A Comparative Study on the Missionary Approach of St. Francis Xavier and Robert de Nobili.

A Comparative Study on the Missionary Approach of St. Francis Xavier and Robert de Nobili.

By: Laldanmawia

…………………………August 2012………………………..

Introduction

From the later part of the 15^th Century, Indian Christian History witnessed the Portuguese’s relationships with Indians. From that moment many Europeans came to India on account of economic merchandising as well as of mission. Among them St. Francis Xavier, the Portuguese and Robert de Nobili, the Italian also came but mainly for the purpose of mission. They were sent by the Jesuit of Roman Catholic. Their encounter with Indian had great impact particularly in the History of Christianity in India. So this paper will discuss on the comparative study on their missionary approaches.

1. Biographical Sketch of:

Before going to the main topic we will look first to their biographical sketch including the introduction to their early life, character and their position in mission works.

1.1. St. Francis Xavier: Francis Xavier was a famous missionary to the South East Asia, born to be the fifth and youngest child on 7^th April 1506 in a noble family of Navarre, a little kingdom near Pyrenees. He studied at University of Paris; there he spent eleven years as student and teacher.[1] During his studies in Paris, he involved in the small enthusiastic group under the leadership of Ignatius of Loyola which forwarded to the formation of the Society of Jesus in 1534.[2] He and his Jesuit friends went to Palestine and Rome. After the Pope recognized the Jesuit in 1540, Xavier and Simon Rodriguez went to Far East as missionaries. There they visited India, Ceylon, Malaca, Eastern Indonesia and even Japan. And he died on 19^th March 1552 while he was on the way to China to do mission. In 1622 he was declared as saint by Pope Pius XI.[3]

He landed in India on 6^th May 1542 at Goa where Christians were already organized. He had achieved thousands of people be converted during the next decade. His first two years were spent among the paravas who were the fishers in the Southeastern coast of India. Then he went to Western coast by staying at Travancore, then moved to Northern side and reached Cochin. From India he moved toward Malaca and Indonesia.[4]

1.2. Robert de Nobili: The other famous Jesuit missionary Robert de Nobili was born in Montepulciano, Italy in September 1577.[5] He joined the Society of Jesus in 1597 at Naples, and after doing education he moved to India for mission in October, 1604.

He ereached India on 20^th May, 1605, and did his work starting from Goa, and to Cochin, Fishery coast, Madura, Malabar Coast and other South Indian regions.[6] After staying in Cochin, he stationed in Madurai in Tamil Nadu from 1606. There he learned Tamil, Telegu and Sanskrit, and he mastered them soon with the help of his teacher, Shivadharma.[7] As he explained the Christian doctrine in Tamil, he coined several words to communicate his message. He used the vernacular language for naming the words like worship, grace, teacher, Bible, mass, etc. He composed Catechisms, apologetic works and philosophic discourses in Tamil as well. He died in Mylapore in Tamil Nadu on 16 January 1656 at the age of 79.[8]

2. A Comparision on Their Missionary Approaches:

According to the books and articles available to us, the two missionaries did not have many approaches in which comparative study could be done. That is why we will look upon two approaches where they have similarities and dissimilarities as well.

2.1. Destination: The destiny of the mission work is one aspect where we can do comparative study. Francis Xavier was very much concerned about the people who were in the coastal plain. However, as he was ordered by King John III, his primarily mission was to restore Christianity among the Portuguese settlers. Many of the Portuguese sailed from Europe had illegal relationships with Indian women and acted unwisely. Francis struggled to restore moral and right relations among the Portuguese themselves.[9] He spent his first five months among them.

His destiny was then felt upon the lower caste fishermen who could be baptized to escape from Muslim oppression.[10] Then he along with three Indian Christians went to Southeast coast where Paravas were living. Visiting all villages, he could baptize almost all children and babies.[11]

The destiny of Robert de Nobili’s approach was to the Brahmin, those who were higher caste in the Hindu caste system. The Indian Christianity was claimed as Portuguese Christianity where people of lower caste were there. In the eyes of Hindu high caste, Christianity was parangis which denotes and suggests Europeans of meat eating, wine-drinking, loose-living, arrogant persons, etc., which were far away from Hindu life.[12] That is why social intercourse with Hindus was difficult. He then tried to have connection with High caste people, particularly the Brahmins, so that Indian Christianity would have more dignity in Indian soil.

2.2. Indigenization: Indigenization was useful approach for these two missionaries, but the way how they used was different. Francis Xavier was flexible according to the context demands. He could change his method when he went to Japan, which was not the method he used in Southeast Asia. When he lived among the paravas between Cape Comorin and Tuticorin, he put an emphasis to the use of Tamil for his mission work. He got a man of well known Portuguese and Tamil, with him, he made prayers in Tamil, and later on he developed Creed, the Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer, and other Hymns in Tamil language. He learnt by heart the translated words first and called people to be taught them.[13] He selected some acquainted persons from each village or place; he left the copies of such translated works with them, so that they will teach by themselves.[14] Xavier did not so much give an emphasis on living like them, rather put importance to the vernacular language. He made use the vernacular languages of each situation where he worked to preach the Gospel.

Meanwhile, the successor of Xavier, Robert de Nobili claimed that one could never come close to the people of India by living European life, unless one act as the indigenous people. That is the reason why he decided to act the role of a Christian sannyasi[15] and to adopt the style of living. He wore sandal and dhoti. He adopted also local Indian customs, such as shaving one's head and keeping only a tiny tuft. Another symbol he embraced was the wearing of a three-stringed thread across the chest.[16] As a member of Italian nobility he claimed to be equivalent of Kshatriya. When it came to 1706, he began instructing young people as guru.[17] He made friends from high class people, from them he learnt Sanskrit, and able to speak soon. After making people to be baptized, he did not tell them to change their ways of living. They did not need to break caste, dress, and food habits, except idolatry.[18] He indigenized himself in to the Indian situation. He put importance to the way of Indian living and he led the converted Indians to live Christianity in an Indian way.

Conclusion:

Now, we have been discussing the life and the missionary approaches of St. Francis Xavier and Robert de Nobili. They were the Jesuit missionaries came to Portuguese settlement in India. Even though their tenure of staying was different, they did great job that many Indian were converted into Christianity. They were claimed to be greatest missionaries of all time. As Xavier started from the lower class people, he left big shadow on Indian soil. In the mean time, de Nobili used top-down theory in which he put himself Indianized and started mission from higher class people. He converted much noble class of Hindus and was known in the History of Indian Christianity. Due to their influential works, Christianity in Indian soil had been consolidated and extended in different ways.

Bibliography:

Firth, C.B. An Introduction to Indian Church History. Delhi: ISPCK, 1961.

Kuriakose, M.K. History of Christianity in India: Source materials.

http://www.answers.com/topic/st-francis-xavier (2 August 2012).

http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=423 (2 August 2012).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_de_Nobili (15 August 2012).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Xavier (16 August 2012).

---

[1] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 55.

[2] http://www.answers.com/topic/st-francis-xavier (2 August 2012).

[3] http://www.answers.com/topic/st-francis-xavier (2 August 2012).

[4] http://www.pweb.sophia.ac.jp/../mathy.pdf (15 August 2012).

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_de_Nobili (15 August 2012).

[6] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 110.

[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_de_Nobili (15 August 2012).

[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_de_Nobili (15 August 2012).

[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Xavier (16 August 2012).

[10] http://www.answers.com/topic/st-francis-xavier (2 August 2012).

[11] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 59.

[12] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 111.

[13] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 59.

[14] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 59.

[15] One who has given up the World and adopted the life of religious mendicant, in the fourth and final stage of Brahman’s life.

[16] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_de_Nobili (15 August 2012).

[17] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 112.

[18] C.B. Firth, An Introduction to Indian Church History (Delhi: ISPCK, 1961), 113.

My Sermon on "Let us start building. (Neh 2:17-20)"

Let us start building. (Neh 2:17-20)

¹⁷ Then I said to them, “You see the trouble we are in, how Jerusalem lies in ruins with its gates burned. Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, so that we may no longer suffer disgrace.” ¹⁸ I told them that the hand of my God had been gracious upon me, and also the words that the king had spoken to me. Then they said, “Let us start building!” So they committed themselves to the common good. ¹⁹ But when Sanballat the Horonite and Tobiah the Ammonite official, and Geshem the Arab heard of it, they mocked and ridiculed us, saying, “What is this that you are doing? Are you rebelling against the king?” ²⁰ Then I replied to them, “The God of heaven is the one who will give us success, and we his servants are going to start building; but you have no share or claim or historic right in Jerusalem.” (NRSV)

When I knew that these verses were given to me, it reminded me of our childhood when we used to sing a song composed by my father basing on these verses, the song was like this, We need a person in this Mizoram, who would be like Nehemiah, who was appointed by God to rebuild the broken walls and gates of Jerusalem.

Yes, we need a person like Nehemiah to rebuild thing or structure in our society, in our church, even in our individual life. I am not going to do a deep study about the text. The main concern of the sermon is about the contextual application. We can connect with our theme New Heaven and New Earth. He had passion for rebuilding Jerusalem. He prayed to God and his prayer was seconded with his serious endeavours, he even look sad when he serve a cup to king Artaxerxes. After asking permission from king Artaxerxes, he went to Jerusalem with the letters of the king and some armies who accompanied him. Within three days he had surveyed the wall of Jerusalem at nights. Then he came to the people of Israel and encouraged them to company him in rebuilding the gates and wall of Jerusalem. They committed themselves to on common hope and good. Even though different objections they encountered, they could accomplish what they want to do.

In the success of rebuilding Jerusalem, Nehemiah’s great leadership contributed a lot. Not only his leadership, his complete trust and his confidence in God were great challenge for other people of Israel. That was why they could build strong commitment towards their goal. Today, in our individual life, in our church, in our society, in our Earth community, we are often challenged by brokenness. Broken in what? It can be spiritual, it can be physical, it can be between human relationships, it can be between human and other creations, it can be between us and God. If not every day, at least one or more time, we all face a challenge of brokenness that we need to rebuild. In order to come up with rebuilding, we can learn some lesson from these verses.

1. Faith and confidence in God’s promise: If we look his true faith, we can include him among the ‘champions of faith’ in the Bible. He had faith to wait, faith to ask, and faith to challenge others. After knowing about Jerusalem, he waited for four months to really go there to do the work under God’s direction. We can be too rushing to solve our problem with our own strength. But we need to wait for God’s providence and instructions with prayerful heart. 

He prayed to God with confident that God’s promise to Moses could be fulfilled as we see in chapter 1:9, “but if you return to me and obey my commands, then even if your exiled people are at the farthest horizon, I will gather them from there and bring them to the place I have chosen as a dwelling for my Name.” He urged God with His promise, and hope that will be revealed. When they faced problems from other people, when they mocked and ridiculed them, he replied them confidently, “the God of heaven is the one who will give us success”. What a great confidence in God! Yes, this is what we need in our struggle against difficulties. This confidence in God is what we need in our rebuilding of the brokenness. 

2. Good leadership: We can see how great leader was Nehemiah. Firstly, he prayed to God, secondly, he followed what he prayed by going to Jerusalem. Thirdly, he enquired about the walls of Jerusalem and planned where and how they should do the work. Fourthly, he encouraged his people to have common good. Fifthly, he stood firm in his position in the midst of different circumstances. He planned everything wisely. He even used the words ‘we’ or ‘us’ instead of ‘you’. That means from the beginning he identified with the people. Can we really lead the people into a common good if we always say “I and you”. We need to think this.

Being a Christian leader, how many of us do not pray fervently before we fight a great challenge? How many of us will stop pushing towards our goal if problems come? In order to rebuild the brokenness, we need good leader, in Christian circle, Christian leader. And we can also be good leaders who would do the same as Nehemiah to heal and to rebuild what is necessary.   

3. Committing together in the common good: Another important force that led them successful in rebuilding Jerusalem was their commitment in a common goal and good. Nehemiah could not do the work by himself. He needed the people to work with him. His personal burden for Jerusalem and his confidence in the Lord convinced the Jews that the time to come together, and they could say, “Let us start building”. Leaders can't do the job by themselves. and workers or followers can't accomplish much without leadership. That is why committing together in the common good is important. Unless we come together with common commitment and common good, we may have less chances of success in our struggle against injustice, problem, difficulties, hardship, and broken relationship.

Lastly, with these three qualities Nehemiah and his people could complete rebuilding the walls and gates of Jerusalem. Likewise, having these qualities, we can be successful in our life in the midst of different circumstances that try to break us, ruin us, burn us, to let us down to nothing. Let us start building… Amen.

Social Theories as Critical Tools for Analyzing People’s Experiences in India

Social Theories as Critical Tools for Analyzing People’s Experiences in India

February 2017                                                                        Presenter: Laldanmawia

_______________________________________________________________________________

Introduction

If theology is to be authentically contextual, it needs to involve in people’s experiences. Doing contextual theology requires an active engagement in a particular situation. In doing so, we are formulating our theological methodologies. Sometimes we use different theories as tools for analyzing people’s experiences. In this paper, we also deal with the necessity, significance and the usage of social theories as critical tools for analyzing people’s experiences in India.

1. Some Aspects of Social Theories

Austin Harrington defines Social theory as analytical framework used to examine social phenomena. It studies about how societies change and develop, about methods of explaining social behaviour, about power and social structure, gender and ethnicity, modernity and civilisation, revolutions and utopias.[1] In the study of social phenomena, different theories and different types of theory have been implemented by different sociologists and social scientists.

Percy S. Cohen differentiates social theories into four types: [2]

(i) Analytical theories, those are of logic and mathematics which may state nothing about the real world, but consist of sets of axiomatic statements which are true by definition and from which other statements are derived.

(ii) Normative theories, which elaborate a set of ideal states to which one may aspire. Such theories like those of ethics and aesthetics are often combined with theories of non-normative nature to constitute ideologies, artistic principle and so on.

(iii)Scientific theories, which are ideally a universal, empirical statement which asserts a causal connection between two or more types of event. One simplest example is in its form ‘whenever X occurs, then Y occurs.’ A scientific theory is universal because it states something about the conditions under which some event or type of event always occurs. Scientific theories must be empirical and causal

(iv) Metaphysical or Programmatic theories, which are not strictly testable, though they may be subject to rational appraisal.  Some metaphysical theories have little or nothing to do with science, but others are clearly part of science. They constitute useful assumptions which have a programmatic or suggestive role.

Malcolm Waters’ four approaches to social theory are also worth mentioning, those are: [3]

(i) Constructionism, which seeks to understand individual and intersubjective meanings and motives. Here human beings are regarded as competent and communicative agents who actively create or construct the social world.

(ii) Utilitarianism, which seeks to explain behavior on the basis of an explicit calculus of individual interest and the means to realize them. Here hu7man human beings are regarded as calculating and maximizing, always seeking advantages at the expense of others.

(iii) Functionalism, which examines social arrangements in terms of their contribution to the meeting of the imperatives specified by an overarching shared normative system. Here human beings are regarded as religious and cultural conformists who cannot survive without social and moral support.

(iv) Critical structuralism, which traces the development through time of underlying material structures and their effects on individuals, societies and cultures. Here human beings are regarded as the victims of their socio economic and historical location which manipulates and twists them into distortions of their true selves.

2. Some Social Theories for Analyzing People’s Experiences in India

Those of Social theories developed in Western world are not simply applicable in Indian societies which are culturally different. In analyzing Dalit, women, Tribal and Adivasi’s experiences in India, we may need to apply different theoretical framework. In that study of Indian society, Sociologists used indology, structural functional, Marxian and other approaches.

2.1. Indological Approach: Indology deals with interpretation of ancient texts and linguistic studies of problems of ancient Indian culture. The Indological approach rested on the assumption that historically, Indian society and culture are unique. Its social realities could be grasped better through the ‘texts’. It also refers to the historical and comparative method based on Indian texts in the study of Indian society. It uses ancient history, epics, religious texts, legends, myths, folk traditions and other symbolic forms of culture.[4]

Indological approach is also called as “textual view” or “textual perspective” of social phenomena as it depends upon texts. An Indological has also been the hallmark of several sociologists. They have hammered against the acceptance of theoretical and methodological orientations of the western countries. These scholars emphasized the role of traditions, groups rather than individual as the basis of social relations and religion, ethics and philosophy as the basis of social organization. When field studies in many areas of their interest in India became difficult, textual analysis, either of classics or ethics or field notes from an earlier data, represented a fruitful basis for continued analysis of Indian structure and tradition.[5] This approach is used to understand the idealized life of Hindu society. Tribal social life can also be analyzed through legends, folk traditions, symbols, etc. Some Indian theological writers use Upanishads and other religious texts as source for knowing Indian social reality.

2.2. Structural Functional Approach: In the third quarter of the 20^th Century, the structural functional approach of Parsons and Merton was used in which the aspect of the integration was emphasized. Structural functional theories are the explanation of functionalists who are trying to bring order, integration, equilibrium and harmony in the social structure. They give explanation about structural aspects of a social situation and describe that how the normative order is functioning in that social structure.[6] This approach analyses society as a system of functionally interrelated variables. Those variables can be personalities in each society. Then that personality’s need is attempted to be treated. For example, professional rules have certain functions for the profession as a body; they define conditions of entry, demarcate the boundaries of the profession and prescribe the right and obligation of practitioner in relation to the society and so on.[7]

2.3. Marxian Approach: After Indian independence, Marxian approach was found to be appropriate particularly in the midst of dynamic relations in the agrarian society.[8] According to Marx, Class is the manifestation of economic differentiation. The concept of class struggle is all throughout the history of existing society. Classes are struggling their own role to play in the relations of production. Relations of production refer to the fact that in the process of industrial production the labour and capital stands in specific relation to each other. Marxist approach assumes that classes of people share the same relationship to the means of production. For example, all labourers have a similar relationship with the land owners. On the other hand all the landowners as a class have a similar relationship with the land and labourers.[9]

S. Kappen is famous for acknowledging the contribution of Marxism in the development of his interests for the poor and the marginalized and his critical thinking. For him, an authentic Indian Christian theology will emerge only when Jesus tradition merges with Indian religious tradition and with the positive insights of Marxism.[10]

2.4. Feminist Approach: Feminist methodology comes out with an analyzing of women’s experiences in the society. R.L. Hnuni says that the common starting point of feminist theology is the experience of women of a patriarchal oppression.[11] Their historical and societal experience of subordination and marginalization made women to raise the question about womanhood. Are they living in a half society? Yes it can be, if their experiences are not considered. Therefore feminist approach of social theory will examine and analyse a patriarchal society in order to turn a half society a whole society.

2.5. Approach from Below: We have to look society as a whole- all inclusive, because we do not have the full picture of the society leaving some groups of people to be invisible, those are powerless and poor. To understand the social depth and division in society, we may put our analytical approach from below perspective.[12] Moreover Indian socialists have largely neglected the social realities of the lowly placed and oppressed people.[13] If earlier those who occupied the bottom of society were invisible due to the cognitive blackout perpetuated by upper caste, middle class, urban, male researchers, today, with perspective from below, they are in full view and demand their legitimate share of representation in the production and representation of knowledge. All societies have bottom. Those bottoms are occupied by women, youth and proletariat, marginalized community, deprived section of society.[14] This necessitates the inauguration of approach from below. Dalit theological methodology is the outcome of analyzing the society from below perspective.

3. Necessity and Significance of Social Theories

In order to understand people, we need to know how their society works and functions. Many a times, we cannot just rely on our feelings, perceptions, impressions and assumptions about the people’s experiences in the society. That is why we need an analysis of the society using some theories and approaches. Some necessity and significance of social theories for analyzing people’s experiences in India, particularly for constructing theological methodology in Indian contextual theology are discussed in the following.

            3.1. To understand people, we need to understand society. We can understand people through their socio-cultural backgrounds. As human beings are social beings, individuals are connected through social aspects like family, tribe, caste, education, religion, job, etc. That is why we cannot really understand any individual without understanding his/her socio-cultural background.[15] Then we need social theory to analyze human’s socio-cultural background.

3.2. We cannot change society purposefully without knowing how to shape it. Is not the purpose of Indian Christian contextual theologies a change in the society? Yes, theologies are being developed in different Indian contexts in order to change something in the people’s life. To change, we need to know how to shape it; to know how to shape, we need to understand it; to understand it, and we need to analyze it. Social theories are engaging as critical tools as to know how changes take place in a society, how they affect people, how we can eventually oppose undesirable changes and contribute to a desirable transformation.[16]

3.3. We cannot do God’s will (or theology) in social life unless we understand in a critical ways how society functions. Without proper analysis we cannot solve social problems. Likewise we cannot develop a relevant contextual theology without critically analyzing the context. For example, if we are serious about ‘good news to the poor’ to bring changes to a particular people, we have to understand the causes of their poverty. If we are serious about God’s love to the margin and most despised we have to analyze the structures of discrimination such as patriarchy or caste. Only then we may be able to find appropriate ways to fight exploitation and discrimination.[17]

3.4. Theology gains its relevance if we analyze how its messages relate to changing social situations. Society is not static, but changing. Changes in the social situations affect people’s understanding of the word of God and the relevancy of the message. Our theological reflection in the wider society needs the help of social analysis in order to address such concern in an adequate way. Since theology has contextual and liberative approach, we need to adopt a critical analysis based on solidarity with the poor and the oppressed. Thus the relevance of the Bible, to be the guide for action from one generation to another, is enhanced through critical social analysis in the present context.[18]

Concluding Remarks

Human behavior is guided by social norms. Different social groups may have different norms. Then it is the duty of social researcher/analyst to find out this. Moreover, since all theologies arise out of certain social milieus I human history. To address their contemporary challenges, no meaningful construction of any contextual theology is possible without an analysis of the society for which theology is constructed.[19] In line with that, C. Nunthara would also suggest three values of Social research and analysis:[20]

            a) Success of social planning depends on systematic knowledge of societal resources, the people and their culture, their needs, their hopes and problems. This knowledge is gained by social research

            b) Social research provides knowledge about organization, society and institutions. Therefore it gives greater power on control over social phenomena.

            c) By a deeper understanding of the cause and effect of social sickness, it provides effective measures for its remedy to see what structural changes will bring about.

So, planning, control and effective measures for social welfare are the steps that we can take through social research and analysis. Tribals, Dalits, women, Adivasis, and other backward groups in India suffer from social injustices. On the part of sociology, theories are thus developed as critical tools to analyze and find out the social sickness. On the part of theology, contextual theologies are being developed to bring remedy to all societal problems faced by the people. Our contextual theology thus demands the mediation of social theories. To create social order of justice and freedom, social analysis is necessary, and then we can apply our theological reflections on the basis of our analytical findings.

In the words of Huang Po Ho, “if theology is to be rooted in context, it must address the problems of the living situation, and then only we can create suitable and responsive theology to it through the established methodology”.[21] To address the living situation, we need to analyze the exact condition first. Thus contextual theological methodology requires a social analysis through available theories. We cannot deny the importance of social theory to know more about people’s experiences, because it provides significant guidelines for the conduct of research and analysis and it enhances the meaningfulness of the social analysis.

Bibliography

Cohen, Percy S. Modern Social Theory. London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1979.

Dietrich, Gabriele and Bas Wielenga. Towards Understanding Indian Society. Madurai:

Centre for Social Analysis, Tamilnadu, 1997.

Hnuni, R. L. “Feminist Theology: Methodology” in Contextual Theology. Compiled by Wati

Longchar. Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2013.

Ho, Huang Po. “Contextual Theologies” in Contextual Theologies. Compiled by Wati

Longchar. Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2013.

Kappen, S. “Towards an Indian Theology of Liberation” Readings in Indian Christian Theology.

Edited by R. S. Sugirtharajah and Cecil Hargreaves. London: SPCK, 1993.

Nunthara, C. “Methodological Issues in Social research” Methodological Issues in Theological

Research: An Exploration., edited by H. Vanlalauva (Kolkata: Department of Research/SATHRI, Faculty of Theology, Serampore College University, 2013.

Oommen, T. K. Understanding Indian Society: The Relevance of Perspective from Below.

Pune: Department of Sociology, University of Pune, 2001.

Ralte, Lalrindiki “Methodological Issues in Social Analysis” Methodological Issues in

Theological Research: An Exploration. Edited by H. Vanlalauva. Kolkata: Department of Research/SATHRI, Faculty of Theology, Serampore College University, 2013.

Thanzauva, K. “Issues in Tribal Theology” An Exploration of Tribal Theology. Edited by Wati Longchar.

Jorhat: Tzudikong Baptist Chruch, 1997.

Waters, Malcolm. Modern Sociological Theory. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 1994.

Webliography

Mondal, Puja “Indological or Textual Perspective of Sociology” in

http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/indological-or-textual-perspective-of-

sociology-explained/35011/ (accessed January 29, 2017).

http://socialtheoryapplied.com/what-is-social-theory/ (accessed January 29, 2017).

 

Priya, Rashmi. “Marx’s Sociology: Theory of Class Struggle” in http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com /sociology/marxs-sociology-theory-of-class-struggle/43763/ (accessed February 10, 2017).

---

[1] http://socialtheoryapplied.com/what-is-social-theory/ (accessed January 29, 2017).

[2] Percy S. Cohen, Modern Social Theory (London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1979), 2-5.

[3] Malcolm Waters, Modern Sociological Theory (London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 1994), 6.

[4] Puja Mondal, “Indological or Textual Perspective of Sociology” http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/sociology/indological-or-textual-perspective-of-sociology-explained/35011/ (accessed January 29, 2017).

[5] Puja Mondal, “Indological or Textual perspective of Sociology”...

[6] T. K. Oommen, Understanding Indian Society: The Relevance of Perspective from Below (Pune: Department of Sociology, University of Pune, 2001), 3.

[7] Percy S. Cohen, Modern Social Theory, 46.

[8] T. K. Oommen, Understanding Indian Society: The Relevance of Perspective from Below, 3.

[9] Rashmi Priya, “Marx’s Sociology: Theory of Class Struggle” inhttp://www.yourarticlelibrary.com /sociology/marxs-sociology-theory-of-class-struggle/43763/ (accessed February 10, 2017).

[10] S. Kappen, “Towards an Indian Theology of Liberation” Readings in Indian Christian Theology., edited by R. S. Sugirtharajah and Cecil Hargreaves (London: SPCK, 1993), 24.

[11] R. L. Hnuni, “Feminist Theology: Methodology” Contextual Theology, compiled by Wati Longchar (Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2013), 207.

[12] Gabriele Dietrich and Bas Wielenga, Towards Understanding Indian Society (Madurai: Centre for Social Analysis, Tamilnadu, 1997), 14.

[13] T. K. Oommen, Understanding Indian Society: The Relevance of Perspective from Below, 16.

[14] T. K. Oommen, Understanding Indian Society: The Relevance of Perspective from Below, 11.

[15] Lalrindiki Ralte, “Methodological Issues in Social Analysis” Methodological Issues in Theological Research: An Exploration., edited by H. Vanlalauva (Kolkata: Department of Research/SATHRI, Faculty of Theology, Serampore College University, 2013), 320.

[16] Gabriele Dietrich and Bas Wielenga, Towards Understanding Indian Society, 5.

[17] Gabriele Dietrich and Bas Wielenga, Towards Understanding Indian Society, 6.

[18] Lalrindiki Ralte, “Methodological Issues in Social Analysis”, 322.

[19] K. Thanzauva, “Issues in Tribal Theology” An Exploration of Tribal Theology, edited by Wati Longchar (Jorhat: Tzudikong Baptist Chruch, 1997), 49.

[20] C. Nunthara, “Methodological Issues in Social research” Methodological Issues in Theological Research: An Exploration., edited by H. Vanlalauva (Kolkata: Department of Research/SATHRI, Faculty of Theology, Serampore College University, 2013), 276.

[21] Huang Po Ho, “Contextual Theologies” Contextual Theologies, compiled by Wati Longchar (Kolkata: SCEPTRE, 2013), 26.