Introduction

Many Naga Christians assert that Nagaland is a Christian state but such assertion is political (politicization of Christianity in Nagaland) because a state is run by the norms of the government and not religion/Christianity. The same applies to the phrase ‘Nagaland for Christ’ because Nagaland is a state that exists for the people of Nagaland and not for/because of Jesus Christ. There seems to be confusion about faith and governance among Christians and Church leaders and how the Christian faith should influence the governing system.

 

Even at the individual level, ‘Naga Christians’ fail to live by Christian principles not because they don’t want to follow them but because there seem to be no principles to follow. Church leaders seem to be speaking so much about sin, salvation, and good Christian life that they forget to contextualize their message (I’m not endorsing Tribal/Contextual Theology here). On the other hand, the Christian teachings from outside (YouTube, social media, and books from other countries) don’t seem to work in the Naga context, which creates a confusion of identity.

 

I believe there needs to be a holistic ‘revival’ of the Naga Christian faith in general and Ao Christian faith in particular. Over the years, we have dissected the holistic nature of ‘revival’ and made it into an event of ‘repentance’ and ‘prayer’ lasting for many days. It is time that churches in Nagaland (all denominations and non-denominational, including prayer centers/houses), including individuals, move towards a more holistic revival by learning from the revivals that we had in the past. This article will discuss what ‘holistic revival’ should look like and how it should also make us ‘holistic Christian.’ I will argue that such holistic nature of revival giving rise to holistic Christianity in Nagaland should also give us a ‘functional faith.’

 

 

Revival: Learning from Our Past

Revival in Nagaland was a gradual process through the impact of the outside agent and events. Bendangjungshi, in his book “Confessing Christ in the Naga Context: Towards a Liberating Ecclesiology,” divides revival in Nagaland into three phases. The first phase was during the colonial administration; the second was during the Indian military occupation; the third was during the Naga Nationalist Movement. In all these three phases of revival, there was a development/progression in the theological understanding of the people regarding ‘God,’ ‘Jesus Christ’ (Christology), ‘Soteriology’ (salvation), and personal faith. The progression of theological understanding also helped respond to societal and governmental issues.

 

Historically speaking, the church’s response to societal problems has succeeded but also failed in many areas. One of the indirect gifts of the church during the political upheaval in Nagaland was the sense of oneness among the Nagas. On the other hand, it also gave rise to Naga Christian Nationalism with the political statement ‘Nagaland for Christ.’ Chongpongmeren Jamir, in his book “Christianity in Northeast India: A Cultural History of Nagaland from 1947,” talks about the contribution of the church toward Naga society and highlights the negative impact of Naga culture and Christianity coming together. He argues that “… cultural appropriation of Christian faith in the Naga context was a key factor for the growth of churches in Nagaland in the post-1947 period” (p. 148).

 

When we look at the past revivals, three things can be highlighted. The first is a progression of theological thought among the people. The second is that there was a societal response. Lastly, the message of Christianity was appropriated in our context and was creatively used. In today’s revivals, all these three factors are missing. There is no progression of theological thought – the revival message hasn’t changed from when I was in high school till today. Church leaders and lay Christians haven’t tried to learn from the past mistakes and success of the societal response.

 

The church, its message, and the people are, in turn, slowly detaching itself from society by only organizing ‘clean election campaigns,’ ‘mission works,’ donating funds for small scale businesses, and so on – without actually having a concrete theological view/vision of the society. Lastly, every revival occasion is taken as an opportunity to criticize our past pre-Christian beliefs and practices with the phrase “from darkness to light” without trying to appropriate it creatively. Trying to detach the Christian from its pre-Christian beliefs and practices, the church indirectly creates confusion of faith among people.

 

This confusion leads to a phenomenon that the church leader called “nominal Christian(ity).” It is clear that the nominality of Christianity in Nagaland is not due to people unwilling to follow the Christian principles and live by them, but the church creates the ‘nominality.’ Thus, there is an urgent need for a holistic revival in Nagaland which incorporates all these three factors.

 

 

Faith: The Nominal as the Normal Christian

Holistic revival is not only the church’s responsibility. Each Christian has a role to play by trying to embody the Christian faith and live by it. The individual Christian faith is intricately tied to the church, the people, society, and outside influence.

 

The church is also an institution like any other institution; it has its shortcomings and its positive role in society. No church is perfect – it is the responsibility of each individual to make it a better place for our spiritual nourishment. In Nagaland, there is a ‘tug of war’ between the so-called ‘traditional churches’ (Baptist) and other churches (specifically charismatics). Historically, the Baptist church argued against certain forms of charismatic Christianity because it directly incorporated/resembled pre-Christian/ traditional beliefs and practices. It also went against the norms of Baptist distinctive.

 

Today, the charismatic churches criticize the Baptist church because of its traditional nature. This ‘tug of war’ is not only between churches but also among individual Christians. Every individual has the right to go to any church they like; that is not an issue. Every individual also has the right to give critical remarks on the church. The problem arises when a Christian goes to another church not to satisfy their spiritual hunger but to satisfy their hatred toward other churches in the name of spirituality. Criticizes the church not to build and edify it but to dismantle it and its reputation. Let us all try to be a ‘normal Christian’ in the first place and not denominationalists and non-denominationalist.

 

We live in a social setting with another fellow Christians and people of different faiths. The church is where we get nourished, and society is where we live out our faith. Sometimes there is a dichotomy between who we are and how we live out for faith because we leave our faith in the church and try to live our lives only with our identity as a Christian. This happens because the content of our faith lacks a social element to it. We need a ‘social faith’ that is not relegated to the confines of the church.

 

A ‘social faith’ that not only prompts you to carry the Bible to church but also to read, understand, and apply it. A faith that not only clasps its hands to pray but also acts out in love, compassion, and kindness. A faith that not only helps you to go to church but also live out that church in you. Indeed! We need a faith firmly planted in a deep understanding of our society (social faith), which will help us become ‘normal Christians’ by living out our faith beyond the confines of our spirituality and our church.

 

We Nagas cannot avoid multiple Christian teachings because of increasing theological education, readers, and social media influence. In fact, everyone has the right to what kind of Christian they want to be. But in many instances, Christians cannot distinguish between the cultural context of theological thought, a theological debate, and what it means to be a Christian. For example, the assertion that a Christian should support capitalism and oppose socialism is a phenomenon unique to American Christianity that has become a part of its theological thought and debate.

 

When we look at the Jewish-Chrisitan context, ‘Trinity’ was one of the theological topics of debate on where the church was also divided. Among Nagas in general and Ao Nagas in particular, capitalism, socialism, trinity, etc., are not the topic that divides our church nor a central theological issue. Thus, there needs to be a proper discernment of all the attractive Christian teachings, or else we will confuse our identity as Christian and our responsibility in society.

 

 

Holistic Christian: Lessons from Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah

When we look at the book of Daniel in the Old Testament, we see the story of Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. When King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon conquered the people of Israel, he sought young men from Israel who could serve in his palace. The criteria for those young men were that they should be without any physical defect, handsome, well-informed, and show aptitude for every kind of learning (Daniel 1:4). Nebuchadnezzar tested Daniel and his friends in all areas of their life, and they were found fit to serve the king. Let me illustrate some lessons from the story of Daniel and his friends, which is essential for all Christians.

 

Firstly, the name of Daniel and his friends, which reflected the God of Israel, was changed to names that reflected the Gods of Babylon (Daniel 1:7). Here we can notice that Daniel and his friends didn’t protest/argue against why their names were changed. As Christians, we often try to detach ourselves from the world, thinking that everything that the world has to offer is bad/wrong. But God intends us to be part of the world and everything God has created. To be part of the world doesn’t mean to be subsumed by the world. Thus, the call of every Christian is to be part of the world and not to detach from it.

 

Secondly, Daniel and his friends were offered royal food, but they rejected it (Daniel 1:8-16). They refused the royal food and requested vegetables and water instead because they didn’t want to ‘defile’ themselves. Here, Daniel and his friends were trying to maintain the dietary law that the God of Israel had put in place during their time. The lesson from this passage is not about food because those dietary laws do not apply to us anymore – it is about upholding God’s word and its result.

 

As Christians who are part of the world and uphold the word of God – it should make us distinct. Often, we Christians mistakenly think that upholding God’s word means detaching ourselves from the world. But the Bible is full of examples where God wants to relate to the world and be a part of it through interacting with human beings in their everyday activity. Thus, God desires that we have distinguishable characteristics through His word and not detach ourselves from the world because of His word.

 

Lastly, Daniel and his friends learned the language and literature of Babylonians for three years (Daniel 1: 4-5). God helped them gain knowledge and understanding during their years of training (Daniel 1:17). We as Christians often forget that one of the greatest desires of God for us is to learn and have knowledge and understanding about everything in the world. Daniel and his friends were not studying Israel’s scriptures, philosophy, and science – they were studying Babylonian scripture, philosophy, and science, but God helped them gain knowledge and understanding.

 

Every skill you have matters to God, be it cooking, singing, speaking, writing, leadership, etc. God wants us to be good and be faithful to it in whatever we do. Like the three years of training that Daniel and his friends went through, every day for a Christian is a new opportunity to brush up their skills and be more faithful in whatever you do. Thus, if we serve God faithfully with whatever we have and can do, God will always shower His blessings on us.

 

 

Conclusion: A Functional Faith

As human beings, we have faith in many things. For example, when we sit in a chair, we have faith/confidence that the chair will hold us up and not break. We usually don’t examine the chair whether it will hold us up or not before sitting on it because we know that someone has sat on the chair and it didn’t break. As Christians, we have faith in God, but sometimes we apply the same example of chair to God – we have faith in God because our parents had faith in God. If we have faith in God because someone had the same faith (like the example of chair) then our faith is non-functional. Faith in God is very different from having faith in a chair. When you have faith in God, that faith determines how you live in the world. Thus, I believe every Naga Christians needs a functional faith that can be achieved through ‘holistic revival,’ understanding the nature of their faith, and applying the lessons from Daniel’s story that I’ve discussed above.

 

Tiatemsu Longkumer
Signal Fellowship , Ph.D. Student, Dept. of Anthropology
North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *