TRIBAL CHRISTOLOGY: JESUS CHRIST THE MAN FOR THE COMMUNITY

Union Biblical Seminary

CONTENT

Editorial
Chief Editor … $i$
Tribal Christology: Jesus Christ the man for the community … 1
M. Maisuangdibou
Rediscovering Jesus’ Missionary Commission and its implication in the Context of Covid-19 Pandemic … 20
David Lalrina
Searching for a Theology of Interreligious Dialogue for the Post-Covid time: Aspects from the German Context … 34
Anton Knuth
The Phenomenon of Puti in Ao Naga Tradition: A Dialogical paradigm of Culture and Christianity for an enriched transformed existence. … 42
Senti Aier
Spiritual Pragmatism in Pentecostal Hermeneutics … 56
George Philip
The Bible in the Korean Church & Mission … 68
Beom Yeon Cho
Trinitarian Images for Pastoral Counselling in Indian Ecclesial Communities 78 Sunny Chalumattu John
Honour Killing/Casteism: Female Sexuality and its Dangerous Nexus … 99
W. S. Annie
Book Reviews
Nelavala Gnana Prasuna. Engendering the Divine Image: Conversations with Dalit Women’s Experience, Delhi, Christian World Imprints, 2020, 170 pp ., Katie Jickling … 111
Christian Management in a VUCA World: Reflections from a Global Pandemic Context, edited by Aby Alexandar, Prasad Phillips and Reji Samuel (Chennai: Christian Institute of Management, 2022, pp. 198) Sajitha Ipe … 114

TRIBAL CHRISTOLOGY: JESUS CHRIST THE MAN FOR

THE COMMUNITY

M. Maisuangdibou*

Abstract

This paper highlights the tribal-indigenous people’s understanding of Jesus Christ in their own contexts with particular reference to Northeast India. Tribal Christians believe in the centrality of Jesus Christ as their fuith foundation; however, they have not fully realized Jesus Christ as their own due to the missional Christ taught by the western missionaries, which was western and uncontextualized. Numerous tribal theologians formulate Christology using tribal resources that are local, contextual, and pertinent. Yet, these tribal Christological subject matters are not holistic in the whole context of the tribals as they are derived primarily from particular tribal worldviews, languages, and knowledge. Therefore, there is a need to revisit these tribal Christological understandings and reenvision them to be more holistic and integrated. The sources for this study are drawn from tribal communitarian worldviews and values that cherish community living and the interconnectedness of whole realities. Moreover, the methodology for this study is a communitarian approach that explores Jesus Christ from the community perspective and perceives Jesus as a community man, the one who lives, dies, and resurrects for the cosmic community.

Keywords

Tribal Christology, Jesus Christ, community, northeast India, communitarian Christology

INTRODUCTION

To the question Jesus asked his disciple Peter, “who do you say that I am?” (Matt 16: 15); tribal ${ }^{1}$ Christians have not responded conclusively and holistically up to the present time. The existing Christology in the tribal context is limited and narrow because it has not been constructed in an all-inclusive manner. Secondly, it is a collection of several limited tribal linguistic-conceptual expressions such as Jesus the Lizaba (Ao-Naga), Jesus the rooster of God, ancestor, and elder brother (Tangkhul-Naga), Jesus the pasaltha (Mizo-KukiZou), Jesus the liangtuong (Liangmai-Naga), Jesus the bamboo (Ao-Naga), Jesus the indoi (Kuki), Jesus the arasentsur (Ao-Naga), Jesus the land (tribal), and more. ${ }^{2}$ These tribal terms and notions are significant, yet they do not express

^[1]

an all-encompassing nature of Christ from the tribal perspective, as they are derived from particular tribes. Therefore, they lack inclusivity, standardization, or normative value in the whole tribal context. In other words, they are deficient in defining the holistic nature of Jesus Christ in the tribal world. Hence, there is a need to reenvision tribal Christology, which is all-embracing, critical, and relevant to all tribals. Against this background, the attempt in this paper is to redevelop a tribal-indigenous Christology by basically appropriating two aspects: first, the vivid tribal worldview of communitarianism, and second, the tribalness and indigeneity of Jesus Christ in the light of the Biblical teaching and the context of the tribal community.

1. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Jesus Christ could be studied from different approaches and utilized several methodologies, such as biblical, exegetical, historical, theological, hermeneutical, mystical, psychological, critical, postmodern, postcolonial, contextual, subaltern, and others. The current study has made use of communitarian methodology ${ }^{3}$ to explore Christology from the tribal-indigenous context. It is to critically reflect on the Word of God to understand Christ from the community-based approach in the lived experiences and realities of the tribes. The exploration focuses on an inclusive manner to reenvision the person and work of Jesus Christ to make him more relevant in the tribal world and empower the tribal church and the community at large. The research intends to reconstruct a Christology from the tribal worldview with a primary focus on the communitarian nature of Jesus’ identity and mission. Overall, the communitarian concern is to interpret Jesus Christ as the man for the community; in other words, the community man who stands for an inclusive community that includes the whole universe.

Regarding the scope of the paper, the researcher has limited it to the tribal Christology of northeast India. Secondly, the researcher, with much respect for biblical-traditional Christologies, historical-systematic Christologies, and various contextual Christologies, are intentionally avoided in discoursing at length in the paper to concentrate on the tribal-indigenous Christology. However, they are referred to wherever necessary in this paper to support the arguments.

2. CHRISTOLOGICAL OVERVIEWS

Christology is not merely a branch of Christian theology, but it is the essence, the core of theology. In other words, Jesus Christ is the center of
because they are part of the whole. The part or a specific tribe’s interest and issue have a broader impact on the tribal as a whole. In that sense, bringing the different tribes’ subject matters on the wider tribal platform and analyzing will provide a better sense of what tribal theology has achieved and where tribal theology is heading. In a nutshell, the interconnectedness of the parts and the whole in tribal Christology is critically appreciated in this paper.
${ }^{3}$ Communitarianism or communitarian approach is an "evolving philosophical outlook with a core emphasis on the need for reciprocal relationships in functional communities… A Characteristic communitarian concern is to oppose

theology. As the saying goes, “Christianity is Christ,” Roger E. Olson remarks, “the person of Jesus Christ is the most important reality for Christianity and therefore believed rightly about him is absolutely crucial to preserving authentic Christianity.” ${ }^{\text {"4 }}$ The uniqueness of Christian theology lies in the Christological expression. It is Christology that defines the overall course and action of theology. Whether it is the ecclesiology, eschatology, history, missiology, soteriology, praxis, creation, anthropology, and psychology are all delineated in accordance with the nature and work of Jesus Christ. There are diverse Christologies from the Bible to the early Church, from the medieval to the Reformation, from the modern to the postmodern, and a plurality of contextual Christologies have been formulated up to the present. Following the footsteps of these Christologies, the present study on the person and work of Jesus Christ is underlined from the contextual points of view with special emphasis on the tribal thought-form in the following lines.

2.1. CONTEXTUAL THEOLOGIES: AN OUTLINE

The coming of contextual theologies as an academic endeavor in the $20^{\text {th }}$ century is a Copernicus Revolution in theology. ${ }^{5}$ These theologies take courage to go against the grain and stand for a context-based orthopraxis. In theological articulation, they (contextual theologies) demand the recognition and appropriation of diversity and multiplicity of cultures, societies, ethnicities, races, languages, worldviews, philosophies, and religions. Here, the term “contextual theology” is understood as a critical reflection of the Gospel in the light of people’s faith in the given context. It is to make the Gospel relevant and appropriate to the context. Thus, the crux of faith reflection is the Word of
both top-down declarations on how everyone should live and any form of laissez faire thinking that suggests that individuals are always best left to finding their own ways without any collective structure. What it offers instead is an inclusive approach to assessing human interactions so as to determine what improvements can be made by all the members of any given community. It has a natural affinity to action research, especially given its focus on empowered community participation in problemsolving." Henry B. Tam, “Communitarianism,” The SAGE Encyclopedia of Action Research, edited by David Goghlan and Mary Brydon-Miller (London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2014), 132. According to Susan Finley, Community-based research is a form of collective action that a community undertakes as key to its survival, its empowerment, or its continued effectiveness in encouraging social and political change." Susan Finley, “Community-based Research,” The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, Vols. 1 & 2, edited by Lisa M. Given (London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2008), 97.
${ }^{4}$ Roger E. Olsen, The Mosaic of Christian Belief (Secunderabad: OM Books, 2014), 223.
${ }^{5}$ For the contextual nature of all theologies, see Robert J. Schleiter, Constructing Local Theologies, $30^{\text {th }}$ Anniversary Edition (Bangalore: Theological Publications in India, 1985, 2015); Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology (New York: Orbis Books, 1992, 2003); Peter C. Phan, "Cultural Diversity:

God and the people’s milieu. In other words, while formulating a contextual and meaningful theology, one needs to seriously take into account the Scripture as it is the basic foundation of any living theology. ${ }^{6}$ Contextual faith articulation, at his point, focuses on the experience of God that results from the struggle and aspiration of the people. Apart from the Scripture and Christian tradition, the people’s culture, history, economy, religion, psyche, social aspects, and social changes in which theologization occurs are valid sources of theology.

The Bible contains contextual elements in various manners. First and foremost, God’s revelation in and through Jesus Christ to make himself relevant to the world is the beginning of the whole contextual enterprise. ${ }^{7}$ In this regard, Daniel Migliore declares that “The incarnation as basis for contextual Christology [theology].” ${ }^{8}$ Secondly, the Bible contains diverse theologies of the priests/Levites, prophets, apostles, kings, and others. That does not mean that these theologies are contradictory, but they are unalike because their social milieus were poles apart. For example, the theology of Daniel is explicitly distinct from the theology of Matthew or Paul. Despite the divergences, these people reflected on the same reality (God’s salvation story), but the perspectives and the starting points were convincingly eclectic and multifarious. Similarly, their theologies reflect diverse contexts, times, and concerns as Israel progressed from one area to another and social changes influenced a lot of their thought processes. ${ }^{9}$

Without a doubt, every theology is contextually founded; therefore, there is no such thing as “universal theology.” Hence no theology can claim universal validity because every study of God is developed in a given context. A theology that is produced in the west should not be imposed on others’

A Blessing or a curse for Theology and Spirituality?" Louvian Studies 19 (1994), 195-211.
${ }^{6}$ G. Arbuckle, Earthling the Gospel (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1990), 3-4. Cited by Stephan B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1994), 1.
${ }^{7}$ Sebastian Chalakkal opines, “The reality of contextual Christology is not a new phenomenon. The New Testament itself bears witness to God’s unique revelation in Jesus Christ in a particular context. According to the scriptural testimony, the incarnation of God took place in a particular time and place. God becomes a human being in the person of Jesus, a $1^{\text {st }}$ Century Palestinian Jew, son of Mary and Joseph. Confessions of Christ always take place in a particular time and place.Plurality in Christology is intrinsic to the nature of the gospel itself.” Sebastian Chalakkal, An Introduction to Christology (Kottayam: Orient Institute of Religious Studies India, 2011), 123.
${ }^{8}$ Daniel L. Migliore, “Christology in Context: The Doctrinal and Contextual Tasks of Christology Today: A Journal of Bible and Theology,” Interpretation 49 (3) (07) 1995: 242, https://www-proquest-comchristuniversity.knimbus.com/scholarly-journals/christology-context-doctrinalcontextual-tasks/docview/20272 7533/se-2?accountid=38885 (30 Aug. 2021). Word within the bracket emphasis added.
${ }^{9}$ Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, 3.

contexts. Regarding this narrative, Stanley J. Grenz and Roger E. Olson remark, "theology is always contextual, never universal. What is developed in one place, whether Rome or Tübingen or New York, cannot be imposed on every other place. ${ }^{110}$ Unfortunately, theology developed in the west, commonly known as systematic theology or classical theology, claims to be universal and meaningful in all contexts. To refute this issue, K.C. Abraham rightly states that all theologies are contextual, even the classical ones, besides “creative movements” in theology rise when the Church responds to a new challenge in a given historical context. ${ }^{11}$ The point is that the theologies developed in the west are not entirely relevant for other contexts because of the differences in socio-cultural realities and historical settings; as a result, it demands new theological systems.

Fascinatingly, contextual theology in tribal domains of northeast India began right from the beginning of the arrival of Christianity. The first step of contextualization was translating Christian God’s name and other concepts into local languages. For instance, in the Liangmai-Naga tribe, “God” was translated as “Tingwang” which is the proper name of the Supreme Being in the Liangmai religion. Here the utilization of natives’ languages or terms and terminologies in mission and evangelization is contextual, per se. Secondly, the translation of the Bible into several natives’ languages is without a doubt a contextual development; therefore, the process of contextualization is intrinsically present right from the arrival of Christianity. However, systematic and methodical contextual theology began to develop in tribal contexts only in the 1990s with the new development of contextual ideas among the tribal theologians and the setting up of Tribal Studies in Eastern Theological College at Jorhat in Assam, India.

2.2. CONTEXTUAL CHRISTOLOGIES

One of the unique characteristics of the modern period is the emergence of diverse contextual Christologies that arise out of Asia, Latin America, North America, Africa, Australia, the Pacific, and others. ${ }^{12}$ Today, there are Latin American Christology, Black Christology, African Christology, Feminist/ Womanist Christology, Asian Christology, Indian Christology, Minjung Christology, Native American Christology, Dalit Christology, Tribal Christology, Adivasi Christology, Indigenous Christology, and more. ${ }^{13}$ These Christologies are developed to make sense of Jesus Christ within the local cultural traditions and worldviews and the response to the experiences and suffering of the local people. They also evolve due to the new awareness of

^[1]

the significance of local cultures and values and the growing confidence of the locals to construct their own Christologies. ${ }^{14}$

The most common themes of these contextual Christologies are liberation, salvation, justice, righteousness, dialogue, creation, equality, equity, rights, dignity, eschatology, mission, cultural diversity, social revolution, and eco-justice. ${ }^{15}$ For instance, Latin American Liberation Christology, Black Christology, Feminist/Womanist Christology, and others stress the liberative dimensions in the historical Jesus and connect it to their contexts. Christ is viewed as the one who promotes the praxis of liberation in the church and society. ${ }^{16}$ These context-based Christologies are characteristically from below ${ }^{17}$ that try to make Jesus Christ relevant in the living reality of the downtrodden and oppressed people. Therefore, Lalnghakthuami asserts, "Any attempt to reconstruct Christology cannot, but be centered on a historical person, Jesus of Nazareth, who continues to be the risen Lord."18

2.3. TRIBES AND COMMUNITARIAN WORLDVIEW

In common usage, the word “tribe” is an umbrella term for different groups of people with a common ancestry and history, shared culture, collective
https://www-proquest-com-christuniversity.knimbus.com/scholarly-journals/ developments-christology-last-fifty-years/docview/1430469731/se2?accountid $=38885\left(30^{\text {th }}\right.$ Aug. 2021).
${ }^{14}$ Chalakkal, An Introduction to Christology, 123.
${ }^{15}$ James H. Cone, A Black Theology of Liberation (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1970); Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1980); Also see, Stanley J. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God (Grand Rapids: Williams B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994). Regarding the issue of liberation in tribal theology, see K. Thanzauva, “Issues in Tribal Theology,” An Exploration of Tribal Theology, Tribal Study Series No. 1, ed. A. Wati Longchar (Nagaland: The Tzudikong Baptist Church, 1997), 39-62.
${ }^{16}$ G. Gutierrez, Leonardo Boff, and Jon Sobrino undersand Jesus as the liberator. It is a Christology from below and it emphasizes Christopraxis. G. Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics and Salvation (New York: Orbis Books, 1973); L. Boff, Jesus Christ the Liberator: A Critical Christology for Our Time (New York: Orbis Books, 1978); J. Sobrino, Jesus the Liberator (Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1994); James H. Cone argues that Jesus is Black and he is the Black Messiah. James H. Cone, Black Theology and Black Power (New York: Seabury, 1969); Rosemary Radford Ruether argues that the maleness of Jesus has no theological significance in itself. She argues that the centre of Christology lies not on the identity of the person of Jesus; but in his message. R.R. Ruether, Sexism and God-Talk: Toward a Feminist Theology (Boston: Beacon, 1993). Also see, Chalakkal, An Introduction to Christology, 123.
${ }^{17}$ Wolfhart Pannenber, Jesus: God and Man, trans. Lewis L. Wilkins and Duane A. Priebe (London: SCM Press, LTD., 1964, 1973), 33-37; Edward Krasevac, “Christology from Above and Christology from Below,” Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review 51 (2) (Apr 01, 1987): 299-306, https://www-proquest-com-christuniversity.knimbus.com/scholarly-journals/christology-above-below/ docview/1291652735/se-2?accountid=38885 ( $30^{\text {th }}$ Aug. 2021).
${ }^{18}$ Lalnghakthuami, Understanding Jesus: Indigenous Women’s Perspective (Delhi: ISPCK, 2014), 186.

tradition and worldview, and language. The primary characteristic of these groups of people is the homogenous way of life and “undifferentiated category” within a particular tribe from the ancient past until the present. These tribal communities are found all over India; however, they are concentrated mainly in northeast India as compared to the rest of the country in terms of the population ratio. Today, tribal communities constitute $50 \%$ of the Christian population in India. ${ }^{19}$ Christianity has played a massive role in bringing development and education as well as erasing their cultures and traditions.

There are several contestations and subversion behind the term “tribe” and its meaning. ${ }^{20}$ First, it is an imposed term on selected native-indigenous people on the basis of politico-administration rather than socio-cultural or economic connotation. ${ }^{21}$ Secondly, negative connotations such as “primitive,” “backward,” “uncivilized,” “inferior” are attached to the term in modern usage. ${ }^{22}$ Thirdly, the Constitution of India does not define clearly the name “tribe.” ${ }^{23}$ Fourthly, the different communities which are clubbed under the category “tribe” prefer to call themselves by their original or locally recognized names such as Adi, Bodo, Khasi, Mizo, Naga, Munda, Oroan, Santal, etc. Fifthly, in spite of the derogatory meanings attached to the expression “tribe,” those communities categorized under this term continue to use it as a common identity; at the same time, the Government of India continues to impose the term on them; therefore, they have fewer alternatives regarding the same. Apart from the above points, tribal communities in India face numerous discrimination, exploitation, and oppression from mainstream societies and castes in terms of race, language, geopolitics, culture, economy, land, education, and livelihood. They are the most neglected and defeated communities in India as well as in the world.

Fascinatingly, tribal communities have a rich worldview that emphasizes community living and communitarian values. For them, every aspect of their lives is centered on community, and this community is universal

^[1]

in outlook. There is an inseparable relationship between God, the world, and humans in this collective community. The tribals believe that the Supreme Being created the universe to have a cosmic relationship with one other. The Supreme Being and other divine entities were integrally part of the physical world, and they spoke human languages and were closely connected to humans and creations. Therefore, there is no dichotomy between the material and spiritual realms in the tribal weltanschauung. Both the phenomena are part of everyday life, and the divine beings are intertwined in human affairs and vice versa. For instance, every tribal family provided food for the divines during each meal. Likewise, foods, utensils, and tools were packed together with the dead body so that he/she could live just like the living in the other world. This nonphysical world is a spiritual realm but on the other side of the mountains and hills or valleys within or beyond their land. Hence both the divine and the living visited each other and helped one another. ${ }^{24}$ This interconnectedness constitutes the cosmic community. There is an inseparable communion between nature, land, humans, plants and animals, organisms, and the divine. In this collective cosmos, individual rights and dignity are respected and well recognized; however, they are within the purview of the community. In that sense, individual lives are the parts of the whole, i.e., the community. All together, communitarianism is the essence of the tribal belief system.

2.4. EXISTING TRIBAL CHRISTOLOGIES

As noted above, developing a Christology from the tribal perspective needs to reflect on the Scripture as well as appropriate the tribals’ ways of life. The sources available for tribal Christology are the Scripture, Christian traditions, cultures, traditions, histories, worldviews, primal religions, creations, and people’s lived experiences, psyches, and more. ${ }^{25}$ Several starting points are available in this venture, depending on the methodologies and how one wishes to divulge. For some, the point of departure is the language and the terms and terminologies; for others, it is the culture, history, religion, worldview, land, or community. In the light of this, the following lines highlight several Christologies from the tribal perspectives.

In an attempt to formulate tribal Christology employing tribal resources, Takatemjen engages with an Ao-Naga tradition to express “Jesus as Lizaba” in his book Studies on Theology and Naga Culture. ${ }^{26}$ The Ao folklore of Lijaba

^[1]

and the Two Sisters describes the account of God Lijaba, who visited every village to bless them. It is a story of how Lijaba, a co-sufferer with the poor and the world, blessed the people, and likewise, he liberated the oppressed people from all forms of bondage. ${ }^{27}$ This Christology expresses the need for the Nagas today to follow the footstep of Jesus Christ in liberating all the oppressed from their oppression and slavery. Similarly, A. Wati Longchar understands Lijaba as the “earth entering Supreme Being.” ${ }^{28}$ While deriving from the Ao-Naga worldview, he affirms that the Supreme Being is the creator and sustainer of all things, and he continues to create the universe and nourish it. ${ }^{29}$

While attempting to construct Christology from the Ao-Naga perspective, Nungshitula makes use of $a u$ (bamboo) as a cultural metaphor to explain the life of Jesus Christ. The point of reference for her is, as she clarifies, "Jesus is one of us and we will understand him better only if he adapts our culture and way of life. ${ }^{330}$ Hence the significance and usefulness of bamboo in tribal lives have convinced her to appropriate Jesus as the bamboo metaphorically. The Christological concepts she constructs by embracing the importance of bamboo are “Christ as Bridge” (the synthesis of all mediations), “Christ as Shelter” (the idea of helping, caring, loving and sheltering, and liberating all entities, including humans), and “Christ as Preserver” (preserving life, culture, creations, the world, and traditional moral principle sobaliba). ${ }^{31}$ Later, in her Ph.D. dissertation entitled: “Reimagining the Cross of Childbearing: Towards a Naga Constructive Christology of Natality,” she formulates a Christology of natality by claiming “Jesus Christ as Nourisher of Life,” “Jesus Christ as embracer of Life,” and "Jesus Christ as Respecter of Life. ${ }^{332}$ It tries to bring out the importance of life-giver and protector of life in Christological thinking.

Yangkahao Vashum, in his book Christology in Context: A TribalIndigenous Appraisal of North East India professes “Jesus as the Rooster,” “Jesus as the Ancestor and Elder Brother,” “Jesus as the Liberator,” and "Jesus as the Reconciler. ${ }^{333}$ According to him, Jesus could be considered the rooster
${ }^{27}$ Takatemjen, Studies on Theology and Naga Culture, 55-68.
${ }^{28}$ A. Wati Longchar, An Emerging Asian Theology: Tribal Theology: Issue, Method and Perspective, Tribal Study Series No. 8 (Jorhat: Tribal Study Centre, 2000), 85-87; A Wati Longchar, “Lijaba - The Earth Entering Supreme Being: The Ao-Naga Concept of God and Ecology,” The Tribal Worldview and Ecology, Tribal Study Series No. 2, ed. A. Wati Longchar and Yangkahao Vashum (Jorhat: Tribal Study Centre, 1998), 24-33.
${ }^{29}$ Longcher, An Emerging Asian Theology, 85-87.
${ }^{30}$ Nungshitula, The Naga Images of the Human Being (Jorhat: Tribal Study Centre, 2001), 110-111.
${ }^{31}$ Nungshitula, The Naga Images of the Human Being, 119-127, 129-134, 137-140.
${ }^{32}$ Nungshitula Jamir, “Reimagining the Cross of Childbearing: Towards a Naga Constructive Christology of Natality” (Ph.D. Dissertation, 2014), 211- 255.
${ }^{33}$ Yangkahao Vashum, Christology in Context: A Tribal-Indigenous Appraisal of North East India, Christian heritage Rediscovered - 49 (New Delhi: Christian World Imprints, 2017), 134-159.

of God in Nagas’ world, just as Jesus is “the lamb of God” in the Bible (John 1:29), as Nagas are more familiar with a rooster sacrifice and offering in their “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” Renthy Keitzar interprets it as “Behold the cock of God who takes away the sins of the world.” ${ }^{35}$ It is a dynamic transliteration where the Gospel is critically and relevantly connected to the people. Again, appropriating Tangkhul-Naga’s traditional practice of ancestor veneration and the role of the elder brother in the family, Vashum metaphorically represents Jesus as the ancestor ${ }^{36}$ and elder brother. ${ }^{37}$ Furthermore, he constructs Jesus as the liberator and reconciler where the implication of a liberator is who liberates the Nagas “not only from spiritual bondage, but from physical, mental, cultural, and social bondage as well.” ${ }^{38}$ Likewise, the idea of Jesus as the reconciler is to acknowledge the one who brings peace, reconciliation, healing, and fellowship in the midst of conflict, strife, and suffering as the Nagas struggle for freedom and rediscover the 'image of God. ${ }^{39}$
L.H. Lalpekhlua, in his book Contextual Christology: A Tribal Perspective, utilizes Mizo traditional category of pasaltha and depicts Christ as the pasaltha. ${ }^{40}$ In Mizo culture, pasaltha denotes “a brave and manly person”

^[1]

or “a hero” who can show his or her integrity of character by acts of selfless service to others who are in need. ${ }^{41}$ Lalpekhlua provides reasons for the validity of describing Christ as pasaltha. Firstly, because the term is integrally rooted in Mizo culture consciousness; secondly, the idea of pasaltha has considerable liberative value and cultural relatedness, which allow it to reflect the significance of Christ in the Mizo culture. ${ }^{42}$ The connotation of Jesus perceived as pasaltha means he bravely fights unto death against the powers of evil and destroys it. It reflects Christ’s bravery and self-sacrifice in his work. Furthermore, Jesus is not seen only as brave but also as tlawmngai (altruistic, selflessness person), which signifies his life for others and not for himself. Thus, one can see that Jesus’ incarnation, his selfless life, his death on the cross, and his resurrection may all be perceived as acts of tlawmngaihna (Mizo moral principle). ${ }^{43}$

Lalnghakthuami, while constructing Christology from the indigenous women’s perspective, rephrases Jesus’ question, “who do women say that I am?” and claims that it is a "challenge to women in northeast context because it involves the liberation of the narrow understanding of Jesus and the gospel itself. ${ }^{344}$ She argues that dance/ing is a symbol of Jesus Christ for indigenous women. Here Jesus is portrayed as a dancer who dances with women as a symbol of resistance against the dominating power, thus raising the women’s voice in the church and society. ${ }^{45}$
H. Chongloi appropriates Kuki primal religious category of indoi symbolism and connects it with Jesus, thus assuring the presence of God Pathen in the world and every household. Indoi is an object made of several articles such as a mother pig skull, horn, jar, miniature basket, and others put together and jutted at the roof of the front porch just above the house’s main entrance. ${ }^{46}$ Every family considers the household indoi as sacred, and it is revered. Chongloi writes, "God and human being once again come into close proximity with the presence of the former assured in indoi. It symbolizes the manifestation, revelation, and accessibility of the sacred. Indoi thus proclaims the Emmanuel of the deus otiosus Pathen. ${ }^{347}$

^[1]

Bendangjungshi, in his book Confessing Christ in the Naga Context: Towards a Liberating Ecclesiology, rephrases Matthew 16: 15 in the Nagas’ context, “but to you (Nagas), who do you say that I am?” ${ }^{48}$ He responds that this question directly confronts the Nagas and brings them to confess Christ from their own existential questions. Not only that, it is a missional challenge for the Nagas and their churches to re-confess the Christian faith in their presentday situations of socio-cultural dilemmas and political uncertainties. ${ }^{49}$

Zhodi Angami, in his article “Looking at Jesus from a Tribal Optic,” reads the Biblical Jesus from the tribal point of view. For him, Jesus as “Nazorean” is "a vindication of tribal identity… He [Jesus] was called a Nazorean, and we are called pahariya (hill people), vanvasi (forest inhabitants), janjati (folk people), adimjati (primitive caste), uncivilized, backward, dirty, naked and similar appellations. That God’s plan is for the messiah to be called a Nazorean, speaks of a reversal of the world’s order whereby the last become first and the littlest become the greatest. ${ }^{550}$ Secondly, Angami considers Jesus “the Good Shephard” who lays down his life for the sheep (John 10: 11) is a liberation for the tribal people because they are disregarded and rejected by dominant groups. Here, the worth of the sheep in the Scripture and the precious tribal lives are equated, and they are enormously valuable that the shepherd, Jesus Christ, lay down his life to save them. ${ }^{51}$ Thirdly, the narrative of Jesus eating a piece of broiled fish (Luke 24: 42-43) after the resurrection is considered evidence of the bodily resurrection of Jesus by several theologies. However, for the tribals, there is no dichotomy between the physical and spiritual world, and therefore there is nothing wrong with the spiritual Jesus consuming the fish. ${ }^{52}$ This point does not neglect the bodily resurrection; still, the main focus in tribal worldview is the interconnectedness and inseparability of the humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ and his close proximity with the world.

Similarly, utilizing Ao-tribal term, Bendanglemla Longkumer, in her book Christ, the Healer: Exploring Indigenous People’s Spirituality, sees Jesus as arasentsur (Healer). It is a vivid integration of the Biblical sources on the healing aspect of Jesus and the Ao-Naga traditional concept of arasentsur. For Longkumar, arasentsur Christology generates holistic salvation because it is implicit in relation to the rest of the creations. ${ }^{53}$ She writes, "arasentsur

^[1]

based Christology reveals that it has liberative motif corresponding to Jesus’ teachings and also as is revealed in his ministry. Arasentsur is a moving image for the indigenous, as the liberative aspects of building the kingdom of God mean working for liberation from evil in all its forms. ${ }^{154}$ Further, she argues that the “tribal women’s image of Jesus” would come from the image of arasentsur, which includes both female and male, is essentially a healer in the community. ${ }^{55}$

In the Liangmai-Naga (Hamai/Zeliangrong) context, M. Maisuangdibou’s book Liangmai and Christianity: Faith in Search of Understanding and Transformation in Indigenous/Tribal Context recognizes Christ as the liangtuong who brings justice, peace, and liberation for the community. ${ }^{56}$ The concept liangtuong connotes an ideal/exceptional person who has every positive quality in the Liangmai-Naga worldview. ${ }^{57}$ It is a unique title that can be achieved only by a few in many years. The title is established as a person who possesses selfless respect, altruism, love, and self-sacrifice for the sake of others. ${ }^{58}$ Such a person is a peacemaker who brings justice, liberation, love, and care for everyone in the community. In the LiangmaiNaga tradition, a liangtuong executes chaliuroubo (moral-ethical praxis), which is similar to the Ao-Naga concept of sobaliba and Mizo concept tlawmngaihna. The notion of Jesus Christ as liangtuong anyway is not an ordinary liangtuong but a perfect liangtuong - the archetype liangtuong for all Liangmais to imitate and live like him. ${ }^{59}$

The Christologies above from tribal perspectives have several benefits as well as limitations. The primary significance of these attempts is to make Jesus Christ relevant and holistic in the living reality of the tribal context. It is to understand God’s revelation - the incarnation of God in Christ - in the tribal world. For that purpose, several tribal cultural categories are employed and synthesized with the Gospel to comprehend the truth better. It also revives, renews, and reawakens positive tribal traditions from dying. At the same time, tribal theologians such as Vashum, Lalpekhlua, and others admit the limitation of the terms and terminologies or the languages employed to understand God as all human languages are limited to interpret the divine. Secondly, such models have drawbacks as they are humans construct about God who is immanent and transcendent. Here the Barthian concept of God as “wholly other” reminds

^[1]

the readers about the differences between God and humans whatsoever. Accordingly, these tribal Christological models simplify and contextualize Christ in tribal culture, yet they never capture the absolute reality of Christ. ${ }^{60}$ Instead, they are the only best ways possible in human capacity within their cultures and languages to reach God.

The above representations also bring to mind that every Christological attempt or theological enterprise, in general, is within Ludwig Wittgenstein’s dictum, the “language game” of which it has its own criteria, context, relevance, and meanings. Hence the possibility of human knowledge about God is through God’s revelation (the knowledge of God as provided by him to humans) and the analogical language as popularized by Thomas Aquinas, and so forth. For instance, the concept of the rooster can be related to the ‘lamb of God,’ and the terms liangtuong and pasaltha could be compared to the titles Christ, savior, and Messiah, etc., but not necessarily to the person Jesus Christ. ${ }^{61}$ Likewise, Lijaba, dancer, bamboo, and ancestor can be associated with Jesus Christ himself but with limited nuances as the uniqueness of Jesus Christ is within and beyond human cultures.

2.5. TOWARDS A NEW TRIBAL CHRISTOLOGY

To put it in perspective, the present enterprise is an addition to the existing tribal Christologies. In other words, it is to amalgamate and integrate the current ventures and reenvision a more inclusive one. Christology, at this point, is to understand Jesus Christ within the distinctiveness and significance of tribal lives and their world. It is an attempt to bring out the idiosyncratic nature of the life and person of Jesus Christ in the tribal context. Here the interplay of the Gospel and tribal culture is crucial as it tries to replace the ‘white Christ,’ ‘colonial Christ,’ ${ }^{62}$ and ‘individualistic Christ’ of the missionaries with a native and community Christ.

In the history of the tribals and especially the tribals of northeast India, Christianity arrived in the first half of the $19^{\text {th }}$ century. However, Jesus Christ, the co-creator and the savior of the world, was at work in the tribal lives right from the beginning of human history. He actively participated in the tribal past, and he was their guide, leader, and liberator during their civilizational processes. Moreover, Christ was the foundation of all positive values in the tribal cultures. The tribal people had experienced the working of Christ in

^[1]

their lives and culture; however, they did not discern him, nor did they acknowledge him. Besides that, Jesus Christ transformed the communities and opened their lives when the Gospel reached their lands through the western missionaries. Intriguingly, it was the western missionaries who unveiled Jesus Christ to the tribals. Here, for the readers’ clarification, the missionaries did not bring Christ, but they only revealed Christ (who he is?) to the tribals.

2.5.1.TRIBALNESS AND INDIGENITY OF JESUS CHRIST’S IDENTITY

First and foremost, tribal-indigenous Christology has to tribalize or indigenize (nativize) Jesus Christ in their context. In other words, it is a contextualization of Jesus Christ in the tribal world. The tribalness and indigenousness of Jesus Christ are imperative as they directly connect to the tribal identity of northeast India. Here, “tribalness” signifies the feeling or the perception of being tribal socially, culturally, mentally, and spiritually. Similarly, “indigeneity” implies the fact of being born in a land or region, or community. It is to perceive the tribalness of Jesus Christ and identify him as a tribalindigenous person. Jesus as tribal is significant, and this is confirmed by Jesus being born in a Jewish-tribal family from the Judah tribe of Israel (Matt. 1: 125; Luke 2: 4; 3: 23-38; Rev. 5: 5). Hence the historical Jesus was tribal. Secondly, Jesus is literally a tribal of northeast India, a mongoloid and Adivasis, who loves his tribal culture and also transforms it. This dimension is feasible because of his incarnation, which is not bound to the Jewish culture but is universal (Matthew 22:31-32; John 1: 1-18; 3: 16; Galatians 3:27-29). The tribalness of Jesus is therefore confirmed both literally and spiritually (allegorically or metaphorically).

The fact is that tribalness or indigenousness of Jesus Christ is more inclusive and collective than the limited tribal concepts such as Jesus the Lizaba, rooster, bamboo, indoi, healer, pasaltha, liangtuong, and more in the understanding of Jesus Christ. This observation is because the term “tribe” or “tribal” is more inclusive for all tribals. ${ }^{63}$ Implying the narratives of tribalness and indigenousness in Jesus’ identity, one can unequivocally categorize that Jesus was a tribal. As noted earlier, he was born in a tribal-indigenous community. This historical dimension of Jesus is thus the point of departure in tribal Christology. The idea is that the interpretation of Jesus Christ should begin from this historical context - the humanness and tribalness of his identity - who was born in a Jewish tribal community as mentioned in the Bible. In that sense, the historical Jesus (immanence) as a common theme for several contextual Christologies is the same for tribal Christology, and it inseparably connects with the Christ of faith (transcendence). As the tribals do not understand the physical and spiritual in a binary way, the human-divine nature of Christ for them is not dichotomous but an interrelated one. Therefore, both natures of Jesus work simultaneously and intertwinedly, and they affect each other every time.

^[1]

In the light of the incarnation narrative of Jesus Christ, tribal-indigenous communities claim Jesus as a tribal-indigenous person from northeast India. This category does not reduce Jesus Christ to one group of people; rather, it is he is God, the savior of the whole cosmos. Likewise, he is black, ${ }^{64}$ feminist/ womanist, ${ }^{65}$ Latin American, Asian, ${ }^{66}$ and so on. Besides the discourses men" (1 Corinth. 45-47), and the “Alpha and the Omega” (Rev. 22: 13) as
ex

God-world-humans (Ting-kadih-maina ${ }^{69}$ in Liangmai), and it includes the whole reality. Likewise, the Bible divulges on the “cosmic Christ” in John 1: 1-18; Ephesians 1:3-14; Colossians 1: 15-20. ${ }^{70}$ It underlines the extent and authority of Jesus Christ’s concern for the total cosmos. The intertwined of the Biblical teaching and the tribal perception in regard to this cosmic reality is significant in numerous ways. Nonetheless, the uniqueness of the tribal communitarian worldview lies in the practicality and micro nature of perception, apart from its universalistic vision. The fact is tribal cosmovision is praxis-oriented, and its point of departure is from the real world, the everyday phenomena. Therefore, it offers less emphasis on abstract and metaphysical matters. ${ }^{71}$ This reality makes sense in tribal Christology, in upholding the incarnated Jesus as its terminus a quo.

Jesus as the man for the community, is not necessary another man or human. He is the perfect community man. He truly embodies the ideal community, the complete vision for the tribal communities. Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945), one of the greatest modern theologians, considers Jesus as the man for others who ‘being there for others’ till his death. ${ }^{72}$ Significantly, there is a good deal of connection between the Christologies of Bonhoeffer and tribal Christians; however, the emphasis on both entities is diverse. Bonhoeffer’s idea of Jesus being the man for others is anthropocentric, whereas the tribal understanding of Jesus, the man for the community, is cosmocentric. Furthermore, the interconnectedness of Jesus and community cannot be separated as Jesus’ incarnation demands his life to be inherently part of the cosmic world. Therefore, Jesus is everything to the cosmic community.
${ }^{69}$ The concept of Ting-kadih-maina is derived from the words Ting from Tingwang (the proper name of Supreme Being), kadih means world, including the whole creations, and maina from chamaina (humans). In Greek, the concept is understood as Theo-cosmic-anthropos interconnectedness. Refer Maisuangdibou, Tribal Theological Hermeneutics, 180.
${ }^{70}$ Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) widely theologizes on the cosmic community. Regarding his work, J.L. Houlden writes, “Jesus is the “omega point,” the goal of consummation, already manifested in history to which the whole cosmic evolutionary process tends.” J.L. Houlden, Jesus: A Question of Identity (London: Continuum, 1992), 102; Similarly, Raimon Panikkar understands this view under the heading “Cosmotheandrism” and he theologizes it extensively. Raimon Panikkar, The Cosmotheandric Experience, Emerging Religious Consciousness (New York: Orbis Books, 1993).
${ }^{71}$ The tribal understand of God, another world, moral-ethics, spirituality, praxis, life, and society is earth-centred, or realities i.e., day-to-day living. Their spirituality is signified in their relation to nature, land, plants and animals. For, instance, cutting a tree is preceded by prayer, requesting the Supreme Being who is considered the God of the tree to provide more trees.
${ }^{72}$ Thus, it demands the church be true to self by existing for humanity. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison, trans. Eberhard Bethge (London: Collins, Fontana Books, 1953), 166; Also see, Grenz, Theology for the Community of God, 280.

Lalnghakthuami asserts, "The community and Jesus should be grasped as inseparable. ${ }^{173} \mathrm{He}$ is the communitarian Christ, the Son of God, the savior, the liberator, the Messiah of the universe. There is nothing beyond him or before him. Here, Jesus is the man for community and the world, the liangtuong (ideal human being), the ‘Son of Man’ because of his involvement in the struggle with the cosmos for holistic salvation. ${ }^{74}$

It is perceived that the tribal conception of Jesus as the man for the universal community would incarnate overwhelmingly and embed him in the tribal world. Jesus Christ is a community man who lives and works in the community and who is there to transform the community, including the natures and cultures, in the light of the kingdom of God. ${ }^{75}$ If Christ is not in the community, his incarnation is meaningless for the tribal-indigenous people. Therefore, for the tribals, Christ has to be genuinely rooted in tribal life and culture. This tribalization and communitarianization of Jesus Christ do not in any way disregard Jesus Christ nor does it remove him from his universal significance. ${ }^{76}$ Rather, it is all about making him relevant in a particular context. In that sense, Jesus Christ, who was born in Jewish culture, is also embodied in every believer’s life and community. Captivatingly, the Blacks think of Jesus as Black; likewise, there is Japanese Jesus, Minjung Jesus, feminist Jesus, Dalit Jesus, and so on. Thus, Jesus, who is God for all, is also an indigenous person for the indigenous Christians. The above viewpoints prove that Jesus’ incarnation in the community has a direct implication in the tribal life to liberate and transform their world and the whole cosmic community at large.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the Christological narrative in the indigenous-tribal context begins with the critical understanding of Jesus Christ as projected in the Bible and his relationship with the cosmos. It starts from below (immanence) without neglecting the above (the transcendence). It also tries to balance the biblical, traditional, theological, praxis, and contextual facets. As underlined above, the tribalization of Jesus Christ is nothing but to make him relevant in the tribal context. It is to fully incarnate and resurrect Christ in the community of the tribals and their worldview. It views that Jesus the God possesses the perfect community consciousness throughout his life, and he is the archetype liangtuong/pasaltha, the Son of God, and the savior who came to liberate the whole world by executing the chaliuroubo, tlawmngaihna, and sobaliba in their perfection.

^[1]

The current tribal Christologies lack inclusiveness; therefore, appropriating the collective consciousness of the tribal people would be a critical departure in tribal scholarship. Instead of reducing Jesus to some terms and notions, particularly of a single tribe, tribal Christology has to appreciate the whole. Christological holism, where the parts are understood better only in relation to the whole, is critical. For instance, Christ cannot be a Mizo pasaltha, Liangmai liangtuong, or Tangkhul elder brother for all tribals; he cannot be reduced to Kuki indoi, or Ao arasentur and Lijaba for entire tribal Christians. They are only parts of the whole; as a result, utilizing tribal terms and terminologies is indispensable whatsoever; yet, it should not straitjacket Christ, thus forcing one particular tribal idea on all tribals. Such attitudes are signified by theological colonization and domination. For this reason, dialogue, inclusivity, comparative study, and critical appreciation for the other are vital in tribal theological studies. If not, tribal theology could be captivated by a few prominent tribes, consequently leading to a self-betrayal and defeating the whole purpose and goal of tribal theology.

Thus, the overall attempt in this paper is to make Christ meaningful and authentic for the tribal Christians. The point is Christ should be genuinely rooted in the tribal context; if not, Christ cannot be the foundation of tribal life, church, and community because he will continue to be an alien, a stranger, and a colonial Christ. Thus, to make Christ invaluable in the tribal world, Christ has to be contextualized, and he has to be intrinsic and genuinely nativized. For tribals, Jesus Christ, who is the Son of God, the second person in the Trinity, the savior of the cosmos, is the Christ. He is a Naga, a Khasi, a Mizo, a Garo, a Karbi, an Arunachali, an Adivasis, and other tribals. Finally, the researcher asserts that the tribalness and the work of Jesus Christ as the man for the cosmic community should be seriously considered in tribal Christology.