Beyond Fate and Hopelessness: The Need for a Contextual Approach to HIV/AIDS Prevention Programmes in the Evangelical Christian Community of French-Speaking Africa

HIV/AIDS and the Evangelical Christian Community of French-Speaking Africa

According to the latest UN AIDS progress report (2011), ¹ the number of new HIV infections in Sub-Saharan Africa is slowly declining. If this fact brings us to the conclusion that the current prevention and education programmes are having an effect, than we too need to say that it is not yet enough. Every day new infections happen. The UN AIDS report writes about Sub-Saharan Africa:

The region bears the biggest burden of HIV in the world. Around 22.9 million or nearly 68% of all people living with HIV worldwide live in Sub-Saharan Africa. Women comprise 59% of people living with HIV in this region. There were an estimated 1.9 million new infections in the region in 2010, representing more than two thirds (70%) of all new infections globally. ²

The Christian evangelical community in this region faces this same reality. In their approach to the problem, they focus on behavioural changes through programmes that stress the God-given nature of sexuality and therefore also God’s code of conduct with this gift, based on the biblical text. Conferences and seminars are organized in order to give people the needed knowledge and understanding of the illness and how to prevent it. Sermons are preached in order to exhort the believers to live according to God’s will. Yet still, many girls will ask how they can abstain from sexual relationships before marriage, if this is the way to find a husband and a future. Married women may ask how they can protect themselves, if it is their own husbands who may infect them. Young men wonder how they can withstand the pressure from their peers and live with their mockery, if they decide to abstain from sex before marriage. And, will they not become impotent if they have not practiced sex before they marry? Many other questions may be asked. Why is it that the Church seems unable to connect with these questions?

In this article, I will give a general description and a summary of the outcomes of a research project, commissioned by Woord en Daad, a Dutch development organization ³ that seeks to fight poverty, working from an evangelical Christian perspective. An important focus of this organization for the French-speaking West and Central African region is investment in programmes for HIV/AIDS prevention within the evangelical Christian community. The objective of the research was to develop a better-informed and realistic strategy for prevention which would take the specific challenges and needs of this group into account. I will then highlight three issues that have come out of the research. The first issue is related to the seeming discrepancy between what people say they believe and the way they live this out in daily life and the clash of values many experience. Secondly, I will look at the role which the community plays and can play in this problem. Thirdly, I will look at the uncertainty about Christian sexual values and the role leaders can play in this. Finally, I will reflect on the importance of real partnership between the development organization and the African community.

I have written this article on the basis of a qualitative research project in which I participated, with a specific people group – the evangelical Christian community in French-speaking Sub-Saharan Africa – hoping that, as a case study, it will contribute to the reflection on strategy development for HIV/AIDS prevention programmes, in a contextual approach and a sincere attitude of partnership. ⁴

The Research Project

In 2007, representatives of the Dutch development organization ‘Woord en Daad’ met with representatives of around seven partner organizations in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. During this meeting, the issue of sexuality in the West-African context was discussed. Following this discussion, a need was felt to explore the questions and issues around sexuality in the African context at a deeper level, possibly during a conference that could be called specifically for this reason.

To assess the feasibility of such a project a qualitative research was conducted both in West and Central Africa. The research questions were:

These questions were asked during semi-structured interviews with Church-leaders, pastors, health workers, youth leaders and young people (mainly students). ⁵

The most important outcome of those interviews was, I believe, that there is a sense of helplessness and fatalism in regard to HIV/AIDS. People feel that they are victims of structures that are stronger than they are and that will make change more or less impossible. Even though most of the interviewed persons believe that with God all is possible, even transformation of moral life, in real daily life the experience is struggle and hopelessness. This may be related to the fact that sexuality is a taboo, about which one does not speak. How much do programmes developed to help people in the fight against HIV/AIDS take the deepest values and beliefs of people into account? According to several interviewees, not many, for the simple reason that they are not known and/or talked about. Yet, these deepest beliefs and values shape the practice of daily life. ⁶ The message of healthy relationships and sexuality does not connect to the personal experience and therefore creates a sense of guilt and helplessness.

Another conference with more teaching was therefore not recommended, but a consultation, in which values and beliefs could be shared and explored on the basis of which new strategies could be developed. Would it be possible to develop an integrated value system that will give the people a holistic view of their world and life (including their sexuality)? New prevention programmes, activities, education and resources will only be effective when they are built on and flow out of this process of contextualization.

This consultation, or workshop, took place in November 2009 in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. The participants came from six different French-speaking countries from the region and consisted of medical professionals, theologians and representatives of youth and youth work, both male and female. ⁷ The aims of the workshop were to analyse the context with regard to sexual values, beliefs and practices, and to develop a strategy.

For the context analyses, the Appreciative Enquiry method was used. ⁸ The aim of this method is to help the participants reflect in a positive and constructive way about their culture and context. Again, it soon became clear how diverse the culture around sexuality is within this region, but even within countries themselves and between the different people groups (ethnic, age, education, etc.). Culture is not static, even for one person the importance of certain values can change with time and place. For the participants, this underscored the importance of dialogue on the issue, not only to understand the other better, but also to become more conscious of one’s own values and beliefs.

It also became clear that there is a strong suspicion of resources and programmes developed by NGO’s and other groups. The reasons mentioned for this range from the fact that French-speaking Africa feels second place to English-speaking Africa with regards to available resources and the attention they receive from other organizations, to theological arguments about how to understand the biblical message and the outworking of it in programmes. Because of a deep respect for the biblical authority over life, this people group finds it difficult to work with resources and organizations that in their eyes do not have the same attitude, for fear of dishonouring God and disobeying his will. Resources developed by the World Council of Churches, for example, will not easily be embraced, because of their openness to the promotion of condoms, their attitude towards homosexuality and their general attitude towards Scripture and Christian ethics. Resources and programmes developed by non-Christian organizations are even more difficult to accept.

Earlier parts of this research track seemed to point to the importance of grass-roots community work, in order to help people to develop a more just community, in which sexuality could have a healthy place for all members of that community (addressing poverty, gender issues, violence and care for those affected by AIDS). ⁹ Even though the participants agreed with the necessity of such work, they stressed that this development would never be possible if there would not be a greater understanding about what the Scriptures say about sexuality and relationships in the community. In short, they asked for the development of a biblical (evangelical), contextual theology of sexuality, which then would need to be communicated to the leaders of the communities.

In the following section of this article, I will reflect on three issues that through this research track have been highlighted for me.

Values and Daily Life

While in the Central African Republic, I regularly heard people say that their leaders and pastors are hypocrites; they say one thing and do the other. Young people say the same thing about each other, that in church they do agree with what is preached, yet at the same time they maintain sexual relationships outside of marriage. Respected theologians as Ka Mana (DRC/Cameroon) and Tite Tienou (Burkina Faso/USA) speak of the moral crisis in Africa ¹⁰ or about the clash of values in Africa. One of the most striking moments for me during the research track was when I interviewed a student. When I asked him about what he believed to be the biblical message with regards to sexuality, he told me full of enthusiasm how he believed that God had created male and female, both in His image and that God had given them the blessing of sexuality in order to be one, as an expression of their love and lifelong commitment to each other. He underscored that this unity would only be possible within the security of a faithful marriage. For this reason he believed that abstinence from sexual relationships was imperative for a happy marriage later. God’s law was for the good of his children. When I later asked him about his personal experience with sexual relationships, he told me with tears in his eyes that, even though he believed that with God all is possible, he had been unable to live up to this great ideal, because of his natural need for sex and his fear of impotence. He clearly suffered under this reality, and told of a sense of fatalism and hopelessness. I would like to state that this young man cannot be labelled as a hypocrite, or immoral as understood in the Christian evangelical circles. Rather, he is confronted by a clash of values, without the tools to understand this and therefore to make a well-considered life choice.

Hypocrisy is described as ‘the practice of claiming to have higher standards or more noble beliefs than is the case’. ¹¹ If we listen carefully to this story, we realize that the student honestly believes in what he sees as God’s plan for his life. These values are real for him, and he even puts in a lot of energy to live in accordance with them. The ‘hypocrisy’ stamp does not fit here.

The problem that the student, and with him many others, is facing is that he lives with more than one set of values. On the one hand, he wants to live a Christian life. On the other hand, he somehow knows that as a man he must use his sexual faculties regularly in order to stay sexually healthy. He knows that a real man cannot withstand his strong sexual desires. This understanding and knowledge can partly be classified as more traditional African cultural beliefs, but are also mixed with so called ‘street wisdom’, taught between boys and friends. A third element is the image upheld in many Western media programmes, which are now adapted and contextualized on radio and television in Africa. The message that sexual pleasure is the ultimate joy and goal of any relationship worth considering is transmitted over and over again.

Tite Tienou writes that African Christians often live in ‘different religious universes’ at the same time. The values of these different universes are all having a real and strong appeal on their lives, yet together they are irreconcilable. ¹² An inner struggle is the consequence, with the result that in different situations and at different times people will opt for giving priority to one of the several value systems, the one that responds best to that particular situation. Yet, the other value systems will still keep their voice and power over the person, resulting in feelings of regret, failure and hopelessness to feelings of fatalism and giving up.

For the development of HIV prevention programmes for the evangelical community, is it of essential importance that this reality of a complex context will be taken into account. If on the one hand a contextual theology of sexuality is developed, which incorporates these complex issues, it will on the other hand be necessary to present and communicate this in such a way that it encourages people to reflect personally and discuss with others what their value systems are and how they impact the different areas of their lives. If not, it will risk to again become a new way of teaching and preaching that does not respond to the deeper and more hidden issues that people are struggling with.

This ongoing dialogue – ‘mutually critical dialogue’ as Stephen Bevans calls it, ¹³ between people’s value systems and experience on the one hand and the biblical message (and tradition) on the other – is imperative for this theology to continue to be contextual, because culture and life experiences are not static, nor uniform. Yet, this ongoing dialogue is essential also from a developmental and didactic point of view. When people are able to vocalize their own complex reality and value systems, they will be empowered to personally and communally engage in the dialogue between their experience and value systems and come to personal and well-informed choices.

Two added challenges for this dialogue are that sexuality is a taboo subject in many African cultures and the perceived lack of positive role models. Choices can only become real choices when they have been experienced or observed in real life situations. This is where community can make an essential difference.

Community

In Africa, it has always been clear that a person does not primarily exist as an individual, but as a member of a community. It is the community that gives life and meaning/identity to the individual, and the responsibility of the individual is to contribute to the well-being of the community. A problem we are facing today is that the communities are not so clearly defined any more. One person can be part of several communities – at home and family, at work, in church, etc. – and each of these communities can carry different and sometimes contradicting value systems.

Throughout the research track, it has become more obvious that people live with conflicting expectations of the different communities of which they are part, which results in a lonely inner struggle about morals, ideals, beliefs and real life experiences. What should a married couple do, if after several years of marriage, they find that they are not blessed with children? Is not their marriage in vain, missing its goal? Could an extra-marital relationship not bring the solution? The family is surely pressurizing them into that direction, whereas the church seems to have an ambivalent reaction, both indicating that if God blesses the marriage He will give them children, yet at the same time preaching that partners should at all times be faithful. Did God not bless this marriage? Is it therefore invalid? Yet, if divorce is also forbidden, there does not seem to be another option.

I would like to ask if it could be possible to re-emphasize the need for the development or strengthening of Christian communities, as the body of Christ, which are countercultural and inclusive, full of grace and healing; which will provide a healthy and holistic framework for education and transformation and be a prophetic voice in society. Would it be possible to create such Christian communities that could become the holistic foundation on the basis of which all areas of life will be lived, on the basis of which’ value system all of life’s choices will be made?

From the Christian perspective, it is God and how He has revealed himself, which forms the foundation of community. In the Trinity, God has revealed himself as relational and he created humanity in his image. As Graham Cole writes in the Jubilee Manifesto: ‘Creation is the overflow of divine love, not divine need’. ¹⁴ John D Zizioulas also points out that communion is not something added to God or human beings: ‘being is constituted as communion’. ¹⁵ A person therefore cannot be wholly independent. Living as part of a community gives each member identity and a foundational framework for the whole of life.

Yet, this community will often be a counter cultural community, calling its members to a life in accordance to God’s plan, in the knowledge that God’s plan brings real and full life and sets people free from the bondage of sin to the full potential with which God has created them. Ethics in this context is not a ‘kill-joy’ set of rules but life giving Gospel, not a legalistic sermon but a joyful celebration of God’s gifts. Sexual ethics will not be diminished to discussions about what is permitted and what not, but will speak to the whole of human relationships within the community in a way that each member can come to his or her full potential. This will include gender and socio-economic issues. As such this community automatically becomes a prophetic voice within the wider society.

Another biblical motive is that the Christian community is described as the ‘body of Christ’. Following her Lord, this community is to be a community of accepting relationships, of forgiveness and healing, of compassion and care. God’s children, who themselves live by forgiveness and grace, know how to forgive and help those who struggle with weakness, bondage and pain. The members of this community will seek to carry one another’s burdens and walk the extra mile with each other. In a time of HIV/AIDS, this means that in this community there will be no space for stigmatization. Musa Dube states:

I can hear Jesus say: I was sick with Aids and you did not visit me. [. . .] I was stigmatized, isolated and rejected because of HIV/AIDS and you did not welcome me. [. . .] A theological truth follows from this and that is that Jesus Christ himself has Aids; for the church is the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:27)’. ¹⁶

Such a community, founded on the relationality of creation, the compassion and empathy of the incarnation, the grace of salvation and the hope and life of the resurrection will be a strong and holistic framework for education and formation, for support and role modelling and as such for any HIV/AIDS prevention programme. It is in this community that identity and character can be formed and supported in such a way that it is possible to live out this identity also while participating in the other communities with their conflicting value systems. Hauerwas and Willimon state, in their book Resident Aliens, that: ‘Learning to be moral is much like learning to speak a language’.

You do not teach someone a language (at least nowhere except in language courses at a university!) by first teaching that person rules of grammar. The way most of us learn to speak a language is by listening to others speak and then imitating them. Most of the time we act as if morality is a matter of rules to be learned. We seem to believe that, after we have learned all the right rules (Think for yourself. First be sure you’re right, then go ahead. Let your conscience be your guide. Abortion is wrong. Love your neighbor), we can go act morally. No. You learn to speak by being initiated into a community of language, by observing your elders, by imitating them. The rules of grammar come later, if at all, as a way of enabling you to nourish and sustain the art of speaking well. ¹⁷

Obviously, this is only possible when this community truly is a contextual community, constantly engaged in the ‘ongoing mutually critical dialogue’, and as such relating and answering to the current and deeply experienced reality of the day and context.

Leaders or Grassroots?

This call for a contextual theology of sexuality is not new, and several attempts at such a theology are already made. ¹⁸ As I mentioned earlier, this is unavoidable since context and culture are not static and people need to redefine their values and beliefs again and again.

For the group with which this research track has been concerned, this is particularly important. To my surprise, during interviews and the workshop, well-educated men and women would refuse to make statements about what they believe is right with regards to issues related to HIV/AIDS prevention and sexuality. They would tell me to ask the theologians or the leaders of the church.

One reason for this attitude may be the deep belief that all of life should be lived under the authority of God’s will as revealed in the Bible. A person cannot just decide, on the basis of rational thinking or life experience or one’s own traditions and heritage, what is good or bad. Yet, understanding the biblical message in the nitty gritty of daily life is not easy, especially when people start to realize that the bible does not necessarily give detailed answers to our questions today.

Secondly, the Christian evangelical communities are structured in a hierarchical way, where the authority lies with the leaders. The leaders decide what is good and right and the members of that community accept these decisions, trusting in the leader’s wisdom and theological understanding. Young people may ask questions, but in the end do accept the authority of the leaders.

This attitude could explain why the idea of grass-root community development was not popular in the research group. Real change will only be possible if it is endorsed and encouraged by the leaders of the community. Only the leaders, with their wisdom and authority can provide the safe framework within which change and transformation will be possible.

What does this mean for the development of an HIV prevention strategy for the Christian evangelical community in Sub-Saharan Africa? Within a more and more pluralist society, identity and values are formed and/or transformed ideally within the community of believers. Yet without the support of the leaders of these communities, any effort will end up in insecurities about what is right and wrong and even in insecurities about what is worthwhile. A multi-faceted approach is therefore recommended. The development of a contextual theology of sexuality by the leaders of the evangelical community could be the start. If this theology then is communicated in a participative way to the leaders of the more local communities, they might be open to and convinced of the necessity of working with the wider community towards becoming a Christian community – ‘body of Christ’ – in which sexuality has a healthy place and in which people will feel supported in their daily struggles and challenges.

Process

Where a contextual approach is of such importance, there is little space for outsiders developing programmes and resources, dictating the process as they see fit. Plenty are the programmes that are developed outside of Africa, by people living on another continent, being so impressed by their own work that they put heavy copy right on the materials and are only willing to support real life projects in Africa if they follow to the letter their guidelines and restrictions.

When we think of a contextual approach we should not just think of the content of the programme, but of the dialogue between God’s revelation and life experience and values. The methods used in the programme are equally important. During the workshop we used the appreciative method ¹⁹ through which the participants reflected on what they believed to be the positive elements in their tradition and culture with regards to sexuality and relationships within the community. They vocalized the things they believed to be so important that they would make a great effort to retain these. On the basis of this understanding, the participants looked at what in their communities could be made better or should change. It was clear that the positive elements could be used as a resource for these changes. Following this discussion, the group worked in a participative way towards a strategy for their community, including the earlier mentioned development of a contextual theology and the communication of this to the local leaders and communities. This approach was contextual in two ways, I believe. First, the organizers (European) did not allow their task orientation to have prevalence over the participant’s orientation towards relationship, discussing, sharing and clarifying. In the evaluation forms at the end of the workshop, one of the participants wrote: ‘It is not often that we have such a meeting without the white people telling us what to do!’ Secondly, the fact that the reflection started with an appreciation and reinforcing of what is good in the participant’s culture and experience, allowed them to have an honest look at what the obstacles are. Important elements of their own culture and experience were seen as a strength, which can be utilized in a positive way. The result was perhaps a less streamlined programme and final document, but a greater openness, honesty and depth in the discussions.

All of this underlines the importance of a right understanding of partnership within mission and development. Where Western development organizations operate in a world of unequal resources and power distribution, they easily get into what Cathy Ross, quoting David Bosch, describes as: ‘a relationship of controlling benefactors to irritated recipients of charity, in which recipients end up experiencing a complex mix of gratitude and resentment at the same time’. ²⁰ Real partnership on the other hand ‘is a relationship entered upon in freedom by persons who remain free’. ²¹

Conclusion

Through this research it has become clear how the evangelical Christian community in French-speaking Sub-Saharan Africa is a specific group, with specific opportunities and specific challenges. General approaches to HIV prevention programmes may not be as effective as people think, since they do not necessarily respond to the deeply felt clash of values, nor operate from the same foundational understanding of who God is, and what his will is for humanity. A contextual approach is imperative, both in the content of the strategy and programme development as in the method of communication and community development. I would like to argue that the specific evangelical worldview should not be seen as a problem, but used as a strength, since it has the potential to provide a very strong foundation for identity and character development and the formation of strong inner convictions that could help people make better and well-informed choices. It has the potential to empower people in all their relationships in their context and community.