Heard by Whom? (on interrogating global theology)
It is getting usual nowadays to read about works in local/indigenous theologies being undertaken so that voices from the margins or the underside will be heard. Yay!
But the question has to be asked: be heard by whom and be heard where?
If the point of doing such works is so that, for example, Majority World voices can be 'heard' and therefore included in the conversations going on in the West, in a way, a happy and blessed addition, then whose interest really is being served? Who is benefiting from such gestures of 'inclusion'? Who is being incorporated into 'what'? At the end of the day, it has to be asked: whose body of knowledge is getting enriched, broadened, and strengthened? And what arrangement/s of the theological status quo are getting reinforced and further taken to be good for everyone, everywhere?
These questions are missed (or lost, drowned) especially when the concern described above gets framed in and within the terms of the fancy word 'global', e.g., global conversations, global table, global theology, etc. But what exactly is 'global'? Where is this 'global'? And most important of all, who is gatekeeping, posturing to be the 'right' point of reference, of this so-called 'global'?
My own personal experience tells me that not a few of these so-called 'global' are more or less operating (still) with the logic of what can only be properly described as 'colonial.'
Emerging are projects this and that with the aim of incorporating non-Western voices into something so that it would appeal more to non-Western voices and therefore expand relevance and ultimately, reach across the globe. Unwittingly, not a few folks from the Majority World end up contributing to the tragic re/construction of the apparatus that upholds the old colonial impulse within the field of theology.
Fortunately, there are some efforts in the Western world to rethink what ‘global’ means from their side of the fence. Usually coming from folks whose social location may be in the West but whose imagination and sensibility transcends geographical belonging. My guess is that this may, more and more, take the shape of an 'insider conversation' -for those reared in the dynamics of Western civilization/Christianity to figure out among themselves on how to re-engage better with the 'rest of the world.' My hope is they will be the one who can help arrest the re-emergence of what has been called as the 'colonially of faith.'*
For those in the Majority World, the 'insider conversation' that might be worth trying is to get folks from within the non-Western contextSSS (yes it has to be in the plural) to hear each other, be able to listen and understand each other, learn to talk to each and in the process also learn from each other, and hopefully, discover options along the way, on how to strengthen not only each other’s sense of belonging, but also a collective resolve towards what may be contributed elsewhere…
Smaller insider conversations as alternative to the massive gatherings that sadly ends up with imperial feels...
Last year, there is one gathering that sought to do something very close to this. I hope there will be more of such spaces this year...
On how these different spaces will converge is an altogether another question. Hopefully, we will not repeat what was wrought at Nicaea. And Chalcedon, later on.
-Rants by Rei Lemuel Crizaldo (January 30, 2026)
*Notes:
Coloniality is now widely understood as a ‘colonial matrix’ perpetuated to this very day through the following manifestations: (1) the coloniality of power, (2) the coloniality of knowledge, and (3) the coloniality of being —which includes the coloniality of faith. Cf., Raimundo Barreto and Roberto Sirvent, Decolonial Christianities (Switzerland: Palgrame Macmillan, 2019), p. 5.