Doing theology requires dissension and tenacity. Dissension is required when scriptural texts, and the colonial bodies and traditions (read: Babylon) that capitalize upon those, inhibit or prohibit "rising to life." With "nerves" to dissent, the attentions of the first cluster of essays extend to scriptures and theologies, to borders and native peoples. The title for the first cluster - "talking back with nerves, against Babylon" - appeals to the spirit of feminist (to talk back against patriarchy) and RastafarI (to chant down Babylon) critics. The essays in the second cluster - titled "persevering with tenacity, through shitstems" - testify that perseverance is possible, and it requires tenacity. Tenacity is required so that the oppressive systems of Babylon do not have the final word. These two clusters are framed by two chapters that set the tone and push back at the usual business of doing theology, inviting engagement with the wisdom and nerves of artists and poets, and two closing chapters that open up the conversation for further dissension and tenacity. Doing theology with dissension and tenacity is unending.

Theologies, no matter their designations, are public measures - they disclose as well as gauge the publics (near and far) on which they stand, sit, lie, or fall. Because publics shift and mingle, theologies require reimagining and relocating, and embracing fresh insights and energies. The insights and energies embraced in this work are in three clusters: spaces, bodies, technologies. The spotlighted spaces are in Africa, Asia, Black America, Caribbean, and Pasifika - beyond the eyes of mainline theologies; the privileged bodies have survived, with scars from, empire and missionary positionings; and the welcomed technologies include Dalit, indigenous, art, poetry, cyborg, and the novel. This collection is troubling in several ways: first, reimagining and relocating are troubling acts upon their subject matter - here, public theologies. On that note, what theology is not public? Second, this work takes theologies in general, and not just the theologies that carry the "public" designation, to be public theologies. Third, this work takes theologies (in general) to be inherently troubling. In other words, theologies that are not troubling are not public enough.