The Challenge of African Priests in America

When in 2006, at the symposium of the American Academy of Religion, Andrew Greeley discussing the growth of the Church in Africa and other developing countries made a remark that, they will always “Take ideas from us”, I found his remark offensive. His statement assumed that that the African church lacks its own original ideas and can only succeed in its mission if it relies on the West for ideas.

It took me more than two years to realize that Greeley’s statement reflects the mentality of the Church in the West as it relates to the Church in Africa. This kind of thinking is ridiculous considering the fact that majority of the leaders of the Church in Africa have studied alongside their Western counterparts and competed well and in some cases outperformed them. That the Church in Africa is poor does not mean that it lacks ideas. Her pastoral plan is about the most successful in any part of the world. Every year, thousands of people join the Church in Africa while thousands of people leave the Church in the West. The Church in Africa has effectively been able to use lay organizations within the Church as instruments of evangelization and the catechists who do not even have the “privileged” Clerical rank of a deacon in the church have done a phenomenal job of not only teaching and bringing people to the sacraments but also leading the people in daily worship where there is no priest. Seminarians spend their summers not in parish rectories wondering what they may do but in intensive work of evangelization both in urban and rural areas. By the time of their ordination, they are men who have a deep care for the people and know that their primary responsibility is that of bringing people to Jesus Christ.

As I speak with many African priests who live and work in the West, their biggest frustration is a church that places no value in their genuine call to serve but see their priesthood or service in the West as merely for economic reasons. These priests are daily being stereotyped. For example, because one African priest does something negative, then all the priests from Africa are like that. While this is in itself very bad logic, the same logic is not applied to their Western brothers. Following this flawed logic one can argue that because about four thousand priests were involved in pedophilia in America, all American priests are pedophiles. Young men as myself who came to America to become priests are not here for economic reasons but because we believe that the Catholic Church is One and universal and if there is need in any part of the world, people must be courageous and willing to respond to this need. I see no gains in being a priest in the West rather than a sacrifice for the Church here.

Ministry should be a two-way stream – African priests learning and receiving from the Church in the West and in turn, the Church in the West learning from their African brothers and accepting the talents and treasures from the Church in Africa. In the most part, this has not been the case. While the Africans have strived to learn and receive from the West, the West is not interested in the gifts that are brought to them from Africa. It is the Africans who have to adjust to the Church in the West: learn to speak like them; dress like them; celebrate the liturgy in their own terms. Up until 1995, we still had Irish missionaries in my home parish in Africa because we were still considered a missionary territory. These faithful Irish priests brought us the gift of the faith from Ireland and we joyfully embraced and learned from them. While they made efforts to embrace our own local traditions, we did not impose our own culture on them. I cannot remember any of them speaking my local language and this means that, there was always an interpreter during the homily and majority of the people did not understand the rest of the Mass. However, we loved them and accepted them wholly. We in turn, learned so much from them that I today consider myself to be 1% Irish. There was mutual giving and receiving. The reverse is the case for the majority of African missionaries in the West where they can only be fully accepted if they embrace fully the culture of the West and in some cases, they have even been forced to embrace this culture by their respective bishops.

The beauty of the Catholic Church is that we are a One and Universal Church. We should worship freely in whatever region of the world we find ourselves. Every culture of the world has something to enrich the Church with and the Church in the West must be humble enough and open to receiving other cultural treasures that God is offering them.

July 4, 2008: St. Elizabeth of Portugal & USA Independence Day

On this day, the Catholic Church celebrates the feast of St. Elizabeth of Portugal, the patron saint of Catholic Charities. Although she was born into enormous wealth, her freedom led her to give away her riches to the poor. She remains a model of authentic Christian freedom. Our freedom should not be a freedom from God but should be a freedom for God. So often, we mistake freedom to be just physical and external. Freedom comes from within. St. Elizabeth is quoted as saying that, “God made me queen so that I may serve others.” She saw her whole success as rooted in God and this success is not for her own selfish ends but for her selfless service to others.

As we celebrate our independence day today, what is our independence or freedom? Is it from God or for God? As much as we may complain about the direction of our country or the problems in our country; as much as we may be cynical about our politics or our politician, we still remain the best democracy in the world. God has blessed us so much and we have the responsibility to share those blessings with others. Our freedom must lead us to bring freedom to others who are in bondage. Sometimes our own policies have not promoted freedom in other parts of the world. While some countries are politically independent, they are still economically dependent on us and sometimes our policies do not necessarily promote their own good but our own good. As a Christian people, we must always stand for what is right and just in the world even if it means making us look “unpatriotic.” I dare to challenge you that we are first Christians and then Americans.

Like St. Elizabeth of Portugal, let us work hard to bring about peace and justice everywhere in the world. We must look at the problems in Zimbabwe as our problems; the problems in China as our problems; the problems in Palestine, Jerusalem, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. as our problems. Their welfare must be our utmost priority as our own welfare because we are all created in the image and likeness of God.

Memorial Day - Building a civilization of Love

In my culture, the dead are very much part of our lives. Even though we grief their passing away, continue to keep their memories fresh in our lives. We do this by giving their names to newly born children in the family; we bury them in our compounds to signify their ever presence with them. Whenever we look at their graves, we remember the time they spent with us and the wonderful influences they had in our lives.

Our celebration of Memorial Day is a reminder of the lives of the many men and women who gave their lives for our freedom. We also remember our loved ones who have died. In many parts of the world today, millions of people are living under political and economic bondage. There are people who are still enslaved today and there are those who have been denied the choice to make decisions for themselves. The government decides for them and usually this is not good for them. We have been so privileged in this country to have freedom. Our freedom did not come easy, it came at a great cost. It came about because many persons in this country decided to offer their whole lives for the service of country. We have our freedom because many men and women chose that fundamental principle “I am my neighbors keeper” and they were ready and willing to die that we might live in freedom. We must respect their generosity to our country. Their actions show the depth of their love for every one of us. Jesus Christ tells us, “no greater love than one has for his friend than to lay down his life for him.” This is what our men and women in the military did in the past for us and are continuing to do for us.

Our freedom is not freedom from God, but it is freedom for God. It should lead us to build a civilization of love around the world. President George Bush told us in 2003, “Freedom is not America’s gift to the world, it is God’s gift to the world.” It is the will of God that everyone in the world should live in freedom and peace. While most times we have to employ our military might to protect ourselves from our enemies or those who wish us harm, it is not always the answer. The answer is building a civilization of love everywhere in the world, so that in all the continents, the people may know the peace and freedom that has been offered by Jesus Christ.

The primary cause of the wars, ethnic violence and unrest in many parts of the world is as a result of poverty, illiteracy and disease. The rich dictators and political Lords in these regions use the most vulnerable members of the society to cause unrest for their own political or economic benefits. In order to live, the poor do all that they are led to do. It is very unfortunate because most of the victims are young people who should be the light into the future of these countries. The insecurity in these regions of the world, affects our own security. No amount of military power will bring us the security that we need. If we can build peace through a civilization of love throughout the world by aggressively ending poverty, disease and illiteracy, we can then enjoy the freedom that Christ has given to us.

Are our Politicians Sincere?

The presidential campaign season started very early. We still have seven months to the end of the Presidential campaign season. Ads have started running on national TV already. The three candidates remaining in the race have been giving stump speeches all across the country. They all profess how much they love this country, yet, they all point accusing fingers on others. Sometimes it is difficult to determine who is right or wrong in a particular issue, because of the way fellow candidates are being portrayed.

Are our politicians really sincere with us that they love this country? The way politics is being played, I am afraid, they do not love the country as much as they claim. Why do I say this? Political campaigns have come down to look at what is all wrong with your opponent. This is not only in terms of policies but also their personal lives. There is guilt by association, no room for conversion or repentance. Issues are made out of frivolous things by opponents, just to make the other look bad. At the end of the elections, there is so much divisions that nothing gets done.
There are people who are still angry over elections that were conducted over forty years ago.

If the purpose of seeking elective office is for service, I do think it should not be a win at all cost. We should not smear the other in order to win an election. No one candidate has a monopoly of good ideas. No one party has a monopoly of good ideas. If the reason for which we seek an office is for service, what we need to do is to show the American people how our own ideas will better their lives more than the ideas of our opponents. We can do this in a very civil way without necessarily saying the other person’s ideas are foolish and without making our opponent an enemy. The opponent is not an enemy, he or she is one who loves the country as much as you do and feels called to serve the common good.

To our beloved candidates, the way you conduct yourselves during this election season, will show us how much you love this country. It will also convince us that you are truly there to serve our interests and not your own interest.

Divisive Labels, A Problem in America

We are the United States of America. Notice that in this unique identity of our union, there is no reference to labels such as Black, White, European, Asian, Hispanics, liberal, conservative, orthodox, progressive, neo-conservatives. How come we have made these labels so much a part of our culture. People are very quick to identify themselves or others as liberal or conservative, etc. It is my firm belief that these compartmentalization’s would not help us as a nation to solve real problems. We are in an election season that seems to be endless already and many people are getting tired of it. More and more the exit polls tell us which ethnic group voted for which candidate. Do we really need to know this? Is it really important? What is important are the issues: who voted for which candidate because of the economy, health care, the Iraq war, education, etc.

One of the problems with using stereotypes such as liberal, conservative, neo-conservative, progressive, is that these are difficult to define. Whenever a definition is attempted by anyone, they will try to put a twist on the definition to fit their ideological biases. I have found people identify me as a liberal, a conservative, a progressive and a neo-conservative. The difficulty here is that when you fit one aspect of the person’s biases, you will be defined based on those biases. Because of my positions on the principle of subsidiarity, I have been defined by some as a neo-conservative; however, because I sometimes support candidates who are pro-choice (NOT BECAUSE OF THEIR PRO-CHOICE POSITIONS) but because of the totality of their policies which I think promote better human dignity, I am called by some "a left-wing liberal." I have seen many people who are anti-abortion, yet at thesame time support capital punishment, unjust wars, racism, etc. We can see how these definitions change based on who is defining you.We all know that common principle that united we stand, divided we cannot stand. We need to listen to the other people’s voice, even if we disagree with them. We need to see where they are coming from. Not talking to the other person and condemning them because they do not share the same ideological positions with you will not perfect our union as a nation.

Addendum:
I am completely prolife - anti abortion; anti-capital punishment; do not believe in waging unjust wars (as they fit Catholic moral teaching); I believe in protecting the environment; I believe in the equality of all human persons.

Also a quote from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops:

"Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so importantto vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship amongmoral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsicevil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases aCatholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter shouldnot use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness toother important moral issues involving human life and dignity.35. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable positionmay decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would16be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisanpreferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil.36. When all candidates hold a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, the conscientiousvoter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for anycandidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likelyto advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic humangoods.37. In making these decisions, it is essential for Catholics to be guided by a well-formedconscience that recognizes that all issues do not carry the same moral weight and that the moralobligation to oppose intrinsically evil acts has a special claim on our consciences and our actions.These decisions should take into account a candidate’s commitments, character, integrity, andability to influence a given issue. In the end, this is a decision to be made by each Catholicguided by a conscience formed by Catholic moral teaching."

Senator Barack Obama and Race Relations

If anyone thought Barack Obama’s speech on race relations in America was just a political speech to clear his name and get elected president, the person must be making a categorical mistake. While the millions of people who have voted for him would want him to become an American president, even if he does not win the democratic nomination, by virtue of this speech, he would be forever remembered in the history of America. Never in the history of this great nation has anyone invited us to confront and deal with this controversial issue of race which has plagued America for over two hundred years. We have deliberately decided to ignore this issue and pretend it doesn’t exist; yet it lies fundamentally in that which drives America. Be it economics, politics, education, or religion, race factors come to play. Barack Obama has reminded us today that we cannot solve the fundamental problems that affect us as a nation if we fail to deal with the problem of race.

My college schoolmate who is White once asked, “why can’t we just get along?” I thought that was an ambitious question but it wasn’t too long when he exposed his ignorance by asking, “Who is Rosa Parks?” I did not bother to ask him if he was aware of the Montgomery bus boycott? As a White young man who grows up in an affluent background, it is easy for him to assume that it is the problem of the blacks that we all just cannot get along. However, for a black man who grows up in a ghetto and for two hundred years, his ancestors were discriminated against and were told they are not human, he will still look at the white man with suspicion. This is a thorny situation we all find ourselves. Will I blame every White person I see for the sins of his ancestors? The answer is an emphatic NO. Do I hold white people today accountable for their own current racist actions? The answer is an emphatic YES. As Obama has said in the last few days, it would be naïve to think that we have transcended racism in this country. It is still here and we see it everyday in the black neighborhoods and schools. As we expect the Whites not to be racist towards us, we too must not be racist towards them – because there is such thing as “reverse racism.”

Some have argued that by virtue of this speech, Obama has put the whole race issue that came up in this election cycle to rest. I don’t think this is true. I do not believe that is the intention of Senator Obama. Senator Obama’s speech is a preamble to a national debate on race that we must truthfully engage in this country. We can only but thank Barack Obama for the courage to speak for us all: Blacks, Whites and Brown. For we are “The United States of America” and not “The divided races of America.” Let us all together, reclaim our true identity as a nation of unity, love, peace and hope. Our moment is now – we either accept it and move forward, or reject it and remain stagnant.

McCain and the Rev. Hagee's endorsement

In the last few days, Senator McCain has been pressured to reject the endorsement he received from Rev. Hagee. When Minister Farrakhan of the nation of Islam endorsed Senator Barack Obama, the Illinois senator denounced the endorsement which he did not seek in the first place. He was told by Hillary Clinton that denouncing the endorsement was not strong enough. He was specifically asked to use the word "reject" which he graciously did. For many days now, The National Catholic League and many Americans have been calling on Senator McCain to reject this endorsement by an extremist evangelical minister who is not only anti-Catholic but has used insulting phrases to describe the Catholic Church.

McCain the straight talker has not been able to come up straight on this issue. Why? Because McCain is trying to court the evangelicals. McCain has forgotten that Catholics constitute a fourth of the electorate that would be voting in November. In his quest to please the evangelical bloc of the party, he is dismissing a strong electoral bloc that could give him resounding victories in November. It is not just enough for McCain to tell us that he stands against the anti-Catholic statements of Hagee. He should reject the endorsement in its full and entirety. Before a person of his standing shares a stage with someone, he should know something about the person he is dining with. I would be embarrassed to learn that McCain did not know about the extreme views of Hagee before he sought his endorsement. I would even be more embarrassed if he was aware and still accepted the endorsement. I think McCain is having his really baptism into presidential politics. I do not believe that America needs a president now who wavers just to please a few people. We need a president that would bring real change to Washington; a president that would tell us the truth even if it is inconveniencing.