I have attended many conferences, seminars and discussions over the years, particularly those dealing with politics, international relations, religious freedom, interfaith harmony and social change. However, my recent participation in the Fifth National Theological Workshop of the Ecumenical Forum for Theologically Trained Women in Pakistan offered me something different: an opportunity to observe how Christian theology is responding to the changing realities of society and how theological thinkers are challenging established assumptions about faith, justice and the role of women.

Before sharing my observations, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the Rev. Dr. Khushnud Azariah for inviting me to this important gathering. I found the experience deeply informative and intellectually stimulating. I am neither a theologian nor a student of theology. My academic interests lie primarily in social and political sciences, international affairs, geopolitics and the movements that shape societies and institutions. I try to follow emerging ideas and developments, particularly those that challenge established structures and influence public thinking.

It was therefore fascinating to observe how the Church, or at least an important section of its theological community, is examining contemporary realities and seeking new ways to respond to them.

The three-day workshop, held from October 23 to 25 at the Christian Study Centre in Rawalpindi, brought together nearly 100 theologians, church leaders and ecumenical partners under the theme “From Silence to Solidarity: Women Leading Transformative Action for Justice and Child Protection.”

What impressed me most was not simply the quality of the theological discussions but the confidence, determination and intellectual energy of the participants. Their mood was not defensive or apologetic. They were vocal, assertive and, at times, openly confrontational towards traditions and institutional attitudes they believed had restricted women’s participation for generations.

There was a strong sense that the time for merely discussing inequality had passed. Participants wanted change, and they were not hesitant to say so.

For someone observing the gathering from the perspective of political and social sciences, this was particularly significant. Social transformation rarely begins with institutions voluntarily surrendering established privileges. It usually begins when people question the legitimacy of existing arrangements and demand that institutions respond to changing realities.

I could see something of that process taking shape during the workshop.

A Visionary Church

One of the most thought-provoking contributions came from Bishop Samuel Robert Azariah, Director of the Christian Study Centre. His emphasis on the need for a visionary Church deserves serious attention, not only from theologians but from the wider Christian community in Pakistan.

The Bishop’s argument, as I understood it, was that the Church cannot afford to remain on the margins of society. It must move towards the centre of public life, engage with contemporary challenges and become an active participant in shaping the future.

This observation struck me because it addresses a problem that extends well beyond religious institutions.

Across the world, institutions that fail to adapt to changing circumstances gradually lose their influence. Political parties, universities, civil society organisations and religious institutions all face the same challenge. They can either engage with emerging realities or become increasingly disconnected from the communities they are supposed to serve.

The Church is no exception.

For too long, much of our institutional religious discourse has remained focused on preserving inherited practices rather than developing a forward-looking vision. Traditions undoubtedly have value. They provide continuity, identity and a sense of belonging. However, when traditions become barriers to intellectual inquiry, institutional reform or social justice, they must be examined critically.

A visionary Church should not fear new ideas. It should encourage theological debate, welcome constructive criticism and recognise that the questions facing society today cannot always be answered through institutional habits inherited from another era.

The Church must not merely react to social developments. It should help shape them.

The Church must not merely react to social developments. It should help shape them.Junaid Qaiser

This is particularly important for Pakistan’s Christian community, which faces challenges involving education, economic opportunities, political representation, religious freedom, social mobility and the protection of vulnerable groups.

A Church that remains confined to its institutional boundaries risks becoming increasingly irrelevant to these broader struggles. A Church that enters public life with a clear vision of justice, equality and human dignity can become a powerful force for positive change.

Niswani Muharkati Theology

Another major intellectual contribution to the workshop was the introduction of Niswani Muharkati Theology (NMT) by the Rev. Dr. Khushnud Azariah.

I found this emerging theological framework particularly interesting because it attempts to connect religious thought with the lived experiences of Pakistani women and marginalised communities.

Rather than treating theology as an abstract academic discipline, Niswani Muharkati Theology seeks to make it a practical instrument of social transformation.

Its central idea is that women and men should become Muharkeen, or catalysts of justice, reconciliation and change.

From my perspective, this approach has considerable relevance to the wider study of social movements. Ideas become influential when they connect intellectual arguments with people’s everyday experiences and provide a framework for collective action.

Niswani Muharkati Theology attempts precisely that.

See, Judge, Act

At the heart of this approach is the See–Judge–Act methodology, developed and popularised by Belgian Catholic priest Cardinal Joseph-Léon Cardijn, founder of the Young Christian Workers movement.

The methodology provides a practical connection between Christian faith, critical reflection and social action.

The first stage, See, requires believers to examine the realities around them. Who is suffering? Who is being excluded? Whose voices are being silenced? What forms of discrimination, violence and exploitation exist within communities?

The second stage, Judge, or more appropriately Discern, calls for examining these realities in the light of Scripture, Christian ethics and the principles of justice and human dignity.

The final stage, Act, demands practical steps to challenge injustice, protect vulnerable people and transform the conditions that produce inequality.

What makes this approach particularly relevant is its insistence that awareness and theological reflection are insufficient unless they lead to meaningful action.

In political science, we often examine the relationship between ideas, institutions and collective action. Niswani Muharkati Theology approaches a similar relationship from a theological perspective.

It asks a fundamental question: What is the purpose of religious understanding if it does not improve the lives of people?

This question deserves attention far beyond the workshop.

Rethinking Scripture and Authority

The keynote address by internationally recognised Asian theologian Professor Dr. Kwok Pui-lan added another important dimension to the discussions.

Her reflections encouraged participants to examine structures of injustice critically and reconsider theological assumptions shaped by patriarchal and colonial histories.

Naureen Akhtar provided the Urdu translation of her address, helping make the discussion accessible to a wider audience.

One of the recurring themes throughout the workshop was the need to revisit biblical interpretations that have historically been used to justify women’s exclusion from leadership and decision-making.

Participants argued that women have played important roles throughout biblical history as leaders, advisers, teachers, protectors of life and figures of prophetic wisdom.

Yet these contributions have often received insufficient attention in conventional religious teaching.

The discussions highlighted biblical figures such as Deborah, whose leadership and prophetic wisdom challenged assumptions about women’s capabilities, and the women who protected the infant Moses despite the oppressive political circumstances surrounding them.

The participants also emphasised the transformative character of Jesus Christ’s ministry.

Jesus challenged social conventions, engaged with marginalised communities and recognised the dignity of women in ways that questioned the prevailing attitudes of his time.

This understanding of Christ’s ministry carries important implications.

If Jesus challenged unjust social arrangements, why should contemporary Christian institutions hesitate to examine traditions that perpetuate discrimination?

If the Gospel emphasises justice, compassion and human dignity, how can religious institutions justify practices that silence women or deny them meaningful participation?

These were among the questions that shaped my understanding of the workshop.

The discussions also explored Niswani Muharkati Theology as a contextual approach to biblical interpretation that takes women’s lived experiences seriously and challenges assumptions associating spiritual authority exclusively with men.

Participants highlighted the feminine personification of Wisdom in Scripture and biblical imagery expressing divine compassion, nurturing and parental care.

My understanding of these discussions was that the language and imagery used in theological reflection can influence how communities understand authority, leadership and human dignity. If religious teaching consistently presents wisdom and authority through masculine images alone, it risks reinforcing social assumptions that place women in secondary positions.

Niswani Muharkati Theology, as I understood it, seeks to challenge these assumptions while grounding its arguments in Scripture and the experiences of Pakistani communities.

What I found particularly important was the participants’ willingness to challenge established interpretations openly.

They were not merely requesting greater recognition within existing structures. Many were questioning the assumptions upon which those structures had been built.

There is an important difference between seeking inclusion and demanding transformation.

Inclusion asks existing institutions to make room for those who have been excluded. Transformation goes further by questioning why exclusion existed in the first place and whether the institutional arrangements themselves require reform.

Inclusion asks existing institutions to make room. Transformation questions why exclusion existed in the first place.Junaid Qaiser

The discussions at Rawalpindi frequently moved towards this second approach.

The participants’ tone was strong, sometimes sharp, and unmistakably assertive. They openly criticised patriarchal attitudes, male-centred interpretations of Scripture and traditions that have limited women’s leadership.

Their arguments were not framed as an attack on Christianity. Rather, they presented their demands as an effort to recover the transformative spirit of Christian faith.

This distinction matters.

Religious reform is often misunderstood as a rejection of tradition. Yet throughout history, theological reflection has also provided the intellectual foundations for challenging injustice, defending human dignity and expanding participation within religious communities.

From Charity to Solidarity

Another important observation was the emphasis on moving from charity to solidarity.

Christian institutions have a long tradition of charitable work, particularly in education, healthcare and assistance to vulnerable communities. These contributions deserve recognition.

However, the workshop raised an important question: Is charity alone sufficient?

Providing assistance to a vulnerable person may address an immediate need, but it does not necessarily change the circumstances that produced vulnerability.

Solidarity requires something more.

It means standing alongside those experiencing injustice, listening to their voices, recognising their agency and working to address the structures that perpetuate inequality.

In this sense, solidarity is not simply an act of generosity. It is a commitment to shared responsibility and institutional change.

The distinction is particularly relevant to women’s empowerment.

Women do not merely need sympathy or occasional recognition. They need equal opportunities, meaningful representation, access to leadership and the freedom to exercise their abilities.

Protecting Children

The same principle applies to the protection of children.

Child protection was another central theme of the workshop, reflecting the Forum’s concern about exploitation, abuse and institutional accountability.

An important panel discussion brought together Humna Kamran, Nabila Feroze Bhatti and Jennifer Jag-Jiwan, with Saleema Munir facilitating the conversation.

The discussion examined child protection from social, legal and theological perspectives, emphasising the responsibility of churches and community institutions to create safe environments for children.

The message was that protecting children cannot remain a matter of good intentions.

It requires practical safeguarding policies, awareness, responsible reporting mechanisms and accountability.

Religious institutions must be willing to confront uncomfortable realities, particularly when institutional silence or concern for reputation prevents victims from receiving justice.

The biblical reflections by Nargis Azhar and Ruby Naeem reinforced this emphasis on practical responsibility.

Nargis Azhar examined the courage of women in Exodus who protected life despite oppressive authority. Ruby Naeem reflected on the Good Samaritan, whose compassion crossed social and religious boundaries and was demonstrated through action.

Together, these reflections illustrated a central argument of the workshop: faith becomes meaningful when it inspires people to protect life, challenge injustice and stand alongside the vulnerable.

Men at the Table

Another development worth mentioning was the participation of men as full participants for the first time in the Forum’s workshop history.

This was an important and welcome step.

Gender justice cannot be achieved through conversations involving women alone. Men, particularly those occupying positions of institutional authority, must become part of the process.

The inclusion of men created an opportunity for shared reflection and mutual learning. It also reinforced the understanding that challenging patriarchal structures should not be viewed as a struggle between women and men but as a collective effort to create more just institutions.

The workshop concluded with an ecumenical service of Holy Communion jointly celebrated by the Rev. Dr. Khushnud Azariah and Bishop Samuel Robert Azariah. Cardinal Joseph Coutts, Chairman of the Christian Study Centre, delivered the homily.

The concluding worship reflected the spirit of Christian unity and shared responsibility that had shaped the gathering.

Five Observations

Having attended the workshop, I came away with several observations that I believe deserve consideration by church leadership and the wider Christian community.

1. First, the Church needs a new institutional vision. It must move beyond a primarily inward-looking approach and engage more actively with the social, intellectual and political challenges facing contemporary society.
2. Second, theological education should encourage critical thinking rather than simply reproduce established interpretations. Religious institutions become intellectually stronger when they allow questions, debate and constructive disagreement.
3. Third, women’s leadership must become a practical institutional priority. Recognising women’s dignity in sermons and theological discussions is important, but such recognition must also be reflected in governance, representation and decision-making.
4. Fourth, the Church must develop a stronger public presence. It should participate in national conversations on education, social justice, child protection, religious freedom, gender equality and the rights of marginalised communities.
5. Finally, solidarity must be translated into action. Declarations and conferences can create awareness, but their real value depends on whether they lead to institutional reform and measurable improvements in people’s lives.

These are my observations as someone who approaches these questions primarily through the lens of social sciences rather than formal theological training.

I do not claim to interpret every theological argument with the expertise of those who have devoted their lives to studying Scripture and Christian traditions. However, I recognise the importance of intellectual movements that challenge established assumptions and encourage institutions to reconsider their relationship with society.

What Rawalpindi Showed

What I witnessed in Rawalpindi was more than a conventional religious workshop.

It was a gathering of people who appeared increasingly unwilling to accept silence as an appropriate response to inequality. Their language was confident, their arguments were forceful and their demand for change was unmistakable.

They were not asking merely to be heard. They were insisting that their voices should influence the future direction of the Church.

That, in my view, was the most significant message of the gathering.

I particularly appreciate Bishop Samuel Robert Azariah’s emphasis on a visionary Church that moves from the margins towards the centre of public life. His argument deserves serious reflection at every level of church leadership.

I also commend the Rev. Dr. Khushnud Azariah for introducing Niswani Muharkati Theology, an approach that seeks to connect theological reflection with the realities of Pakistani society and encourages believers to become agents of transformation.

Whether this emerging framework develops into a wider theological movement will depend on how effectively its ideas are translated into education, institutional practices and community action.

The workshop demonstrated that meaningful change requires both intellectual courage and practical commitment.

The Church cannot expect to remain relevant simply because of its historical importance. Its future influence will depend on its willingness to engage with contemporary realities, welcome new perspectives and respond to the needs of the communities it serves.

For Pakistan’s Christian community, the challenge is particularly important. At a time when questions of minority rights, social inclusion, education and political participation remain pressing, a forward-looking and socially engaged Church could make a substantial contribution to national life.

I left the workshop with a deeper appreciation of the role theology can play in shaping social consciousness and inspiring collective action.

Above all, I left with the impression that the women participating in this Forum were no longer prepared to remain on the margins of theological and institutional conversations.

They were articulate, determined and ready to challenge the status quo.

Their message was not one of confrontation for its own sake. It was a demand for dignity, equality and meaningful participation, grounded in their understanding of Christian faith.