INTRODUCTION
“If Christianity is not indigenized in Africa then we are putting on a borrowed jacket which is of oversize”, said Professor Mugambi. Again one of the African theologians said, “African God cannot suffocate in the western garment.” All these are the cries of Africans to indigenize Christianity. But now the question we are raising is to what extent can Christianity be indigenized in Africa and still remain candid to the cardinal teachings of the bible? In this paper we are trying to answer this question.
CHRISTIANTY AS AN AFRICAN RELIGION
In his presentation Mbiti strongly argued that missionaries did not bring Christianity, it is God who brought them here to strengthen that which was already there. It’s obvious when we go back to the history of Christianity in Africa, Christianity started even before the coming of missionaries.[1] The article written by Mugambi stating that Christianity reached Africa within the apostolic period. This is evident in the conversion of the Ethiopian Eunuch and during the day of Pentecost when there were also some people from Africa who had come from Africa.[2] The men who really carried the Christian faith along the west coast in the mid-nineteenth century were nearly all Africans, many of them men and women rescued from the slave ships on the Atlantic and landed by the British navy at Free Town in Sierra Leon. Muzorewa argued; “African theologians are the first and the second generation Christians. The Christian missionaries from Europe and America penetrated into the interior of Africa either shortly before or simultaneously with colonial occupation. African Christian kingdom existed led by powerful divinely appointed mediators (Kings), which were centers of great cultural achievement and international trade.”[3]
AFRICAN CHRISTIAN THEOLOGIANS’ ARGUMENTS ON INDIGENIZING CHRISTIANITY
At the cultural level the missionary’s view of the relationships between Christianity and culture always prevails over that of the authentic response of the converts of the Gospel. There is a tendency to portray the missionary’s culturally conditioned Christianity as if it were identical with the Gospel itself. Theologically, we can suggest that the gospel has a universally relevant and applicable message which cannot be reduced to the strait—jacket of any culture, however sophisticated.[4] All cultures need the Gospel and are judged by it.
When people of a particular culture accept the Christian faith, they are challenged to bring into a being community of believers which in tune with the needs of that situations. If the church is to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world, it is challenged to adjust itself to the changing world. The Bible is full of illustrations on how this adjustment can be effected. Mugambi argued that, “To most missionaries from Europe and North America, evangelization meant disorientating their objects of mission from pagan, heathen, savage, primitive and barbaric traditions. Thus on the scale of conversion the foreign missionary gave himself 100% while the prospective convert was supposed to start at zero.”[5] In the contrast African theologians have suggested that in the process of evangelization there were no active senders and passive recipients. The missionary ought to be learners as much as the prospective convert is a receiver. Many denominations today have break away and established their own denomination in which they can interpret the Gospel without foreign paternalism. Nthamburi argued that African Christians remains African. In spite of the translated hymns and prayer-books foreign ecclesiastical vestment and architecture, theological training in a foreign language- in spite e all of these Africans in the imported denominations remain Africans and Christian at the same time.[6] If the missionary enterprise fails to be faithful to these perspectives, it will be by passed and the church in Africa will go as it has always done in history. Christianization of Africa is evident in every country south of the Sahara. Christianity has continued to have influence and prestige in many African countries after the attainment of constitutional independence, much to the amusement of those who thought Christianity would be discarded together with the relics of colonialism.[7]
The gospel should not be confused or mistaken with a particular interpretation or presentation. It is possible for a missionary agent to fail completely in winning converts and for a Church to grow paradoxically as a result of his effort. “The early church in Africa contributed in the immense preservation of the unity of Christian faith. The African Church is being called to the abolition of a slave mentality among the African people and the establishment ones and for all of the instruments of the total liberation of the African people from centuries of foreign domination.”[8] The African people have failed to distinguish the missionary work and the western culture. Instead of taking the gospel, they have been adopting the Western culture. As a result the African heritage is losing its meaning due to the challenge the western culture has brought. This is evidently seen in the style of worship, language, dressing, preaching, and instruments. This has also affected evangelization among Africans by the Africans. Most Africans have a misconception of missionary work thinking that it only belongs to the westerners and they are the only people who qualify to do mission work. Africa has been regarded to be backward and uncivilized, political and culturally dark-continent prior to the missionary and the colonial advent in the 18th century. ATR was a dominant religion characterized by backward polytheism and animism. Cole suggests that authentic indigenization must be open constantly to the painful process of de-indegenization, for the sake of re-indegenization.[9]
FACTORS TO CONSIDER IN INDEGENIZATION
Victor Cole in the book, Issues in African Christian theology suggested the common factors that African theologians should consider in Africanizing the faith.
Philosophical factor
By philosophy he means the total world and life view as well as the though patterns of both the original context in which the Bible was given as well as those of the interpreters of the Bible today. “Bible scholars are no strangers to what is referred to as Hebrew or Greco-Romans thought forms. Thought forms as well as world views are essential to the understanding of customs, habits, behaviors and messages, intra or inter culturally.”[10] To successfully contextualize theology within a given culture today, both the thought forms, world and life views of the Bible as well as those of the contemporary culture must be well understood by the theologians.
Cultural factor
Culture has been described as the total way of life of a people in that regard it embraces thought patterns, and world and life views. However, culture is here delineated to emphasize this fact that there are differences in cultural appreciation of the particular teachings of the Bible. “If Christianity is also to be lived not to be just a matter of assent the contemporary socio- cultural factor must come in the fore ground, which must then provide the Christian with the constantly changing data which represents man’s situation in life.”[11] To engage the word of God in a face to face confrontation with our situation in life is to strive to apply the absolute word to our lives. The culture diversities of our world necessitate differences in emphasis from one cultural to another.
Linguistic Factor
“Language is a vehicle of communication, and is also included in a comprehensive approach to the meaning of culture. However, language is singled out because of its importance in communication.”[12] Language conveys concepts and thought forms. The Christian theologians who want to indigenous ought to be able to work with the biblical languages, so he can have a feel for word concepts as close as possible to the original text. The meaning of concepts must be traced back to their original context. Hence contextual use of language ought always to take precedence in process of indigenizing.
Hermeneutical factor
This factor deals with the fair exegesis of the Biblical text. In the quest for meaning, priority ought to be given at all times to the context of the passage in question. Also vital in the quest for context meaning is the principle of allowing scripture to interpret scripture. “An understanding of the context of writing enhances our own understanding of the message of the Bible. Consequently, such an understanding enhances our ability to apply the message of the absolute word of God inscripturated to our particular contexts and cultures.”[13] It is difficult to indigenize Christianity and remain true to the cardinal doctrine of the Bible if the hermeneutical factor is neglected. For many years, hermeneutic has been one of the outstanding factors in understanding as well as spreading the gospel.
CRITIQUE
Most African theologians opt the idea of indigenizing Christianity. We would like to agree that the idea of indigenizing Christianity has both positive as well as negatives aspects. In the first place we would like argue on the positive side. The worship will be revived. As Africans, we acknowledge that worship has lost its essence in some parts due to Western influences. People have become blind in distinguishing western culture from Christianity. In most cases this is manifested through the use of foreign languages, dressings, music in worship services. The use of foreign languages has made some worshipers feel out of place. Again dressing styles that some churches allow become disruptive in worship services. Indigenizing Christianity means our worship will be accommodative through the use of local and understandable languages, songs, and dressings that will not disrupt the weak brother in the worship service. The use of local languages will be an effective tool in evangelism. As a result, the gospel will find home in the hearts of many Africans because communication would have been made easy and accessible. The use of local music, Christological names for example ‘Baba Yesu’ will help Africa to redeem and maintain its heritage. However, indigenizing Christianity is not an easy task. Looking at the positive side and the need for indigenization, the question should be to what extent should Christianity be indigenized and remain candid to the cardinal teachings of the Bible? There are also negative outcomes of indigenization. Barrett pointed out that the issue of language is controversial because most of the theological studies that are done by most African theologians are foreign languages, in English to be precise.[14] For this reason it could be so complicated to indigenize Christianity based on language.
Some of the African names are associated with African Traditional Religions of which when they are used, they raise many so debates among Africans themselves for example, regarding Jesus as an ancestor. There is a danger that conceiving of Christ as an Ancestor may actually encourage people to think of their ancestors as intermediaries, while the scriptures clearly teach that we have just one mediator between God and humanity: Jesus Christ; Africans may be encouraged to actually worship the ancestors and place them in a position that only God should hold by offering to them sacrifices and oblations; It seems to make Jesus just another human being rather than God-incarnate. The scriptures clearly condemn necromancy (consulting the dead) and that is precisely what happens in much focus on the ancestors. However significant and weighty the above reasons for rejecting the image of Christ as ancestor are, our focus here has not been on any of them.
Our focus has been exclusively on the question of whether the image of Christ as Ancestor, if it were to become commonly employed in the churches of Africa, would contribute to or diminish the kind of ethnocentrism and tribalism that were mentioned at the beginning of this article. In addressing this, it should be acknowledged that the very African theologians who have put this image before us are not oblivious to the dangers associated with this kind of inculturation or contextualization. Indeed, they are very much aware that inculturation taken too far can easily lead to syncretism. They have fought valiantly to couch their Christologies in ways that protect them from incorporating unchristian practices into the church. Bujo is a good example at this point. In the following quote he even notes that his understanding of ancestorship transcends ethnic and tribal boundaries. “At the same time, Jesus corrects and completes the traditional morality.
The moral perspective is no longer limited to my clan, my elders, my friends, but extends to the whole human race, in loving service of the Father. The morality of the disciple who accepts Jesus as Model and Proto-Ancestor is a personal re-enactment of the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus. It is this new perspective which must be henceforth the constitutive principle of African Christian ethics. The history of the Crucified One must be subversive for the customs and practices of both traditional and modern Africa. From the standpoint of tradition, the remembering of Jesus is a challenge to conscience, urging the elimination from life of those mistakes which might be labeled ‘the specific errors of African group life’. The integration of the memory of the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus is leaven which, when necessary, precisely in the name of a wider humanizing of Africa, causes certain venerable clan traditions to be abandoned.”[15] We are living in a multicultural and multiracial society where most churches are occupied with people from different cultural dimensions and backgrounds. In this case it can be so challenging to indigenize Christianity in a pluralistic society. From the inception of the History of Christianity in Africa, sycrenticism has been a challenge. People have been failing to distinguish between culture and religion and in this case Christianity. The other question we may ask ourselves in trying to indigenize Christianity is that which one should dictate the cream of Christianity or to have a loud voice between the Bible which is universal and the Culture? There is need for African theologians to base their strategy of indigenization on the authority of Bible than focusing much on western Christianity and culture. Africans should bear in mind that not everything that is from the west is a thorn in the fresh of African Christianity. The message of the Bible if well interpreted and understood can fit in every culture. Because the message of the Bible is universal and it is applicable to any person regardless of geographical setting and cultural background.
CONCLUSION
As we have seen, the hunger and the thirsty for indigenizing Christianity in Africa are the peak among African theologians as well as the laity. The challenges that Christianity is facing today are the ones that are prompting and propelling Africans to cry and fight for indigenization. This shows how passionate the local theologians and the laity are for the gospel. However, as pointed already indigenizing Christianity in Africa is a great task which demands a lot of planning as well as time. Indigenization is possible and it can be achieved. However, due to the diversity of cultures we have in Africa it is challenging. So if we ask ourselves as to what extent should Christianity be indigenized in Africa and remain candid to the cardinal teachings of the Bible? The Bible should be an anchor when it comes to the indigenization of Christianity in Africa.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barrett, David B. Schism & Renew in Africa in Africa, Oxford University Press, 1970
Bujo, Benezet (Ed). Africa Theology: The Contribution of the Pioneers, Nairobi: Pauline’s Publications Africa, 2002
Getui, Mary N. Theological Methods & Aspects of Worship in African Christianity, Nairobi: Acton Publishers 1990
Isichel, Elizabeth A History of Christianity in Africa William Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1995.
Mbiti, John S. The African Religion & Philosophy, New York: Doubleday & Co. Inc, 1970
Mugambi, J.N.K. African Christian Theology, Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers, 1997
Mugambi, J.N.K. African Heritage and Contemporary Christianity, Nairobi: Longman Kenya Ltd, 1989
Ngewa, Samuel ed. Issues in African Christian Theology, Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers, 1998
Nthamburi, Zablon J. Ecclesiology of African Independent Churches, Nairobi, Action Publishers, 1998.
Osabutey, Isaac D. The African Religion & Philosophy, Nairobi: Maillu Publishing House,
Wilbur, O’Donovan. Biblical Christianity in Africa Perspective, Kwara state, Nigeria, Paternoster press, 1996.
[1] Mbiti, John S. The African Religion & Philosophy, New York: Doubleday & Co. Inc, 1970, p. 98
[2] Mugambi, J.N.K. African Heritage and Contemporary Christianity, Nairobi: Longman Kenya Ltd, 1989, p. 134
[3] Gwinyai Muzorewa. The Origin and Development of African Theology, New York, Orbis Books, 1985, p. 39
[4] Mugambi, J.N.K. African Christian Theology, Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers, 1997, p.47
[5] Mugambi, p. 136
[6] Nthamburi, Zablon J. Ecclesiology of African Independent Churches, Nairobi, Action Publishers, 1998, p. 78
[7] Isichel, Elizabeth A History of Christianity in Africa William Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1995, p. 151
[8] Osabutey, Isaac D. The African Religion & Philosophy, Nairobi: Maillu Publishing House,1989, p. 101
[9] Ngewa, Samuel ed. Issues in African Christian Theology, Nairobi: East African Educational Publishers, 1998, p. 19
[10] Ngewa, p. 145
[14] Barrett, David B. Schism & Renew in Africa in Africa, Oxford University Press, 1970, p.91
No comments:
Post a Comment