Post/decolonialism and Theology – A Short Survey and Critical Engagement

Elias Kruger Th 591 Dr. Garcia-Johnson Post/decolonialism and Theology – A Short Survey and Critical Engagement Introduction The story of resistance to colonialism did not begin with the writing of books on the topic. Its articulation was also already present way before it caught the attention of the academy. When one surveys the history of Latin America, challenges to the colonial mindset date as far as when colonial project itself began in the fifteenth century. What has become clearer in the last fifty years is the connection between knowledge and power. That is, it is not enough to recognize the political and socio-economic effects of colonialism without dismantling its epistemological foundation. In other words, there can be no social justice without cognitive justice. Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Another Knowledge Is Possible : Beyond Northern Epistemologies (New York: Verso, 2007), xi. Towards that end, a number of theories and movements have arisen in the last fifty years. This way, they have added to an already existing tradition of resistance by uncovering the knowledge apparatus which undergirded western imperialism for the last five centuries. This paper critically surveys the similar yet independently-developed Postcolonial and Decolonial studies that have emerged in the last fifty years. I will begin by providing a short historical overview of the emergence of each school of thought. I will then compare and contrast highlighting primarily their differences. I will then survey their intersection with theology as Christianity played a crucial role in the colonial project. I will argue that building on the foundation of a critique of colonization of knowledge, Decolonial and Postcolonial theory must move beyond binary conceptions of power to take into account multiple relations of dependence and antagonism within postcolonial societies. This is especially true in their interaction with theology that continues to be tied to reductionist notions that Christianity is synonymous with colonialism. While this critique is still necessary as colonial tendencies persist in globalized capitalism; the emergence of a multi-polar world demands a greater understanding not only of the Western colonial legacy but also the inter-relationships between and within postcolonial nations. Only by doing so, can post/decolonial thinking transcend its deconstructive nature to truly become a constructive theory for alternative futures. 1. Historical overview As the social sciences slowly transcend the modernist assumptions of objectivity, the influence of geography, culture and biography on a discipline’s methodology becomes more evident. Thus, it is fitting to provide a short historical overview of both Postcolonial and Decolonial studies before comparing and contrasting them. This background should elucidate and clarify differences from the beginning while also allowing us to define their place of enunciation. That is, these schools of thought emerged both from specific localities and emphasize certain historical experiences that led them to different approaches and conclusions. Beyond that, one should add that many of the proponents of these theories, while scholars themselves, carried a biography marked by the impact of colonialism. Thus, they did not speak as detached observers but as representatives of the people groups who experienced the colonial heritage of oppression. Furthermore, it is important to point out that these two schools developed relatively separate from each other. It is only in the mid-90’s that they start interacting through the emergence of the Latin American Subaltern studies and the work of Walter Mignolo. Walter Mignolo Local Histories/Global Designs : Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges, and Border Thinking (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2000), 184. Yet, even after that, they continue to develop separately one primarily led by scholars from Anglo American universities while the other mostly carried by scholars in Latin American universities. This reality is rather unfortunate as these two schools have much to learn from each other. 1a Postcolonial Studies Postcolonial studies started in the United State as a literary critique of French and British colonial construction of Middle East and Asia. Edward Said’s Orientalism, published in 1978 is regarded as the inaugural work for this academic field. One could argue that Fannon work in the 60’s to expose the destructive effects of colonialism in natives people as a pre-cursor and possibly the begining of postcolonial critique in the 20th century. Yet, it did not gain enough prominence of academic energy as Said’s work did. A number of authors have cited Said as the precursor of postcolonial studies. For more info see: Ato Quayson, Postcolonialism : Theory, Practice, or Process? (Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA: Polity Press ; Blackwell Publishers, 2000), 3. Said, a Palestinian Christian, who had immigrated to the United States, trained as a literary theorist was well positioned to uncover the insipid Euro-centric bias resident in the Oriental view. Applying deconstructive lens to historical documents, newspaper articles and books of the colonial period; Said built a compelling argument to show that the Orient was a European fabrication based on the exteriority of Middle Eastern and Asian populations. Moreover, this fabrication was not a harmless misperception but became the epistemological foundation that enabled the West to exert authority and domination over the region for centuries. Edward Said. Orientalism (New York: Pantheon Books, 1978), 3. His critique was groundbreaking in making this connection between knowledge and power implying that the process of full independence would not be complete as long as knowledge remained tied to Euro-centric assumptions. While his focus was on the colonial period, Said also showed how Orientalism persisted in his day but now under Anglo American leadership and well illustrated in the caricatures of Palestinians, one which he had experienced himself. Said, Orientalism, 385 Orientalism sent shockwaves through academic circles provoking a number of reactions that ran from questioning its validity to not going far enough in its critique. Thus, while his views were not fully accepted, his main contribution was to set the terms of the postcolonial academic debate that continues till this day. B. J. Moore-Gilbert, Postcolonial Theory: Contexts, Practices, Politics (London: Verso, 1997) , 35 Among these respondents were scholars that wanted to take Said critique into a theory of identity formation. They believed it was not sufficient to uncover Euro-centric bias, but that postcolonial critique needed to progress into a postcolonial theory that would allow the colonized to form their own identity and history. Thus, within this line of reasoning emerged the Subaltern Studies Group led primarily by Indian literary theorists working in Anglo-American universities. Robert Young, Postcolonialism : An Historical Introduction. (Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers, 2001), 353 Spivak, an Indian literary theorist and one of its key proponents, also warned of the dangers of reducing diverse colonial experiences into a homogeneous group instead of allowing a polyphonic hearing of colonial voices. Moore-Gilbert, Postcolonial Theory: Contexts, Practices, Politics, 76. This approach broadened Said’s initial project from deconstruction into constructing a richer emancipating narrative, free from totalizing narratives. In this vein, the group attempted to re-write Indian and South Asian history from below as opposed to the official historical record that privileges elites and government-centric narratives. A comprehensive assessment of Postcolonial studies cannot be accomplished in a short historical overview. For an in-depth description of postcolonial theory consult Robert Young. White Mythologies. (London: Routledge 1990) . Yet, for the purposes of this comparison, one should highlight the following characteristics: 1) Postcolonial theory reliance on both a Marxist critique of history combined with French high theory. Said credits the influence of Foucault in his work while also using Gramsci work in Orientalism; Said, Orientalism, 23 2) Their challenge to the Euro-centric invisible subject hidden in a claim of objectivity that was embedded in the foundation of social sciences; 3) It has been developed and garnered attention primarily within Anglo American universities rather than from subaltern outposts of coloniality and it is mostly conducted in the English language; 4) It initiated primarily as a literary critique only more recently crossing over into other disciplines such as history and sociology; 5) It focuses on the colonial projects initiated in the 17th century onwards led primarily by the British and the French. These traits will be crucial in understanding both the similarities and differences with the Decolonial school. 1b Latin American Decolonial Thinking Decolonial thinking in Latin America has had a long history traces back to at least Bartolomeo de Las Casas work in the 1600. Jose Antonio Mazotti, “Creole Agencies and the (Post) Colonial debate in Spanish America.” In Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postciolonial Debate, edited by Mabel Moraña, Enrique Dussel and Carlos A. Jauregui (Durham: Duke University Press, 2008), 85. Yet, it is only in the twentieth century that this Decolonial theory comes into its full fruition. It started as early as 1920’s with Peruvian Mariategui and Cuban Marti Marxist critique of colonial domination in Latin America. Walter Mignolo, Local Histories/Global Designs : Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges, and Border Thinking, 55. With the Cold War, as U.S. intervention in Latin American regimes intensified, so did a growing movement critiquing imperialism. In 1960’s, this resistance grew into revolutionary movements in multiple geographies and different sectors of society. While armed groups were forming, Catholic clergy working among the rural poor also started developing a social critique of imperialism that eventually became the foundation for liberation theology. This liberationist thinking, initiated within Catholic theology, and then started translating into other academic disciplines. One of them is the development of dependence theory in the social sciences. Authors like Fernando Henrique Cardoso (who would later become president of Brazil), Andre Gunder Frank, and Theotonio dos Santos, challenged the modernist idea that Latin American countries would follow the same economic development path as Europe and North America. They used a Marxist framework to show that underdevelopment was tied to center-periphery economic system that bred dependency. Ramon Grossfogel, “Developmentalism, Modernity, and Depdendency Theory in Latin America.” In Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postciolonial Debate, edited by Mabel Moraña, 318. While a having promising start, these theories did not challenge the epistemological framework of dependence. This would only begin to be addressed in philosophy. In this context, after being educated in Europe and spending time in Jerusalem, Enrique Dussel, an Argentinian philosopher, developed a philosophy of liberation in the 70’s aiming to move beyond a critique to start building a foundation for an independent Latin American epistemology. Enrique D. Dussel, "En busqueda del sentido: origen y desarrollo de una filosofia de la liberacion". Anthropos : Huellas Del Conocimiento (Barcelona:. no. 180, -Oct 1998) 20. His views would be deemed dangerous in the eyes of Argentinian dictatorship forcing him into exile. At this point, Roberto Retamar of Cuban descent, starts delineating the concept of Occidentalism by the mid 1970’s. In the 80’s Anibal Quijano, a Peruvian sociologist, would build on liberationist roots and Walllerstein world-system theory to develop the concept of coloniality of power. In it, he exposed the European race-centric worldview that informed and justified the colonial project. Santiago Castro-Gomez, “(Post)Coloniality for Dummies: Latin American Perspectives on Modernity, Coloniality and the Geopolitics of Knowledge.” In Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postciolonial Debate, edited by Mabel Moraña, 280. This dialogue would further develop into full-blown critique of Modernity, offering an alternative to post-modernity in Dussel’s concept of Transmodernity that not only linked modernity with colonialism but also rejected the a postmodern view that neglected the geo-political nature of modernity’s project. Enrique Dussel and Michael D. Barber. The Invention of the Americas: Eclipse of "the Other" and the Myth of Modernity, (New York: Continuum, 1995), 12. Later in the 90’s, Walter Mignolo, an Argentinian Semiotician working in at Duke University would bring the Decolonial dialogue to Anglo-American postcolonial discussion in the formation of the Latin American Subaltern Studies group. He would further the horizons of the Decolonial thinking by exposing the Euro-centric dependence on written language, therefore incorporating the contribution of Native-American that included artifacts, oral traditions, tools among others. Walter Mignolo, “(Post)Occidentalism, (Post)Coloniality and (Post)Subaltern Relationality.” The Pre-Occupation of Postcolonial Studies, (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2000) edited by Afzal-Khan, Fawzia and Kalpana Seshadri, 87. Decolonial thinking continues to develop in both Americas in a number of academic disciplines including philosophy, sociology, history and theology. For the purposes of this comparison, I would like the highlight the following traits of Decolonial thinking: 1) A foundation based on Marxist critique and French high theory especially Levinas and Foucault.; 2) A perspective that challenged Euro-centric idea that qualifies the Americas as an extension of the Occident, that is, as the subaltern same rather than the subaltern other; 3) A multi-disciplinary foundation that defies Western academic disciplinary divisions spanning theology, philosophy, anthropology and sociology to name a few; 4) Drawing from a historical re-interpretation of European history, Decolonial thinking re-defined Modernity and its most recent movements seeking to transcend it. 5) It spans not only the earliest European colonial projects in the late 15th century to also include the British and the more recent North American imperialism in Latin America. This is a short list for a complex movement but sufficient to set the stage for the comparative analysis of the following section. B. Occidentalism vs Orientalism As demonstrated above, the similarities between these two are clearly evident in four main points: 1) Both share on the reflection of a colonial experience from the position of the colonized; 2) Both shout in unison the reality that geo-politics matter in the production of knowledge; 3) Both realized the connection between knowledge and power - therefore aiming to complete the process of independence in countries that were subjugated by colonialism; 4) Both share a postfoundational French philosophical framework coupled with an expanded Marxist critique of modernity. Given these similarities, it is unfortunate that such schools of thought have taken so long to start interacting with each other. Till this day, one is hard-pressed to find literature classified as postcolonial that even mentions Latin American Decolonial thinking. Amaryll Chanady, “The Latin American Postcolonial Debate in a Comparative Context” In Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate, edited by Mabel Moraña, 401. This factor in itself could be seen as part of colonial legacy: that is, that while colonies share a common resistance to the metropolis, they rarely talk horizontally between each other preferring instead to focus on the colonizer for critique and engagement. Hopefully, the work of Mignolo will continue to bring these similar schools of thought to interact in a more consistent basis. Until then it is worth comparing their development as separate entities, defined along the lines of a postcolonial critique of the Orientalism (Postcolonial studies) and a postcolonial critique of Occidentalism (Decolonial studies). This distinction, while not exhaustive in defining these complex theories, already elucidates one of their major differences: namely their distinct loci of enunciation. Mignolo coined this term as a way to highlight the place from which knowledge is formed. Walter Mignolo Local Histories/Global Designs : Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges, and Border Thinking, 95. Unlike European epistemology that neglects the place of perspective in the claim of an objective view, considering a place of enunciation can be rather clarifying in understanding knowledge production. It encompasses not only geographical space as well historical and biographical dimensions. Postcolonial theory was developed within the United States (geography), focusing on the colonial period from 17th to the 20th century (history) by developing world scholars (biography). Decolonial theory was developed in Latin America (geography), spanning from early colonial period to the present (history), by scholars and clergy working mostly in Latin American educational institutions (biography). To these categories, one could also add language as Decolonial studies was developed in Spanish and Portuguese and Postcolonial studies primarily in English. Laying out them in geographic, historical and biographical places of enunciation helps highlight their differences. The geographical source of postcolonial studies has been a source of contention. Critics challenge Postcolonialism’s ability to analyze western heritage from inside, as the United States is considered an extension of the Euro-centric Modernity project. Moraña, Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate, 13. Part of the response, has been the pointing out of the US as a past colony of Europe therefore being adequate for such analysis. Regardless of how this argument is settled, this Anglo-American geography may explain the postcolonial narrow disciplinary scope and dependence on the English language. Being birthed in English departments, Postcolonial theory, while provoking responses from other disciplines, has not moved to a multi-disciplinary and multi-language space. Its primary unifying theme has been its deconstructing critique of western depiction of the Asian as the other and their efforts to re-define identity in non-western terms. Decolonial theory, while emerging mostly from Latin American universities, boasts a broader interdisciplinary foundation. Many proponents, while working in Latin American universities, had life experience and education in Europe, some of them being fluent in multiple languages. Here is also worth noting the cross-pollination with liberation theology which allowed Decolonial thinking to surpass academia affecting the religious sphere as well. This broader geographical locus, being multi-linguistic and multi-disciplinary, may help explain the richness of Decolonial thinking and why it cannot be easily categorized. Its strongest unifying theme is a critique of the West grounded in the Latin American experience of five centuries of colonialism and dependence. This also allowed it to further transcend formal knowledge production to bring it closer to the streets, where political resistance was latent in the 60’s and the 70’s. This in turn generated a healthy dialectic between theory and praxis. The different historical perspectives also offer additional contrasts between the two. Postcolonial theory is mostly interested in a critique of the second phase of European colonial project led by England and France in the 17th century onwards. Decolonial theory looks back at 1492 as the turning point of the Euro-centric Modernity project and the first phase of colonization led by Spain and Portugal. The first one relied on a Christian medieval worldview of propagating truth to the new lands. The second one was driven by the Enlightenment secular project of civilizing the pre-modern world. Nelson Maldonado-Torres, “Secularism and Religions in the Modern/Colonial World-System: From Secular Postcoloniality to Postsecular Transmodernity” In Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate, edited by Mabel Moraña, 365. While these descriptions may not encompass the totality of these historical periods, they do help explain the different colonial experiences. This difference will be further explored in a subsequent section in which I explore the role of Christianity in both of these theories. For now, suffice it to say that different historical periods elucidate reflection on distinct colonial experiences leading to different strategies and methodology for knowledge production. In the area of biography, one finds a greater affinity between the two than at first is apparent. Postcolonial scholars write from a hybrid (term developed by Bhabha) perspective. They are able to do so because of the life experience of growing up in the periphery but then coming to age in the metropolis. Said grew up in Beirut and then moved to the United States while both Spivak and Bhabha grew up in India and the moved to the United States later in life. This is similar to what happens with Decolonial thinkers such as Dussel and Mignolo. They are border thinkers (term developed by Mignolo) in that they are well versed in European academy and also grounded in the Argentinean experience. In short, their biographies of migration become the very source for producing knowledge that challenges the Euro-centric view. It gives them the privilege to be in the tension between Western knowledge and non-Western life experience. As they grapple in this tension, fresh perspectives emerge. C. Emerging Voices: Transcending Postcolonial/Postoccidental Categories In a Multipolar World A common and compelling critique of both postcolonial and Decolonial thinking is their tendency to reduce the colonial West into a homogeneous totality. In an effort to expose euro-centrist tendencies of Modernity, they fail to see the diversity of thought and experience residing in Europe itself. Moreover, they are reluctant to concede the any positive development that may have resulted from interaction between colony and the colonized. Building on that, in focusing on eurocentrism, they tend to define the colonial experience as a one-way relationship from Europe to the rest of the world, neglecting to see how the interaction with other nations also transformed European societies. One could justify this over-emphasis in their deliberate agenda that seeks liberation, which therefore will emphasize the source and reality of oppression. This blind-spot does not diminish their contribution in un-covering Eurocentric tendencies in the process of knowledge production but possibly limit them by reducing the history to the binary relationship between colonizers and colonized. In light of this reflection, it is encouraging to see emerging voices that are moving the dialogue further in recognizing complexities that better fit multi-layered descriptions. Santiago Castro-Gomez, a philosopher from Colombia both critiques liberation philosophy while also broadens its scope. Using a Foucaultian argument, Castro-Gomez challenges the classical hierarchic view of power put forth by the Decolonial critique. Santiago Castro-Gómez, "Michel foucault y la colonialidad del poder". (Tabula Rasa. no. 6:2007) 153-172. In his view, philosophy of liberation, in it binary structure, did not fundamentally changed the power structures of colonialism but only replaced its subject. Santiago Castro-Gómez, Crítica de la razón latinoamericana. (Bogota, Colombia: Editorial Pontificial Universidad Javeriana, 2011) 38-40. Therefore, instead of altering the subject-object relationship in which modernity was based, liberationist thinking only merely flipped the hierarchy upside down, putting the oppressed on the top. Instead, Castro-Gomez proposes a heterarchical view of power that takes into account not only the relationship between colonizer and colonized but also horizontal relationship among colonies and within the colonizer geography as well. In a response to Castro-Gomez, Dussel pointed out that the path should not be a mere rejection of dualities but a thorough re-working of them while still recognizing them as they are. He also defends his philosophy of liberation as a an avant-garde postmodern thinking as opposed to still thinking in modern categories. While his point is well taken, Castro-Gomez critique stands as a valid lever to broaden decolonial thinking beyond binary confines. Building on this point, Boaventura dos Santos, a Portuguese Sociologist, adds to the dialogue by pointing out the existence of a European periphery. His position is interesting that while affirming the Decolonial critique of modernity, he points out that its effects were not only felt in the colonies but reproduced in the European continent itself. He calls this a “Non-Occidental West” where he cites intellectual figures and theories that were discarded by the Modernist political project. Santos, Boaventura. "A Non-Occidentalist West?" Theory, Culture and Society (26, no. 7-8 (2009): 7-8) 103. By doing so, he complicates the picture of the European colonizer by showing the underside of Modernity within the European continent. This way, colonial thinking can be critiqued not only from the outside but also from within. He also expands the scope of Decolonial thinking by challenging the hegemony of scientific thinking among academic disciplines. His argument is that European Scientism, discarded and ignored local knwoledges relegating them to the lower status of cultural or mystical knowledge. In this he does not propose a rejection of the scientific method but a move towards an ecology of knowledge that uncovers and validates these native approaches to nature. Boaventura de Sousa Santos, Another Knowledge Is Possible : Beyond Northern Epistemologies, xxxiii As an example of that, he points to the unnecessary division between sociology and archeology. Both are looking at human societies yet the division implies a civilized (sociology) / primitive (archeology) division of culture. Boaventura de Sousa Santos, “Porquê as espitemologias do sul?” (Lecture, Faculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, March 9th, 2012). Accessed on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErVGiIUQHjM on 03/05/2015 This ecology of knowledges is especially relevant in a world where complex problems demand multi-faceted solutions. Castro-Gomes and Boaventura’s contributions not only enrich the process of de-linking knowledge production from western categories but are also more in line with the emerging multi-polar geopolitical situation of the 21st century. In a place where BRICS are starting match the influence of the G-7, binary view of colonialism will be deficient in both unearthing the horizontal relationships in the global south and also in the creation of new epistemic structures that foster liberation and emancipation. D. Intersections with Christian Theology The comparison between Decolonial and postcolonial theory along with the alternative voices surveyed above set the stage to understand the intersection between Post/decolonial thinking and Christian theology. I will begin by looking the postcolonial case in Anglo America to then compare it with the Decolonial intersection based in Latin America. The difficult of intersecting postcolonial theory with Christian theology is clearly present for at least two reasons. First, Christianity is seen as part of the colonial project initiated in the 18th century in Asia and the Middle East challenging the existing religions that emerged from these cultures. Following this argument, challenging Orientalism also means de-linking Christian influences from Asia. The second reason lies in the secular culture of Anglo American universities. This is well expressed in Said, originally a Palestinian Christian, humanist approach to postcolonial theory. Said opts for a secular intellectualism in response to the oppression of all sacred texts, condemning not only Western religions but all religions. Edward Said, Representations of an Intellectual: The 1993 Reith Lecture, (New York: Pantheon Books, 1994) , 84-84. Therefore, it is not surprising that given the strong secular bias and the idea of Christianity as part of occidental project of colonization that postcolonial authors rarely if ever engage constructive dialogue with Christian theology. Ironically, in spite of these two obstacles, Christian theologians have intersected postcolonial theory with theology in two main ways. First, they have used postcolonial lenses as hermeneutical tools for both Scripture and classical theology. Most notable adopters of postcolonial theory as hermeneutical tools has been feminist and mujerista theologians, who employ a postcolonial lens for doing theology. For examples look at Pui-lan Kwok. Postcolonial Imagination and Feminist Theology, (Louisville, Ky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005) and Catherine Keller, Michael Nausner, and Mayra Rivera. Postcolonial Theologies: Divinity and Empire, (St. Louis, Mo: Chalice Press, 2004). Given the postcolonial foundation in the literary field, consequently this nascent postcolonial theology has primarily focused in exposing Eurocentric interpretations of Scripture and in classical theological texts. That is, a postcolonial theology seeks to expose imperialism present in those texts by apply multi-form lenses such as gender, race, class to name a few. Kwok, Postcolonial Imagination and Feminist Theology, 144. This way, it employs diverse readings that can uncover hidden assumptions embedded in these texts. Evangelical theologians, late comers to the conversation, have also started exploring a dialogue with postcolonial theory. They illustrate well the conversation partner approach. At this point, this work is primarily led by Anglo-American scholars from evangelical universities who want to reflect on the possibilities of a postcolonial conversation with evangelical theology. In 2014, the network published their first book offering the beginning sketches coming out of their dialogue. Interestingly, this interaction has arisen less from a desire to engage postcolonial academic thought than as a necessity when ministering in an increasingly multi-ethnic context of North America. Kay Higuera Smith, Jayachitra Lalitha, and L. Daniel Hawk. Evangelical Postcolonial Conversations: Global Awakenings in Theology and Praxis, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press 2014), 13. The network boasts a rather diverse group even if most are operating from the Anglo-American context. Overall, the Anglo American interaction between theology and postcolonial theory is in its very beginning stages. That is why it may be wise to heed the lessons of the more historically established intersection of Decolonial thinking and theology in Latin America. Decolonial thinking, that with its early connection with liberation theology offered a broader space for conversation. In fact, one could say that in this case, theological reflection preceded rather than followed the academic thinking. Unlike his postcolonial counterparts, Dussel engages theology in his early writings even writing a history of the Latin American church. He argues that the continent was the only place to experience fully colonial Christendom which therefore affords is a rather unique position for doing theology. Enrique Dussel, Historia de la Iglesia en América Latina : Coloniaje Y Liberación (1492-1983), (México: Mundo Negro, 1983), 51. He is also able to see a nuanced picture of the Catholic church which had both an official segment tied to the colonial power and another unofficial segment that aligned with the poor. Dussel’s goes as far to equate the advent of liberation theology, which emerged from the later segment, with the birth of a true Latin American church. Dussel, Historia de la Iglesia en América Latina : Coloniaje y Liberación (1492-1983), 346-350. While his assertion may border an overstatement, the recognition of Catholic churches within Latin America is a welcome progress from the original binary postcolonial thinking that painted the church solely in imperialistic colors. Before moving forward, some clarification is needed in regards to Latin American catholic liberation theology. That is, it is important highlight its integrative character. Many have criticized it for proposing a replacement between salvation and revolution. That is it has exchanged the “spiritual” meaning for a “political” one. This critique, while having some validity, misses the point that this theology cannot be fit into traditional European theological categories such as Reformed, Armenian, Conservative or liberal. Perhaps a better way to understand it is to illustrate it using the Brazilian iconic practice of capoeira as an analogy. Capoeira was developed by African slaves in Brazil as a way to train and prepare for escape. Yet, as its practices was done with drums and singing, slave owners thought it just to be a recreational dance. Instead, it was really a politico-religious organizing act of resistance. Liberation theology also needs to be seen through such multi-layered lens. It is not just a theology but embedded in it is a social critique and at times it has translated into organized political resistance. With that said, liberation theology Marxist foundations have significantly limited its relevance and reach in Latin America. One reason is its inherent secular bias. A Decolonial critique of secularism has shown that the second colonial period post-Enlightenment saw the replacement of a Christian rationale for colonization with a modernist secular one. That is, while secularism claimed to free European thinking from church dogma, it merely replaced with a type of secular orthodoxy that regarded religion as inferior to rational thinking. Nelson Maldonado-Torres, “Secularism and Religions in the Modern/Colonial World-System: From Secular Postcoloniality to Postsecular Transmodernity” In Coloniality at Large: Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate, edited by Mabel Moraña, 366. While liberation theology represented a step in the right direction by recognizing Christian theology as a way to combat imperialism, its formation was significantly steeped in a Marxist-secular foundation to fully incorporate the integrative view of Christianity. Instead, in an attempt to combat a private view of salvation, it over-emphasized its historical and political character, downplayed its transcendent character which is exactly what attracts Latin Americans to it. Liberation theology has also struggled to keep pace with the changing religious and socio-political environment of Latin America. On the political front, its alignment and support to left-leaning regimes have tied their influence to the success of failure of these political projects. So as these projects are now being evaluated by their governmental performance, liberation theology then is also being challenged. Liberation theology has also failed to account for the changing religious landscape in Latin America, namely the rise of evangelical churches. By reducing them to extensions of Anglo-American imperialism, they failed to see the indigenous character of these movements. Liberation theology challenges in Latin America illustrate well the limitations of a binary Decolonial thinking that tends to divide the world into colonizers and colonized. These definitions failed to account for the horizontal power interactions such as the rise of Protestantism in Latin America and the emergency of centrist or center-leaning alternative in Latin American political scenario. This is where Castro-Gomez proposal becomes a promising start for a Post Post/decolonial conversation. We need reject a monolithic understanding of Christianity but instead start speaking of Latin American Christianities. This short-coming also applies to the Anglo-American context in its reduction of Christianity to its colonial past. The rise of Christianity in the global south cannot be explained by North American missionary work alone. The global evangelical church finds its majority among the poor of the developing world. Vinoth Ramachandra, Subverting Global Myths : Theology and the Public Issues Shaping Our World, (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2008), 246. Moreover, even the United States, the evangelical bloc cannot be equated with the Christian right movement of the 80’s and 90’s. The rise of Hispanic churches fueled by immigration and the millennial generation has further heterogenized this segment in its political and social character. Here also, a multipolar, heterarchic analysis is more fitting. Conclusion In paragraphs above, I surveyed the history of postcolonial and Decolonial thinking. I contrasted their locus of enunciations and different approaches. After this contrast, I analyzed their intersection with Christianity suggesting some direction for future thinking. As this analysis demonstrated, the rise post/decolonial was fundamental in uncovering the connection between knowledge and power that sustain and continues to perpetuate social and economic injustice in peripheries across the world. Their critique fostered emancipation and initiated the process to recover and reproduce local knowledges. In the middle of the second decade of the second millennium, a multipolar world presents multi-form challenges that require this same level or critique and emancipation. Yet, in this situation, while recognizing the need to continue to expose and understand imperialistic ideas, there is also a need for a more complex engagement of forces. The multi-polarity and increased inter-connectedness of the world presents both new challenges and new opportunities. Post/decolonial can provide a valuable contribution as long as it is able to identify the paradoxes of a post/transmodern era. This is well exemplified in its interaction with Christianity. While the history of Christianity is deeply connected with colonial projects, its present reality transcends such reductionism. One could speak that Christianity is returning to its original state of being the religion of the poor and the oppressed. Yet, this process is rather convoluted, given that Christian thinking still carries its share of imperialistic thinking. Thus, the task of emerging theologians should be to use post/decolonial tools not only to uncover imperialist traces but also have the humility to hear the voices of the faithful that are speaking from the favelas of the world. Residing in this paradox should be our primary place of enunciation for dreaming of alternative futures. One in which the message of the unjustly murdered savior will not only provide comfort and eternal bliss but also concrete change for those living in miserable conditions. I hope this paper is small contribution toward this end. Bibliography Afzal-Khan, Fawzia and Kalpana Seshadri. The Pre-Occupation of Postcolonial Studies. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2000. Boff, Leonardo. Global Civilization : Challenges to Society and to Christianity. London; Oakville, CT: Equinox, 2005. Castro-Gomez, Santiago. "Latin American Postcolonial Theories." Peace Review 10, no. 1 (1998): 27-33. ___________. Crítica De La Razón Latinoamericana. Bogota, Colombia: Editorial Pontificial Universidad Javeriana, 2011. Dussel, Enrique. Desintegración De La Cristiandad Colonial Y Liberación : Perspectiva Latinoamericana. Salamanca: Sígueme, 1978. __________. Historia De La Iglesia En AméRica Latina : Coloniaje Y LiberacióN (1492-1983). Madrid, España; México: Mundo Negro ; Esquila Misional, 1983. __________. Philosophy of Liberation. Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1985. __________. "En Busqueda Del Sentido : Origen Y Desarrollo De Una Filosofia De La Liberacion." Anthropos : huellas del Conocimiento (Barcelona), no. 180 (1998): Oct. __________. and Michael D. Barber. The Invention of the Americas : Eclipse of "the Other" and the Myth of Modernity. New York: Continuum, 1995. Isasi-Díaz, Ada María and Eduardo Mendieta. Decolonizing Epistemologies : Latina/o Theology and Philosophy. New York: Fordham University Press, 2012. Keller, Catherine, Michael Nausner and Mayra Rivera. Postcolonial Theologies : Divinity and Empire. St. Louis, Mo.: Chalice Press, 2004. Kwok, Pui-lan. Postcolonial Imagination and Feminist Theology. Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2005. Mignolo, Walter. Local Histories/Global Designs : Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledges, and Border Thinking. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2000. __________. El Vuelco De La Razón : Diferencia Colonial Y Pensamiento Fronterizo. Buenos Aires: Ediciones del Signo, 2011. Moore-Gilbert, B. J. Postcolonial Theory : Contexts, Practices, Politics. London; New York: Verso, 1997. Moraña, Mabel, Enrique D. Dussel and Carlos A. Jáuregui. Coloniality at Large : Latin America and the Postcolonial Debate. Durham: Duke University Press, 2008. Quayson, Ato. Postcolonialism : Theory, Practice, or Process? Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA: Polity Press ; Blackwell Publishers, 2000. Ramachandra, Vinoth. Subverting Global Myths : Theology and the Public Issues Shaping Our World. Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2008. Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978. __________ Representations of the Intellectual : The 1993 Reith Lectures. New York: Pantheon Books, 1994. __________. and David Barsamian. Culture and Resistance : Conversations with Edward W. Said. Cambridge, Mass.: South End Press, 2003. Santos, Boaventura de Sousa. Semear Outras Soluções : Os Caminhos Da Biodiversidade E Dos Conhecimentos Rivais. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 2005. __________. Another Knowledge Is Possible : Beyond Northern Epistemologies. London; New York: Verso, 2007. __________. "A Non-Occidentalist West?" Theory, Culture and Society 26, no. 7-8 (2009): 7-8. __________.“Porquê as Espitemologias do Sul?” (Lecture, Faculdade de Economia da Universidade de Coimbra, March 9th, 2012). Accessed on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErVGiIUQHjM on 03/05/2015 Smith, Kay Higuera Jayachitra Lalitha, and L. Daniel Hawk. Evangelical Postcolonial Conversations: Global Awakenings in Theology and Praxis. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press 2014. Toro, Alfonso de, and Fernando de Toro. El Debate de la postcolonialidad en Latinoamérica: una postmodernidad periférica o cambio de paradigma en el pensamiento latinoamericano. [Frankfurt am Maim]: Vervuert, 1999. Wolfe, Patrick. "Review Essay: History and Imperialism: A Century of Theory from Marx to Post-Colonialism." Peace Research Abstracts 36, no. 2 (1999). Young, Robert. Postcolonialism : An Historical Introduction. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 2001. 21