Globalization and Inculturation an African Perspective

Abstract

I feel very challenged to tackle this topic. The reason is simple. Both key words in the topic, namely inculturation and globalization, need volumes in order to make oneself fully understood. I shall, therefore, give my working definition and understanding of the two concepts and then strongly argue that they can and indeed must creatively live together in a marriage that is both ratified and consummated! The entire article is based on six main arguments. In the first place I argue that in defining globalization, we must clearly distinguish the positive from the negative nature and content of globalization. I shall deal with globalization from the point of view of its effects on the poor, the vulnerable, the marginalised and the powerless, in a word the victims of society, who are easily exploited, oppressed, suppressed and alienated and isolated. I shall use views and perceptions of these victims to show what they consider positive and negative in globalization and what their hopes and fears are in this regard.The second argument, which runs through the paper, concerns the radical move from the narrow and classical understanding of inculturation to a new, dynamic, holistic and rich definition of inculturation. The fifty years of the inculturation movement, if we are to begin from 1953, Lea Pretres Noir SГўВҖВҷlnterrogent, have seen great strides in the concept and reality of inculturation. Incultuaration is no longer a concept found in universities, but one on the ground among people and in their daily lives and concrete situations. It is this new understanding of inculturation which will be analyzed in view of globalization.In the third place, I argue that the five models of inculturation currently in place can each absorb the positive elements of globalization, while at the same time strongly and powerfully resisting the negative elements. Globalization in this view is simply one of the factors to the context in place, which context should be taken into account in any effective and relevant inculturation. The fourth argument is directly addressed to those who would wish to use the excuse of globalization to re-impose the oppressive uniformity of some so-called developed countries or Older Churches on Africa and those who think that globalization means some people and some societies must think, create, and plan for others. This is not a new reality but a very old one. Within the Catholic Church, this thinking is often linked to the group of Cardinal Ottaviani during the Vatican II. It stands for Semper Idem: One universal church, one universal theology, philosophy, liturgy, spirituality, education, one mode of thinking and acting, one vision and one ethos! This so-called globalized thinking is neither universal nor orthodox. The fifth and last arguments relate to the creative manner in which authentic incultration should be done and promoted taking into serious account of what is taking place with in Africa, within each country and community in Africa and in the world at large. Globalization only challenges the method in which inculturation should be conceived, the method in which it should be implemented in a fully relevant way. It is therefore not a question of either choosing inculturation or globilisation, but rather of how inculturation must control the negative aspects of globalization, shine cut clearly over globalization and relate with it relevantly, creatively and profitably.