow Jesus: the Cherokee Stomp Dance. The Cherokee, due to Removal, call both the Southeastern and Southern plains cultural areas home. Rev. Evan Jones allowed the Stomp Dance

268 Corky Alexander to be performed on church property as early as the nineteenth century. What complicates this issue are the differences between Euro-Americans and Natives in their respective approaches to dance. For white EuroAmericans, dance has been historically artistic, sometimes spiritual or religious, but more widely recreational. For Native Americans, dance is prayer, and is a part of the renewal of creation, but not necessarily religious.3 In light of this difference, it is easy to understand how the early missionaries to Natives, and especially the later American Holiness Movement, could have done damage to a culture by requiring an abstinence from dancing, which was based upon a white man’s experience. The Stomp Dance is not exclusive to the Cherokee. Creeks and other tribes have practiced it as well. The dance is performed around a fire to the beat of a water drum that is small enough to be held in one hand. The remainder of the percussion emanates from the “shackles” (rattles made of turtle shells or condensed milk tins sewn onto the top of cowboy boots or pieces of leather and worn on women’s legs). The men sing in “call and response.” There is often a speech describing the history of the dance and the grounds on which it is played. Soon there is a meal. The dance then commences in counterclockwise fashion. The leader and the men turn their faces and hands toward the fire, honoring it. There are many songs designated only for Stomp Dances. The people dance all night. Those who “belong to the stomp grounds” sit under seven brush arbors. The others ring around that huge circle. A game of stickball might also be played.4 This dance will not be seen at a powwow, due to the fact that it has not been widely shared with other people. In 1889, many traditional Cherokees resisted the loss of tradition in Cherokee society and consequently revived the Keetoowah Society. A Cherokee named “Redbird” Smith instituted the “Nighthawk Keetoowah.” This group not only served to preserve old traditional practices, but also opposed allotment of Cherokee tribal lands to white settlers. The Keetoowah Society keeps the Stomp Grounds because they keep the Sacred Fire. They aid the memory of the people. Stomp Dances continue today in Oklahoma and North Carolina.5 In recent times, among the Eastern Cherokee in North Carolina, the late Walker Calhoun held the Sacred Fire, having brought it from Oklahoma. The following is included in a website for a recent PBS documentary titled “Indian Country Diaries”: Anthropologists have recognized the power of oral history for at least the last 150 years. In 1887, a young Irish ethnologist, James Mooney, began writing down many of the Cherokee stories, songs and medicinal plant formulas. Oral history became part of the “official” . . . that is, written . . . historical record. Mooney talked with the elders of the time—men like Ross Swimmer, Ayasta, Suyeta, John Ax, William Holland Thomas and Will West Long.

The Cherokee Stomp Dance 269 Today, Will West Long’s nephew Walker Calhoun is one of the most respected and recognized authorities on Cherokee songs and oral history . . . Walker learned the ancient songs and stories from Will West Long, who had learned from Swimmer, who had learned from his elders. . . . In 1947, Will West Long passed away, and Walker began to pass on the traditions he had learned to his children and other students. . . . during celebrations marking the 150th anniversary of the Trail of Tears—Walker was honored at a gathering of the Eastern and Western Bands of the Cherokee and was asked to bring the sacred fire back from the Oklahoma Western Band to North Carolina.6 The Cherokee Stomp Dance, as suggested above, serves more than a social function. It has served the Cherokee and other tribes as a link to their history, functioning as what Pentecostals and other Christian groups might refer to as “testimony.” Significant for the Removal Era, and probably the underlying function that caused Jones to allow it in the 1830s, is its statement of resistance or protest and confidential nature. One Cherokee legend, “The Rabbit Escapes from the Wolves,” that is connected with the Stomp Dance, bears reciting: Some Wolves once caught the Rabbit and were going to eat him when he asked leave to show them a new dance he was practicing. They knew that the Rabbit was a great song leader, and they wanted to learn the latest dance, so they agreed and made a ring about him while he got ready. He patted his feet and began to dance around in a circle, singing: Tlâge’sitûñ’ gäli’sgi’sidâ’hä Ha’nia lïl! Ha’nia lïl! On the edge of the field I dance about Ha’nia lïl! Ha’nia lïl! “Now,” said the Rabbit, “when I sing on the edge of the field, I dance that way”—and he danced over in that direction— “and when I sing lïl! you must all stamp your feet hard.” The Wolves thought it fine. He began another round singing the same song, and danced a little nearer to the field, while the Wolves all stamped their feet. He sang louder and louder and danced nearer and nearer to the field until at the fourth song, when the Wolves were stamping as hard as they could and thinking only of the song, he made one jump and was off through the long grass. They were after him at once, but he ran for a hollow stump and climbed up on the inside. When the Wolves got there one of them put his head inside to look up, but the Rabbit spit into his eye, so that he had to pull his head out again. The others were afraid to try, and they went away, with the Rabbit still in the stump.7

270 Corky Alexander It is not difficult to imagine the meaning this held for victims of government oppression. In the legend, the Cherokee could envision an escape from repression, and ultimately from removal from their tribal lands. The eventual recovery of the dance in the late 1880s coincides with the Ghost Dance movement that was amazingly universally widespread among American Indians, and which culminated in the Wounded Knee Massacre. The Cherokee Ghost Dance is not widely recognized, but represented a revitalization movement and a protest movement among the Cherokee. Data Randy Woodley’s first participation in a Stomp Dance (which Woodley refers to as, “Our Native Cherokee dance”) was in Oklahoma. “There was a deep sense in my soul that I had heard that music many times before. I was soaking all this in and feeling very fulfilled during this time among my own people.”8 Woodley elaborates on another experience he had during Keetowah dancing: As I reverently approached the mound, a strong sense of destiny filled my being. Suddenly I was pulled into a trance-like state. I began to sing, then dance—the entire time oblivious to where the rest of the group was standing. After about fifteen minutes of communing with God, I was exhausted and fell to the ground. I could only lie there and thank God for whatever He was doing. God-“Yowah” met me there that day, the same God who visited my ancestors thousands of years prior. The same God who I had known for much of my life. The same God who sent His Son into the world for the Cherokees and for all people.9 Here we have a contextual Cherokee minister participating in the Stomp Dance, and we are given a glimpse into the type of experience that such a minister has while dancing. The manifestations are highly Pentecostal or Charismatic in that they include trance, falling down, and use communion language that Pentecostals prefer when describing an experience in the presence of God. Woodley’s experience is fully contextualized in that he realizes continuity between the Christian heritage of his childhood and his affirmed Native identity in the ceremony. Critical Contextualization Again, the reader is able to see that the phenomenological examination, which Hiebert’s model calls for, is done internally here by the Natives themselves. Randy Woodley’s experience in this historic case reveals how he, as a Native person, was transformed in the Stomp Dance to get more in touch with himself and his God. The practice of Stomp Dances on

The Cherokee Stomp Dance 271 Baptist church grounds from the early Removal Period until now demonstrates how churches have not believed that performing the Stomp Dance has in any way compromised their commitment to the Christ and his cross. The historic practice of performing the Stomp Dance is an example of Native Americans exercising spiritual discernment while evaluating old beliefs and practices in the light of biblical truth. Examining the matter further from another perspective, the missiologist Charles Kraft assists us with his recognition of the fact that for past generations of Christian believers, any type of dance would have been held in suspicion and condemned in Native contexts (African, in his case), regardless of whether or not it resembled the dancing of the missionary’s culture of origin. He describes the Africans, who danced in a circle around a drum. The missionaries condemned the practice, especially in light of the “empowerment and meaning issues” that were attached to the dance. The fear, according to Kraft, that prompted missionaries to exercise such censure was the “fear of syncretism.”10 Kraft goes on to describe two consequences of this type of censure due to fear of syncretism. The first is that the missionary unwittingly projects the opinion that the peoples’ culture is worthless, and second, he/she pushes the people into another, equally dangerous form of syncretism: the driving underground of native practices. This is what happened in the Removal Era for the Cherokees, with the exception of Evan Jones. Hiebert has also elaborated on this damage unwittingly done by missionaries, by describing its twofold detriment: it elevated Western culture as being Christian, and also failed to provide a replacement practice for those that had been taken from Natives.11 The discussion that Kraft gives concerning dance among Nigerians may not be completely applicable, due to the less sexually suggestive movements in Native American dance (with the exception of dances like the Booger Dance, which are highly sexually suggestive).12 Nevertheless, Kraft recognizes dance as serving as a “vehicle of enculturation” and as having the ability to communicate the values of a society. This function is observed in Woodley’s experience as he encounters his Native roots in Keetoowah.13 Further engaging Kraft in a positive way, I would agree that any rite, if the power of Satan is broken, can be used for God’s service. Kraft’s concerns about the meanings that lie behind any dance or practice do not particularly raise a problem with the Stomp Dance, due to the fact that the legendary background and essential meaning that the dance holds for the community was always redemptive. By this I mean that the significance of the dance, according to Green, is the expression of the tribe’s collective memory, the cohesiveness of the people’s culture, and the protest of the encroaching enemies onto the tribe’s land and future.14 I feel, however, that Kraft stops short in his prescription for the avoidance of syncretism by limiting it to three resources: (1) our own interpretations and worldview;

272 Corky Alexander (2) biblical authors’ writings and worldview; and (3) receptors’ understandings and worldview. Biblical Literature Pentecostals would add another resource: the discernment of the Spirit as it relates to dance. John Wesley’s Quadrilateral also seems to incorporate four resources: reason (our own), Scripture (biblical authors), tradition (receptors worldview), and experience (the witness of the Spirit). Acts 15 describes the process, concluding: It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things (Acts 15.28–29). Though this passage is often used to describe the process of contextualization, which often includes searching the Scriptures, this text does not mention Bible study (though the chapter does), but does mention that “it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us.” This Pentecostal “Discerning the Spirit(s)” is developing into an entire Theology of Religions through the work of scholars like Amos Yong and Tony Richie.15 Woodley cites what he calls Hiebert’s four steps to critical contextualization. Hiebert advocates that participant observers look at the culture in as objective a way as possible, without judging it; then test the truth claims of the culture in light of the Scriptures and the culture; then evaluate the response to the existing beliefs in light of their new biblical understanding, using the community as a judge; and then finally accept, reject, or reformulate the cultural practice to give it a Christian meaning.16 Hiebert provides this four-step model of critical contextualization into which Native American experiences can be applied. In the model, folk religions answer the middle ground of issues that pertain to everyday life. It is my opinion that for tribes like the Cherokee, dealing with the folk religious middle is not enough. They have creation stories and myths of origin that have bearing on their everyday practice. The responsible missiologist will have to engage such stories and myths that probably overlap higher and lower religious concerns. Woodley has effectively pointed out that talking opossums and birds in Cherokee myth are not much different from a talking donkey in Scripture.17 If we say that Cherokee tradition is a folk religion and not a religion “in the Western sense,” it further underlines the need for a postmodern revision of what religions really are. Is religion a worldview that merely promises future transcendence, or that which immanently transforms and influences the lives of God’s people?

The Cherokee Stomp Dance 273 The Ghost Dance Movement, with its Millenarian concern, eschatological resurrection, and earth renewal, reveals the important interplay between the high and middle worlds for Native peoples. It is a dance (folk practice to some, worship in King David’s context of 2 Sam. 6:20– 23) that is connected to an apocalyptic event. In this we see the middle and the high forms of religion interacting integratively. The model constructed for us by Hiebert is extremely helpful in moving us from the anthropological emphasis of what Kraft describes, but may not fully provide a way to evaluate the spiritual experiences that Woodley is describing as a contextual Indian. I want to reiterate that neither Kraft nor Hiebert include in their steps the important dimension of the discernment of the Spirit. Woodley also makes an important point when he emphasizes that it is important not only “how” we approach the task of critical contextualization, but also “who takes part in the process.”18 The history of Native American missions demands that Euro-Americans step aside and allow Natives to do the constructing, leaving the Euro-Americans to the business of encouraging and equipping. Woodley is such a constructionist. He writes: “Contextualization could simply mean to present the good news of the kingdom of Jesus Christ in a way that people can understand in their own context—but it is a much deeper process.”19 We should not be surprised to be reminded that the Stomp Dance, an “expressive aspect of culture,” deals with the affective nature of spiritual experience, as Woodley’s own experience shows. What missiologists have tended to emphasize is the analogical function that rituals like dance can serve. How are we to understand this “much deeper process”? It may be helpful for us to be reminded that in the Native American cultural context, “Native Christians consider personal and collective experience to play a central role in the development of spiritual insight.”20 Woodley says on one occasion, which he prefaces with a Native translation of Hebrews 1:1–3: Long ago Creator spoke many times and in many ways to our ancestors through the prophets. But now in these final days, He has spoken to us through his Son. Creator promised everything to the Son as an inheritance, and through the Son he made the universe and everything in it. The Son reflects Creator’s own glory, and everything about him represents Creator exactly. He sustains the universe by the mighty power of his command. I like this last one because it connects us to our ancestors. All the promises He made to them are fulfilled in Jesus. . . . To me it says that any ceremony that is from the Great Spirit will point to Him. If it is true, then it will point to the Truth. Everything that is true will point to Him. He is the fulfillment of the sacred fire, the cleansing fire, the water ceremonies, the sweat lodge and all other things. They all point to Him. . . . When I pray at water I know

274 Corky Alexander He is the One I am thanking. When I dance, I dance to Him. When I bless myself with the cedar fire I am realizing that it is His blood that cleanses me. And when I sweat in the O’si I am thanking Him for a cleansing that never ends.21 Much of what Woodley is saying here clearly refers to his experience in the Stomp Dance. He understands the ceremonies to be a gift from the Creator, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that these ceremonies all point to Jesus. This is a critical contextualization of dances, like the Stomp Dance, and displays a truly contextualized understanding. Transformed Praxis The act of coming to a contextualized understanding of dances, like the Cherokee Stomp Dance, is not a new exercise. In the emerging Native American Theological debate, the dance has frequently been considered. It is placed within the category of earth renewal ceremonies.22 Here I acknowledge that Native Americans, if welcomed into the theological discussion, hold a future for the postcolonial Church that could eventually help God’s people to save the earth, rather than destroy it through a weak stewardship approach to ecology. Thus, dances such as the Stomp Dance and also the Green Corn Dance carry eschatological and ecological significance. Imagine seasonal, even Earth Day, celebrations, where a fully contextualized Native American dance could be understood as a sacrament for the church as believers pray and work for the renewal of the earth’s life. This represents one of the many hopes that Native Christians hold for the future of the church worldwide. Toward a Contextual Sacramental Theology of the Stomp Dance If we approach the Last Supper narrative, as Christians have for centuries, we will see the significance that it has held theologically for believers: While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take it; this is my body.” Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, and they all drank from it. “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many,” he said to them. “I tell you the truth, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it anew in the kingdom of God.”23 Ever since the Lord instituted it, believers have observed the Lord’s Supper or Communion. As the rite developed, participants incorporated the Synoptic texts. In this respect, John Wesley would have labeled it an

The Cherokee Stomp Dance 275 “Instituted Means of Grace.” Shaw uses the Lord’s Supper as an example of contextualization. The occasion and means of celebrating the “Lord’s supper” provides a case in point. Should this be regularly incorporated into the worship service or be a separate celebration in believers’ homes? How should the “elements” be represented—by local materials such as coconut meat and milk or possible imported items like grape juice (or even wine) and bread? To answer these questions, Christians need to appreciate the concepts and symbolic meanings process. Such a recognition of the relationship between a particular context, Scripture and the church enables the theology that develops to serve the plan for people in all times and places.24 This is helpful for the purposes of this study because it recognizes precedence for using the Lord’s Supper as a sample case for postcolonial contextualization. One need only reflect on the varieties of expression of this sacrament or ordinance in North American churches alone in order to realize the possibilities for plurality in worship. Pentecostal theology has seen within the text of the Last Supper, in the words of R. Hollis Gause, “rapture, rapport and proleptic.”25 Gause calls this a “Theology of Worship.” What this means is simply that the Lord’s Supper enables the church to reflect upon three realities: (1) The rapture of spiritual graces in the individual experience as the worshipper reflects upon the Passion event in the phrase “this is my body”; (2) the rapport within the communal aspect of collective worshippers as part of a larger community of mutual fellowship in that “they all drank from it”; and (3) the prophetic anticipation of the future restitution of all things in that he will “drink it anew in the kingdom of God.” In a similar way, the Stomp Dance holds significance for at least the Creek and Cherokee tribes. It was a secretive ceremony that was celebrated historically during a time of persecution. The legend upon which it is related speaks of a rabbit that is prisoner to a pack of wolves. He victoriously tricks his enemies through a dance in which he slips away into “another world.” The Stomp Dancers view the dance as a renewal of the earth, and it was historically revived during a time of national loss and grief. Though the Stomp Dance could not be seen as an instituted means of grace in the Christian context, a postcolonial contextualized practice could yet be developing as Natives, like Randy Woodley, contextualize it. Notes 1. Tomochichi, a Creek elder, tried to explain these ideas to John Wesley to no avail. See Richard P. Heitzenrater, Wesley and the People Called Methodists (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1995), 61–62.

276 Corky Alexander 2. Much of this information can be found in my work, Native American Pentecost: Praxis, Contextualization, Transformation (Cleveland: Cherohala Press, 2012). 3. Clara Sue Kidwell, Homer Noley, and George E. Tinker, Native American Theology (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2001), 12. 4. William G. McLoughlin, Cherokees and Missionaries, 1789–1839 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1995), 207–208. 5. Rayna Green and Melanie Fernandez, The British Museum Encyclopedia of Native North America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999), 152–153. 6. Frank Blythe and Carol Cornsilk, “Spiral of Fire,” Indian Country Diaries. PBS, http://bit.ly/postcol5-168, June 16, 2008. Walker is one of the few living links to the ancient oral history of the Cherokee. 7. James Mooney, “Myths of the Cherokee,” Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution 1897–1898 by J.W. Powell Director, in Two Parts (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1902), 274. 8. Randy Woodley, Living in Color: Embracing God’s Passion for Ethnic Diversity (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2001), 94–95. 9. Ibid., 134–135. 10. Charles H. Kraft, Anthropology for Christian Witness (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1996), 259–260. 11. Paul G. Hiebert, R. Daniel Shaw, and Tite Tienou, Understanding Folk Religion: A Christian Response to Popular Beliefs and Practices (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1999), 20. 12. Laurence French and Jim Hornbuckle, The Cherokee Perspective: Written by Eastern Cherokees (Boone, NC: Appalachian Consortium Press, 1981), 126–128. 13. Kraft, Anthropology for Christian Witness, 265–266. 14. Ibid., 213. 15. Amos Yong, Discerning the Spirit(s): A Pentecostal-Charismatic Contribution to Christian Theology of Religions (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark). 16. Hiebert, Shaw, and Tienou, Understanding Folk Religion. 17. Woodley, Living in Color, 50. 18. Woodley, When Going to Church Is Sin and Other Essays on Native American Christian Missions, p. 144. 19. Woodley, When Going to Church Is Sin and Other Essays on Native American Christian Missions (Chambersburg: Healing the Land, 2007), 140. 20. James Treat, Native and Christian: Indigenous Voices on Religious Identity in the United States and Canada (New York: Routledge, 1996), 13. 21. Woodley, When Going to Church Is Sin, 27–28. 22. Kidwell, Noley, and Tinker, Native American Theology, p. 12. 23. Mk 14:22–25. 24. R. D. Shaw, “Contextualizing the Power and the Glory,” International Journal of Frontier Missions 12.3 (1995): 158. 25. Kimberly E. Alexander and R. H. Gause, Women in Leadership: A Pentecostal Perspective (Cleveland, TN: Center for Pentecostal Leadership and Care, 2006), 198.

21 Post colonial Whiteness: Being-With in Worship Sharon R. Fennema I was leading a workshop on intercultural worship planning in a mediumsized urban mainline Protestant church a few years ago, and as we began our time together, I asked people to break into small groups and introduce themselves to each other by talking about their racial background and cultural heritage. As people milled about, settling into their small groups, a white woman came up to me and said, “I’m not sure what to say. I mean, I don’t really have a culture; I’m just American. Is that what you mean, just say that I’m American?” Another person, overhearing our conversation chimed in, saying, “Yeah, you know, I’m white; I don’t think I have a lot to contribute to a conversation on race.” These two sentiments illustrate what prompts me to write this essay. In the crucial work of developing the connection between liturgical studies and postcolonial criticism, attention must be paid to the intersections of dominance, privilege, and power centered in colonial whiteness. The tendency of colonizing whiteness to be “both invisible to itself and the norm by which everything else is measured,”1 requires critical engagement, especially in the context of Christian worship, which affirms the equal citizenship of all people in the Body of Christ. Thus, the question that motivates this essay is “How can white North American Christians embody postcolonial whiteness in their liturgical practices, and what might that contribute to the transformation sought by postcolonial criticism?” I come to this work in postcolonial liturgy in the tenuous position of being both white and a born-and-raised citizen of the United States, among the many other subject positions I inhabit and perform. These locations of privilege make my participation in the discourse of postcolonialism problematic, because, at its heart, postcolonialism represents a conceptual reorientation that both contests the colonial way of seeing things and privileges the experiences of those seeking to extricate

278 Sharon R. Fennema themselves from the history of imperial dominance as its source. Yet, as Kwok Pui-lan suggests, the colonial process is doubly inscribed, affecting both the colonized and the colonizer, so likewise, the postcolonial process must involve both the colonized and the colonizer.2 Even as she insists that “subalterns who experience the intersection of oppressions in the most immediate and brutal way have epistemological privileges in terms of articulating a postcolonial . . . theology,”3 she concludes that because of the multiple subject locations that all people inhabit, both the former colonizers and the formerly colonized are able to engage in postcolonial criticism, from different starting points and with different emphases. So it is from my starting point as a white, North American Christian, and citizen of the United States, committed to the work of dismantling colonial hegemony and imperial domination, that I undertake this endeavor. The crucial start to this inquiry lies in understanding the invisible and normative dynamics of whiteness. Much of the work aimed at bringing whiteness into view as an area of study has occurred in the context of racial discourses. In these racial frameworks, whiteness is understood both as a physical signifier (a “skin color”) and social status. But, more importantly, it represents a category of persons associated with notions of power and privilege, because of the historical associations of whiteness with superiority. To be white comes with a cadre of advantages, not the least of which is the invisibility of one’s own racial identity. Where ethnic and racial minorities are often identified almost exclusively by their race, the racial identity of whiteness is most often imperceptible and unacknowledged, functioning instead as a sort of universal against which other races exist in contrast. Whiteness serves as the normative backdrop against which racial minorities come into view as different from, and often less than, normal. The power afforded this status as “normal” is embodied in an extensive web of privileges, including, importantly, the ability to understand oneself as unraced or neutral in racial discourses. Whiteness comes with a sense of culturelessness because it is “just there,” the atmospheric backdrop against which other cultures appear as exotic and unique. The comments made by the two white workshop attendees illustrate these understandings of whiteness poignantly, as they articulated their understandings of themselves as unraced or neutral in the context of conversation about race, and cultureless in the context of expressing a cultural identity. In reality, we may recognize that “whiteness” is not a monolithic identity, but rather, embraces many different physical manifestations and ethnicities. We may also acknowledge that there is nothing about whiteness that is inherently superior to any other race. We may even be able to conceive of characteristics and attributes of “white culture,” demonstrating that it is just one culture among many in our world. Yet, the privileges of whiteness in the United States and around the globe are undeniable. And

Postcolonial Whiteness 279 with these privileges comes the power so often wielded over others, both intentionally and unintentionally. While it may be hard to imagine overt manifestations of the power and privilege that constitute whiteness in racial discourse being part of Christian worship practices, the operation of whiteness as both invisible and normative within worshipping communities in the United States is pervasive. Consider this conversation I recently witnessed in a worship planning meeting I was attending. A regular attendee of worship for whom English is a second language filled out a form offering his time and talents to the community. On that form, he indicated an interest in reading scripture for worship, so his generous offer to share his gifts was brought to the worship committee who arranges for volunteers to take part in various aspects of the service. A discussion ensued among worship committee members about whether or not it would be “appropriate” for him to read scripture. Concerns were voiced about whether his “accent” would “obscure” the text. One person thought that the reading would feel less artistically prepared and would not exemplify the excellence they strive for in the worship of Almighty God. Another wondered if the volunteer would be able to read it thoughtfully if he was not sure what it meant. It was finally decided that this volunteer would be asked to serve as an usher, a position for which he had not volunteered, instead. In all of these comments, the invisible privilege of whiteness is at play, serving as the normative backdrop against which a person from a minority racial group was viewed as different from and less than “normal,” affecting the ability of the members of the committee to perceive him as an “effective” worship leader. The people on this worship committee were not ill-intentioned or uncaring. What is more, they are part of a worshipping community that dedicates itself to the work of racial justice. And it is perhaps interesting to note that not all of them were white. And yet, the invisibility of whiteness, its culturelessness, resulted in the marginalization of this volunteer. From the “neutral” position of whiteness as a universal measure, the volunteer was considered inadequate. When someone who speaks with “an accent” is excluded from worship leadership because of concerns for intelligibility or artfulness, the invisible cultural aesthetics of whiteness are likely at play. When we look at whiteness from the perspectives of postcolonial critique, a slightly different focus comes into view. In order to understand what postcolonial whiteness might look like, it is important to explore what whiteness came to be and mean in colonial contexts. Under the mechanisms of colonialism, whiteness functions less as the normative backdrop it is in racial discourse and more as an assumed right to dominate others, even where “white” might be associated with a minority identity. It is hard to imagine in colonial contexts, where colonizers were an extreme racial minority, that their whiteness was “invisible.” Rather, its extreme visibility

280 Sharon R. Fennema served the purposes of domination through its deployment as superior. Colonial whiteness, understood as a superiority, fostered practices of domination that denied the basic humanity of people of other racial/ ethnic origins. Thus, whiteness becomes not only a signifier of power and privilege, as in the racial discourses, but also a symbol and enactment of displacement, domination, and claim-staking. While the invisibility and normativity of race serves as a component of the colonial system, particularly grounding foundational claims of the inferiority of indigenous peoples, it is only one component of a broader system of domination. Moreover, the legacies of this domination far outlast the demise of colonial rule. Even after decolonization, the cultural domination of whiteness persists, in colonized minds, bodies, spirits, and societies. As Alfred Lopez points out, “the cultural residues of whiteness linger in the postcolonial world as an ideal, often latently, sometimes not,” and this ideal undergirds the continuation of colonial domination pervasively, beyond the boundaries of governance.4 With colonialism, racial differences are transformed into hierarchies that allow, if not necessitate, domination and subjugation. Postcolonial criticism helps us see that whiteness serves a cultural imperative achieving the designs of colonialism. According to Ania Loomba, colonialism can be defined as “the conquest and control of other people’s lands and goods.”5 As such, modern colonializing drew colonizers and colonized into complex economic relationships, characterized by the dominance of whiteness. If colonialism was the means by which capitalism achieved global reach and influence, then the myth of white supremacy was the conduit through which people’s land and goods were appropriated. At its heart, the colonizing force of whiteness turned the colonized person in to an object, a thing that could be (and was suited to be) owned, controlled, and used for profit. Thus, colonization becomes more than conquest of lands and goods; it is the ownership of the very people themselves. While in the context of race, whiteness embodies normativity and privilege; in the context of colonialism, whiteness embodies superiority, domination, and objectification. They are interrelated, but distinct. How might this colonial understanding of whiteness help us understand and analyze Christian worship practices? Consider the ways in which the dynamics of domination associated with whiteness are manifested in the symbols of color related to the Christian liturgical year. Christian congregations whose patterns of worship are shaped by a lectionary, and, increasingly those who simply follow the contours of the liturgical year with its progression from the seasons of Advent, Christmas, and Epiphany to Lent, Easter, and Pentecost, often mark these seasonal changes with a predominant symbolic color: purple (or blue) for Advent and Lent, green for Epiphany, red for Pentecost, and white for Christmas and Easter.6 It is clear that whiteness is considered the appropriate color for the high holy

Postcolonial Whiteness 281 days in the Christian calendar (Christmas and Easter, but also the Baptism of Jesus, the Transfiguration, and Trinity Sunday), serving as a symbol of purity, honor, goodness, blessedness, sacredness; whiteness is associated with the manifestation of the Divine. While other colors mark other seasons, the only holy days where the color black is considered appropriate are Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday, the “darkest” days of the liturgical year, associated with extreme penitence and the tremendous effects of sin and evil in the story of salvation history—holy, yes, but indelibly linked to human frailty and sinfulness. Drawing on images from scripture that associate God’s presence with light and whiteness,7 the colors of the liturgical year reinforce the dominance of whiteness.8 The same logic of whiteness (understood as a superiority) that fostered practices of domination, denying the basic humanity of people of other racial/ethnic origins, underlies the color symbolism of the liturgical year, reinforcing the idea that whiteness is holy, a more fitting symbol for the Divine. While this analysis may seem facile, only scratching the surface of the way in which whiteness is deployed as domination in the context of worship, the subtle and pervasive messages of colonial whiteness embodied as superiority that justified the understanding of people of other races as objects that could be owned and controlled, shape and form Christian worshippers at a fundamental level through the symbolic uses of the color white in the liturgical year. Looking at these formulations of whiteness, it is hard to imagine how it could ever serve the work of dismantling colonial hegemony and imperial domination, the transformations at the heart of postcolonial critique. In fact, whether conceived of as normative or superior, the privilege and dominance of whiteness seems inescapable. Alison Bailey describes the dilemma this way, “If I embrace the idea that being white is an unchangeable fact about my identity, and if white privilege is made possible by this system, then questions about how white people should act with regard to privilege can only be cast in terms of a choice between findingomplex ways to use privilege safely or divesting from privilege.”9 Bailey suggests that, rather than understanding whiteness as an essential racial identity tied inexorably to particular physical attributes, like skin color, we might be better served by understanding whiteness as a kind of style, a way of being in the world that, while related to physical traits, is not entirely dependent on them. Thus someone could act “whitely” without having light-complected skin, and persons who have white physical attributes could potentially not act in “whitely” ways.10 It might be helpful to think of these ways of being in the world, this whiteliness as scripts. These scripts include “racism [as] a social/political system of domination that comes with expected performances, attitudes and behaviors, which reinforce and reinscribe unjust hierarchies.”11 In this context, it becomes possible to think about how one might find one’s way out of the seemingly

282 Sharon R. Fennema inescapable exercises of privilege and power associated with whiteness. If whiteness is less an essential identity and more a way of being in the world, then, even if I cannot disavail myself and with the privilege others afford to me based on my perceived race, I can refuse to inhabit ways of being that promote white supremacy and replace them with habits that do not reinforce racial hierarchies.12 Part of the process of transformation suggested by racial discourse is making the privilege of whiteness visible. And part of the process of transformation suggested by postcolonial discourse is disavowing practices that reinforce dominance and superiority. But also, part of both of these processes is making oneself accountable for privilege by collectively exploring strategies for redressing the effects of colonial racism. This, I believe, is the key to cultivating postcolonial whiteness. In his introduction to Postcolonial Whiteness: A Critical Reader on Race and Empire, Alfred J. Lopez proposes that the crucial task of postcolonial whiteness resides in embodying the contours of what philosopher Martin Heidegger called Mitsein: Being-with. He argues, “It is the learning of a postcolonial Mitsein, this being with others after the fact of domination, abuse and outright murder of them, that constitutes the ground of the most important negotiation between erstwhile colonizers and colonized that postcolonial studies can offer.”13 This Being-with requires an honest assessment of whiteness and the ways in which one inhabits whiteness in relation to histories of oppression and domination of others. The powers and privileges of whiteness must be uncovered. It also requires a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which power structures the relationships between those in the dominant group and those subjected to that dominance. But, more than anything, Being-with requires mutual recognition between whiteness and its “others” in such a way as to reveal their interdependence. Key to the cultivation of Being-with is the fostering of a spirit of interrelatedness with others. As Bailey might say, we need to learn to perform a new script of whiteness, a post-empire whiteness that operates with mutual recognition in solidarity. The “Being-with” that Lopez identifies as the primary gesture of postcolonial whiteness recognizes that we cannot understand ourselves outside of the relationships we have to and with others. These relationships reveal, embody, and rely upon our interdependence on one another, and that interdependence is indispensable to us. They also rely on a fundamental reorientation from positions of colonizer over colonized, oppressor over oppressed, to reciprocal relations between equal human beings. The moment of encounter with another, and the recognition of our interdependence, brings both a reckoning and a responsibility: reckoning with the realities of privilege and dominance; responsibility for transforming those realities. The mutuality being fostered by postcolonial whiteness is not a feel-good affirmation of difference (e.g., I’m OK, you’re OK),

Postcolonial Whiteness 283 but rather a fundamental orientation toward mutual flourishing that radically challenges and seeks to unravel white privilege, domination, and the assumptions about supremacy that undergird them. Perhaps the journey toward cultivating liturgical practices that embody postcolonial whiteness begins with creating non-dominating encounters with difference in the context of worship. These encounters must go beyond the surface-level engagement of what John Witvliet calls “ethnotourism”14 or the self-aimed gestures of inclusion that rely on the power of an in-group to invite or include “others,” reaching toward a deeper level of interrelationality, that is, understanding oneself and one’s community as integrally related to and constituted by others. How might we imagine worship practices that create an encounter with another, that foster the recognition of our interdependence, bringing both a reckoning with the realities of privilege and dominance and a sense of responsibility for transforming those realities? In the context of twenty-first-century Christian worship practices in the United States, one of the most common encounters with difference happens through music. Even in communities perceived to be racially, ethnically, and culturally monolithic, music from different cultures is often sung, played, and experienced. Increasingly, this takes the form of purposefully incorporating so-called “global music” in the context of worship.15 The sincere desire motivating this movement in most worshipping communities is, as Michael Hawn puts it, for “worshippers in the United States [to] experience the drama of salvation from a different cultural perspective . . . in order to understand and more fully appreciate the sacrifice and salvation of the Incarnation.”16 Tied to both an affirmation of the Incarnation as a manifestation of the Holy in the specificity of a human life as it is lived concretely located in culture and race, and the affirmation of the unity and equality called for by our membership in the Body of Christ, the theological practices fostered by these musical encounters have the potential to embody the modalities of postcolonial whiteness. Yet, too often, they fall short of becoming a postcolonial gesture, instead embodying the colonial domination and racial privilege of whiteness. When white Westerners “take” the music of cultures from other parts of the globe without attending to the power dynamics at play, it serves to renew the binary between colonizer and colonized instead of dismantling it. It is a play of power and domination that suggests that whiteness has an inherent right and ability to appropriate the cultural expressions of another group of people. When music from different cultures is chosen to make worship more lively, emotional, or exciting, without regard to the specificity of its context, it serves to exoticize other cultures, creating a rift between “us” and “them” rather than establishing our interrelationality.17 When music is used to represent a culture, for example, singing a song in Spanish on Cinco de Mayo, it embodies a kind of tokenism,

284 Sharon R. Fennema reductionistically portraying a culture based on one expression and asking that expression to “represent” the vast complexities of a group of people in a superficial way. When intercultural engagement with music is not rooted in developing an understanding of the cultures and peoples from which the music originates, or when it masks and hides the dynamics of colonialism at play in the music itself, then it risks promoting commonality at the expense of recognizing difference. If these methods for engaging in intercultural musical encounters serve to reinforce the colonizing power of whiteness, how might different approaches embody postcolonial whiteness and contribute to the transformation sought by postcolonial criticism? The hymn “Many and Great, O God, Are Your Works / Wakantanka Taku Nitawa” can serve as a case study. This hymn, known primarily by the title “Many and Great,” is included in many of the hymnals produced by mainline Protestant denominations in the United States in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, including the United Methodist, Chalice, and New Century hymnals, among many others. It is commonly identified as the “Dakota Hymn,” described in the New Century Hymnal, for example, as “the best-known Native American hymn.”18 It is often sung as a purposeful encounter with difference by worshipping communities seeking to honor and engage the cultures of the indigenous peoples of the United States, sometimes in conjunction with holidays such as Columbus Day/Indigenous People’s Day. What this practice and the identification as the “Dakota Hymn” masks, however, is the colonial play of power embodied in its composition and usage. The composer of the hymn, Joseph Renville, was an explorer and a fur trader who ran a trading post on the Mississippi River called Fort Renville. Renville, who is reported to have been the child of a French canoeman and a Sioux woman, is credited with inviting missionaries to bring Christianity to the Dakota people with whom he traded.19 He worked with these same missionaries to translate part of the Bible into the Dakota language.20 Together, Renville and the missionaries composed the words of the hymn, based at least to a degree on Jeremiah 10:12–13. The tune for the song was created by incorporating sonic qualities associated with Dakota music, especially its harmonic and rhythmic structures, and adapting it to a more European hymnic style. The missionaries Stephen R. Riggs and Thomas S. Williamson used this music and the biblical translation created by Renville to “Christianize” the Dakota people. This missionary work resulted in the US-Dakota conflict of 1862, which ended with the imprisonment of many Dakota people and their dislocation to reservations in South Dakota and Nebraska. It is still sung by the Santee Dakota in their native language.21 The complexities of the composition of this hymn as one both taken from and used by the Dakota people, as both native to and serving to

Postcolonial Whiteness 285 missionize these indigenous peoples, is masked by the common understanding and usage of it as the “Dakota Hymn.” Without a deeper understanding of the missionary context in which it was composed and deployed, the possibilities for cultivating a non-dominating encounter with difference in the context of worship are limited. A more fulsome understanding of the context of the hymn fosters the “Being-with” of postcolonial whiteness, requiring mutual recognition between whiteness and its “others” in such a way as to reveal their interdependence. Moreover, such a recognition of interdependence has the potential to facilitate a reckoning with the realities of privilege and dominance, as well as a commitment to transforming those realities. Imagine, for example, a worship service during which the story of this hymn is told, the scripture upon which it is based is read, the hymn itself is sung, a time of confession related to colonial dominance and privilege is enacted, and a commitment to the transformation of systems of oppression is expressed and embodied in a ritual act such as sharing communion. This kind of sustained engagement, I believe, is key to embodying the mutuality characteristic of postcolonial whiteness as a fundamental orientation toward shared flourishing that radically challenges and seeks to unravel white privilege, domination, and the assumptions about supremacy that undergird them. Key to the transformation of this liturgical action from colonial to postcolonial is the process of contextualization that both guards against misappropriation and empowers communities to sing in solidarity with those of different times, locations, and cultures. It refuses the impulse to make use of music as a cultural artifact for the benefit of one community over another by taking up the biblical imperative to “rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep” on a global scale.22 Worshipping communities cannot accomplish this interrelationality, this solidarity, without knowing something about those with whom we seek connection through intercultural musical encounters. Part and parcel of this kind of intercultural engagement is a sense of cultural humility.23 Cultural humility includes: L Commitment to self-evaluation and self-critique L What assumptions and beliefs shape us in intercultural encounters? L Addressing power imbalances How is power at play in this encounter? How might we make the L distribution of power more equitable? L Developing mutually beneficial partnerships How can we cultivate a sense of interrelationality, not simply one L accepting or including the “other”? L Maintaining an interpersonal stance that is open to others How can we recognize, appreciate, and embrace difference without L relying on privilege or dominating another?24

286 Sharon R. Fennema Communities of faith that approach worship keeping these questions in mind can begin to cultivate a postcolonial whiteness that reaches toward a deeper level of interrelationality. In a panel presentation honoring the work of interfaith scholar Jane I. Smith at Harvard Divinity School, theologian Daniel Madigan suggests that one of the keys to dialogue among differences, whether of religion, culture, and/or race, is how we understand the grammar of the first-person plural. Key to this grammar of “we” that grounds Madigan’s approach to dialogue is not objectifying the other, “not a ‘we’ studying an ‘it,’” but rather, a “we gradually discovering a sort of ‘we-ness’ which goes beyond ‘us’ and ‘them,’”25 that does not define oneself over and against another. It is also not a “we” that erases differences, does not distinguish otherness, producing instead a commonality that masks the dynamics of power, privilege, and domination at play in our encounters. The “we-ness” Madigan identifies is reflected in actions that affirm our belonging to one another, our interrelatedness and interdependence, without subsuming our differences. It is, I believe, to this kind of “weness” that the work of postcolonial whiteness calls Christian worshipping communities. Cultivating encounters with difference in the context of worship that refuses both objectification and domination of others, as well as a false sense of commonality that masks the play of power and privilege, is the work to which postcolonial critique calls us and the task to which the liberatory gospel of Jesus Christ compels us. Notes 1. Henry Giroux, “Racial Politics and the Pedagogy of Whiteness,” in Whiteness: A Critical Reader, ed. Mike Hill (New York: New York University Press, 1997), 305. 2. Kwok Pui-lan, Postcolonial Imagination and Feminist Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005), 127. 3. Ibid. 4. Alfred J. Lopez, “Introduction: Whiteness after Empire,” in Postcolonial Whiteness: A Critical Reader on Race and Empire, ed. Alfred J. Lopez (Albany: SUNY Press, 2005), 1. 5. Ania Loomba, Coloniailsm/Postcolonialism, 2nd ed. (New York: Routledge, 2005), 8. 6. For more on this symbolism, see Hoyt L. Hickman, Don E. Saliers, Laurence Hull Stookey, and James F. White, The Handbook of the Christian Year (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1992), especially pp. 288–289. 7. Consider, for example, the gospel reading associated with the Transfiguration, where Jesus was “transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white.” Matthew 17:2 (NRSV). 8. For a more in-depth postcolonial critique of the ways in which the symbols of light and darkness are employed in liturgy, see Michael N. Jagessar and

Postcolonial Whiteness 287 Stephen Burns, Christian Worship: Postcolonial Perspectives (Oakville, CT: Equinox, 2011), 37–50. 9. Alison Bailey, “Despising an Identity They Taught Me to Claim,” in Whiteness: Feminist Philosophical Reflections, ed. Chris J. Cuomo and Kim Q. Hall (New York and Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999), 95. 10. Baily draws the terms “whitely” and “whiteliness” from Marilyn Frye, who coined them in her article “White Woman Feminist,” in Willful Virgin: Essays in Feminism (Freedom, CA: Crossing, 1992). Bailey, “Despising an Identity,” 96. 11. Bailey, “Despising an Identity,” 96. 12. Ibid., 98. 13. Lopez, “Introduction,” in Postcolonial Whiteness, 6. 14. John D. Witvliet, “The Virtue of Liturgical Discernment,” in Music in Christian Worship: At the Service of the Liturgy, ed. Charlotte Kroeker (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2005), 95. 15. From a postcolonial perspective, the term “global music” is problematic because of the ways in which it relies on notions of Western music as “music” and all other musics as “global,” recreating the dynamics of colonizer and colonized with their concomitant power relationships in the terminology surrounding music. 16. C. Michael Hawn, “Reverse Missions: Global Singing for Local Congregations,” in Music in Christian Worship: At the Service of the Liturgy, ed. Charlotte Kroeker (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2005), 99. 17. “During the 19th century . . . the exotic, the foreign increasingly gained, throughout the empire, the connotations of a stimulating or exciting difference, something with which the domestic could be (safely) spiced . . . representing whatever was projected onto them by the societies into which they were introduced . . . a significant part of imperial displays of power and the plentitude of empires.” Bill Ashcroft, Gareth Griffiths, and Hellen Tiffin, Post-Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts (London and New York: Routledge, 2000), 94–95. 18. New Century Hymnal (Cleveland: Pilgrim Press, 1995), 80. 19. Lois Willand and Jon Willand, “History of the Dakota Hymn Lac que Parle,” unpublished pamphlet, Chippewa County Historical Society and Minnesota Historical Society, 2002. 20. Gertrude Ackerman, “Joseph Renville of Lac que Parle,” Minnesota Historical Society Magazine 12.3 (1931): 244. 21. Willand and Willand, “History of the Dakota Hymn Lac que Parle.” 22. Romans 12:15 (NRSV). 23. Melanie Tervalon and Jann Murray-García, “Cultural Humility Versus Cultural Competence: A Critical Distinction in Defining Physician Training Outcomes in Multicultural Education,” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 9.2 (May 1998): 117. 24. Tervalon and Murray-García, “Cultural Humility,” 117–125. 25. Daniel Madigan, “Muslims, Christians and Interfaith Dialogue: A Panel Discussion in Honor of Jane I. Smith,” Harvard Divinity School, Cambridge, MA, April 16, 2012.

Bibliography Abraham, Susan. “What Does Mumbai Have to do with Rome? Postcolonial Perspectives on Globalization and Theology.” Theological Studies 69 (2008): 376–393. Aching, Gerard. “Masking Power: Carnival and Popular Culture in the Caribbean.” In Cultural Studies Series of the Americas. Edited by George Yúdice, Jean Franco, and Juan Flores. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002. Ackerman, Gertrude. “Joseph Renville of Lac que Parle.” Minnesota Historical Society Magazine 12.3 (1931). Agard, John. “Listen Mr. Oxford Don.” Mangoes and Bullets. London: Serpent’s Tail, 1985. Aguilar, Mario. “Postcolonial African Theology in Kabasele Lumbala.” Theological Studies 63 (2002): 302–323. Aldred, Raymond C. “Incarnation in Indian Life.” Missio Dei Gathering. Nashville, TN 2006. Aleshire, Daniel O. “2030: A Theological Odyssey of the Work of the Theological Educator.” ATS (October 2013). http://bit.ly/postcol5-148. Aleshire, Daniel, and Earthen Vessels. Hopeful Reflections on the Work and Future of Theological Schools. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008. 31. Alexander, Corky. Native American Pentecost: Praxis, Contextualization, Transformation. Cleveland, OH: Cherohala Press, 2012. Alexander, Kimberly Ervin. “Pentecostal Healing: Models in Theology and Practice.” Journal of Pentecostal Theology Supplement Series. Blandford Forum. Dorset: Deo Publishing, 2006. ———, and R. Hollis Gause. Women in Leadership: A Pentecostal Perspective. Cleveland, TN: Center for Pentecostal Leadership & Care, 2006. Alkhairo, Wael. Speaking for Change: A Guide to Making Effective Friday Sermons (Khutbas). Beltsville, MD: Amana, 1998. Althaus-Reid, Marcella Maria, and Lisa Isherwood. Controversies in Feminist Theology. London, SCM Press, 2007. Amalorpavadass, D. S. Towards Indegenization in the Liturgy. Bangalore: BSCLC, 1982. 9. Amer, Sahar. “Medieval Arab Lesbians and Lesbian-like Women.” Journal of the History of Sexuality 18 (2009): 215–236. Anarfi, John, Stephen Kwankye, Ofuso-Mensah Ababio, and Richmond Tiemoko. Migration from and to Ghana: A Background Paper. Development Research Centre on Migration, Globalisation and Poverty (December 2003), 1–38. http://www.migrationdrc.org. Accessed July 30, 2013.

290 Bibliography Andrade, Oswald de. “O manifesto antropófago.” Vanguarda européia e modernismo brasileiro: Apresentacão e crítica dos principais manifestos vanguardistas. 3rd ed. Edited by Gilberto Mendonça Teles. Petrópolis: Vozes; Brasília: INL, 1976. Anzaldúa, Gloria. Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. San Francisco: Spinsters/Aunt Lute, 1987. Appasamy, A. J. Temple Bells: Readings from Hindu Religious Literature. Calcutta: Association Press, 1931. ix. ———. The Christian Task in Independent India. London: SPCK, 1951. 96. ———. The Theology of Hindu Bhakti. Bangalore: United Theological College, 1970. 114. ———. What Shall We Believe? Madras: CLS, 1971. 73. Appiah, Kwame Anthony. “Is the Post- in Postmodernism the Post- in Postcolonial?” Critical Inquiry 17.2 (1991): 353. Appleton, Joanne. Assimilation or Integration: Migrants in Europe. Encounters Mission Journal 36 (March 2011): 1–11. http://bit.ly/postcol2-37and39. Asad, Talal. “Conscripts of Western Civilization.” In Dialectical Anthropology: Essays in Honor of Stanley Diamond. Edited by Christine Gailey. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1992, 333–351. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin. The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post-colonial Literatures. New York: Routledge, 2003. ———. Post-Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts. New York: Routledge, 2000. Association of Theological Schools, The. Racial/Ethnic Students Represent Largest Growth Area for Theological Schools. December 16, 2013. http://bit.ly /postcol5-141. Augé, Marc. Los no lugares: Espacios del anonimato. Barcelona: Gedisa, 2000. Augras, Monique. O duplo e a metamorfose–A identidade mítica em comunidades nagô (The pair and metamorphosis: Mythical identity in nagô communities). Petrópolis: Ed. Vozes, 1983. Ávila, Teresa de. Escritos de Santa Teresa d’Ávila. São Paulo: Edições Loyola, 1977. 125. Bailey, Alison. “Despising an Identity They Taught Me to Claim.” In Whiteness: Feminist Philosophical Reflections. Edited by Chris J. Cuomo and Kim Q. Hall. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999. Bakhtin, Mikhail. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Edited and translated by Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984. 7. Balasuriya, Tissa. The Eucharist and Human Liberation. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2004. Balbinot, Egídio. Liturgia e política: A dimensão política da liturgia nas romarias da Terra de Santa Catarina. Chapecó: Grifos, 1998. Bauman, Chad M. Christian Identity and Dalit Religion in Hindu India, 1868– 1947. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008. Barros, Marcelo, and Artur Peregrino. A Festa dos pequenos: Romarias da Terra no Brasil. São Paulo: Paulus, 1996. Barton, John. “The Bible in Liturgy.” In The People of the Book? The Authority of the Bible in Christianity. Edited by John Barton. London: SPCK, 1988. 69–78. Bass, Althea. “Cherokee Messenger.” Civilization of the American Indian Series, Book 12. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1996. Bass, Dorothy C., and Craig Dykstra. Theology, Theological Education and Christian Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2008. 117–148.

Bibliography 291 Bennett, Zoë. “‘Action Is the Life of All’: The Praxis-Based Epistemology of Liberation Theology.” In The Cambridge Companion to Liberation Theology. Edited by Christopher Rowland. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Berger, Teresa, ed. Liturgy in Migration: From the Upper Room to Cyberspace. Collegeville, MN: Pueblo Books, 2012. ———. Gender Differences and the Making of Liturgical History. Surrey: Ashgate, 2011. Berryman, Phillip. Stubborn Hope: Religion, Politics, and Revolution in Central America. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1994. ———. The Religious Roots of Rebellion: Christians in Central American Revolutions. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1984. Best, Thomas. Baptism Today: Understanding, Practice, Ecumenical Implications. Faith and Order Papers. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Books, 2008. Betz, Hans-Dieter. Galatians: A Commentary on Paul’s Letter to the Churches in Galatia. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1979. Beverley P. Smith. “The Eucharist as a Liberation Praxis.” Black Theology: An International Journal 2 (1999): 57–70. Beyani, Chaloka. Migration in Africa, Enduring Phenomenon? The Nansen Lecture, Johannesburg, South Africa (September 15, 2011), 1–7. Accessed August 5, 2013. http://bit.ly/postcol2-17. Bhabha, Homi. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge, 1994. ———. “The World and the Home.” In Dangerous Liaisons: Gender, Nation & Postcolonial Perspectives. Edited by Anne McClinctock, Aamir Mufti, and Ella Shohat. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. 445–455. Bieritz, K.-H. “Fundamentos antropológicos.” Manual de ciência litúrgica, vol. 1. Orgs. Hans-Christoph Schmidt-Lauber, Michael Meyer-Blanck, and KarHeinrich Bieritz. São Leopoldo: EST/Sinodal, 2011. ———. “Heimat Gottesdienst?” Theologisches geschenkt: Festschrift für M. Josuttis. C. Bizer, J. Cornelius-Bundschuh, H.-M. Gutmann (Hg.). Bovenden: Foedus, 1996. 265–266. Bilger, Veronika., and Albert Kraler. “Introduction: African Migrations. Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Dynamics.” Stichproben Wiener Zeitschrift für kritische Afrikastudien. Special Issue: African Migrations, Historical Perspective and Contemporary Dynamics 8 (2005): 5–21. Billings, Alan. Making God Possible: The Task of Ministry Present and Future. London: SPCK, 2010. Biviano, Erin Lothes. The Paradox of Christian Sacrifice: The Loss of Self, The Gift of Self. New York: Crossroad Publishing, 2007. Black, Richard, Jonathan Crush, Sally Peberdy, with Savina Ammassari, Lyndsay McLean Hilker, Shannon Mouillesseaux, Claire Pooley, Radha Rajkotia. Migration and Development in Africa: An Overview. Southern African Migration Project, 2006. African Migration and Development Series, 1. Blaise, Clark. Time Lord: Sir Sandford Fleming and the Creation of Standard Time. New York: Pantheon Books, 2000. Blythe, Frank, and Carol Cornsilk. “Spiral of Fire.” Indian Country Diaries. June 16, 2008. http://bit.ly/postcol5-168. Boersma, Hans. Heavenly Participation: The Weaving of a Sacramental Tapestry. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2011.

292 Bibliography Boff, Leonardo. Sacraments of Life, Life of the Sacraments. Translated by John Drury. Portland, OR: Pastoral Press, 1987. Booth, K. “The Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand, and Polynesia.” In The Oxford Guide to the Book of Common Prayer: A Worldwide Survey. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991. Bose, Ram Chandra. “Work among Educated Natives.” Indian Evangelical Review 16 (1888–89): 182. Bosi, Alfredo. Dialética da Colonização. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1992. Bosswick, Wolfgang, and Friedrich Heckmann. Integration of Migrants: Contribution of Local and Regional Authorities. European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 2006. July 20, 2013. http://bit.ly/postcol2-36. Boyarin, Daniel. A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Bradstock, Andrew. Saints and Sandinistas: The Catholic Church in Nicaragua and its Response to the Revolution. London: Epworth Press, 1987. Briggs, Sheila. “Galatians.” In Searching the Scriptures. Vol. 2, A Feminist Commentary. Edited by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. New York: Crossroad, 1994. 218–236. Browning, Robert L., Roy A. Reed. The Sacraments in Religious Education and Liturgy. Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press, 1985. Burns, Stephen, Nicola Slee, and Michael N. Jagessar, eds. The Edge of God: New Liturgical Texts and Contexts in Conversation. Peterborough: Epworth Press, 2008. ———. “‘Limping Priests’ Ten Years Later: Formation for Ordained Ministry.” Uniting Church Studies (2012): 1–16. ———. “‘Four in a Vestment’? Feminist Gestures for Christian Assembly.” In Presiding Like a Woman. Edited by Nicola Slee and Stephen Burns. London: SPCK, 2010. 9–19. ———. “Formation for Ordained Ministry: Out of Touch?” In Indigenous Australia and the Unfinished Business of Theology: Cross-Cultural Engagements. Edited by Jione Havea. New York: Palgrave, 2014. 151–166. ———. “From Women’s Ordination to Feminist Ecclesiology?” In Looking Forwards, Looking Backwards: Forty Years of Women’s Ordination. Edited by Fredrica Harris Thompsett. New York: Church Publishing, 2014. 99–110. ———. “Ministry.” In An Informed Faith. Edited by William W. Emilsen. Melbourne: Mosaic Press, 2014. 34–67. ———. “School or Seminary? Theological Education and Personal Devotion.” St. Mark’s Review 210 (2009): 79–96. ———. Worship and Ministry: Shaped Towards God. Melbourne: Mosaic Press, 2012. Buyst, Ione. “Teologia e liturgia na perspectiva da América Latina.” Eu sou o que sou. ed. C. Favreto and Ivanir A. Rampon. Passo Fundo: Berthier, 2008/ ———. Como estudar liturgia: Princípios de ciência litúrgica. São Paulo: Paulinas, 1990. 53. Carrell, Brian. Creating a New Zealand Prayer Book: A Personal Reminiscence of a 25 Year Odyssey 1964–89. Christchurch: Theology House, 2013.

Bibliography 293 Carroll, Jackson W., Barbara G. Wheeler, Daniel O. Aleshire, and Penny Long Marler. Being There: Culture and Formation in Two Theological Schools. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. Carvalhaes, Cláudio. Eucharist and Globalization: Redrawing the Borders of Eucharistic Hospitality. Eugene: Pickwick, 2013. Cavanaugh, William T. “The World in a Wafer: A Geography of the Eucharist as Resistance to Globalization.” Modern Theology 15.2 (April 1999): 182–196. Corley, Kathleen E. Private Women, Public Meals. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1993. Chauvet, Louis-Marie. Symbol and Sacrament: A Sacramental Reinterpretation of Christian Existence. Translated by Patrick Madigan, SJ, and Madeleine Beaumont. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1995. 190–195. Chavunduka, Gordon L. Dialogue among Civilizations: The African Religion in Zimbabwe Today. Occasional Paper, 1. Harare/Munster: Crossover Communication, 2001. Chikhaoui, Naima, and Fatima J. Casewit (trans. and ed.). “The Minbar: Symbol of Verticality and of Elevation.” Sacred Web: A Journal of Tradition and Modernity 14 (2004): 93–107. January 11, 2014. http://bit.ly/postcol1-52. Chupungco, Anscar J., OSB. Inculturation of Worship: Forty Years of Progress and Tradition. bit.ly/postcol_i-17. Chitando, Ezra, and Lovemore Togarasei. “‘June 2008, verse 27’: The Church and the 2008 Political Crisis.” African Identities 8.2: 151–162. Chittick, William. In In Search of the Lost Heart: Explorations in Islamic Thought. Edited by Mohammad Rustom, Atif Khalil, and Kazuyo Murata. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2012. Church of England. Formation for Ministry within a Learning Church. http:// bit.ly/postcol5-152. Church of the Province of New Zealand = Te Haahi o te Porowini o Niu Tireni, A New Zealand Prayer Book = He Karakia Mihinare O Aotearoa. Auckland, NZ: Collins, 1989. Cole, Victor B. “Africanising the Faith: Another Look at Contextualisation of Theology.” In Issues in African Christian Theology. Edited by Samuel Ngewa, Mark Shaw, and Tite Tienou. Nairobi, Kampala, and Der es Salaam: East Africa—Educational Publishers, 1998. 12–23. Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments. Directory on Popular Piety and the Liturgy: Principles and Guidelines. Vatican City: Libereria Editrice Vaticana, 2002. Connell, Martin. “Ascension Day.” In The New Westminster Dictionary of Liturgy & Worship. Edited by Paul Bradshaw. Louisville, KY: WJK, 2002. 29–30. ———. Eternity Today: On the Liturgical Year. Vol. 2, Sunday, Lent, The Three Days, The Easter Season, Ordinary Time. New York: Continuum, 2006. Connell, R. W. Gender. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2008. Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. Sacrosanctum Concilium. Solemnly Promulgated by His Holiness Pope Paul VI on December 4, 1963. bit.ly/postcol_i-13. Cox, Harvey. The Feast of Fools: A Theological Essay on Festivity and Fantasy. Harper & Row, 1972. Crossan, John Dominic. The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant. North Blackburn: CollinsDove, 1991.

294 Bibliography Cruz, Gemma Talud. “Between Identity and Security: Theological Implications of Migration in the Context of Globalization.” Theological Studies 69.2 (2008): 357–375. Cunha, Eduardo Leal. Indivíduo singular plural: A identidade em questão (The Plural Singular Individual: Identity in Question). Rio de Janeiro: 7 letras, 2009. Damasio, Antonio. The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. New York: Mariner Books, 2000. Davidson, Allan K., and Peter J. Lineham. Transplanted Christianity: Documents Illustrating Aspects of New Zealand Church History, 2nd ed. Palmerston North: Dunmore Press, 1989. Davie, Grace. Religion in Britain since 1945: Believing without Belonging. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994. Davies, J. G., ed. A New Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship. Norwich: SCM Press, 1994. Dawn, Marva. Reaching Out without Dumbing Down: A Theology of Worship for the Turn-of-the-Century Culture. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995. de Certeau, Michel. “How is Christianity Thinkable Today.” In The Postmodern God. Edited by Graham Ward. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 1997. 142. Deloria Jr., Vine. For This Land: Writings on Religion in America. New York: Routledge, 1999. Derrida, Jacques. Points . . . Interviews, 1974–94. Translated by Peggy Kamuf and others. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995. Derrida, Jacques, and Elizabeth Roudinesco. For What Tomorrow . . . A Dialogue. Translated by Jeff Fort. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004. Dix, Dom Gregory. The Shape of the Liturgy. New York: Continuum, 1945. ———. The Shape of the Liturgy, with additional notes by Paul V. Marshall, 2nd ed. New York: Seabury Press, 1983. Douglas, E. A. “Christian Festivals.” Harvest Field 3 (1896): 285. Douglas, Ian T., and Pui-lan Kwok. Beyond Colonial Anglicanism: The Anglican Communion in the Twenty-First Century. New York: Church Pub, 2001. Douglas, Mary. “Deciphering a Meal.” Daedalus 101 (1972): 61–81. Dube, Musa W. “Grant Me Justice! Towards Gender Sensitive Multi-Sectoral Reading of the Bible in the face of HIV and AIDS.” In Grant Me Justice! HIV/AIDS and Gender Readings of the Bible. Edited by Musa W. Dube and Musimbi A. Kanyoro. Pietermaritzburg: Cluster, 2004. 1–24. ———. “Reading for Decolonization (John 4.1–42).” In John and Postcolonialism: Travel, Space and Power. Edited by Musa W. Dube and Jeffrey L. Staley. London and New York: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. ———. “To Pray the Lord’s Prayer in the Global Economic Era (Matt. 6:9–13).” In The Bible in Africa: Transactions, Trajectories and Trends. Edited by Gerald O. West and Musa W. Dube. Leiden: Brill, 2001. ———. “Curriculum Transformation: Dreaming of Decolonization in Theological Studies.” In Border Crossings: Cross-cultural Hermeneutics. Edited by D. N. Premnath. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2007. 121–138. Dubuisson, Daniel. The Western Construction of Religion: Myths, Knowledge, and Ideology. Translated by William Sayers. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007.

Bibliography 295 Duck, Ruth C. Worship for the Whole People of God: Vital Worship for the 21st Century. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2013. Dussel, Enrique. Filosofía de Liberación. México: Edicol, 1977. Edith, Mother. “Missionary Principles: The Place of Prayer.” IRM 7 (1918): 59. Elewa, Ahmed, and Laury Silvers. “‘I Am One of the People’: A Survey and Analysis of Legal Arguments on Woman-Led Prayer in Islam.” Journal of Law and Religion 26.1 (2010–11): 141–171. Eliade, Mircea. Aspectos do mito (Aspects of Myths). Lisboa: Edições 70, 1963. ———. Mito e realidade (Myth and Reality). São Paulo: Perspectiva, 1963. ———. O sagrado e o profano: A essência das religiões (The Sacred and the Profane: The Essence of Religions). São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2001. Ehle, John. Trail of Tears: The Rise and Fall of the Cherokee Nation. New York: Doubleday, 1988. Elvey, Anne, Carol Hogan, Kim Power, and Claire Renkin, eds. Reinterpreting the Eucharist: Exploration in Feminist Theology and Ethics. Sheffield: Equinox, 2013. Esack, Farid. The Qur’an: A User’s Guide. Oxford: Oneworld, 2005. Ferguson, Kathy E. “Patriarchy.” In Women’s Studies Encyclopedia. Edited by Helen Tierney. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2002. January 27, 2014. http:// bit.ly/postcol1-49. Foley, Edward. “Eucharist, Postcolonial Theory and Developmental Disabilities: A Practical Theologian Revisits the Jesus Table.” International Journal of Pastoral Theology 15 (2011): 57–73. Foucault, Michel. “Two Lectures.” In Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. Edited by Colin Gordon. Brighton: Harvester, 1980. Ford, David F. The Future of Christian Theology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. 168–190. Fortescue, Adrian. “Liturgy.” In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton, 1910. Accessed October 13, 2011. http://bit.ly/postcol2-84. Foster, Charles R., Lisa Dahill, Larry Golemon, and Tolentino, Barbara Wang. Educating Clergy: Teaching Practices and Pastoral Imagination. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2005. Francis, Mark R. Local Worship, Global Church, Popular Religion and Liturgy. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2010. Francis, T. Dayanandan, ed. The Christian Bhakti of A. J. Appasamy. Madras: CLS, 1992. 180. Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Translated by Myra B. Ramos. London: Penguin Books, 1996. French, Laurence, and Jim Hornbuckle, eds. The Cherokee Perspective: Written by Eastern Cherokees. Boone: Appalachian Consortium Press, 1981. Frye, Marilyn. Willful Virgin: Essays in Feminism. Berkeley, CA: Crossing, 1992. Gaffney, Patrick D. “Friday Prayer.” In Encyclopaedia of the Qur’an, vol. 2, edited by Jane D. McAuliffe. Leiden: Brill, 2002. ———. The Prophet’s Pulpit: Islamic Preaching in Contemporary Egypt. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. Galbraith, Kyle L. “Broken Bodies of God: The Christian Eucharist as a Locus for Ecological Reflection.” Worldviews 13 (2009): 283–304.

296 Bibliography Galí Boadella, Montserrat. “Música para la teología de la liberación.” Anuario de Historia de la Iglesia 11 (2002): 177–188. Gandhi, Leela. Affective Communities: Anticolonial Thought, Fin–de–Siècle Radicalism, and the Politics of Friendship. Durham: Duke University Press, 2006. Garcia, Ricardo. Teaching in a Pluralistic Society: Concepts, Models and Strategies. New York: Harper and Row, 1982. Garrigan, Siobhán. Beyond Ritual: Sacramental Theology after Habermas. Burlington: Ashgate, 2004. ———. The Real Peace Process: Worship, Politics and the End of Sectarianism. London: Equinox, 2010. Gilliland, Dean S., ed. The Word among Us: Contextualizing Theology For Mission Today. Dallas, TX: Word Publishing, 1989. Giroux, Henry. “Racial Politics and the Pedagogy of Whiteness.” In Whiteness: A Critical Reader. Edited by Mike Hill. New York: New York University Press, 1997. Goitein, S. D. Studies in Islamic History and Institutions. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Goizueta, Roberto S. Christ our Compassion: Toward a Theological Aesthetics of Liberation. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2009. Gooch, Paul W. “Studies and Character-President’s Page.” Vic Report (Summer 2013): 2. Gooder, Paula, and Michael Perham. Echoing the Word: The Bible in the Eucharist. London: SPCK, 2013. Graham, Colin, and Willy Maley. “Introduction.” Irish Studies Review 7.2 (1999): 149–152. Green, Rayna. “Telephone Interview with Dr. Rayna Green.” Knoxville, TN, July 6, 2006. Green, Rayna, and Melanie Fernandez. The British Museum Encyclopedia of Native North America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999. Groody, Daniel G., CSC. “Crossing the Divide: Foundations of a Theology of Migration and Refugees.” Theological Studies 70 (2009): 638–667. Hammer, Juliane. “Performing Gender Justice: The 2005 Woman-Led Prayer in New York.” Contemporary Islam 4 (2010): 91–116. Hammond, Adam. “The Honest and Dishonest Critic: Style and Substance in Mikhail Bakhtin’s ‘Discourse in the Novel’ and Erich Auerbach’s Mimesis.” Style 45.4 (Winter 2011): 639. Hanciles, Jehu J. “Migration and Mission: Some Implications for the Twenty–first Century Church.” International Bulletin of Missionary Research 27.4 (2003): 146–153. Harris, Maria. Fashion Me a People: Curriculum in the Church. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1989. Hashem, Mazen. “The Ummah in the Khutba: A Religious Sermon or a Civil Discourse? Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 30.1 (2010): 49–61. ———. The Muslim Friday Sermon: Veiled and Unveiled Themes. Dearborn, MI: Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, 2009. Havea, Jione. “Who is Strange(r)? A Pacific Native Muses Over Mission.” Journal of Theologies and Cultures in Asia 7–8 (2008/2009): 121–137. Hawn, C. Michael. “Reverse Missions: Global Singing for Local Congregations.” In Music in Christian Worship: At the Service of the Liturgy. Edited by Charlotte Y. Kroeker. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2005.

Bibliography 297 Heathfield, Adrian, and Tehching Hsieh. Out of Now: The Lifeworks of Tehching Hsieh. Boston, MA: MIT, 2009. Hefling, Charles C., and Cynthia L. Shattuck. The Oxford Guide to the Book of Common Prayer: A Worldwide Survey. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Heitzenrater, Richard P. Wesley and the People Called Methodists. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1995. Hickman, Hoyt L., Don E. Saliers, Laurence Hull Stookey, and James F. White. The Handbook of the Christian Year. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1992. Hiebert, Paul G. Anthropological Insights for Missionaries. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985. Hiebert, Paul G., R. Daniel Shaw, and Tite Tienou. Understanding Folk Religion: A Christian Response to Popular Beliefs and Practices. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1999. Hill, Andrew, and Andrew White. “The Flying of Israeli Flags in Northern Ireland.” Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 15.1 (2008): 31–50. Hilst, Hilda. “Do desejo.” Trechos selecionados. Portal Cultural Hilda Hilst [n.d.]. http://bit.ly/postcol3-5. Hirschkind, Charles. The Ethical Soundscape: Cassette Sermons and Islamic Counterpublics. New York: Columbia University Press, 2006. Hoffman, Lawrence A. Beyond the Text: A Holistic Approach to Liturgy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1989. Hogan, Carol. “Eucharistic Metamorphosis: Changing Symbol, Changing Life.” In Reinterpreting the Eucharist: Exploration in Feminist Theology and Ethics. Edited by Anne Elvey, Carol Hogan, Kim Power, and Claire Renkin. Sheffield: Equinox Publishers, 2013. 10–30. Holquist, Michael, ed. “The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M. M. Bakhtin.” Translated by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996. 358. Hooper, J. S. M. “Fellow-workers with God.” South India Church Man (April 1948): 123. Horst, Willis, Ute Mueller-Eckhart, and Frank Paul. Misión sin conquista: Acompañamiento de comunidades indígenas autóctonas como práctica misionera alternativa. Buenos Aires: Kairos, 2009. Huston, T., Thomson, R., Gidoomal, R., and Chinn, L., “The New People Next Door,” Lausanne Occasional Paper No. 55, Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, http://www.lausanne.org/documents/2004forum/LOP55 _IG26.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2013. Jackson, Darrell, and Alessia Passarelli. Mapping Migration Mapping Churches’ Responses. Brussels: Churches Commission for Migrants in Europe, 2008. Sol, J., ed. Refugees: A Challenge to South African Churches – A Ministry to Refugees Handbook. Pietermaritzburg: South African Council of Churches, 1982. Jacobs, Annemarie. Es ist dunkel, aber ich singe. Erlangen: Bkv, 1992. 26. Jagessar, Michael N., and Stephen Burns. Christian Worship: Postcolonial Perspectives. Oakville, CT: Equinox, 2011. ———. “Liturgical Studies and Christian Worship: The Postcolonial Challenge.” Black Theology: An International Journal 5.1 (2007):45. Jasper, R. C. D. “Liturgies.” In The Westminster Dictionary of Liturgy and Worship. Edited by J. G. Davies. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1986.

298 Bibliography Jastrow Jr., Morris. The Study of Religion. AAR Journal Press, 1981. 61–62. Jelinek, Estelle C. The Tradition of Women’s Autobiography: From Antiquity to the Present. Boston, MA: Twayne Publishers, 1986. Joh, Wonhee Anne. Heart of the Cross: A Postcolonial Christology. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 2006. Johnson, Maxwell E., ed. Between Memory and Hope: Readings on the Liturgical Year. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2000. Johnson, Todd. “Ora et Labora: Reflections on the (Non-)History of Seminary Chapels.” In Common Worship and Theological Education. Edited by Siobhán Garrigan and Todd Johnson. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2010. 9. Joint Working Group of the Roman Catholic Church and World Council of Churches. “Ecclesiological and Ecumenical Implications of a Common Baptism.” Eighth Report 1999–2005. World Council of Churches, 2005. Jones, J. P. “Christian Work at the Madurai Festival.” Harvest Field 10 (1899): 2. ———. “The Church and the Buddha.” Harvest Field 16 (1906): 98–99. Jones, Linda G. The Power of Oratory in the Medieval Muslim World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Joy, David. “Liturgical Explorations in a Postcolonial Context.” In The Edge of God: New Liturgical Texts and Contexts in Conversation. Edited by Stephen Burns, Nicola Slee, and Michael Jagessar. Marylebone: Epworth, 2008. 39–49. Kanyoro, Musimbi A. “Engendered Communal Theology: Africa Women’s Contribution to Theology in the 21st Century.” In Talitha cum! Theologies of African Women. Edited by N. J. Njoroge and Musa W. Dube. Pietermaritzburg: Cluster, 2001. 158–180. ———. Introducing Feminist Cultural Hermeneutics: An African Perspective. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. ——— A. “Preference: Reading the Bible in the face of HIV and AIDS.” In Grant Me Justice! HIV/AIDS and Gender Readings of the Bible. Edited by Dube Musa and Musimbi A. Kanyoro. Pietermaritzburg: Cluster, 2003. viii–xiv. Kanyoro, Musimbi A., and Njoroge N. J., eds. Groaning in Faith: African women in the Household of God. Nairobi: Acton, 1996. Kavanagh, Aidan. “Christian Initiation: Tactics and Strategy.” In Made, Not Born: New Perspectives on Christian Initiation and the Catechumenate. Edited by Murphy Center for Liturgical Research. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1976. 1–6. Kervin, William S. Gathered for Worship: A Sourcebook for Worship Committees, Leaders, and Teams. Toronto: United Church Publishing House, 2010. Kidwell, Clara Sue, Homer Noley, and George E. Tinker. A Native American Theology. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2001. Kim, Yung Suk. Christ’s Body in Corinth: The Politics of a Metaphor. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2008. Kim-Cragg, HyeRan. Story and Song: A Postcolonial Interplay between Christian Education and Worship. New York: Peter Lang, 2012. Kim-Cragg, HyeRan, and Joanne Doi. “Intercultural Threads of Hybridity and Threshold Spaces of Learning.” Religious Education 107.3 (May–June 2012): 262–275. Kinnamon, Michael. Signs of the Spirit: Official Report Seventh Assembly. Geneva: WCC, 1991.

Bibliography 299 Knight, Henry H., III. The Presence of God in the Christian Life: John Wesley and the Means of Grace. Lanham: Scarecrow Press, 1992. Kobia, Samuel. “Global Migration and New Ecclesial Realities.” World Council of Churches, April 25, 2007. Accessed August 5, 2013. http://www.oikoumene .org/en/resources/documents/general-secretary/speeches/global-migration -and-new-ecclesial-realities. Kolakowski, Leszek. “Slumbering Islam.” New Perspectives Quarterly 19.1 (2002): 92–93. Koll, Karla. “Struggling for Solidarity: Changing Mission Relationships between the Presbyterian Church (USA) and Christian Organizations in Central America during the 1980s.” PhD diss., Princeton Theological Seminary, 2004. Koser, Khalid. International Migration: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University, 2007. Kraft, Charles H. Anthropology for Christian Witness. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1996. Krahn, Cornelius, Nanne van der Zijpp, and Robert S. Kreider. “Architecture.” Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online, 1989. January 27, 2014. http://bit.ly/postcol3-49. Kwok, Pui-lan. “What Has Love to Do with It? Planetarity, Feminism, and Theology.” Planetary Loves: Spivak, Postcoloniality, and Theology. Edited by Stephen D. Moore and Mayra Rivera. New York: Fordham University Press, 2011. 31–45. Lake, Kirsopp. “Epistle to Diognetus 5:4–5.” In The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 2. London: Heinemann, 1959. Lange, Ernst. Predigen als Beruf: Aufsätze zu Homiletik, Liturgie und Pfarramt. München: Kaiser, 1987, 83–95. Larsen, L. P. “The Interest of Mystical Christianity to the Missionaries.” Harvest Field 16 (1905): 7. Lartey, Emmanuel Y. Postcolonializing God: New Perspectives on Pastoral and Practical Theology. London: SCM Press, 2013. ———. “Postcolonial African Pastoral Theology. Rituals of Remembrance, Cleansing, Healing, and Re-Connection.” Journal of Pastoral Theology 21.2 (2011): 1–17. Lathrop, Gordon W. Central Things: Worship in Word and Sacrament. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Press, 2005. ———. Holy People: A Liturgical Ecclesiology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1999. ———. Holy Things: A Liturgical Theology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1998. ———. Holy Ground: A Liturgical Cosmology. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2003. Lingenfelter, Sherwood. Agents of Transformation: A Guide for Effective CrossCultural Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996. Loomba, Ania. Colonialism/Postcolonialism. New York: Routledge, 2005. Lopez, Alfred J. “Introduction: Whiteness after Empire.” Postcolonial Whiteness: A Critical Reader on Race and Empire. Edited by Alfred J. Lopez. Albany: SUNY Press, 2005. Lorde, Audre. “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.” Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Berkeley, CA: Crossing, 2007. Lott, Eric J. Worship in an Indian Context. Bangalore: UTC, 1986. 6.

300 Bibliography Lubarsky, Sandra. “Dialogue: ‘Holy Insecurity.’” Religious Education 91.4 (1996): 545. ———. Tolerance and Transformation: Jewish Approaches to Religious Pluralism. Cincinnati, OH: Hebrew Union College Press, 1990. 2. Lumbala, Francois Kabasele. Celebrating Jesus Christ in Africa: Liturgy and Inculturation. New York: Orbis Books, 1998. Lutheran World Federation. Nairobi Statement on Worship and Culture. Geneva: Lutheran World Federation, 1996. MacDonald, K. S. “The Natural History of ‘Om’ and ‘Amen.’” Indian Evangelical Review 16 (1888–89): 15–18. Mahmood, Saba. “Secularism, Hermeneutics, and Empire: The Politics of Islamic Reformation.” Public Culture 18.2 (2006): 323–347. Mamdani, Mahmood. Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War, and the Roots of Terror. New York: Pantheon Books, 2004. Maraschin, Jaci C. A beleza da santidade: Ensaios de liturgia. (The Beauty of Holiness: Esssays on Liturgy). São Paulo: Aste, 1996. ———. Da leveza e da beleza: Liturgia na pós-modernidade. (On Lightness and Beauty: Liturgy in Post-Modernity). São Paulo: Aste, 2010. Maraschin, Jaci C., and Frederico Pieper Pires. “The Lord’s Song in the Brazilian Land.” Studies in World Christianity 12.2 (2006): 83–100. Martin, G. M. Fest und Alltag: Bausteine zu einer Theorie des Festes. Stuttgart /Berlin/Köln /Mainz: Kohlhammer, 1973. Martínez, Juan F. “Latin American Anabaptist-Mennonites: A Profile.” Mennonite Quarterly Review 74.3 (2000): 463–477. Martins, J. de Souza. Os camponeses e a política no Brasil. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1995. Martyn, J. Louis. “Apocalyptic Antinomies in Paul’s Letter to the Galatians.” New Testament Studies 31 (1985): 410–424. May, Roy. Los pobres de la tierra: Hacia una pastoral de la tierra. San José: DEI, 1986. McClintock, Anne. “The Angel of Progress: Pitfalls of the Term ‘PostColonialism.’” Social Text 31/32, Third World and Post-Colonial Issues (1992): 84–98. McClintock Fulkerson, Mary. Places of Redemption: Theology for a Worldly Church. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. McKay, Susan. “At City Hall.” London Review of Books 35.3 (February 2013): 16. “Misa Campesina Nicaragüense.” Wikipedia. Accessed April 7, 2014. http://bit .ly/postcol3-17. McLoughlin, William G. “Cherokees and Methodists, 1824–1834.” American Society of Church History 50.1 (March 1981): 44–63. ———. Cherokee Renascence in the New Republic. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986. ———. Cherokees and Missionaries, 1789–1839. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1995. Méndez–Montoya, Angel F. The Theology of Food: Eating and the Eucharist. Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2012. Meredith, P. “Hybridity in the Third Space: Rethinking Bi-cultural politics in Aotearoa/New Zealand.” Paper presented to Te Ora Rangahau Maori Research and Development Conference, July 7–9, 1998, Massey University.

Bibliography 301 Mezzadra, Sandro, and Federico Rahola. “La condición postcolonial.” In Estudios postcoloniales: Ensayosfundamentales. Compiled by Sandro Mezzadra. Madrid: Traficantes de Sueños, 2008. 261–278. Migne, Jacques-Paul, ed. Patrologia Latina. Paris, 1844–1865. Vol. 51. Mignolo, Walter. “Epistemic Disobedience, Independent Thought and De-colonial Freedom.” Theory, Culture & Society 26.7–8 (2009). ———. Desobediencia epistémica: Retórica de la modernidad, lógica de la colonialidad y gramática de la descolonialidad. Buenos Aires: Editora Del Signo, 2010. ———. Local Histories/Global Designs: Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges and Border Thinking. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000. Miranda, Carmem Lúcia Sales. Identidade: Síntese das múltiplas identificações (Identity: Synthesis of Multiple Identifications). Taubaté: Cabral Editora Universitária, 1998. Moltmann, Jürgen. Die ersten Freigelassenen der Schöpfung: Versuche über die Freude an der Freiheit und das Wohlgefallen am Spiel. München: Kaiser, 1971. Moltmann-Wendel, E. I am a Body: New Waves of Embodiment. London: SCM Press, 1994. Mooney, James. “Myths of the Cherokee.” Nineteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1897–98, Smithsonian Institution. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1902. Mora Guevara, Edwin. La celebración Cristiana: Renovación litúrgica contextual. San José: Editorial Sebila, 2009. Mosshammer, Alden A. The Easter Computus and the Origins of the Christian Era. New York: Oxford, 2008. Moutsoulas, Elias. “ASCENS: In ascensionem Christi oratio.” The Brill Dictionary of Gregory of Nyssa. Edited by Lucas Francisco Mateo Seco and Giulio Maspero. Leiden: Brill, 2010. 86–87. Mouw, Richard J., William McKinney, and Brian Stiller. “The President’s Role as Symbolic, Culture-forming Leader.” In A Handbook for Seminary Presidents. Edited by G. Douglass Lewis and Lovett H. Weems. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006. 186. Muers, Rachel. Keeping God’s Silence: Towards a Theological Ethics of Communication. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004. Nagy, D. A Theology of Migration. Boekencentrum: Utrecht, 2009. Neu, Diann L. Women’s Rites: Feminist Liturgies for Life’s Journeys. Women’s Alliance for Theology, Ethics and Ritual. Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 2003. New Century Hymnal. Cleveland, OH: Pilgrim Press, 1995. Newbigin, Lesslie. The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission. Revised edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995. Nirmal, A. P. “A Theological Appraoch to the Question of Celebrations of Some Indian Festivals by Christians in India.” BTF 5 (1973): 37. Noren, Carol M. What Happens Sunday Morning: A Layperson’s Guide to Worship. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1992. Nsibande, A. E. “The Black Theologian and the Black Church.” In Dynamic African Theology: Umphumulo Contribution. Edited by H. L. Nelson. Durban: Pinetown Printers, 1992. 26–27. “Nueva canción.” Wikipedia. Accessed April 7, 2014. http://bit.ly/postcol3-u.

302 Bibliography O Rappa. “Pescador de Ilusões.” Rappa Mundi. São Paulo: Warner Music, 1996. O’Connor, Murphy. “Eucharist and Community in First Corinthians.” In Living Bread, Saving Cup: Readings on the Eucharist. Edited by R. Kevin Seasoltz, OSB. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1982. 1–30. O’Neill, William S. J. “Rights of Passage: Ethics of Forced Displacement.” Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics 27 (2007): 113–136. Oakley, E. S. “The Gospel in Songand Lay.” Harvest Field 16 (1906): 208–209. Ochoa, Enriqueta. “Las urgencias de un Dios.” Poemas de Amor [n.d.]. http:// bit.ly/postcol3-2. Oduyoye, Mercy A. Daughters of Anowa: African Women and Patriarchy. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1995. ———. Introducing African Women’s Theology. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. Omulokolei, Watson. “The Quest for Authentic African Christianity.” In Issues in African Christian Theology. Edited by Samuel Ngewa, Mark Shaw, and Tite Tienou. Nairobi, Kampala, and Der es Salaam: East Africa—Educational Publishers, 1998. 24–48. Pato, L. L. “African Theologies.” In Doing Theology in Context: South African Perspectives. Edited by John W. De Gruchy and Charles Villa-Vicencio. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1994. 152–161. Paul, J. “Christian Growth.” Harvest Field 4 (1892): 406–409. Pearson, Clive. “The Face of Theology.” In Crossing Borders: Shaping Faith, Ministry and Identity in Cross-cultural Australia. Edited by Helen Richmond and Myong Duk Yang. Sydney: NSW Board of Mission, 2006. Pellet, Ch. “Quss b. Sa’ida.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Leiden: Brill Online, 2013. May 9, 2013. http://bit.ly/postcol1-46. Percy, Martyn. Clergy: Origin of the Species. London: Continuum, 2006. Perdue, Theda, and Michael D. Green, eds. The Cherokee Removal: A Brief History with Documents. Bedford Series in History and Culture. Boston, MA: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2004. Pfeil, Margaret R. “Oscar Romero’s Theology of Transfiguration.” Theological Studies 72 (2011): 87–115. Pilcher, Carmel. “The Sunday Eucharist: Embodying Christ in a Prophetic Act.” In Reinterpreting the Eucharist: Exploration in Feminist Theology and Ethics. Edited by Anne Elvey, Carol Hogan, Kim Power, and Claire Renkin. Sheffield: Equinox, 2013. 31–53. Poling, James, and Donald Miller. Foundations for a Practical Theology of Ministry. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1985. Prabhakar, Samson. Towards an Indian-Christian Religious Education. Bern: Universitat Bern, 1989. ———. “Authenticity and Relevance of the Liturgy of the Eucharist: A Case Study.” Masihi Sevak (December 1998): 37. ———. “Editor’s Note,” Special Issue on Worship NCC Review. Nagpur: NCCI, 1991. 1. Prakash, Gyan. “Who’s Afraid of Postcoloniality?” Social Text 49: Yale Strike Dossier (1996): 187–203. Prior, Michael. The Bible and Colonialism: A Moral Critique. London: T&T Clark, 1997. Procter-Smith, Marjorie. In Her Own Rite: Constructing Feminist Liturgical Tradition. Akron: OSL, 2002.

Bibliography 303 ———, and Janet R. Walton, eds. Women at Worship: Interpretations of North American Diversity. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1993. Pui-lan, Kwok. “Theology and Social Theory.” In Empire: The Christian Tradition; New Readings of Classical Theologians. Edited by Kwok Pui-lan, Don H. Compier, and Joerg Rieger. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2007. 15–30. ———. “The Legacy of Cultural Hegemony in the Anglican Church.” In Beyond Colonial Anglicanism: The Anglican Communion in the Twenty–First Century. Edited by Ian T. Douglas and Kwok Pui-lan. New York: Church Publishing, 2001. 47–70. ———. Postcolonial Imagination and Feminist Theology. Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 2005. 127. Qara’i, Ali Quli. The Qur’an, with a Phrase-by-Phrase Translation. London: Islamic College for Advanced Studies Press, 2004. Quijano, Aníbal. “Colonialidad y Modernidad/Racionalidad.” Perú Indígena 29 (1991): 11–21. Qutbuddin, Tahera. “Khutba: The Evolution of Early Arabic Oration.” In Classical Arabic Humanities in Their Own Terms: Festschrift for Wolfhart Heinrichs. Edited by Beatrice Gruendler and Michael Cooperson. Leiden: Brill, 2008. Radhakrishnan, R. “Postcoloniality and the Boundaries of Identity.” Callaloo 16.4 (1993): 762. Rakoczy S. In Her Name: Women Doing Theology. Pietermaritzburg: Cluster, 2004. Ramadan, Tariq. In the Footsteps of the Prophet: Lessons from the Life of Muhammad. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007. Randall, Margaret. Sandino’s Daughters: Testimonies of Nicaraguan Women in Struggle. Revised edition. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1995. Reda, Nevin. “Women in the Mosque: Historical Perspectives on Segregation.” American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 21.2 (2004): 77–97. Regan, Patrick, OSB. “The Fifty Days and the Fiftieth Day.” In Between Memory and Hope: Readings on the Liturgical Year. Edited by Maxwell E. Johnson. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2000. 223–246. Ramshaw, Gail. God beyond Gender: Feminist Christian God-Language. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1995. Robinson, W. “The Use and Abuse of Hindu Mythology in Preaching to Hindus.” Harvest Field 12 (1901): 15. Rollins, Peter. How (Not) to Speak of God. Brewster, MA: Paraclete Press, 2006. Roman Catholic Church and World Council of Churches. Ecclesiological and Ecumenical Implications of a Common Baptism. A Joint Working Group between Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of the Churches: Eighth report 1999–2005 (Geneva/Rome: WCC, 2005). Ross, Susan A. Extravagant Affections: A Feminist Sacramental Theology. New York: Continuum, 1998. Rowson, Everett K. “The Effeminates of Early Medina.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 111.4 (1991): 671–693. Ruether R. R. Sexism and God Talk towards a Feminist Theology. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1983. Russel, Letty M. Church in the Round Feminism Interpretation of the Church. Westminster: John Knox Press, 1993. ———. “God, Gold, Glory, and Gender. A Postcolonial View of Mission.” International Review of Mission 93.368 (2004): 39–49.

304 Bibliography Rutherford, Jonathan. “The Third Space: Interview with Homi Bhabha.” In Identity, Community, Culture, Difference. Edited by Jonathan Rutherford. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1990. 207–221. Rynkiewich, Michael A. “Missio Dei Et Regnum Dei.” Missio Dei Gathering. Nashville, TN, 2006. Safi, Omid. Memories of Muhammad: Why the Prophet Matters. New York: HarperOne, 2009. Safra, Gilberto. A face estética do self-teoria e clínica (The Aesthetic Face of the SelfTheory and Clinic). São Paulo: Unimarco, 2005. Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1978. ———. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books, 1994. Saldívar, José David. Border Matters. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997. Saliers, Don E. Worship Come to Its Senses. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1996. ———. “Liturgy and Ethics: Some New Beginnings.” In Liturgy and the Moral Self: Humanity at Full Stretch Before God. Essays in Honor of Don E. Saliers. Edited by E. Byron Anderson and Bruce T. Morrill. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1998. 24–25. Sant’Anna, Affonso Romano de. “Mistério.” Página de Carlos Seabra [n.d]. http:// bit.ly/postcol3-4. Santa Ana, Julio de. Pão, Vinho e Amizade: Meditações. São Paulo, CEDI, 1986. Schein, Edgar. Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass, [3] 2004, 2, cited in Mouw et al., “Symbolic, Culture-forming,” 180. Schmemann, Alexander. “Liturgical Theology: Remarks on Method.” In Liturgy and Tradition: Theological Reflections of Alexander Schmemann. Edited by Thomas Fisch. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1990. 138. Schmidtke, Sabine. “Homoeroticism and Homosexuality in Islam: A Review Article.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 62.2 (1999): 260–266. Schreiter, Robert J. Faces of Jesus in Africa. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1991. Schwartz, Regina Mara. Sacramental Poetics at the Dawn of Secularism: When God Left the World. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2008. Scott, David. Conscripts of Modernity: The Tragedy of Colonial Enlightenment. Durham: Duke University Press, 2004. Senn, F. C. Christian Liturgy Catholic and Evangelical. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 1997. Seoka, Johannes. “African Culture and Christian Spirituality: An Interpretation.” In An African Challenge to the Church in the Twenty-First Century. Edited by Mongezi Guma and A. Leslie Milton. Johannesburg: South African Council of Churches, 1997. Shafi, Sophia. “Turning Turk: Anxieties Surrounding Bodily Difference in Orientalist Discourse.” Orientalism: A Eurocentric Vision of the “Other.” London: International Peace Studies Center, 2014. Shah-Kazemi, Reza. The Spirit of Tolerance in Islam. New York: I. B. Tauris, 2012. Shaw, R. Daniel. “Contextualizing the Power and the Glory.” International Journal of Frontier Missions 12.3 (1995): 6. ———. Transculturation: The Cultural Factor in Translation and Other Communication Tasks. Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1988.

Bibliography 305 Shenk, Wilbert R., ed. The Transfiguration of Mission: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Foundations. Vol. 12, Institute of Mennonite Studies Missionary Studies. Scottdale: Herald Press, 1993. Silva, Vagner Gonçalves da. Intolerância religiosa: Impactos do neopentecostalismo no campo religioso afro-brasileiro (Religious Intolerance, Impact of Neo-Pentecostalism in the Afro-Brazilian Religious Field). São Paulo: EDUSP, 2007. Skye, Lee Miena. “How Australian Aboriginal Christian Womanist Tiddas (sisters) Theologians Celebrate the Eucharist.” In Reinterpreting the Eucharist: Exploration in Feminist Theology and Ethics. Edited by Anne Elvey, Carol Hogan, Kim Power, and Claire Renkin. Sheffield: Equinox, 2013. 54–77. Smith, Andrea. “Dismantling the Master’s House with the Master’s Tools.” In Hope Abundant: Third World and Indigenous Women’s Theology. Edited by Kwok Pui-lan. New York: Orbis, 2010. Smith, Christine M. Preaching as Weeping, Confession, and Resistance: Radical Responses to Radical Evil. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004. Smith, D. E. From Symposium to Eucharist the Banquet in the Early Christian World. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 2003. Smith, Linda Tuhiwai. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. London: Zed Books, 2012. Snyder, Susanna. “Strangers in the Sanctuary: Asylum Seekers, Faith and the Church.” In The Edge of God: New Liturgical Texts and Contexts in Conversation. Edited by Stephen Burns, Nicola Slee, and Michael Jagessar. Marylebone: Epworth, 2008. 73–87. Souza, Marcelo Barros de, Jose Luis Caravias. Theologie der Erde. Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1990. Spadaro, Antonio SJ. “A Big Heart Open to God: An Exclusive Interview with Pope Francis.” America, September 30, 2013. http://bit.ly/postcol5-131. Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. “In Memoriam: Edward W. Said.” Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East 23.1–2 (2003): 7. ———. “Moving Devi.” Cultural Critique 47 (Winter 2001): 120–163. Spohn, William. Go and Do Likewise: Jesus and Ethics. New York: Continuum, 2007. Staufer, Anita (Hg.). Christlicher Gottesdienst: Einheit in kultureller Vielfalt. Genf/ Hannover: LWB/VELKD, 1996. Steil, C. A. O sertão das romarias: Estudo antropológico sobre o santuário de Bom Jesus da Lapa. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1996, 285. Strongman, L. “Post-colonialism or Post-imperialism.” Deep South 2.3 (Spring 1996). Sugirtharajah, R. S. “Complacencies and Cul-de-sacs: Christian Theologies and Colonialism.” In Postcolonial Theologies: Divinity and Empire. Edited by Catherine Keller, Michael Nausner, and Mayra Rivera. St. Louis: Chalice, 2004. ———. “The First, Second and Third Letters of John.” In A Postcolonial Commentary on the New Testament Writings. Edited by Fernando F. Segovia and R. S. Sugirtharajah. London: T&T Clark, 2009. ———. “Postcolonial and Biblical Interpretation: The Next Phase.” In The Bible and Postcolonialism, 13, series editor, R. S. Sugirtharajah. London: T&T Clark, 2007. 455–466. ———. Postcolonial Criticism and Biblical Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Taylor, Charles. A Secular Age. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press, 2007.

306 Bibliography Te Paa, Daniel, J. “To Say My Fate Is not Tied to Your Fate is like Saying, ‘Your End of the Boat is Sinking’: A Heartfelt Critique of the Three Tikanga Church.” Progressive Spirituality Aotearoa. http://bit.ly/postcol4-32. Te Paa, Daniel, J. “From Te Rawhiri to the New Zealand Prayer Book.” In The Oxford Guide to the Book of Common Prayer: A Worldwide Survey. Edited by Charles Hefling and Cynthia Shattuck. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Terrance, Ranger, and Nagwabi Bhebe, eds. The Historical Dimensions of Democracy and Human Rights in Zimbabwe: Pre-colonial and Colonial Legacies, vol. 1. Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications, 2001. Tervalon, Melanie, and Jann Murray-García. “Cultural Humility Versus Cultural Competence: A Critical Distinction in Defining Physician Training Outcomes in Multicultural Education.” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 9.2 (May 1998). “The Christo Samaj, Madras.” Harvest Field 62.1(1922): 7–14. Thurian, Max. The Mystery of the Eucharist: An Ecumenical Approach. London: Mowbray, 1983. Tienou, Tite. “The Theological Task of the Church in Africa.” In Issues in Africa Christian Theology. Edited by Samuel Ngewa, Mark Shaw, and Tite Tienou. Nairobi, Kampala, and Dar es Salaam: East Africa–Educational Publishers, 1998. Tiffin, Chris, and Alan Lawson. Describing Empire: Post-Colonialism and Textuality. London: Routledge, 1994. Tomasi, S. “The Prophetic Mission of the Churches: Theological Perspectives.” The Prophetic Mission of the Churches in Response to Forced Displacement of Peoples, a Global Ecumenical Consultation, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. World Council of Churches, 1995, 6–11. Torres–Saillant, Silvio. Caribbean Poetics: Toward an Aesthetic of West Indian Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Tourage, Mahdi. “Performing Belief and Reviving Islam.” Performing Islam 1.2 (2012): 207–226. Treat, James. Native and Christian: Indigenous Voices on Religious Identity in the United States and Canada. New York: Routledge, 1996. Trinh, Minh-ha. When the Moon Waxes Red: Representation, Gender, and Cultural Politics. New York: Routledge, 1991. Turner, Denys. “The Darkness of God and the Light of Christ: Negative Theology and Eucharistic Presence.” Modern Theology 15.2 (April 1999): 143–158. United Church of Canada. Sacraments Elders. Toronto: United Church Publishing House, 2013. Uzukwu, W. Elochukwu. Worship as Body Language Introduction to Christian Worship: An African Orientation. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1997. van Dijck, Jasper, Peteke Feijten, and Paul Boyle. Migration and Religion in Scotland: A Study of the Influence of Religion on Migration Behavior. LSCS Research Working Paper 8.0, November 2010. August 10, 2013. van Schalkwyk, A. “Hectic but Faithful: The Reclaiming of the Body as Sacred in Christian Feminist Theology.” Journal of Religion and Theology 9.1–2 (2002): 135–161. Vigil, José María, and Angel Torrellas. Misas centro americanas: Transcripción y comentario teológico. Managua: CAV-CEBES, 1998.