1.    Introduction

Christology has advanced quite remarkably in African theology.[1] John Mbiti claimed in 1972 that there are no Christological conceptions in Africa. Only nineteen years later, Charles Nyamiti stated that Christology is the most developed doctrine in African Christian theology.[2] And it has continued to develop over the subsequent thirty-five years.

In this essay, I will highlight some of the major developments and note the dominant Christological models that have emerged. Within the heuristic taxonomy I present, the categories I work with are missionary, liberation, inculturation, and reconstruction Christologies. The first section of the paper discusses each of these categories, identifying its primary concerns and providing some examples where applicable. African Christologies ensue from particular lived realities of African Christians.[3] What’s more, these Christologies have implications for understanding African evangelicalism as a subset of global evangelicalism. In the second part of the essay, therefore, I briefly argue that engaging with these Christologies within an evangelical framework will be mutually beneficial to both global evangelicalism and African Christological and theological discourse.

2.    Missionary Christologies: Jesus “over” Africa

Against the backdrop of anti-colonial agitations in Africa, Kwame Bediako notes that African theologians “set about demonstrating that the African religious experience and heritage were not illusory and that they should have formed the vehicle for conveying the Gospel verities to Africa.”[4] This became a ground for questioning the Christology that African Christianity received from Western missionary efforts.[5] For example, Judith Bahemuka says, “When the Gospel was brought to Africa, it came as a foreign religion; Christ was, as it were, obstructed by European culture. The presentation was faulty.”[6] What exactly was faulty in the presentation of Christ in Africa by Western missionaries? First, it is viewed as imperialistic, serving as an oppressive rather than a liberating message to Africans. Enyi Ben Udoh, for example, claims that in presenting Christ as Lord, the missionaries extended his lordship to themselves over Africans.[7] Second, it is viewed as intellectualistic or too abstract and dismissive of African cultures and life concerns, thereby lacking the necessary framework to be relevant or meaningful to the African.[8] Others accuse this “missionary” Christology of being too spiritualistic, presenting a Jesus who only provides eternal salvation of the soul in heaven but is of no help in the face of other troubles (e.g., Congo’s rubber trouble under Leopold).[9]

Therefore, earlier Christologies in Africa sought to redress this alleged faulty presentation of Christ, aiming to be both Christian and African.[10] Thus, liberation and inculturation motifs were dominant, and these are the next two categories of our taxonomy. However, it is worth noting that, these criticisms notwithstanding, the so-called missionary Christology remains the Christology of Catholic and Protestant evangelical churches in Africa.

3.    Liberation Christologies: Jesus “for” Africa

In contrast to the perceived imperialistic, abstract, and spiritualistic “missionary Christology” that does not meet Africans in lived reality, liberation Christology in the African context (which shares some affinity with Latin American liberation Christology) emphasizes the humanity of Christ and his solidarity with the poor, the marginalized, and the oppressed as the necessary first step to their emancipation. It also “includes emancipation from other forms of oppression such as disease, poverty, hunger, ignorance, and the subjugation of women.”[11]

Emmanuel Martey says that the main concern of African liberation Christology is the sociopolitical realities of Africans in general, but particularly black South Africans.[12] Takatso Mofokeng’s Black Christology is a powerful example of this approach. For him, “Black goes beyond color to signify the commitment of the poor and marginalized who seek to realize their humanity through humble dependence on Jesus Christ and obedience to his radical demands for establishing true humanity.”[13] African women theologians also employ the liberationist model for their Christological discourse. Mercy Oduyoye’s Christology echoes this theme of liberation, particularly for African women who contend daily against mistreatments ensuing from some African traditional practices, which include marginalization and inequalities in both family and society.[14]

Liberation models also appeal to the general yearning of African people for wholeness of life.[15] This yearning is informed by African worldviews of spiritualized cosmology which sees interconnectedness between the physical and spiritual realms. African theologians think that given their lived reality of contending with evil forces, African Christians are forced to seek wholeness of life elsewhere if it is not found in Christ.[16] So, examples of liberation Christologies have included Christ as Healer, Medicine Man, even Witch Doctor.

4.    Inculturation Christologies: Jesus “of” Africa

If liberation models focus on what Christ does for the African believer, inculturation models concern themselves with who he is (an African identity). Inculturation theology is “theological exploration of African indigenous cultures in an attempt to integrate the African pre-Christian religious heritage with the Christian faith.”[17] If indeed the Christ presented by Western missionaries was unrelatable and irrelevant to Africans, then the attempt to fashion an authentically African Christology becomes necessary. It reverses the erroneous but often understandable view of Christianity as a foreign religion in Africa—that to be Christian is to jettison one’s Africanness and take up a Western identity.[18]

Proponents of this model claim that Christ cannot be fully understood by Africans “without Africa’s past religious knowledge and experience.”[19] Consequently, Charles Nyamiti, Bénézet Bujo, Kwame Bediako, and others have advanced or popularized the African idea of ancestor for doing Christology.[20] This “inculturation Christology” is perhaps the most popular constructive Christology from Africa; it is both widely appreciated and criticized. Those who appreciate it point to the fact that it not only draws from a concept and practice pervasive in many African ethnic groups, but it also connects the “ancestorship” of Christ with the teachings of Scripture and the Christian tradition.[21] Proponents of inculturation Christology also appeal to second century Logos Christology as a forerunner of Ancestor Christology.[22] However, studies carried out independently by Timothy Palmer and Diane Stinton in separate parts of Africa both reveal that most African Christians prefer not to use “ancestor” for Jesus, finding it to be either inappropriate, unhelpful, or both.[23]

5.    Reconstruction Christologies: Jesus “in” Africa

This category asserts that Christian theology should help to rebuild or reconstruct societies, enhance human flourishing, and chart a new future for Africa. J. N. K. Mugambi, its main proponent, writes, “In Africa, Christianity has been used for too long to destroy the cultural and religious foundations of African peoples.”[24] This necessitates inculturation, but, Mugambi notes, “inculturation is not possible in Africa as long as Africans are not in control of their own lives and destinies, both outside and within the Church.”[25] Since it shares this priority with liberation Christologies, what is unique about reconstruction Christologies? The liberation model, contrived as it is by the Exodus motif, portrays movement over time and space. However, since Africans occupy the same geographical space over time, Mugambi argues that “The theme of reconstruction is made attractive by the fact that it highlights the necessity of creating a new society within the same geographical space, but across different historical moments.”[26]

Kä Mana articulates a Christological appropriation of this model “as foundational in building a new African society.”[27] He says that the present reality of African societies is characterized by a sense of powerlessness due to a poor estimation of our capabilities; inconsistent actions that do not match prevailing ills of the continent; and destruction of self-worth.[28] In response, Mana proposes a mythological conceptualization of Christ for Africa’s reconstruction. He says it is “necessary to think of Christ from a mythological perspective where he represents a revitalising power of our divided and dislocated Africa.”[29] Christ becomes for Africans the new force that empowers, inspires creativity, and repairs the African’s poor self-image. This vital energy that Christ embodies, if appropriated by the church, will transform Africa. An undeveloped Christology that I situate in this category is Christ as Community Leader.

In the following, final section of the paper, I briefly consider how this taxonomy of different Christological models in Africa may be engaged through an evangelical lens and the mutual benefits of such interactions.

6.    Global Evangelicalism and African Christologies

Christology is critical to evangelical identity. The identity of Christ is a non-negotiable element in each of the key identifiers of evangelicalism proposed by David Bebbington: (1) conversion, (2) activism, (3) biblicism, and (4) crucicentrism.[30] If Bebbington’s quadrilateral holds true, then evangelical identity rises and falls with the identity of Christ. The Christ of Christian Scriptures and early Christian tradition must be sustained in and through contextual appropriations of his image. Otherwise, we risk creating a Jesus in our own image, one who does not necessarily bring glory to the Father but to us. This situation obtains when we are more preoccupied with preserving our ancestral cultural heritage—whether African, American, Chinese, etc.—than with preserving the apostolic identity of Christ captured in Scripture.[31] This commitment to biblical fidelity is one of the hallmarks of evangelicalism that global Christological constructions will do well to maintain.

Reflecting on the various African Christological categories in light of the evangelical quadrilateral, we see that to varying degrees different models embrace one or more of these markers more seriously than the others. While the missionary model is somewhat underdeveloped in the literature on African Christology,[32] we can deduce that it likely emphasized conversion (#1), the Bible (#3), and the cross (#4). Its major deficiency is the lack of or not enough activism (#2). The liberation and reconstruction models put more emphasis on activism (#2) and crucicentrism (#4). For them, the person of Christ or his cross should be a symbol and tool for social change. Finally, the inculturation model tends to dwell more on the idea of conversion (#1) and activism (#2) such that conversion is seen to happen not only at a personal level but also at the cultural level. What is often the problem with the last three models is a deficient use of Scripture (#3) in their Christological constructions.

These African Christological models cut across diverse ecclesial traditions on the continent. However, evangelicals are leading efforts to reorient these reflections to be more biblically (and theologically) grounded (#3) without being dismissive of African contextual realities (#2). This is consistent with Tite Tiénou’s call for African evangelical Christianity to pursue the path of allegiance to the Triune God rather than either allegiance to African ways or allegiance to Western (evangelical) ways.[33] While early missionary Christologies opposed the use of African cultural elements in their (often unconscious) allegiance to Western forms and ways, other Christological categories (liberation, inculturation, and reconstruction) often err on the side of allegiance to Africa and Africanness without leaning on Scripture—which is actually neither Western nor African even while having rich implications for both (and beyond).

7.    Conclusion

The quest for distinctly African Christologies was birthed by the diverse lived realities of African people—social, political, cultural, economic, epistemological, infrastructural, spiritual, etc. These constructive Christologies are not mere academic exercises driven by a detached intellectual curiosity. They are quests for real life relevance, meaningfulness, and theological wholeness. The taxonomy presented in this essay helps to make this clear.

More importantly, the taxonomy above serves as an entryway into African Christology for those who wish to understand and interact more deeply with Christological constructions throughout global Christianity. Such understanding and interactions will benefit global evangelical theology in general, especially if done in a way that transcends mere patronizing affirmations to more robust interaction, correction, and integration. A particular area that needs further research is the missionary Christology model, which I noted above is underdeveloped in the literature. More intentional work that traces the Christology that a variety of missionaries in Africa actually taught would enrich the conversation more than the current generic sentiments and statements of postcolonial criticisms. Finally, since this taxonomy shows that all the models discussed emerged from past contextual realities in Africa, it may also function as a springboard for launching still more relevant conceptualizations of Christ rooted concretely in contemporary African Christianity while increasing their accord with Scripture in more careful and profound ways.