Missiology: An International Review

This paper examines the major causes underlying the spread of what African elders and Westerners alike regard as immoral behavior among Anang youth in Southeastern Nigeria. The Anang have experienced profound cultural change since World War I, at which time they were finally pacified by the British and the first trading post and Christian mission were established among them. When this change is assessed, it is apparent that most of the forces contributing to immorality among young people in other African societies are also operative in Anang society, namely the breakdown of traditional political, religious, and kinship forms and the adoption of Western values, especially those in the economic realm.¹ This paper treats these common causal factors, but emphasizes one in particular which is important in producing immorality among Anang youth: Their acceptance of the Christian concept of forgiveness. Probably this new doctrine is affecting the behavior of other African peoples in a similar manner, but, if so, it has not received adequate attention in acculturation studies.

By drawing on data from East Africa and Samoa, Dr. Brown stresses the point that culture change, even the economic penetration of the West, may he resisted by a strong and elaborate social organization. Or, if not completely resisted, the innovation may be altered. He makes an analysis of the missionary role in the changes which have taken place in the two areas.

After making a survey of some of the different attitudes toward culture and the mission of the church which have stimulated the study of culture and anthropology, Nida suggests that none of them are adequate. He considers the prime service which the study of culture has to offer to be that of a valuable basis for relevant communication, whether it be in the choice of words, in the cultural relevance of the message, or the issues to which the gospel is addressed. He feels that communication based upon a perceptive understanding of a culture can stimulate some members of the culture to make vital decisions for Christ in a responsible way.

In this issue and the two following, we present a series of articles by a leading African sociologist on three important phases of changing Africa. In this first part the author discusses some of the fundamental characteristics of African point of view. The description is of the spiritual world of African people before they were influenced by European civilization and Christianity, but much of it is by no means lost today, as the author often personally testifies. The parts which follow are “Africa under European Colonialism” and “Africa and Technical Civilization.”

In this tongue-in-cheek article, Dr. Morgan describes and criticizes that highly sophisticated “tribe” of people with the philosophical point of view called logical positivism. But even if the average reader of Practical Anthropology has no particular abiding interest in logical positivists, he may well be struck by Dr. Morgan's discussion of human values, and of the fact that we cannot extricate ourselves from them. Not only can we not escape them, but neither can we escape responsibility for them.

When several parties have to work together, it is possible for them to differ, or to be at cross purposes, because they differ fundamentally in aim; but it is very likely that their differences arise because, although their aims have much in common, they differ on means of attaining them, which indeed they may elevate to the status of ends in themselves. Both situations can easily arise when a colonial government, a Christian mission, and an indigenous people are in contact. An extremely interesting case of such differences, both on ends and on means, is described in a recent paper, “Natural Disaster and Political Crisis in a Polynesian Society,” by James Spillius.¹ What gives especial interest to this case is that a further party was present, Spillius being an outsider who, by force of circumstances, was drawn into helping both the colonial government and the Polynesians, and who, in addition, was by training and temperament disposed to look at the whole pattern of relations between all parties. Moreover, the natural disaster that caused him to be involved in the affairs of the people he was studying was such that the possibilities of famine, disorder, discord, misunderstanding, and intrigue that had been latent in the society were starkly revealed.

It seems that the only optimism that can be generated with respect to reaching the millions without Christ is not to be found in the number of missionaries who go to the field, but in the rapid multiplication of Christianity among nationals reached by nationals. How effective are indigenous churches? How free are indigenous churches? How numerous are they? Is the use of the term “indigenous church” simply lip service to a concept? [Question by Frank E. Houser, Jr.]

It has not been often that the editor of Practical Anthropology has received a letter raising serious objection to any of the many viewpoints which have been expressed in the pages of the magazine. We welcome such letters, of course, as they draw attention to weaknesses of presentation, faulty logic, wrong data, unwarranted conclusions, and many other possible problems with material published in PA. We did receive one such letter from the Rev. Paul Abrecht of the Department on Church and Society, Division of Studies of the World Council of Churches in Geneva. Since it was in reference to something I had written, I am taking this opportunity of printing the letter along with an explanation of my earlier statement.