When the modern African reflects upon his fundamental experience, almost intuitively he grasps three historical events which have exercised profound influence on his cultural roots and values, namely, slavery, colonialism, and Christianity. Indeed at the first conference of Independent African States in Accra (Ghana) its first president, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, spoke these words with obvious pride: "In the last century, the Europeans discovered Africa. In the next century, the Africans will rediscover Africa." It was to him and other independent African statesmen a mark of triumph that the yesteryears of slavery, colonialism, and imperialism were then over. The new age for the recently independent African had begun; with the attainment of colonial freedom, there should follow also a great responsibility, namely, "to rediscover Africa."

Nkrumah spelled out the existential task which faced the modern, politically-liberated African, namely, to rediscover himself and his world anew after his sad and humiliating experience of slavery and colonialism. Great scholars, Africans and non-Africans, have reflected extensively on the colonized blacks or Africans. These reflections have appeared mostly in political and sociological literature; few were made by philosophers at a philosophic level.¹

On the other hand there has not been as much philosophic reflection on the African experience of Christianity as on the other two. To what extent is Christianity disruptive of African culture and values? What are the possible tensions experienced by the African in his effort to live out Christian values in an African culture? What are the sources of these tensions? These are the dimensions of the problematic and the main burden of the essay. The analysis of the concept of "value" among philosophers and the nature of Christian value are component parts of the inquiry.

THE CONCEPT OF VALUE

Like "good" or any other simple notion, "value" is not easily definable; indeed, as John Hospers writes, "The attempt to give a satisfactory definition of value is an unexpectedly difficult and tricky business."² In its ordinary, simple meaning "value" means worth of some sort: a thing has value if it is worth something. In common usage this worth usually is in terms of the economic or quasi-economic, but among philosophers it covers a multitude of uses and applications.

As a more concrete term, William Frankena distinguishes two main uses of "value":

(a) What is valued, judged to have value, thought to be good or desired, (the expressions 'his values,' 'her value system' and 'American values' refer to what a man, a woman and Americans value or think to be good.) (b) What has value or is valuable or good, as opposed to what is regarded as good or valuable. Then 'values' mean 'things that have value,' 'things that are good,' or 'goods' and for some uses also things that are right, obligatory, beautiful or even true.³

Hospers easily distinguishes three senses of "value," namely as (1) "a liking or preference," (2) "that which promotes a goal (end) independently of one's liking or preference" (he makes a distinction between what one de facto likes--is of value to one--and what one ought to like as a means to something else), and (3) "that which has value or worth in itself without reference to any end."⁴

In this essay the term is used in its wide sense to cover not only what one ought to like, whether as ends-in-themselves or as means to further ends. For it is clear that philosophers make a distinction between what is valued by people in their own culture, for example, and what they ought to value. Ethel M. Albert indeed holds that:

more than two thousand years of discussion of the relationship between what is valued and what is worthy to be valued have yielded many permutations and combinations of the themes proposed by the Athenian philosophers: absolutism vs. relativism; exalted moral idealism vs. interest in the world as it is; rationalism vs. irrationalism . . . both what is valued vs. what is valuable and what is valued vs. what is actually done.⁵

Our point here is not to enter into these controversies among philosophers, but to note the distinction they often make between what people actually do value and what they ought to value, since this is relevant to our discussion on the relation of Christian to African values.⁶

Lastly philosophers make a distinction between intrinsic good or value and instrumental good. The former is applicable to those things that are valuable, desirable, worthwhile or worth having, and as such good for their own sakes. The latter "instrumental good" refers to those things held as worthwhile and hence good insofar as they lead to other goods desired for their own sakes. Money is an easy example of instrumental good, whereas happiness for most philosophers is an intrinsic good. There is a considerable disagreement among philosophers as to which goods are intrinsic and which are only instrumental, but what is important to this essay is not the controversy, but the distinction between intrinsic and instrumental good.

NATURE OF CHRISTIAN VALUE

One must admit that the African finds Christianity problematic precisely because of the nature of its values and the ethical imperatives it imposes upon those who profess it. It is the nature of Christian ethics, moral theology, etc., to specify what values and norms Christians ought to pursue in the light of their supernatural vocation and orientation in Christ. Hence one general definition given to Christian ethics is a "systematic and critical reflection on the moral judgments of those who share a certain perspective, the key to which is the life of Jesus of Nazareth."⁷ Charles H. Dodd sees Christianity as "an ethical religion in which ethics are directly related to a certain set of convictions about God, man and the world." He gives four principal motives of Christian ethics, namely, "Christian eschatology," "the idea of the 'Body of Christ' "; "the imitation of Christ," and the "primacy of love or charity."⁸

Consequently, because of man's essentially supernatural horizon as a child of God and not of mere nature, Christian values unlike natural human values have a different source and reference point, namely, revelation and Christ. Man's vocation and orientation are in Christ as man's redeemer; through Him man is called to an intimate sharing of life with God. These Christian values are normative for human conduct as a result of man's new existence in Christ as a child of God and heir to the Kingdom. Christian values are also intrinsic rather than instrumental; they are pursued for their own sake as ends-in-themselves.

Christians generally pursue common values because of their common religious Weltanschauung. This includes a belief in a transcendent God as the Creator and End of man, the Fall and Redemption of man (Incarnation), the Trinity, Christ as man's ethical ideal, Scripture as divinely inspired, the existence of grace, Sacraments the church, etc. As a result of these common beliefs and certain fundamental convictions, Christians share a common attitude towards the world or nature, and particularly toward man.

What is emphasized at this point is that belief in a transcendent absolute (God), personally related to man and providentially to the world, has meant for Christians a different, if not radical, view of the world from, e.g., that of the naturalists or atheists. The Christian, unlike the non-Christian, has dual sources of truth, law, knowledge, and hence, values, namely, "nature and grace" "reason and faith" and "man and God." These need not, and should not, contradict each other since God is the ultimate source of everything according to the Christian faith.⁹

In its authentic Christian affirmation this belief in God has profound consequences upon one's fundamental options, goals and values. "When I believe in God," Hershel Jonah Matt explains, "I affirm my faith in the One Who is my ultimate Lord and Master; the only one whose absolute sovereignty I accept, the only one to whom I owe absolute allegiance and acknowledge absolute obligation. He alone has absolute claim upon me."¹⁰ This type of faith has its own morality, ethics, and values based on the life of Christ. Christian values are thus normative for all Christians as ideals to be pursued concretely through their various cultures, so that the actions and values of Christians are judged in their ethical significance from the perspective of Christ and the teachings of the Church, since Christ alone is the "Way, the Truth and the Life."¹¹

Because the heavenly kingdom and its values are often antithetical to those of this world, Christianity itself or the churches find themselves in a position of tension in nearly all cultures. H. Richard Niebuhr refers to this tension in his Christ and Culture when he speaks about "the double wrestle of the church with its Lord and with the cultural society with which it lives in symbiosis."¹² The more basic problem is how Christian values are related to human cultures and men's natural values. How is Christ or the church related to culture defined briefly as the total way of life of a people?¹³ Is Christ "above culture," "against culture" or the "transformer of culture" as described by Niebuhr?

This is not the place to discuss the controversy. There is no doubt, however, that some tension exists with Christ or Christianity in practically every culture. "It would still be impossible to find any culture invaded by Christ in his army of followers which remains unchanged," Sam Erivwo comments.¹⁴

The reason for this is the nature of the Christian values themselves as grounded in man's supernatural vocation as a child of God and in the whole history of his salvation. Consequently at times certain values demanded by Christianity, such as love of poverty, suffering, forgiveness of one's enemies, love of all men, humility, particularly as recorded in the New Testament, are the reversal of man's natural values.

Also because man ordinarily pursues natural ends or goals in his culture, plus the fact of his limited notion of what is good, his essential moral weakness, the influence of passions, greed, and so on, definite tensions are bound to arise between the ideals of one's culture and many of the values demanded of Him on the basis of revelation or faith. Needless to say not every Christian value is a reversal of natural value. "Kindness" and "generosity" for example, are both natural and Christian values, while Christianity confers on them special character and importance. Such is the nature of Christian values.

DOMINANT AFRICAN VALUES

It has been necessary to consider first of all the philosophical notion of "value" as a basis for understanding the nature of Christian values. Now we shall attempt to understand the African in his dominant cultural aspirations and values.

The "African" in this analysis is the black, largely sub-Saharan African and his "dominant values" are those of his traditional culture prior to his contact with Christianity and still significant to him. The traditional African is religious to the core of his being: Professor J. Mbiti speaks of him as "notoriously religious." Indeed, as I indicated elsewhere:

"Religion is the main principle that dominates his life and sets a definite tone in his relationship with nature and his fellow man. The triangle of God, nature, and man is inseparable because these ^'supreme beings^' form the same one reality. Religion is not therefore something extraneous to the African, a 'beyond' in his experience."¹⁵

Along this line too, mention is to be made of the observation of the religious life of the African by Bishop Shanahan, the great apostle of Igboland in Nigeria. He was convinced "that the average native was admirably suited by environment and training for an explanation of life in terms of the spirit rather than of the flesh. He was no materialist. Indeed nothing was further from his mind than a materialistic philosophy of existence. It made no appeal to him."¹⁶ In spite of its profession of religious transcendence. African traditional religion is a natural one, rooted in the ethos and belief system of a people. Its cultural values are a mixture of good and evil; and from the perspective of revelation or Christian faith many African values are antithetical to those of the heavenly kingdom.

Traditional values and beliefs of the African that stem from his culture include polygamy, belief in One Supreme God as well as many other minor deities; love of children, music, dancing; respect for old age and authority; belief in a future life, marriage and funeral celebrations; a sense of family togetherness and of the extended family, etc. What happens to these cultural beliefs and values when the traditional African embraces Christianity has remained a source of deep tension in the African church. How are these values related to Christian values, to many of which they appear antithetical?

The unfolding of the dimensions of this problematic is our next point, but this much is certain: when a culture receives Christ as a new reference point in its ethical values and aspirations it does not and cannot retain all its values because of the inherent problem and presence of sin as an essential part of the human condition. What values change and what values remain the same, and the criteria for the change, are part and parcel of the problematic.

DIMENSIONS OF THE PROBLEMATIC

The traditional African culture may well be a theocratic one because of the dominating sense of the numinous and the sacred, but it is far from being Christian. The African finds Christianity disturbing in many of its values and ideals and consequently has every reason to raise constantly the problem of what it means to be African and a Christian at the same time. There is real tension regarding the relationship of Christ to African culture in the African church today and it is important to discern its main sources.

We can easily isolate three distinct sources, the first is the ardent quest of the modern African to regain his existential integrity after the experience of his tragic past of slavery, colonialism and the violence these evils have worked upon his personality and culture. This quest can be described best in the phrase of Amilcar Cabral, the late leader of Guinea Bissau, as "Africans repossessing themselves culturally and materially."

Decolonization of his continent became an inescapable imperative for the post-independence African, who also manifested an explicit desire to assert the truth about himself and his world through the projection of his personality and cultural values to the world community. Kwame Nkrumah said it well when he wrote: "The desire of the African people themselves to unite and to assert their personality in the context of the African Community has made itself felt everywhere."¹⁷

Consequently in recent times and in black Africa there has been a notable cultural revival reflecting an unconditional desire of the African to return to his cultural roots as the only path to his authentic being. The Second World Black and African Festival of Arts and Culture (FESTAC '77) held in Lagos (Nigeria) remains clear testimony to this fact. "The flame which burnt throughout the period of celebration was, we are told, to be kept burning to symbolize the continuation of the spirit of cultural revival, self-rediscovery and determination of the black race which FESTAC '77 engendered."¹⁸

In the sphere of religion as in politics the desire for the church to take deep roots through African culture and its values has been an equally marked phenomenon. A little reflection sufficed to bring home to the African clergy in particular that the church in their continent was "a missionary, hence, foreign church," partly because of the fact that Western missionaries constituted the main labor force in many parts of the continent. Moreso, because Western ideas, values and standards characterize the church functions and structures (even in areas where the local hierarchy is predominantly African). Professor Fashole-Luke notes that, "Several political leaders--and African priests--have criticized Western Christian Missionaries for producing churches which are pale imitations of Western church patterns of thought and structures and reflections of Western cultural imperialism."¹⁹

But the clamor to return to the African roots in the profession of Christian belief, to Africanize the church or, in its more current phrase, "to incarnate Christianity in the local culture" is hardly the end of the problem for the African Christian. The realization, for instance that the early missionaries destroyed some elements of the African culture in the name of Christianity, such as, title-taking and native names, is only the tip of the iceberg as far as the real problems of the African church are concerned. Africans strongly desire to be fully Africans and fully Christians: is this possible? It depends upon the essence of "Africanness" and that of Christianity neither of which is easy to determine or define.

Moreover, what are the criteria for rejecting or accepting African cultural values on the basis of a new life in Christ? And how can Western cultural values be separated from the content of the message itself? Some factors, such as monogamy or Western forms of Catholic liturgical celebration imposed by Rome might seem easy for the African to detect, isolate, and question as examples of Western cultural imperialism; but in fact this is not always easy, and in any case such a task is almost a lifelong process. These are some of the areas of the problematic for the African church today.

Another great source of tension in the African experience of Christianity particularly in incarnating Christianity in the local culture is the criteria put forward or rather approved by the Vatican for "African Catholic Christianity." The late Pope Paul VI, in his address to the Bishops of Africa in Kampala, Uganda, 1969, gave the blueprint in no uncertain terms: "Your church must be first of all Catholic, that is, it must be entirely founded upon the identical, essential, constitutional patrimony of the self-same teaching of Christ, as professed by the authentic and authoritative tradition of the one true church. This condition is fundamental and indisputable."²⁰ Making his point clearer still, the Supreme Pontiff said: "To make sure that the message of revealed doctrine cannot be altered, the church has even set down her treasure of truth in certain conceptual and verbal formulas. Even when these formulas are difficult at times, she obliges us to preserve them textually."²¹

The understanding of the church which has remained popular in Catholic theology is that faith or truth is one, universal, unchanging; only its modes of communication or expression are different. This calls to mind the philosophical categories of "essence" and "accident," but is such dualism warranted in the case of the Christian faith? Is the message of Christ one, timeless, and universal? Are there such things as timeless truths or, for that matter, absolute Christian values for all men and for all times?

If faith comes "by hearing"²² and if "whatever is received is received according to the mode of the receiver," according to the scholastic maxim,²³ then faith has meaning for a people only through their culture, which makes all the difference in the question of hermeneutics and faith. The problem of timeless, universal truths is all the greater in modern times because of the increasing number of respectable scholars who uphold cultural relativism as an anthropological principle, that is to say, the idea that each culture is a unique and integral unit, not a part of a macro-culture. In effect this is a plea for tolerance and respect for different patterns of culture, as well as for all the races of mankind. It calls into question the idea of universal values and truths. Can two different cultures and peoples understand the same absolute truths in exactly the same way?

Since faith or the Gospel message is and can only be culture-bound, that is to say, received or interpreted by people in a given culture who are influenced by its values, it is difficult to think of transmitting "pure Gospel news" uninfluenced by some culture to people of a different culture. Hence the idea of the "essence" of the Christian message universally valid for all Christians is no less a problem than that of absolute, timeless values. In effect, the task set forth, by the Bishop Delegates of East Africa in their deliberations on "Evangelism" appears extremely difficult, to say the least: "We have first to give Africans what is pure Christianity applicable to all human beings and then what is Christianity in African cultural wrapping."²⁴ How is this possible, for what exactly is "pure Christianity," or what may be the criteria for African Catholic Christianity, is itself problematic?

The blue print for "African Christianity" or for Africanizing the church became clear to the African particularly after Vatican II with its acceptance of theological or cultural pluralism in the life of the One church and of the One faith. Again, as Pope Paul VI distinctly put it:

The expression, that is, the language and mode of manifesting this one Faith may be manifold; hence, it may be original, suitable to the tongue, the style, the character, the genius and the culture of those who profess this One Faith. From this point of view a certain pluralism is not only legitimate but desirable.²⁵

It was in this sense that he meant the African to pursue his own "African Christianity."²⁶

The Pope urged the African, "Formulate Catholicism in terms congenial to your own culture; you will be capable of bringing to the Catholic Church the precious and original contribution of 'Negritude' which she needs particularly in this historic hour."²⁷ Pope John Paul II in Nairobi 11 years later (1980) sealed the views of his predecessor in this question of African Christianity by telling the Kenyan bishops: "Thus not only is Christianity relevant to Africa but Christ in the members of his Body is Himself African."²⁸

It is thus obvious that the supreme authority in the Catholic Church shows encouraging sensitivity to the rich cultural traditions and values of Africa as an important contribution to the universal church. The African church on its part has taken the task of incarnating Christianity into the local culture seriously, and in some places has made remarkable progress along this line. In Zaire, for example, the Eucharistic celebrations and rites are significantly Africanized.

But despite positive signs of approval to Africanize Christianity along determined and accepted criteria, the Vatican itself often stands in the way of progress toward Africanization. In areas that concern the African church and its identity, the African is often subjected to the authority and control of the Vatican. A Zairean mass scheduled by the Zairean church to honor Pope John Paul II during his first historic visit to Africa in 1980 was suddenly cancelled a day before the Pope's arrival by the order of the Vatican Congregation for Sacraments. This undue exercise of Vatican power was a bitter disappointment to the African church, particularly to local ecclesiastics. Cardinal Malula, Archbishop of Kinshasa, registered his protest in no uncertain terms: "As for liturgical life, we would have wished that Your Holiness could have had a first-hand, living experience of a eucharistic celebration in the so-called Zairean rite."²⁹

The same fear of obstruction from the Vatican seems to underline the slow pace of the African Church at indigenization or incarnating Christianity in the local culture in such other areas as the use of African staple foods for the Eucharist in the Catholic liturgy:³⁰ why not African wine and drink instead of foreign bread and wine; why not African liturgical rites and functions for mass, marriage, baptism, etc? The African church often blames the Vatican for slowing down the process of Africanizing the church. "Rome does not approve of this or that," one often hears from African bishops. Whether the fears are real or merely fictional, the African at times finds the Vatican a barrier on his way to Africanize Christianity.

The attitude of the reigning pontiff, Pope John Paul II, during his visit to Nigeria (1982) was not to ease the many socio-cultural problems which the people experience in Christianity such as polygamy or in Roman Catholicism such as the mandatory celibacy for the African priests. As far as these core problems of African Christianity are concerned, for the Pope tradition is and should be the rule for Africans as well as the Europeans. He was, for instance, emphatic on one man and one wife as the only ideal Christian marriage for all Catholics: "God made them one man and one woman until death." He was equally emphatic on clerical celibacy as mandatory for African priests as for all the priests of the Roman Church, asking the priests to "rely on grace to resist temptation against celibacy." The Pope did not seem to recognize the need even for a dialogue on these issues: on these problems for him Roma locuta est, causa finita.

The Pope recognised and commended the African's great love for children and sense of family unit and solidarity, but failed to see the connection between the great love the African has for children and the high value placed on polygamy and the non-celibate state in the African culture. It is precisely because of the African love for children that monogamy, celibacy, the childless marriage, etc., have become problematic in the African experience and practice of the Christian faith. This implies regarding such rules and regulations as instances of Western cultural imperialism. Incarnation of Christianity in the local culture will mean very little unless the Vatican takes these problems seriously. Its reluctance to carry on serious dialogue with the African on these prime values of his culture is an indirect war against the Africanization program. The important point we wish to stress is that the African at times finds the Vatican a source of paradoxical tension in its enthusiastic call for "Africanization," on the one hand, and its unwillingness to give the African a free hand in the process, on the other.

This, or course, is not to say that the Vatican has all the blame, The African indigenous church is also to blame, and this is the third major source of tension. A free and independent spirit of inquiry and action is not among the foremost characteristics of African bishops and cardinals, a few exceptions notwithstanding. They seem to lack initiative and courageous action, even in the very causes such as the Africanization question which they ought to champion and on which they ought to speak out.

It is not easy to pinpoint the exact cause. A foreign critic, Henri Fesquet, points to their "exaggerated docility in respect to the Holy See,"³¹ because of their training in Western scholastic methods. A young Nigerian theologian, Nathaniel Ndiokwere, put the same idea differently--"Leaning so much on Rome," he writes, "has slowed down liturgical adaptation. There is a clash between allegiance to Rome and obedience to church laws, on the one hand, and indigenization and initiative, on the other hand. As long as this obstacle is not removed there will be no meaningful adaptation, what more, dialogue in search of solution."³²

It might not be the whole reason, but it does seem to be an important one, for there seems to be a display of "over zeal" by the African bishops to please the Holy See at all costs, and never to risk a confrontational stance with it even at the expense of the good of the African church.

CONCLUSION

We have seen that in this question of Christ and African culture, or the African and Christian values, difficulties and tensions are not wanting. We have also tried to identify their important sources or dimensions. In conclusion some points basic to the inquiry need to be stressed.

First, the African may well count himself fortunate to be blessed with such a basically sound and enduring religious and moral tradition. But this does not at all mean that the Christian religion based on Christ's love ethic constitutes a mere superficial dimension in his moral life. The Christian religion means for the African fundamental changes in many of his cultural values and options such that a real conversion is required for him to be a Christian in the authentic meaning of the term and in its ethical implication.

For Christ or the Gospel to be firmly rooted in the African soil would indeed mean a reversal of many traditional values and practices long cherished by the African, such as the killing of the enemy, an eye-for-an-eye-morality, idol worship, etc. It would mean also a new ethical reference point, Christ's own love ethic as his "new commandment."³³ His introduction of fallen man to that divine agape (love) which is self-unclaiming and non-preferential is in itself a significant departure from the traditional ethics of the African. In practice this new faith with its new morality means to the African a higher idea of God and more perfect rules of human conduct.

Secondly, the attitude of Christ or the church to the local culture cannot now be said to be that of hostility. The ideal relationship can be said to have been clearly articulated by Pope Pius XII in 1951 in one of his Encyclicals, which said, among other things:

The church from the beginning down to our own time has always followed this wise practice: let not the Gospel on being introduced into any new land destroy or extinguish whatever its people possess that is naturally good, just or beautiful. . . . Whatever is not inseparably bound up with superstition and error will always receive kindly consideration and, when possible, will be preserved intact.³⁴

In his own way Pope Paul VI endorsed these views of Pope Pius XII by his own criterion for the authentic incarnation of Christianity in the African culture: "Not every religious feeling is good," he told the Kenyan bishops in 1969, "but only that religious sentiment which interprets the thoughts of God, according to the apostolic teaching authority established by the sole master, Jesus Christ."³⁵

With the mind of the Vatican on the criteria for African Christianity made clear to the African bishops, it should be the main burden and responsibility of the bishops and their theologians to apply the criteria to the needs of their various cultures. The final judgment on which African values are to be or not to be Christianized should be that of the African bishops and their theologians. "You will be able to formulate Catholicism in terms congenial to your own culture." said Pope Paul VI to the Kenyan Bishops in 1969. Consequently the Vatican should be able to trust the initiative, prayerful wisdom and the reflection of the African church in carrying out this mandate of incarnating Christianity in the local culture, and not bind the African church with all sorts of rules and regulations which in practice produce a negative effect on the whole enterprise.

"The Holy Spirit after all acts in his church today as yesterday, . . ." Cardinal Malula of Zaire--perhaps the most progressive African cardinal on Africanizing Christianity--boldly stated. "In the past, foreign missionaries Christianized Africa. The Spirit of God was with them. Today Africans are called on to Africanize Christianity. The same spirit of God will be with them."³⁶ A task of this nature demands a double thrust of fidelity according to the cardinal, "Fidelity to the Holy Spirit and fidelity to Africa."³⁷ The Vatican should manifest some faith in the ability and wisdom of the African church to handle its own cultural problems in its own way and not to indulge in what, to many African theologians and bishops, appears an arbitrary exercise of power in this important question of Christianity and African culture.

The third point we wish to stress as a concluding reflection is that for African theology or Christianity to come of age, more initiative, courage and independence of thought will be required of the African bishops and their theologians. The type of Christianity needed in Africa, among other things, is one that answers the real fears and needs of the African people, one that integrates their good cultural values with Christian ones, one that answers or attempts to answer the questions raised by the people's historical and cultural situations. This would mean taking difficult stands on issues and defending unpopular causes like polygamy and non-celibate priesthood if these are judged to be important values of the African culture, as in fact they are.

The challenge of African Christianity would mean also, in effect, a lot of trial and error, mistakes and failures, hindsight and foresight, and retroactive as well as prophetic wisdom. It would require above all the kind of inner freedom and resources of creativity and imagination that usually come with hard work, tireless effort and a determination and courage to be one's self. Whether the African church is ready to rise to the challenge is the question.

Lastly the African should be under no illusion that African Christianity, even when fully of age, would mean the absence of all tensions. The problem of Christ and any culture is one of unresolved tension in the sense of ultimacy. The root of the tension may be traced partly to the mature of revelation itself which is essential to Christianity. Its source is God, Spirit and Incomprehensible. The Gospel message as the history of man's salvation transcends all cultures, but its proclamation is by and to people deeply tied to a culture. The very meeting point of God with man, supernature with nature, universal with particular is itself the root of tension.

We can also regard man himself as the source of tension for man is a profound mystery, as St. Augustine has characterized his nature. To Blaise Pascal man is, "an irrational composite of metaphysics and of history, inexplicable in his grandeur if he truly comes from clay, inexplicable in his misery if he is still that which God made him; to understand him it is imperative to return to the irreducible fact of the Fall."³⁸ Consequently his culture, the sum total of his handiwork partakes of the same mystery which characterizes his essential nature. The important point for the African to note is that in spite of all kinds of tensions, the dialogue of encounter between Christ and his local culture must continue and it must be vigorous.

1. See such works on the evils of Colonialism and slavery as Albert Memmi, The Colonizer and the Colonized (Boston: Beacon Press, 1965), and The Dominated Man (Boston: Beacon Press, 1957); Kwame Nkrumah, Consciencism (London: Panaf, 1964) and Towards Colonial Freedom (London: Heineman, 1962); and Black Orpheus, tr. S. W. Allen (Paris: Presence Africaine, 1976).

2. An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1956), p. 581.

3. William Frankena, "Value and Valuation," The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. 8 (New York: MacMillan, 1967), p. 230. The article contains as well other philosophical usages of "value" and "valuation."

4. Ibid., pp. 583-584.

5. Ethel M. Albert, "Facts and Values," The Range of Philosophy Introductory Readings, Harold H. Titus and Maylon H. Hepp, eds. (New York: Van Nostrand, Reinhold, 1970), p. 252.

6. In the case of Plato, for example, the main task of his philosophy is to draw man away from the fleeting values of the senses to the type of life and good that man ought to live and pursue. Likewise Aristotle propounded his practical science of ethics based on the knowledge of what different men find good or valuable and distinguished these goods from the good for man.

7. Van A. Harvey, A Handbook of Theological Terms (New York: MacMillan, 1969).

8. C.H. Dodd, Gospel and Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1951), p. 85.

9. Cardinal Newman's celebrated view summarized it all: "Nature and grace; reason and revelation come from the same Divine Author whose works cannot contradict each other" The Idea of a University (London: Longman's, Green and Co. 1947), p. 194.

10. Hershel Jonah Matt, "What Does it Mean to Believe in God?" Theology Today (1954), p. 258.

11. John 14:6

12. Christ and Culture (New York: Harper, 1956).

13. Culture for H.R. Niebuhr is "the work of men's minds and hands. . . . Hence it includes speech, education, tradition, myth, science, art, philosophy, government, law, rite, beliefs, inventions, technologies." Op. cit., p. 33.

14. Sam U. Erivmo, "Traditional Culture and Christianity Rivals or Partners," African Ecclesiastical Review (AFER), 21 (1979), 217.

15. Chukwudum B. Okolo, The African Church and Signs of Times--A Socio-political Analysis (Kenya: GABA Publications, 1978), p, 2.

16. Quoted by John P. Jordan, Bishop Shanahan of Southern Nigeria (Dublin: Elo Press Ltd., 1971), p. 115.

17. Quoted in Axioms of Kwame Nkrumah (London: Panaf Books Ltd., 1967), p. 4.

18. Sam U. Erivwo, p. 216.

19. Fashole-Luke, "What is African Theology?" AFER 16 (1974), 383.

20. "Address to Bishops of Africa, Kampala, 1969" AFER 20 (1978), p. 322.

21. Ibid., p. 325.

22. Romans 10:17.

23. Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, q. 85, a. 5.

24. AFER (1975), p. 43.

25. "Address to Bishops of Africa, Kampala, 1969," ibid., p. 325.

26. "And in this sense you may, and you must have an African Christianity." Ibid.

27. Ibid., p. 326.

28. AFER (1980), p. 196.

29. Quoted by Luke Mbefo, "Recalling the Pope's First Visit to Africa," The Leader (1982), p. 3.

30. See Chukwudum B. Okolo, "Christ in Palm Wine," Bulletin of African Theology (Kinshasa, Zaire), 3, (1980), 16-23.

31. Quoted by Richard McBrien, "Despite Growth, Church in Africa Has Problems," Catholic Exponent (Sept. 24, 1982).

32. Catholic Life: A National Christian Magazine (Nigeria), (Christmas Edition, 1982), pp. 4-5.

33. John 13:34.

34. Pope Pius XII, On Promoting Catholic Missions (Rome, 1951), No. 56, p. 59.

35. Pope Paul VI, "Address to Bishops of Africa, Kampala, 1969" Ibid., p. 323.

36. Cardinal J. Malula, "The Church at the Hour of Africanization," AFER (1974), pp. 370-371.

37. Ibid.

38. Jean-Paul Sartre, op. cit., p. 53.