One of the identifying marks/emphasis that can be observed ...
A BIBLICAL, CULTURAL AND MISSIOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF TRADITIONAL CIRCUMCISION AMONG XHOSA-SPEAKING ADVENTISTS.
THE MEANING AND PURPOSE OF THE RITUAL OF CIRCUMCISION.
It should be noted from the onset that the issue of traditional circumcision has not received any meaningful attention from the church leaders and scholars in the Adventist church. This is understandable as this challenge is more provincial than national and has consequently escaped the attention of the Adventist church in South Africa and the World. However the problem is even more critical in that even in areas where traditional circumcision is practiced there has been no formal attention given to it, either by the local church or denominational leadership.
There are currently no written guidelines, each family decides in principle decides on own as to how to observe the rite and what meaning it has to attach to it. This has led to a form of a cut and paste in the adaptation of the custom, which lacks theological credibility. A continued silence from the Xhosa-speaking Adventist church leadership, scholars and church pastors, might be construed as legitimization of the current status with its inherent theological discrepancies.
There are two reasons why this study is crucial and timely even though it may be viewed as long overdue. The first reason has to do with the fact that the Xhosa speaking Adventists, as part of the Xhosa speaking people represent the only group in the Adventist church in South Africa that still practice traditional circumcision (Interview sa-sda: 2004). Some Nguni tribes, for example the Zulu-speaking people, have long stopped the ritual for various reasons (Sirayi: 2000: 142,143); but in those tribes where the rite is still observed, Adventists for theological reasons do not engage in the ritual of circumcision.
This is the case with the Ndebele, the Sotho and Northern Sotho - speaking people. The exception may be the Sotho-speaking Adventists who dwell among Xhosa-speaking Adventist. This group is known for its strict adherence to the tradition of circumcision. I am sure this would be the same in other cultures with slight variations. This leaves then only the Xhosa-speaking Adventists who not only practice the custom but encourages others to do so and frowns at those who do not.
The second reason is that in general and as part of their fundamental beliefs, Adventists espouse a doctrine of the non-immortality of the soul (Ministerial Association of SDA: 1988:350-355). Adventists therefore do not get involved or participate in any rite that seeks to give honor and respect to departed loved ones. Any rites that can be linked to ancestral worship or veneration are frowned at and members are discouraged from participating in such. Adventists in general are known for their opposition to ancestral rituals of any kind.
The main objective of this research is to evaluate critically, in light of the Bible and the church’s mission, the meaning and purpose attached by the Xhosa speaking Adventists on traditional circumcision. The aim is to recommend a Biblically based, missiologically relevant and culturally sensitive approach to the practice of circumcision.
The objective is not only to provide guidelines or ways of dealing with the custom but also to unearth Biblical principles that can help the Adventist church as a whole in South Africa, in dealing with the challenge of inculturation. Other ethnic groups may not be faced with circumcision but by other traditional customs, it is hoped that the research will provided some guidelines in dealing with such.
Basic aspects of traditional circumcision
The event is usually conducted for those who are between the ages of 15 to 25 years old (Meintjies March 1998:7). Circumcision for those younger than this age is not encouraged by Xhosa-speaking communities.
La Fontaine (1985:25) observes a tripartite form in all rituals of transitions, these being, separation, liminal phase and integration. Circumcision as a form of a rite of transition or passage clearly follows these three distinct stages. These are surgical operation, seclusion and coming out ceremony or reincorporation into the community (Ngxamngxa, 1971:186). It is in this light that the following statement is made: “Among the Xhosa-speaking tribes if a man is to consider himself as a man he must have gone through these stages.” (Ngxamngxa:1971). It is the combination of these three stages that completes the rite of circumcision. One might add here that circumcision is not just the three phases mentioned above but the how those phases are observed. There may still be variations in so far as how these stages are observed (Gitywa, 1976:178,179).
First Stage: Surgical Operation
The actual operation is usually preceded by ritual preparations (Ngxamngxa, 1971:186). Already by this time the building or the Lodge of the initiates (ithonto) together with the appointment of ikhakhanta (traditional attendant) during the seclusion, has been fixed (Soga 1931: 249). Part of ritual preparations, in some Xhosa-speaking groups, includes the killing of a sacrificial beast (Umngcamo). Initiates are expected to eat a certain part of the beast, usually a strip of meat cut from the right leg (Ngxamngxa, 1971:187). The next ritual act is usually the shaving of the hair from the boy’s head (Ngxamngxa 1971).
The core and the hallmark of circumcision, is the actual surgical operation and is an irreversible symbol of the social maturity of the individual (Gitywa, 1976:180). It is this act that remains as a permanent sign that one was circumcised.
The operation, which is the severing of the foreskin, is done by the ingcibi (traditional surgeon). This is done outside of the lodge and the initiates are immediately led to the lodge after the operation (Gitywa, 1976: 181). The initiates have to repeat after the surgeon as he says, “You are the man” (Unpublished Document). After severing the skin is handed over to the owner and is usually buried later in an ant heap where it will be devoured by the ants. (Gitywa, 1976). The wound is then covered with herbs and then the initiates move into the lodge (Ngxamngxa, 1971:188). It should be understood that some of the details may not apply to other areas or families.
Seclusion
The period of seclusion begins immediately after the operation. Soga (1931:257) observes that there is no regular time limit for the period of seclusion. This period can last from one month to twelve months. However, today this period usually coincide with the long school breaks either in winter or summer, to allow for the initiates to return back to school in time.
The first eight days are regarded as the most critical and most painful for the initiates. The first eight days of seclusion the initiates are debarred from fresh food, green food, meat and water (Soga, 1931:254).
This eight-day period culminates in an illustrious event called “ukojiswa” whose main object is to release the initiates from certain food and other taboos that were prescribed to him and expected in the last eight days (Ngxamngxa 1971:189). An animal is killed on this day and the initiates are allowed to eat this meat.
The initiates are still expected to observe certain taboos even after this ceremony. They wear a peculiar dress during this time (Ngxamngxa 1971:189). The initiates while their time by engaging in some traditional games, hunting, dancing, etc (Ngxamngxa, 189).
Coming out Ceremony
The end of the seclusion is marked by ceremonies releasing the boy from the marginal status of previous months (van der Vliet, 1974:231). The termination of the seclusion and preparation for reincorporation back to the community is usually begun by a race to the river, or a ritual washing where there is no river (Ngxamngxa, 190). Butter or red ochre is applied after the washing by an appointed person. After this, the initiates are led to the kraal of the usosuthu (usually at the father’s house of one of the fathers of the initiates). This happens after the hut or the lodge has been burnt and under strict instruction, the initiates are not to look back at the burning lodge (Gitywa, 1976:189).
It is while they are in the kraal where the ceremony of “ukuyala” begins. Here they are harangued and admonished by the older men about their new status (Gitywa, 1976:189). “The theme of the speech is the same, mention being made of the new status attained by the novices and the responsible and dignified conduct expected of them” (Gitywa, 190). This ceremony is also characterized by “ukusoka” which consists of giving of various gifts to the “amakrwala” (newly initiated) (Ngxamngxa, 1971:191).
Function and Meaning of Circumcision.
Circumcision is prominently and distinctly expected to “transform the irresponsible and intractable boy into a matured with dignity and self-respect” (Mayer P quoted in Gitywa 1976:203). President Nelson Mandela himself a Xhosa wrote the following, in his autobiography, “I count my days as a man from the date of my circumcision.” (Quoted in Robert Block Sunday Times (London), p. 18, 29 December 1996).
In spite of the current spate of deaths reported in these initiation schools, many young Xhosa-speaking boys still flock to these schools at the risk of dying or being maimed during the process. Circumcision therefore continues to occupy a central point in the socio-cultural life of the Xhosa-speaking people.
While circumcision can be regarded as a rite of transition, from boyhood to manhood as observed above, it can also be regarded as one of the agents of transition. This observation is succinctly argued by Driver (1991:93) when he says, “Rites of passage are performed not simply to mark transitions but to effect them.” In cases where the expected outcome is not realized after the ritual, the blame is put on the (initiate) for his lack of mental capacity or in some cases for the way the ritual was performed with some aspects of it not properly observed (Young 1965:74). In general those who undergo the ritual do show distinct signs of change in behaviour and lifestyle.
The following outlines some basic arguments used in support of circumcision; this gives us a window on the significance of this custom for the Xhosa-speaking people. :
Sociological Significance
Gitywa (1976:203) observes that one of the most important things in the life of a newly initiated (ikrwala) is a change of behavior. A clear distinction can be seen between a boy who is not circumcised and the man. The anti-social behavior is characteristic of boys and not men (Gitywa 1976). A boy is regarded as a thing and not a person (Document: 1987 January).
The horizontal relationships that are altered include the one between the newly initiate and his mother and women in general. It also includes his new status with other men as well. The right to procreate and establish a family of his own is also part of this new change.
But the most important is the vertical relationship that involves ancestors (Gitywa 1976:204). The newly initiated is taught to honor and respect the ancestors by adhering to the customs and carrying out the rituals that he witnessed, to his progeny (Gitywa 1976:207).
Psychological Significance
There is a pronounced and expected change of personality of the newly initiated. At the coming-out ceremony, the initiate are anointed by a chosen person who is known to be of good repute with the hope that his charisma and good qualities will rub off to the youth (Gitywa 1976:208). This is further emphasized during the service of ukuyala (admonition) where the initiates are reminded of their newly acquired status, the wearing of new clothes signify a change of character (Ngxamngxa 1971:201).
Ngxamngxa (1971:201), Gitywa (1976:208,209) and Mbiti (1969:121), all do agree that circumcision does symbolize death and rebirth. Mbiti argues that the “ritual seclusion is a symbolic experience of the process of dying” (quoted in Gitwya1976:209), while Ngxamngxa (1971:201), notes that the white paint of the youth represents the venix caseosa with which an infant is born.
Bettelheim( 1954:53), says, “by circumcision the glanspenis is freed; it emerges like an infant from the mother’s womb… the initiated the circumcised boy is born without a foreskin and is thus a man”. Van der Vliet (1974:230) observes that in some cultures when a boy dies during the circumcision period, he is buried secretly and the parents are only informed at the end of the ritual. She goes on to say that the “dead initiate is often not publicly mourned, suggesting that the boy they had known was “dead” anyway and the man had not yet been born”. The Xhosa-speaking usually refer to a boy as a “dog”. This of course has to do with the behavior to be expected from him. His death in other cultures may not mean that much since he was not yet a “human being”. The age of the initiate is usually reckoned from the year of circumcision (Gitywa 1976:208).
Educational Significance
The beating and the physical ordeal and pain that accompany the ritual of circumcision is designed to effect discipline and to prepare the youth for the hardships of manhood (Van der Vliet 1974:230). La Fontaine (1985:25) observes that pain and physical ordeal is common in rituals of maturity.
Formal teaching is also reported where the initiates are told and taught how to behave as men (Ngxamngxa 1971:195). New vocabulary is acquired that seeks to create a bond of solidarity between the initiates and an attitude of respect within the community of circumcised men.
Religious and Magical Significance
Soga (1931:248) argues that, “while there is no religious ceremony connected with the rite of circumcision, that it has a religious significance is not doubted”. When the initiate has completed the rite of circumcision he is expected to enter into a new relationship with the ancestors (Soga 1931). The killing of animals during initiation is said to involve dedicating the victims to the ancestors (Ngxamngxa 1971:192).
The meat eaten during ukosiswa is believed to give courage and protection against evil influence (Soga: 1931:254). The man who is appointed to anoint the initiates is chosen so as to pass his good virtues and charisma to them (Ngxamngxa 1971:?).
As it can be seen, the ritual of circumcision is fraught with meaning for the traditional Xhosa-speaking people. Some have also argued that it is the strict observation of such rituals that the Xhosa as a people have been sustained and kept from extinction. Those who do not undergo this process remain immature and abnormal and an embarrassment to the community.
The new status affords the circumcised privileges he never had before. He now has the right to get married, the right to communicate with the ancestors, of late, the right to smoke, to drink to have relationship(s) with the opposite without strict supervision. Indirectly or directly, those who have returned from the “bush” are expected to engage in sexual conduct as part of the finalization of the process. The seriousness of this expectation varies from culture to culture or from family to family.
II. CIRCUMCISION AS PRACTICED BY ADVENTISTS
The importance attached to circumcision by the traditional Xhosa speaking people is not very different from the one of the Xhosa speaking Adventists. Indeed it can be said that there are three major points of transitions even for a Xhosa speaking Adventists boy, it is circumcision, marriage and death. Even for those who reside in non-Xhosa speaking areas, the significance of this event and in particular circumcision, is not lost. Some are known to travel as far as the Eastern Cape from Gauteng and other provinces, just to make sure that the practice is observed. Actually one family that is resident in the USA had to fly all the way to make sure that the boys undergo traditional circumcision. It would be less than honest to argue that there is no meaning attached to this rite.
It would not be an exaggeration to indicate that this is a pride and something that every Xhosa – speaking Adventist boy and family looks forward to. Usually the event is announced in the church as a way of inviting the members to be part of the occasion on a given date. Due to the number of people who attend these rituals, especially on the last day of the “coming out”, parents often get involved in huge expenses to cater for the crowds, thereby making the event a public and important one.
Adventists obviously did not invent circumcision but have tried to adapt the practice to suit the Adventist beliefs and theology. The church has therefore followed the traditional structure in their practice of circumcision, while Christianizing certain aspects of it.
The surgical Operation
The average age of those who go for circumcision is usually around seventeen, usually the penultimate or the final year at high school. The preferred time which is mainly for practical reasons is summer break in December. This allows for the boys to undergo the ritual in time to be ready for the beginning of school term the following year. The newly initiates who were interviewed were all circumcised during the winter break, that is June and July. Not many people opt for this period due to its relative shortness compared to the summer break.
All the groups interviewed and selected individuals interviewed testified to the absence of any ritual sacrifice during this stage. Usually this part is limited to the family and close relatives. Some initiates indicated that prayer was offered just before they were taken to the bush. When asked whether they were told about the importance of the event or at least given some explanation about the procedure, none of those interviewed answered in the affirmative.
With the exceptions of the Motherwell group, most boys were surgically operated by the Non- Adventist traditional doctor (Ingcibi). The Motherwell group has surprisingly been able to organize their own “traditional” doctor who is an Adventist. The very “doctor” is also recognized and used by the rest of the community. The main advantage in using an Adventist it appears, inter alia, is the fact that as part of his payment, a bottle of Brandy/liquor is not included. It comes as no surprise that other Adventist have had to compromise their stance on liquor and its usage as form of payment in the absence of a qualified Adventist “doctor”. In general the traditional doctor operates at the same level as the “inyangas”, or “amaxhwele.
There is no particular day in the week on which circumcision can be done, but the majority seems to prefer the last two days of the week, Thursday or Friday. There seems to be no observable difference or uniqueness that Adventists can boast of when it comes to the cutting and the disposal of the prepuce (Interview, Motherwell Congregation). Initiates are expected to affirm that they are now men as opposed to boys, after the cutting of the prepuce.
The period of seclusion
The newly initiates that were interviewed had all spent about three weeks away from home. This seems to be the average period unless there are some medical complications. The first week carries the same restrictions as in the traditional context. The only difference is what happens on the last day of the first week. Food restrictions are lifted from this day onward, but the ritual surrounding the event is done differently by Adventists. For Adventists there is no prescription as to what kind of animal must be slaughtered for this event. Usually a sheep as opposed to goat is slaughtered.
There was no structured instructional programme even for the Adventist that was reported to have taken place during this period of seclusion. The newly initiates reported that their day consisted of prayer or devotions in the morning and nothing else. A male person known as ikhankatha (traditional guardian) is tasked with the responsibility of monitoring the progress of the initiates. It is his job not only to look at the medical progress of the initiates but to guide them into manhood by sharing relevant information to them. Unfortunately, most of these guardians are necessarily people with good reputation or character. These are more like nurses who look after the patient after the surgical operation.
Coming Home (Umphumo)/Reintegration
There is not much difference between what Adventists do on the day of the “Coming home” and the traditional Xhosa speakers. The day starts early in the morning and focuses on two main events, the admonition (ukuyala) and the presentation of gifts. For the ritual of washing and anointing, some Adventist families request the ordained minister to be the one applying the ointment, which is olive oil as opposed to the ordinary butter.
This event marks the climax of the whole ritual of circumcision. The celebration and the jubilation is beyond description. The involvement of the church is usually more visible at this stage than in any stage of the ritual. In some cases announcements are made in church or word is passed around informing the church about this occasion. The role of the church includes participation in giving admonitions and counsel to the new initiates and presentation of gifts.
Unlike in the traditional setting, where bottles of liquor are presented as gifts and with the same being imbibed as part of the festivities, such is not seen in the Adventist celebrations. While this may be the norm, there are some Adventists who have succumbed to the social pressure to provide liquor, but these could be regarded as exceptions.
The singing of Christian hymns, prayer and use of the Bible distinguishes this part in the ritual from the traditional one. Those who stand to give admonition to a large degree use the Bible as the reference point for the words of advice and counsel that are given. The following texts as confirmed by the Motherwell groups and the new initiates seem to be the common ones: (Genesis 17:10-14, 23-27; Genesis 34:15,17,22,24; Deut. 10:16; 30:6; Acts 16:3;Romans 2:29; Philippians 3:3; Colossians 2:11).
It is made clear to “amakrwala” (newly initiated) as they are now called, that the rite is from God and that it was not invented by the Xhosa-speaking people. New Testament is also used to show that Paul also had to circumcise Timothy, so that he can be accepted by the Jews. Biblical texts that also show the importance of behavioral change, which is regarded as the true circumcision of the heart, are elaborated upon.
The objective of the admonition is to highlight the importance of behavioral change that goes with being a man as opposed to being a boy. It is emphasized repeatedly that the previous life has come to an end and a new life of manhood has started. It is here that the meaning and purpose of circumcision is clearly seen, which does not differ much from the traditional one.
After these celebrations, the new initiates will put on new clothes, and they are not allowed to put any of their old clothes, these obviously signifying a new status, that of manhood.
HOW XHOSA SPEAKING ADVENTIST HAVE USED CULTURE AND SCRIPTURE TO DERIVE MEANING AND SIGNIFICANCE FOR CIRCUMCISION.
As part of the Xhosa speaking community, Adventists do also attach a deep meaning and significance to circumcision. Obviously, the reasons used to justify the practice will be different to those used by other Xhosa-speaking people. The chapter is divided into two main parts, the first is an attempt by Xhosa-speaking laity to accommodate circumcision into Adventism. The second is how the same laity, probably with support from pastors have used the Bible to find meaning and justification for the ritual.
Attempts at Accommodation of circumcision by Laity
One of the major themes that surfaced from the respondents is the lack of information on how to deal with cultural issues that impact on our understanding of Adventism. It became clear from the interviews that the members did not have a clue as to what the church’s position with regards to circumcision. The fact of the matter is, there is no position and no official guidelines specific to the issue of circumcision as practiced by Xhosa-speaking Adventists. The ritual of circumcision has never been debated or seen as something that deserves close scrutiny and investigation by the church except in cases where statements are made with regards to culture.
The information from the respondents was based on what they thought was in line with the Bible. The response can be divided into at least three arguments; argument from silence, argument of “non-contradiction” and argument of “conditional injunction.”
Argument from Silence
One prevailing argument used by Adventists is that the “Bible does not prohibit them from doing so.” Some members argue that if the Bible is silent, then it is up to that community to go ahead or not. To put simply the argument asserts that if the Bible is silent on any given cultural practice, we cannot make cultural conformity a test of fellowship.
Argument of “non-contradiction”
The point being argued here is that unless it can be shown that the rite of circumcision contradicts the Bible, it remains a neutral issue. There may not be an explicit command to observe the rite but on the same vein there does not seem to be an explicit instruction prohibiting the observance. The contradiction as explained by the group includes more than just Biblical texts. It also includes the theology and the mission of the church. If the practice is seen to contradict either our mission or theology then it must not be observed. Coincidentally, circumcision was practiced in the Bible with God’s approval, then why would it be sinful to observe the rite today?
Argument of “conditional injunction”
Here it is adduced that the Bible actually encourages the observance of any cultural practice if by so doing we create a climate of receptivity for the gospel
The argument is that the rite of circumcision does help in the propagation of the gospel. The Biblical example that is often given for this is that of Paul who had to circumcise Timothy and that act helped in the propagation of the gospel; anything contrary would have hindered the advancements of the mission of the church.
In spite of the lack of ecclesiastical direction and theological guidance from the church leadership and church theologians, most Adventist congregations have had to accommodate this ritual into their faith and practice. This attempt needs to be recognized and commended.
The provision of their own surgeon “ingcibi”, and involvement of Adventist men to look after and to attend to the needs of the initiates coupled with the non-provision of alcoholic beverages is a bold step. This is increasingly making the church and the way it conducts the circumcision an envy of other Xhosa speaking people. This creative adaptation effected by the laity is becoming more popular in Adventist circles if not a norm.
However, there are certain practices and expectations in the observance of the this practice that are clearly traditional and have no biblical basis. By traditional it is meant that these could be seen as contradicting the Bible and its message as understood by the Adventists. It was shown that in the traditional setting those who have gone through the ritual of circumcision are afforded the privilege to intermingle and associate with men. Boys traditionally are not allowed to address men and even to be seen in their company. This has been carried to the church in some form or another.
An interview with one respondent confirmed that the involvement of uncircumcised men/boys in the services of the church especially preaching during the main service is a rare event. Although the respondent added that this used to be a norm in the past, a practice that was accepted as a policy. Today this has become a silent policy; it is not made a public, or an official statement. However there is a general reluctance in having male member who have not been circumcised to preach in the church.
Circumcision carries a significant weight even with Adventists as it does with traditional Xhosa-speaking people. Xhosa speaking Adventists who reside in areas like Gauteng and as far as Europe and America are known to have traveled to the Eastern Cape or back to their homes to have their children circumcised. Even though in such areas, circumcision is regarded as a non-issue, these Adventist take time to make sure that they comply with the practice.
There are no clearly presented arguments for such practices. One respondent conceded that these are done because that is what is expected and is unthinkable to be a man without going through the traditional route.
An interview with a student studying to be a minister and who was doing his practicum in one of the Xhosa-speaking churches reveals also how this custom is regarded by some Xhosa speaking Adventists . This student reveals the embarrassing situation where he and his friends were asked to sit with boys, since they had not been ritually circumcised.
These student pastors in training were of Zulu background where the practice is not followed either by the Adventist or the community at large. This was clearly a clash of church and custom, pastors are in principle welcomed to all events and occasions organized by church members. It became clear to these student pastors that their presence was creating discomfort and disturbance for other attendees in this gathering.
The extent to which Xhosa speaking Adventists have gone to adapt this practice reflects the seriousness in which they view circumcision. It is only as we examine the Biblical evidence upon which the whole system is based that we can be able to understand why the Xhosa – speaking Adventists have gone to these lengths in adapting and accommodating this custom.
The use of the Bible to find meaning and significance
The first observation focused on how Adventists have accommodate this practice as a way of inculturation. The second observation is how the Xhosa speaking Adventist have used the Bible, either to explain or justify the continuation of this custom. Adventists pride themselves in being a church that still believes not only in the sola scriptura, but tota scriptura (Davidson 2000:61). It therefore does not come as surprise that the Bible is used to explain and justify the continued practice of circumcision in the church.
The Biblical texts that are used as seen from above can be grouped into three sets. The first set deals with the origin of circumcision. The main point being that the custom is not just a Xhosa tradition; it has its origin in the Bible, and to be specific Old Testament. This origin as seen again is a Jewish origin as reflected in the Old Testament.
The second group of Biblical texts reflects the continuity of this practice in the New Testament. The argument advanced here is that circumcision continues to be important not only because of the argument of the argument of origin, but also on missiological grounds. Circumcision is seen as the best and effective way of reaching the traditional Xhosa speaking people who still believe in the significance of the practice.
For the adult respondents the issue of evangelism was paramount as the reason for the continuance of the rite. To them the whole meaning of circumcision is to be derived from this objective. The intention as argued is to make it possible for their male children to relate to other men and to be able to preach to the community.
It was noted earlier that one of the benefits of undergoing circumcision is the new community status that is conferred on the participants. Part of this involves being able and permitted to mingle with men (those already circumcised). The interesting phenomena is that this evangelistic rationale is not fully supported by the initiates. For those new initiates this part did not feature very much, it was the change that comes with circumcision that stood out for them.
The last batch of Biblical texts shows the real importance and expectations that even Xhosa speaking Adventist have when it comes to circumcision. This involves the expected behavioral change. The whole ritual becomes useless and meaningless without this observable change of life style.
The initiates interviews were all unanimous that an observable change of lifestyle is expected and desired and anticipated, failing which they would have disgraced their manhood. Even though three of them were baptized members of the church, they felt that the real change came about as the result of circumcision. When asked what the meaning of baptism is, again here there was unanimity that it had to do with the right to participate in church activities. “One has the right and the permission to preach once he is baptized”.
The changes and adaptations that Xhosa-speaking Adventists have effected on the ritual of circumcision can at best be regarded as cosmetic if not non-essential. It appears that the Adventist church has to a great extent baptized the ritual into the church without any meaningful transformation. The intended purpose of circumcision even for Xhosa-speaking Adventists is seen in their scrupulous attention to details when it comes to the core aspects of circumcision. These include the surgical operation; Adventists in general make use of the very person that is used by the traditional Xhosa-speaking people. The ingcibi (traditional surgeon) as he is called, plays a very significant role in this ritual, the survival of the initiates to a great degree depends on how skilled and experienced he is in the procedure.
An interview with one of the ingcibi who is a Christian Adventist revealed that these persons are authorized and equipped by their ancestors to perform the surgical operation. While Henderson Tiyo(1931:252), writing in the early twentieth century remarks that such people did not belong to an recognized group such as diviners, witch-doctors or herbalists. They were experts who through trial and error and consistent practice had gain the skill as surgeons. He however, concedes that in some cultural groups or tribes these traditional surgeons are indeed regarded as religious functionaries. Also in this vein Ngxamngxa (1971:187 ) notes that the ingcibi undergoes a form of ritual cleansing which includes fasting, abstaining from women, not drinking beer or smoking. The use of these persons by Xhosa-speaking Adventists implies a recognition of their powers and guarantees the safety of their children who are about to be circumcised.
The Motherwell congregation’s case is an exception, where the ingcibi happens to be an Adventist. In most areas this is not the case, the traditional person is used, for it is believed that this would augur well for the initiate. Attempts are underway to make sure that there are other Adventists who are trained to perform the surgical operation in the area of Motherwell.
It was shown that both for the traditional and the Adventists that there is little or no systematic instruction given during the period of seclusion. It would seem that the belief is that the ritual itself will confer or effect a change in the initiates. The ritual act of anointing done on the last day before they initiates are taken back to their homes shows the validity of this assertion. The chosen person for the ritual who is known for his charisma and good manners is expected to pass the same in a magical way to the new initiates.
In some areas, as reflected in an interview with and Adventist pastor, the Adventists are resorting and requesting the minister to be the one doing the anointing. The expectation and belief is still the same, that his virtues would be transferred to the young initiates.
The burning of the lodge as seen above symbolizes the burial of the past life of irresponsibility and carelessness. The initiates are urged not to look back signifying their intention to forget the previous life.
Lastly, the admonitions and words of advice given on the day seem to point in one direction and that is a change of behavior and new lifestyle. The new clothes that they are expected to put on from that day onwards, would remain a constant reminder that they are new persons and that their lives have changed.
When asked which occasion brought much joy and celebration in their families and in their personal experience, again the respondents were in agreement that it was the coming out ceremonies (umphumo). Some of them could not remember what was done when they were baptized, all they could attest to was that circumcision meant a lot to them as individuals, the family and the church at large. It should be noted that Adventists practice a believers’ baptism (Kiesler 2000:586,587). In some cases those going for circumcision would have already been baptized. It must be admitted that the ritual of circumcision eclipses that of baptism and seems to carry more weight than Christian baptism.
A critique of the above meaning which Xhosa speaking Adventists have attached on circumcision will follow. The cultural critique seek to examine whether there has been a clearly defined inculturation or a mere non-critical absorption of tradition into the church. The Biblical and missiological critique on the other hand seeks to analyze the Biblical texts used to justify the continuance of the ritual. The following chapter will focus on the latter.
III. BIBLICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE RITUAL OF CIRCUMCISION
(Biblical and missiological critique)
We noticed from the previous chapter that the response from the Motherwell Congregation last two fundamental evidences used to justify the continuance of the ritual of circumcision by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists. The first line of evidence is more implicit and shows an attempt by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists at enculturating this ritual. The second deals with the explicit texts from the Bible that are used to support the ritual of circumcision as practised by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists.
In this chapter we will focus exclusively on the explicit Biblical texts used as justification for the observance of the ritual of circumcision. The next chapter will be a critique on the approach and method used by the church to accommodate the ritual of circumcision into its practise.
The Biblical texts used during ukuyala reflect the theological understanding of significance of the ritual among the Xhosa-speaking Adventists. As observed earlier, the Bible is used to justify the ritual in at least three ways: The first is the argument of origin (Genesis 17:10-14; 23-27). The second argument is that of missiological significance (Acts 16:3), and the last being the moral argument (Deuteronomy 10:16; Philippians 3:3). The purpose of this chapter is to examine the tripartite arguments to see if these arguments can be sustained.
Argument of Origin
The basic argument here is that the ritual of circumcision dates as far back as the Old Testament. While this may be true but to argue that this is one of the reasons why Xhosa-speaking Adventists observe the ritual seems untenable. To assert that the instruction first given to Abraham in Genesis 17 applies to Xhosa-speaking Adventists is to imply that all men regardless of their culture should be circumcised. If this can be proved to be true, then it will have to be conceded that this teaching and understanding is only held by Xhosa-speaking Adventists and no other group of Adventists, both in South Africa and anywhere in the world.
The events leading to the Jerusalem Council as recorded in Acts 15 leave us in no doubt that the role of circumcision had begun to take on a strictly cultural significance. The conversion of Cornelius recorded in Acts 10 proved beyond reasonable doubt that God had accepted the Gentiles without the ritual of circumcision. James Dunn(1996:146) commenting on why the Holy Spirit preceded baptism in the case of Cornelius, says “God had to give so clear an indication of his will otherwise even Peter might have hesitated to take such a bold step in the case of Gentiles without first requiring them to be circumcised”. This shows that up to that point even in the minds of the early Church leaders, circumcision was binding even for the Gentiles.
According to Scott Spencer (1997:116),” the outpouring of the Holy Spirit creates remarkable social unity”. The two groups, one circumcised and the other uncircumcised are now bound together in the community of God’s people. This happens without any requirement for the Gentiles to be circumcised for the Holy Spirit “has broken through such barriers in forceful, undeniable fashion…” (Spencer, 117).
Even though we have here this unusual order, of Spirit preceding baptism, Peter still recognizes baptism as something that cannot be dispensed with. God had ratified his acceptance of Cornelius by the gift of the Holy Spirit; the church had to do the same by the symbol of baptism (Dunn 1996:146). Luke Johnson (1992:195) draws the following practical conclusion from this event:
If God has given these Gentiles the same experience as they had at the beginning, doesn’t this mean they belong as fully to the messianic community? And doesn’t it follow that since they had been baptized by the Spirit by the free gift of God, the Church should ritually ratify the initiative by baptizing these Gentiles (10:47-48)?
The second event leading to the Jerusalem Council is found in Acts 11. The same event that took place in chapter 10 is rehearsed with its radical implication to the other apostles, hoping for the same response that Peter made. It is interesting to note that the bone of contention as reflected in 11:3 is not so much about Peter baptizing the Gentile Cornelius, but it is about him eating with a Gentile. The conclusion reached in 11:18 mentions nothing about eating but rather focuses on the salvation of the Gentiles, “Then hath God also the Gentiles granted repentance unto life”.
Barret (2002:166) notes two fundamental questions that are raised by the Cornelius story: “May a Jew, even if a Christian and going about Christian duties, have domestic and table-fellowship with a Gentile”, the second question is: “May those who are not Jews become Christians, and if they wish to do so, is it necessary that that they should first be circumcised as Jews before being baptized as Christians?” The conclusion in 11:18 seems to settle this agitation from the Jerusalem, and as F. F Bruce puts it (as quoted in Stott:1992:196), “their criticism ceased; their worship began”.
Unfortunately this matter was not settled in Jerusalem, but later came up with specific focus on salvation of Gentiles and the need of circumcision for the same and not just social relations between Jew and Gentile as recorded in Acts 15. This appears to have been one of the main issues that led to the first Council which met in Jerusalem.
The resolution recorded in 15:19 emphasizes the importance of “turning to God”. On this Dunn (1996: 204) argues and says, “The critical factor in the acceptability of Gentiles to the believing Jews should be the fact of their conversion to God and thus acceptance to God”. The interesting point highlighted by Scott Spencer (1997:156-157) is that here the James uses the same verb (parenochlein) which was used by the Jews in the Maccabean revolt signifying the Jews resolution to observe their laws. Here the point is that the Gentiles also should not be (parenochlein) by pressurizing them into keeping the Jewish laws.
It should be remembered at this point, that the initial question that was raised in Antioch implied that Gentiles had to be circumcised if they wanted to be saved (Acts 15:1). The stipulation reflected in 15:20 should not be seen as modified list of things that Gentiles should do in order to be saved. But according to Justo Gonzalez (2001:176), the question was not, how much of the Law must be obeyed in order to be a Christian? It was rather, how much of the Law must one obey in order to live in the midst of Israel?
It would be unbiblical to ignore this resolution and to seek to derive meaning by appealing to Old Testament as an attempt to justify the continued observance of circumcision. This resolution limits and restricts the ritual of circumcision to the Jews only.
Missiological Significance of Circumcision
Immediately after the Jerusalem Council, Paul is reported to have circumcised Timothy (Acts 16;3). The concern is whether this can be used to justify a continued observance of circumcision by non-Jewish Christians or not. Was Timothy circumcised in order to advance the mission of the church? How can this act be reconciled with the Jerusalem Council?
The Motherwell Congregation did not doubt that this is undeniable evidence that the Bible does not prohibit circumcision, and in such instances it actually encourages it, as seen in Acts 16:3. To be sure Xhosa-speaking Adventists do not attach any serious meaning to circumcision except for the one that seems to be mission motivated.
An interview with a Xhosa-speaking Adventist residing (permanently) in Gauteng shows the above to be true. This member had to drive all the way to Eastern Cape to have his two boys circumcised. His reason for this is the one seen above, “to make sure that the two boys are accepted in that community and are able to preach and be listened to.” This clearly is circumcision on missiological grounds. Those interviewed both in the group from Motherwell and isolated individuals all do concur that there is no significant value in circumcision besides the need for cultural and social acceptance.
The basic argument is that circumcision is morally neutral and as such can easily be used to an evangelistic strategy to win more Xhosa-speaking to Adventism. Is the above argument justifiable and sustainable? Since circumcision is generally a ritual observed by most of the other Nguni tribes; should the Adventists in those groups be expected to practise the ritual? Could there be more substance to circumcision than the Xhosa-speaking Adventists are willing to admit?
Paul’s teaching on circumcision is clearly reflected in several texts in the New Testament. In Romans 2:25-29, he seems to be pointing out that it is obedience to the law of God that counts and not mere circumcision. He also advocates a spiritual circumcision, that of the heart.
Again we see the same trend in I Corinthians 7:17-24. His instruction to all churches (7:17) is that men should remain what they were when they became Christians. He argues that “circumcision and uncircumcision are both nothing (7:19). The same line of reasoning and argument can be seen in Galatians 6:15. For Paul what counted more was a new creation and neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counted for anything.
The resolution taken in Jerusalem does concur with Paul’s teaching or rather Paul does not contradict the Jerusalem resolution. According to this resolution, Gentiles could not be expected to undergo circumcision, this was left only for the Jews (Acts 15:19-21).
Circumcision of Timothy
In Acts 16:3, Luke records that Paul circumcised Timothy because of the Jews. This text interestingly has not been taken at surface value by many scholars. The fundamental issue being argued is whether Paul indeed circumcised Timothy, as Luke reports in this text. John Polhill (1992:342) observes that some scholars have argued that Paul would have never asked Timothy to be circumcised. This is premised, as these scholars argue, on the fact that Paul is strenuously opposed to circumcision. The point is that this practise would be inconsistent with his teaching.
Indeed for Paul to circumcise Timothy, especially after the events recorded in Acts 14, 15 would be “startling”, argues Johnson (1992: 284). John Stott (1990:257) quotes Baur when he says, “the Paul of Acts is manifestly quite different person from the Paul of the Epistles”. This goes to show the difficulty that exists in reconciling Acts 16:3 with the rest of Paul’s writings and particularly his teaching on circumcision.
Attempts have understandably been made to reconcile Acts with the Epistles. Some scholars have argued, for a redactor and also accusing Luke of “perpetuating gross confusion.” (Expositors Bible Commentary 1981:455). The key to unlocking this apparent discrepancy is by resolving the national identity of Timothy. Was Timothy regarded as a Jew or Gentile? If a Gentile, then according to Paul’s teaching and the resolution taken in Acts 15, he was under no obligation to undergo circumcision. If a Jew then it would be expedient for him to be circumcised.
Luke seems to be at pains to give his readers the reason why Paul circumcised Timothy. This is obviously in view of the apparent inconsistency and contradiction this would cause, especially in the footsteps of the decision taken in Acts 15. The rationale for the circumcision of Timothy is given as “because of the Jews” (Acts 16:3), which were in the areas Timothy would be visiting with Paul. It is also significant to note that Timothy had mixed blood, that his mother was a Jew while his father was a Greek. This would explain why he was not circumcised at an early age as required by the Jewish law (Genesis 17).
The question confronting us is whether Paul circumcised Timothy for prudential and missiological reasons or whether this was proper and expedient. Gerd Ludemann (1987:173) points out that Paul had to make Timothy (who was a Gentile) a Jew so that he can accompany him. If this was the case, would this not contradict both the spirit and the letter of Acts 15 since Gentiles were not expected to become Jews after conversion? It would be difficult to explain why Titus was not circumcised while he occupied the same position as Timothy and with added pressure from some Jews that he be circumcised.
In response to the above French Arrington (1988:161) notes that; “no one was insisting that Timothy be circumcised,” Paul then did the ritual in compliance with the principle of I Corinthians 9:19 “To the Jews I became a Jew, in order to win Jews.” He also argues that Paul refused to circumcise Titus simply because the Judaizers demanded it as necessary for salvation (French 1988:161). If Timothy was a Gentile, clearly his circumcision would not be a condition for his salvation, for he was already saved, and if he was a Jew, the rite would not be for discipleship as he was already one as shown in Acts 16:1 (Johnson 1992:284).
While the above argument seems to add weight on the observation that Paul circumcised Timothy in keeping with the principle in I Corinthians 9:19; it remains to be seen why he did not apply the same principle in the case of Titus in Galatians 2:3.
Did Paul set aside the resolutions taken in Acts 15 in favour of the principle of I Corinthians 9:20? In other words did the decision taken in Acts 15 make room for prudentiality in the matter of circumcision? If Timothy was perceived as a Gentile then the above argument would hold, but if he was not, then the reason for his circumcision would be more than just for prudential reasons.
While conceding that Timothy’s circumcision was a matter of missionary strategy at the very least, Polhill (1992:343) succinctly argues for a matrilineal principle. That Timothy due to her mother being a Jew would then qualify as a Jew in the eyes of the Jews. As a Jew his circumcision would then required in keeping with the Jerusalem resolution and consistent with Paul’s teaching on circumcision in the epistles.
Luke does not only give as a reason the fact that Timothy would work among the Jews, but he alludes also to his lineage. What would be the relevance of informing his audience about the mother of Timothy whom he says was Jew, if this was not material to the whole issue? That his father is a Gentile was known, and it also explains why Timothy was not circumcised, but because his mother was a Jew, “he was a Jew in the eyes of the Jewish world” (Expositor’s Bible Commentary 1981: 455).
Paul’s circumcision of Timothy was consistent with the early church’s resolution (Acts 15:21) and with his own teachings. The accusation in Acts 21:21 that Paul was teaching Jews to forsake the Law of Moses; would then be seen to be false. Paul was even willing to undergo ritual purification (Acts 21:26) to dispel the accusation against him for not abiding by the Law of Moses. The exemption as far as circumcision is concerned, is again reinforced in (Acts 21:25).
Refusal to Circumcise Titus
Does the circumcision of Timothy really provide a legitimate basis for the Xhosa-speaking Adventists to practise circumcision? If so, the apparent refusal by Paul to circumcise Titus (Galatians 2:3) would clearly challenge this argument. To simply assert that Paul’s circumcision of Timothy justifies the practise of circumcision by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists might be an oversimplification of Paul’s view on circumcision.
Raymond Brown (1997:306) makes a striking observation when he asserts that there are two accounts on the Jerusalem Council; one is found in Acts 15 and the other in Galatians 2. The account as given by Luke in Acts 15 gives a purely objective and simplified report of what took place in this Council. But as regards Paul, he offers a personal account written in self-defence which also reveals the acrimonious nature of the debates during the Council (Brown 1997:306).
Circumcision is first mentioned in the book of Galatians in chapter 2:3 with reference to Paul’s refusal to circumcise Titus. The entire book seems to reflect a tacit assumption that circumcision was the main point of controversy between Paul and his opponents (Ridderbos: 1979:82).
To have brought a Gentile convert in the name of Titus in the predominantly Jewish Council, argues Brown (1997:307), was “a shrewd manoeuvre” by Paul. It offered the audience a first hand, face to face opportunity to meet a Christian Gentile who was not circumcised.
Wilson (1973:33) is correct when he says, “The presence of Titus constituted a test case, and the fact that he was not compelled to be circumcised, though this was strongly pressed by the Judaizers, really amounted to a declaration of principle”. The same sentiments are echoed by F.F. Bruce (1982:111) when he asserts, “in retrospect Titus could be cited as a test case…”
Titus served as a living proof of an uncircumcised Christian and as a witness to the gospel without the law (Ebeling 1985:87). Titus was the only non-Jew in a conference that was to decide the fate of non-Jews. The fact that he was not compelled to be circumcised presents a powerful argument against the teaching that Gentiles had to be circumcised.
The refusal to circumcise Titus cannot therefore be viewed as a missionary strategy, it might actually be easier to argue for the contrary. The incident not only illustrates clearly Paul’s view on circumcision but it shows the unity in the Jerusalem Council in so far as circumcision for Gentiles was concerned.
Titus, a Gentile Christian, was not only Paul’s convert but his chosen and trusted “partner and fellow –worker” (2 Corinthians 8:23). This implies that at one time or the other he would mingle with Jews as is on this occasion in Jerusalem. Even this consideration was not enough to have Titus circumcised. This then was a deliberate act on the part of Paul, which as observed earlier would prove to be a living proof on the resolution taken in the Jerusalem Council.
If the Jerusalem Council had succumbed to the Jewish pressure (Judaizers) and circumcised Titus, then Paul’s theology and teaching on justification by faith as seen in (Galatians 3:1-6), would have been made in valid. According to Gerhard Ebeling (1985:87), Paul here was not just creating a test case, but had “made up his mind with respect to the basic question”. Hence the resolution as recorded in Acts 15:21 affirmed Paul’s position and teaching. The unyielding stance taken in Jerusalem in not succumbing to the influence of the Judaizers was a matter of principle and not just a missiological strategy.
The incident recorded in Galatians 2:3, in light of the foregoing arguments, fits in well with Paul’s teaching and the early church’s expectation. Rather than conflict with Paul’s circumcision of Timothy it shows clearly his consistent application of his teaching throughout
Moral Argument
It is true that the Bible does make a clear distinction between circumcision of the heart and that of the flesh. Xhosa-speaking Adventists have used this to show that the ritual of circumcision has as its goal a change of lifestyle. It would seem that even Adventists tend to believe that without the circumcision of flesh a moral change is not possible. One of the respondents among the group of initiates that were interviewed conceded that, “Without circumcision one would continue to behave like a boy even though he may be baptized” (Ngamlana). To these newly initiated (amkrwala), the ritual of circumcision effects a change in one’s lifestyle and this is how the concept of the circumcision of the heart is applied by Xhosa-speaking Adventists.
Physical and Ethical dimension of Circumcision
It is clear from the Bible that for the Jews, circumcision was both physical and ethical (Deut. 30:6, Genesis 17:10-14). According to Genesis (17:11) physical circumcision was a sign of the covenant between Israel and God. “By circumcision,” writes Palmer Roberts (1993:54), “a testimony was given to the world, and a person was sealed in his membership with the organized community of the covenant”. It should be noted that circumcision in the Biblical sense was not a sign of entrance into manhood as it is with Xhosa-speaking people; instead it was a formal sign of membership in the covenant community (Robertson, 55).
This covenant community according to Thomas McComiskey (1985:37) constituted “a people who by virtue of God’s faithfulness to is promise owe to God the debt of obedience to this commands”. Those who become members of this covenant and do so by physical circumcision are “to maintain the purity of heart and deep sensitivity to the will of God as reflected in the concept of ethical circumcision” (McComiskey, 37).
James Dunn (1998:422) state convincingly that the Jews had always emphasized the necessity of a circumcised heart but the only difference being that they entertained the hope that this will be realized in future. He (Dunn 1998) argues that for Paul the above claim and hope was realized among the early Gentile and Jewish believers; meaning that “their conversion could be described as an act of circumcising the heart by the Spirit”. This hope as he (Dunn 1998) concludes “was fulfilled in the gift of the Spirit”.
However, George Ladd(1994:540,541) does not see this fulfilment as a future reality. He argues for a twofold view of the people of Israel. In the first place he sees Israel as constituting a theocracy, a nation; and secondly, as being a spiritual people also. Circumcision was an external requirement for membership in the nation, but this alone did not make them right with God. In Jeremiah (4:4) and Deuteronomy 10:6, a need for the circumcision of the heart is adumbrated. He (Ladd, 541), sums up his view as follows: “Thus there is found even in the Old Testament the distinction between the nation and the “church” between physical Israel and the true, spiritual Israel…”
One does not want to lose the import of Dunn’s argument, that this realization was seen clearly in the gift of the Holy Spirit to the believers. It may have been intended in the Old Testament, but may not have been fully and clearly realized until the New Testament.
The above seems also to be the basic argument advanced by Paul (Romans 2:25-29). Here the ethical dimension takes precedent over the physical. Paul seems to be asserting that one can have ethical circumcision without the physical. For to him a true Jew is the one who fulfils the ethical responsibility which is shown in obedience to God’s law and not just the circumcised one.
It can be readily seen that for Xhosa Adventists to insist that boys should be circumcised in order to effect a change in lifestyle; undermines the power of conversion and that of the Holy Spirit. The believers then are those who have experienced what circumcision of the flesh was meant to symbolize, and that is circumcision of the heart (Dunn 1998:424).
In the New Testament circumcision as the sign of inclusion into the covenant community loses its strength and becomes of relative importance, if not just a cultural ritual. John Walton (1994:118) sees “baptism as an initiation sign just as circumcision was for the Abrahamic phase”. While we observe an exemption for the Gentiles to observe circumcision, baptism seem to be requisite for both the Jews and the Gentiles (Acts 2:38). Covenant of grace has as its sign baptism, which also incorporates women (Robertson 1993:57; Kline 1967:94).
However, as noted by James Dunn(1998:454,455), “It is the gift of the Spirit, not baptism, which provides the new covenant answer to the old covenant circumcision”. What Dunn seeks to show here is that it was the presence of the Spirit in the life of the Gentiles that made the ritual of circumcision redundant and unnecessary. He (Dunn 1998:455) also sees the sociological significance of baptism as functioning the same way as circumcision.
It has been shown that the whole weight of the ritual of circumcision rests on the belief and expectation that those who undergo the ritual will be more responsible and will show a change of behaviour. Xhosa-speaking Adventists do subscribe to this belief in more than one ways. The attempt by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists to link physical circumcision to ethical circumcision in this dispensation is unwarranted and unbiblical. This becomes even more so when the same expectation is given to both the baptized and unbaptized “boys”, thereby giving the impression that conversion counts for nothing and circumcision becomes everything.
We have looked briefly at the three-fold Biblical arguments given by Xhosa-speaking Adventists in an attempt to justify the continued observance of circumcision. We have argued that Timothy was circumcised because he was seen as a Jew in the eyes of the Jews. His circumcision was more expedient than prudent. We also argued that both in the Old and New Testament, spiritual conversion was not dependent on physical circumcision. Baptism substituted circumcision and was required of both the Jews and Gentiles unlike circumcision.
There is therefore no Biblical justification and support for the arguments raised by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists for their continued observance of the ritual of circumcision.
INCULTURATION IN THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH
(Cultural Critique)
The previous chapter was a Biblical analysis of the textual evidence used to support the ritual of circumcision by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists. Here in this chapter the focus is on the attempt by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists in adopting and accommodating the ritual of circumcision into their faith and theology.
We have observed that besides the use of explicit Biblical texts to justify the ritual of circumcision, Xhosa-speaking Adventists use three other reasons to justify the ritual. The first argument is that of silence, where the Bible is said to be neutral on the subject and does not explicitly forbid those who observe the ritual. The second argument is that of non-contradiction, that the practise does not contradict the teachings of the Bible, as held by Adventists. The last one was a conditional injunction, which allows and encourages the observance of the custom in areas where it is socially acceptable so as to aid in the spreading of the gospel.
In spite of the theological and Biblical justification that Adventist may advance for circumcision, the fact of the matter is that the roots of circumcision among Xhosa-speaking people are traditional and not Biblical. This was confirmed by the one respondent when he confessed that the main reason why the church is involved in circumcision is simply because of tradition and culture more than anything.
It has already been noted that the Xhosa – speaking Adventist are the only group among Adventists that has to deal with the challenge of circumcision. It is also true that Xhosa-speaking Adventists do not as yet regard this as a challenge, it is not something they are struggling with, for this is not an imposition but something they enjoy and look forward to, as Xhosa speaking people. This is a clear display of cultural pride.
The fact that only the Xhosa-speaking Adventists are observing the ritual of circumcision raises serious concerns from other Adventists. Those who observe this custom are regarded as having compromised the Adventist and indeed the Christian faith by other Adventists. This observation was also confirmed by a respondent who indicated that in his culture any Adventist who observes circumcision is regarded as one who has denied his Adventist faith, this is the case also in Sotho-speaking people especially in Lesotho. These concerns emanate from Adventists who are surrounded by this custom in the areas where they live, but who have refused to be part of it, for Biblical reasons.
On the surface, the observance of this custom does seem to conflict with the Adventist faith. It has already been noted that Adventist believe in the mortality of the soul, and as such do not subscribe to the general African traditional belief of ancestors. The ritual of circumcision as already shown has in one way or the other links with some form of ancestral veneration or African traditional religion. The interviews conducted do not directly and explicitly support the assertion that these Adventists may be compromising their faith, but the onus rests with these Adventists to show why they among all the Adventists still practice this custom.
It is appropriate at this point to register the fact that any practice that regulates how one can serve in the church, which forces or expects members to travel long distances to observe it, that limits the function and the role of the pastors, that raises concerns from some members of the community of believers, cannot be treated lightly. It is even worse when the same practice appears to contradict the community’s own basic beliefs. The Xhosa-speaking Adventists owe it to themselves, their children and the other Adventists both in South Africa and the World at large, to explain and show why this custom is still relevant to them.
Xhosa-speaking Adventists and Adventists in general have not seriously engaged or acculturated Western Christianity. The church has no Biblical position as to how its members should relate to the issue of the ritual of circumcision as well as many other cultural .
It is in this vein that Pauw (1975:66) observes that Western Christianity has persisted “relatively unchanged and unrelated to Xhosa tradition” among the Xhosa speaking believers. This shows that more of Western Christianity still abounds in many African Christians but for some reason it is not related to the African traditional life. The cut and paste method employed by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists as observed in Motherwell church has not yielded good results.
Pauw(1975:66) continues to argue that many Christians tend to act in terms of certain Xhosa traditions in the homestead. This on the surface creates a “double life” for the Christians, a life in the church which is regulated by Western Christianity and one in the homestead which fits in with the African tradition. As a result of this “schizophrenic” condition, Xhosa-speaking Adventists can practice the ritual of baptism in the church and that of circumcision at home with ease and with no sense of contradiction.
This superficial treatment of the culture is the reason for the lack of understanding for both the Biblical position and traditional cultural significance of the ritual of circumcision by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists. Below is an attempt to explore the principles that should guide the Xhosa-speaking Adventists in its inculturation process and in dealing with circumcision.
Challenge of Inculturation
Bosch (1991:447) succinctly argues that, “The Christian faith never existed except as translated into culture.” However it is the dynamics of this process that has always created a problem for the church. This process appears to be a two edged sword, on one hand it might lead to a transformation of culture and the other to a distortion of Christianity. This is acutely observed by Bosch (1991:291)as he quotes Eugene Smith, when he remarks that the relationship between culture and Christianity has been one of the major compromises of the Christian mission.
The position the Xhosa-speaking Adventists finds themselves in could be the result of enculturation gone wrong, leading to a distortion of Christianity and Adventism in particular. It could also be the positive fruition of inculturation leading to a transformation of culture and a better understanding of Christianity.
The process of inculturation is strikingly viewed by Bosch (1991:454) as a “double movement”. This avoids a one sided approach of enculturation of Christianity without a Christianization of culture. It is also in keeping with this basic understanding that Bavinck (quoted in Hesselgrave 1991:132), says the following about enculturation:
“It is the process of disengaging the supracultural elements of the gospel from one culture and contextualizing them within the cultural from and social institution of another, with at least a degree of transformation of these forms.”
Correctly understood and applied, this process requires of those who engage in it, a proper understanding of the gospel and thorough knowledge of the culture. It will be easier for the gospel to be absorbed by any given culture instead of transforming it, if there is no thorough understanding of either the gospel or culture.
It has already been shown that the Xhosa-speaking Adventists tend to exhibit a shallow understanding of the gospel as relating to the imperative of circumcision; and a lack of insight into the cultural significance of this ritual and its religious implication. It is at this point that we must look and evaluate the process of inculturation and the challenge the Christian church in general has faced in dealing in the area of culture.
Inculturation in the Bible
It is true that the Bible actually commands us to go out and mingle with other cultures for the purpose of spreading the gospel (Matthew 28:19). Commenting on the word poreunthentes, Verkuly (1981:A62), observes that this connotes “to depart”, “to leave” and “to cross boundaries”, mandating the missionaries to be willing to cross boundaries in their attempt to spread the gospel.
Christ is heralded as the pioneer in a radical way in this process. Teressa Okure (1990:62) forthrightly asserts that the “incarnation of Christ constitutes an integral part, a necessary aspect of enculturation.” This process for Christ consisted in “self-emptying” (Ephesians 2:6-11). This self-emptying was not only a display of Christ’s love but far more importantly, a willingness and intention to bridge the barrier between humanity and divinity (John 1:1-3; 12). Discipleship for Christ was the culmination of an intense and deliberate engagement and interaction with those who needed His help (White 1891:363).
According to Okure (1990:57,58), “incarnation presupposes a union of two realities, where each reality is enriched and mysteriously transformed by the other.” It is clear that in this process, Christ took his divinity seriously without denigrating the human element which assumed after incarnation. It is in this sense that the author of (Hebrews 2:14) emphasizes the benefit accrued to Christ in the incarnation process.
The process is once more reflected in the decision made by the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:19-21). Here the early church displays competency in separating the gospel from the cultural matrix of the Jews. A thorough knowledge of the Gentile way of life and the demands of the gospel led to the mutual enrichment of the two realities. It was also a humble admission on the church’s part that, “In truth God shows no partiality” (Acts 10:34).
History of Mission in Africa
Much of the eighteenth century missionary activities suffered from a serious lack of appreciation of the difference between culture and the content of the gospel. The grounds gained by the early church as seen in (Acts 15), of making the Gentiles, Christians and not Jews, was lost sight of in subsequent years. The failure by the early missionaries in Africa to effect a proper and Biblical enculturation led to a distortion of Christianity and an unnecessary elimination of most African cultures. The following are some of the factors that led to the above observation.
Clash of two cultures
In the wake of Enlightenment, Bosch (1991:291) argues that the West was put at an “unparalleled advantage”. This advantage which was purely based on scientific and technological advances made the Westerners to feel superior that the rest of Africans. This feeling us superiority was unfortunately transferred to the Christian religion (Bosch 1991:291). This led to a tenuous situation where civilization and the gospel competed for primacy. Civilization became the means to conversion and the result of the same.
James Kiernan (1990:12) elaborates on the consequences of this cultural clash. He observes that the material gap between the two cultures created a desire and a longing among the Africans to have access to this material advantage while staying away from the Western religion. On the other hand the missionaries only thought and saw Africans as “backward, miserable, superstitious and inhabiting a moral wasteland” (Kiernan 19909:15). It is in this regard that Bosch (1991:290) makes a striking observation when he says, “The pagan’s pitiable state became the dominant motive for mission, not the conviction that they were (objects) of God’s love.”
It is not surprising to note that most of the Nguni people viewed conversion as “cultural treason and political defection” (Kiernan 1990:18). For this and other reason, it is reported that conversion was hard to come by in many missionary fields. Different cultural groups devised methods to neutralize the influence of Christianity. Among the Xhosa-speaking peoples, the converts were separated from their kinship (Kiernan 1990:18). Among the Zulus a policy of “resistance and containment” led the missionaries to renounce their efforts and allowed the British troops to invade the Zulu Kingdom (Kiernan 1990:19). They not only devised ways of resisting the intrusion of the gospel into their lives but also made sure that those who accepted it were excluded from their communities.
It is of paramount importance to note that the distortion of the gospel was not only on the side of the Africans, Willliam Smalley (1981: C157) sees it as not just paternalism toward other peoples but also as paternalism toward God. They did not only reflect a distorted view of the Africans; but their view and theology and understanding of God were distorted as well. Not only did they fail to understand and appreciate the African cultures but they misunderstood and misrepresent the very gospel they sought to bring to Africa.
Methods of Inculturation
It was not only the content that was contentious but also the method that was employed by the missionaries that let to disastrous results as far as mission was concerned. Wallace Mills (1995:153) observes that the missionaries did not only oppose a number of Xhosa customs, but used force, discipline and expulsion from the church as a way of enculturation. This was met with resistance by many African groups as it was seen as a way of destroying their belief in ancestors (Mills1995:158).
The Africans on the other hand developed three most creative and ingenious ways of dealing with this onslaught on their culture. The first as observed earlier was a policy of resistance and containment. The second response was that of creative adaptation, namely syncretism. Pauw (quoted in Kiernan 1990:21,22) argues that the belief in ancestors among “Christians has survived with great pertinacity.” This phenomenon developed in spite of the growing popularity and acceptance of Christianity by Africans.
The last radical response from the Africans was the policy of schism, which has led and unleashed the most powerful Christian movement, initiated and grown in Africa. The African Initiated Churches continue to grow in galloping strides. Allan Anderson quoted in (Pretorius and Jafta 1997:211), observes that there are more people in South Africa who belong to these churches than to churches originating from in Europe or America.
Judging Culture by Scripture
It has been observed that the Motherwell groups sees circumcision either as a practice that is not contradictory to the Bible, or the one where the Bible shows neutrality or even sanctions under certain circumstances. Using Scripture to judge culture is an involved process. This is summed up in the Lausanne Covenant (quoted by Hesselgrave(1991:118):
Culture must always be tested and judged by Scripture (Mark 7:8, 9, 13). Because man is God’s creature, some of his culture is rich in beauty and goodness (Matt. 7:11, Gen. 4:21, 22). Because he is fallen, all of it is tainted with sin and some of it is demonic. The gospel does not presuppose the superiority of any culture to another, but evaluates all cultures according to its own criteria of truth and righteousness, and insists on moral absolutes in every culture.
It is the gospel and not another culture that should be used to judge cultures. What we have witnessed in Africa was the tendency for the Western culture to critique other cultures. A similar observation to the Lausanne Covenant is made by Van der Walt (2003:26) when he asserts that the “conflict between Western individualism and African communalism is a conflict between two idolatries…” The following is an elaborated view of the same author when he notes:
…the Gospel provides a correcting, liberating invitation to both individualism and collectivism. The Gospel calls people in a communalistic society to an experience of the fullness of being human that communalism has denied them: the experience of individuality and a diversity of societal relationships. For those of us living in an individualistic society, the same Gospel call us to an experience of the fullness of being human that individualism has denied: the experience of community (2003:157).
This shows once more the inherent weakness of judging another culture on the basis of one’s culturally determined predispositions (Hesselgrave 1991:123). It is the gospel and not another culture that should evaluate the proximity to or distance from moral absolute in any culture.
Hesselgrave (1991:101) divides culture into three categories: the technological, sociological and ideological. It is the ideological aspect of culture that is judged by Scripture and not the other two. It is on this vein that Van der Walt (2003:96) observes that “the soul of a culture is its religion and worldview.” A change in the worldview might take the form of discarding certain practices while transforming others as observed in the Lausanne Covenant.
Here then the focus on any given culture should not just be on what is being done or practised, but rather on the religious presuppositions underlying the practise. Adventists might be guilty of viewing culture from a purely technological aspect. The religious assumptions which have been shown to contradict the Bible teaching as understood by Adventists remain unchallenged.
Loius Luzbetak (1989:265) observes that religion is often reflected in the myths and the ritual of a given culture. He also sees both the myth and ritual as “twin terms, the one adding its strength to that of the other” (Luzbetak, 268). While the same author continues to affirm that Christians do respect and should respect mythologies of other religions, he is quick to add that this does not mean that Christians should accept non-Christian mythological contents such as existence of gods (Luzbetak, 267).
“Initiation rituals”, argues O’Donovan (1992:233), “present serious spiritual problems”, for committed Christians. He (O’Donovan, 233), further argues that there are traditional religious meanings associated with these rituals. Any recommendation should somehow help the church in dealing with these religious assumptions.
Creation of an Indigenous Church
It can be readily conceded that the ideal purpose of inculturation should be the creation of an indigenous church. The goal of mission, argues Bosch (1991:450) has always been the establishment of an indigenous church. This goal has not always been met with true and Biblical success. A brilliant formula was devised to evaluate the authenticity of an indigenous church. This was formulated as the three “selfs” (Bosch 1991:450), given as self-government, self-support, and self-propagation. However as observed again by Bosch (1991:450), these churches could only exist as they learn to please their founders and by segregating themselves from the surrounding cultures. This produced replicas of Western churches in Africa.
A different and yet provoking light is thrown on this by William Smalley (1981:C150), when he asserts that the three “selfs” are concepts based on “Western ideas of individualism and power.” This at best, argues Smalley, produces a Western idea of an indigenous church. Bosch (1991:451) forthrightly and correctly indicates that it is only the introduction of the fourth “self” that will make a difference.
By fourth “self” he means “self-theologizing”. This is the only way there could be a development of an “autochthonous African theology” (1991:452). Inculturation in this sense for Bosch (1991:454) becomes as a flowering of a seed implanted into the soil of a particular culture. This understanding is reflected poignantly by Smalley (1981:C154) when he notes “that an indigenous church cannot be founded,” but is rather planted. The crucial question is whether the Adventist church qualifies to be called an indigenous church or not.
A cautionary advice is and a powerful and profound appeal is made by Mbiti (1977:91) when he says:
As long as African theology keeps close to the Scriptures, it will remain relevant to the life of the church universal. African theologians must give even more attention to the Bible than is sometimes the case. As long as we keep the Bible close to our hearts and minds, our theology will be viable, relevant, and lasting service to the church and glory to the Lord.”
It is only a faithful adherence to the Scriptures that any form of provincialism can be thwarted in the church. This can also help the Adventist church to have a unified approach to common cultural rituals like circumcision.
The Adventist Church and the four “selfs.”
The African converts have had a very tenuous and awkward relationship with the Adventist Church over the years. The Adventist mission began in South Africa at a time when other Africans were looking for a church they could call their own. This was manifested in the agitation by Africans for both political and cultural freedom (Sundkler 1948:36).
The establishment of African Initiated Churches undoubtedly helped in realizing the ideal of mission, which is an indigenous church. These churches came into existence as a reaction to White dominated mission churches (Sundkler 1948:36,37).
Barret (quoted in Daneel 1987:75), identifies three fold failure of mission churches, viz, “Philadelphia, africanism and Biblicism.” These he explained as “failure to exercise brotherly love to Africans, lack of understanding of traditional religious worldview and the failure to see any parallelism between traditional religion and biblical faith.” It is insightful to recognize the fact that the driving force for the establishment of these churches was firstly, political freedom; and the secondly, cultural protest; a drive seeking relevance to African traditional religions (Daneel 1987:38).
It is however the last part that has created truly indigenous African churches which has become a great attraction to many Africans. It is estimated that in Africa alone since 1960, these churches have grown over 400% (Siaki 2002:41). It has been conceded by some that the ability to engage in the fourth “self”, which is self –theologizing has made these churches to stand out and be counted Froise (1989:71).
It is a fact that cultural protest is not possible where there is no political freedom. It has been seen from the foregoing observation that political freedom alone did not produce an indigenous church. It is through cultural restlessness that is couched in the fourth “self” – self theologizing that guarantees any possibility of effective inculturation.
Makapela (1995:270), quoting from the Seventh day Adventist Encyclopaedia observes that, the African Adventists were allotted Bantu Missions but even those ware administered by Whites. The Whites not only built better facilities and schools for themselves but occupied administrative positions even in the Black educational institutions (Makapela, 298).
With no control of their educational institutions, with little say in the propagating of mission, with no financial backbone, Black Adventist could never have the motivation and the courage to engage in a meaningful, effective and sustained cultural protest. It is clear that self governing, self funding and self propagating was not possible for the Black Adventist and as such no cultural protest would mount to anything. Mission in the Adventist church has always until recently been in the hands of the White members.
The Black Adventists have continued to show a serious dearth of well educated church leadership and ministerial workers. Based on the latest Statistical report (SAU Quarterly Report, January-September 2004), there at least 65% who have the first university degree, out of that only 2.7% have doctoral degrees. As of January 2000, there was one one if not two Blacks pastors with a Doctoral Degree. While great strides have been made on other aspects including, self-funding, self-propagating and self-governing, a lot still needs to be done in this aspect of self-theologizing.
Pauw (1975:336) commenting on the stages of acculturation says, “Zionists have syncretized the two traditions, while orthodox Christians tend to retain certain features of Xhosa tradition”. He further asserts that these two traditions are applied in different social contexts. Black Adventists and Xhosa-speaking Adventists would fall under orthodox Christians. The sad part with them is that even the retention of certain aspects of Xhosa-tradition have not been initiated or led by the church leadership. The ritual of circumcision has never been addressed formally; it has been left to families and members to deal with.
Xhosa-speaking Adventists have tried to distance themselves on any cultural aspect that seems to be linked to ancestral worship. This is seen in how they have discarded or adapted those areas where there is a direct link to ancestors. It can be said that the only aspect as far as circumcision is concerned that has been done away with and continues to make a significant difference, is the drinking of beer. None of those interviewed confirmed the use of such in the ritual, while it can be said that there could be some Adventist who do cave in due to social and family pressure, but this is more of an exception than a rule.
Areas of Concern
The following are distinct areas in the ritual of circumcision that are glaringly inconsistent with the Adventist theology and the church’s understanding of the Bible.
These areas will be grouped under two headings; syncretism and Biblical conversion. While it can be argued that these two are not necessarily separate units, for the sake of clarity we will consider them separately.
1.` Syncretism
While commendation is apropos for some areas that have been discarded in the way the ritual of circumcision is conducted by Adventist, however the very process seems to justify those areas that have not been discarded. Earlier it was mentioned that, for many Adventist except in some few areas, the person used for surgical operation is the traditional surgeon. The acceptance of this person’s credentials may actually imply approval of the institution that has qualified him. Adventists in general do not subscribe to the traditional belief in the power of the inyangas (traditional healers). But for some reason, they are willing to leave their children in the hands of traditional surgeon, simply because this is how it is done in the traditional context.
Graeme Meintjies (March 1998:5), who writes as a medical doctor and researcher, has observed that in “each circumcision season a significant number of initiates are admitted to hospital and there are a number of deaths”. “This morbidity and mortality,” he continues is “associated with septic and gangrenous complications of the circumcision wound as well as the practice of fluid restriction”. The irony is that Xhosa-speaking Adventists continue to subject and expose their children to such practices under the guise of Biblical mandate and cultural relevance coupled with missiological significance.
It is hard to reconcile the beating and the physical ordeal and pain and death that accompany the ritual of circumcision with the Bible. It would be difficult to explain to a person going through this ordeal the significance and the benefit of this experience within the Biblical context. It has been argued as reflected above that this is designed to effect discipline and to prepare the youth for the hardships of manhood (Van der Vliet 1974:230). Failure to speak against such “torture”, in spite of its alleged pedagogical intentions, implicates the church in the deaths and medical complications that have resulted from this practice.
The Xhosa-speaking Adventists have to grapple with the sentiments and critical reflection made in the Lausanne Covenant (Hesselgrave1991:118), when it was asserted; “Culture must always be tested and judged by Scripture (Mark 7:8, 9, 13). Because man is God’s creature, some of his culture is rich in beauty and goodness (Matt. 7:11, Gen. 4:21, 22). Because he is fallen, all of it is tainted with sin and some of it is demonic…” While one may not actually label the above areas as demonic, they are nevertheless tainted seriously with sin and lack beauty and goodness. Unfortunately, the substitution of the traditional surgeon by an Adventist surgeon, while commendable, does not significantly reduce the pain and the physical and emotional ordeal that they boys are subjected to, all in the name of culture.
2. Biblical Conversion
One of the disheartening observations in the whole ritual of circumcision as practised by Xhosa-speaking Adventist is the anticipation and expectation of a type of conversion experience for the boys. The only rationale why these kids must go through physical and emotional ordeal and at the risk of penile mutilations and death, is for them to become responsible man. It is indeed as Graeme Meintjies says in the title of his book; “Manhood at a price.”
The Adventists show this in their particular attention to the details of the ritual. Some significant cultural practises are done on the day when the initiates are to be reincorporated to their communities. A special person as indicated above is appointed to anointing the initiates with butter. It is believed that this person can somehow transfuse his good virtues and charisma to the one he is applying the butter to.
People with good morals and who lead a virtuous life and are seen to be successful and respected, do have a positive influence and can serve as a role model to the initiates. But this idea of influence is taken to extreme lengths when it is loaded with religious and magical significance and some form of impartation of good qualities. The use of ministers in the ritual of anointing reveals the seriousness in which this is held by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists.
The ritual of washing and anointing is usually followed by the burning of the lodge and its symbolic significance of the beginning of new life and destruction of old ways of living. What is strange is that this is expected even of those who had experienced conversion. By this act it is implied that conversion does not offer as much as circumcision does for the change of life-style and character. The question can once again be asked; when is one a new person, is it at conversion or circumcision? Does this mean that conversion can be part of the old life style of the newly initiated that must also be forgotten?
The admonitions that follow only reinforce the belief in religious significance of the ritual. The presence and the often participation of the church in such occasions further rubber stamps the traditional meaning and the value placed on this ritual. The use of the Biblical imperatives on a ritual fraught with traditional indicatives is a misuse of the Bible. The statement of advice from Mbiti (1977:91), is worth repeating and it demands a closer look and application by the Xhosa-speaking Adventist if they want to remain true to the Bible.
As long as African theology keeps close to the Scriptures, it will remain relevant to the life of the church universal. African theologians must give even more attention to the Bible than is sometimes the case. As long as we keep the Bible close to our hearts and minds, our theology will be viable, relevant, and lasting service to the church and glory to the Lord.”
It can be concluded that the Xhosa-speaking Adventists have yet to produce a legitimate and cohesive acculturation of the ritual of circumcision. Members and families need guidance from the leadership of the church for this to happen. These adaptations must be seen to be in harmony with Adventist faith here in the country and elsewhere.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND GUIDELINES IN DEALING WITH THE ISSUE OF TRADITIONAL CIRCUMCISION
Should we leave things as they are, continue with this practise as we have done for many years? As they say “if it ain’t broken we must not fix it” but the question is, is it not broken? Few years ago, I had to comfort a family especially the mother whose son had died during the circumcision rite. The woman had two sons and one daughter. It was the eldest son who had just completed matric and had been taken to the initiation school that had died. According to this particular culture (Sotho), an initiate who dies during initiation is not supposed to be mourned and the involvement of the mother is highly restricted.
How do we comfort the family as a church, what do we say. Is it enough to remind the woman that this is our culture, we just do it, it has no significance? How does the family explain this tragic event to the younger son who still must go through the same rite of circumcision in two or so years from now? How do we justify the rite to others who may not even understand our culture? Why should something that seemingly has no value, no profound meaning be allowed to bring so much pain?
Adventist families are beginning to ask questions about circumcision, they need clarity and guidance from the church. Can the church afford to be silent and pretend all is well when it is not? The cry is not coming only from the Adventists, the communities where this rite is observed are beginning to ask if it is worth all the pain and the stress it generates. If the church is the light, how much of light is it giving to the world suffering in darkness?
It would be appropriate at this juncture to reflect in a nutshell on the predicament that confronts the Xhosa-speaking Adventists. Since circumcision cannot be regarded as sin, by the way this is not the argument of this paper, we cannot just prohibit it. Circumcision is a complex system that demands a comprehensive approach if progress is to be made. In the final analysis the decision to be circumcised or not lies with the one to be circumcised. At the moment this is not happening, the question is not whether one will be circumcised but when he will be circumcised. Any recommendation or guideline which should be worked out by the community of believers should address the following critical issues:
1. Xhosa speaking Adventists are part of the world wide church.
The issue of circumcision cannot be provincialized, it does not only affect the Xhosa-speaking Adventists, it has become a concern for all Adventists not only in South Africa but throughout the world. We are part of the family, we owe it to the family to explain why we do what we do and also to listen to them and hear what they think about what we are doing. To say “hands off” this is our culture is an irresponsible attitude we are all together in this.
It was observed that the Xhosa-speaking Adventists represent the only group in the Adventist church in South Africa that observes the ritual of circumcision. While the writer is not aware of any study that has been made to determine the reasons for the non-observance of this ritual in other groups; the limited interview conducted reveals that it has to do with how these groups interpret Adventist faith.
For these group, observing the ritual of circumcision is tantamount to a tacit denial of their faith. A study might need to be done to determine how the Seventh-day Adventist church is viewed in those cultures. The situation is such that the Xhosa-speaking Adventists might have to learn something from these communities or these communities of Adventists may have to learn from Xhosa-speaking members. This lack of unity in the church might create missiological hiccups and make it difficult for the church to present a united voice in such issues and many others.
2. Superficial Inculturation
The absence of the fourth “self” as argued above, will continue to render the church powerless and incompetent in dealing with cultural issues confronting the church. The cosmetic cultural treatment coupled with the cut and paste approach adopted by the church indirectly, make the church a laughing stock. While the church purports to be against any form of ancestral worship, it actually finds itself by default engaged in cultural aspects that owe their legitimacy to the belief in ancestors.
The only aspect in which Xhosa-speaking Adventists differ with the traditional Xhosa-speaking is one of the non-supply and non-use of traditional beer and alcoholic beverages in its ceremonies. Any transformation that the Xhosa-speaking Adventists have made in the ritual is either superficial or non-existent. It does appear that both the traditional and Adventists attach the same meaning and significance to the ritual of circumcision. The Biblical support given seems to be nothing but a camouflage for a deep seated religio-cultural need.
We need to make a distinction between syncretism and inculturation. What we have done at best leans toward syncretism where we have baptized a cultural practise into Christianity. Inculturation seeks to find in the resident culture modes, expressions, examples that would make the gospel understandable. Snycretism seeks to find accommodation for a cultural practise while inculturation seeks to express a Christian practise in cultural terms.
3. Significance of the Ritual of Circumcision
“Rituals”, writes Jurgens Hendriks (2004:137), “are rites of intensification. In an explicit way they define who we are and what we believe”. For the Xhosa-speaking people, their identity as a people and their beliefs are reflected in the ritual of circumcision. The question for Adventists is what core beliefs do they reflect as they participate in the ritual of circumcision? The ritual of circumcision has been shown not only to be in conflict with the rite of baptism but that it has somehow overshadowed it.
The whole meaning of the ritual of circumcision seems to pivot around an expected change of lifestyle and behaviour. While this can be accepted and is indeed expected among the traditional Xhosa-speaking, such is inconceivable for a community of faith such as Adventists. The linking of character transformation and behavioural change to the ritual of circumcision, by the Xhosa-speaking Adventists, is a gross misrepresentation and clear misapprehension of Biblical teaching on salvation. While this change is not spoken of in salvific terms, it is somehow maintained that without the ritual of circumcision this change is not possible.
When the Xhosa-speaking Adventists put more emphasis and value on the ritual of circumcision the message being communicated is that it is this ritual rather than conversion that effects change to the individual’s life.
4. Complex Nature of the ritual of Circumcision
The church may prohibit the practise, but in practise how does this work out? If it is a prohibition what disciplinary measure would the church take, and against whom, the child or the parents? Circumcision is firstly a family affair. It is the family that organizes; monitors and validates the whole process of circumcision. It would be difficult for the child on his own to decide not to go for circumcision. Without a visible support from the family, the child might be put in an awkward position and may be isolated by the family. In some instances boys have been forcibly circumcised without their consent.
There could also be an instance where the parents are convinced that their child should not go for circumcision, the child in question might not be convinced or may cave in due to peer pressure and fear of being socially maligned by the community. This, as it happens sometimes, may compel the child to go for circumcision without the parents’ involvement. Some parents may decide to circumcise the child in its infancy to avoid all these complications, these are the decision that each family must wrestle with. The church as a family must be seen to be supporting its members and giving advice and suggesting options, regardless of the complexity of the problem.
There are situations also where only the mother and probably the children are Adventists but the father is not. This is even more complicated in that almost everything done in a traditional African way will be apply here. A lot will depend on the child and how much support he will get from the church..
The Involvement of the Church
The church as much as possible must not be involved in the ritual. Announcements relating to circumcision must not be made in the church. It should remain a family ceremony. Currently next to the wedding and funeral, circumcision is the biggest event even for the church members. This forces the church to advance theological and Biblical justification for the ritual. The church is not usually involved in birthday celebrations, families organize and friends and relatives are invited. This could be done in a similar fashion. This should be accompanied with systematic teaching and explanation on the meaning and purpose of circumcision. People who choose not to be circumcised must be fully accepted and supported by the church. The church cannot be perceived as persecutor of those who refuse to be circumcised
The greatest challenge facing Xhosa-speaking Adventists is on how to de-emphasize the importance of the ritual of circumcision while practising it. Currently, the Xhosa-speaking Adventists not only observe the ritual but attach the same meaning and significance to it as does the traditional Xhosa-speaking people. This has led to a situation where Adventist youth tend to regard the ritual of circumcision as being far more significant than baptism.
Inculturating of Baptism
Instead of bringing traditional circumcision into the church or Christianity we need to bring Christianity to our culture. We need to express the significance and meaning of baptism in such a way that those who believe in circumcision will understand.
At the moment, baptism is relegated to one of the events in the church calendar which is void of meaning and significance. The church needs to take a decided position and get involved in highlighting the importance of baptism for its members. The enthusiasm and excitement usually associated with circumcision should slowly be directed to the event of baptism. We need to make baptism a big family event and make it clear that it is the most important in the life of our children. The church cannot afford to have its members confused as to the importance and value of baptism in the life of its members. Baptism seems to carry the same meaning for Christians as circumcision does for Xhosa- speaking people in general.
Conclusion
It would be appropriate at this stage and development of this paper to reflect on the warning given by Ellen G White. E White is accepted as a Prophetess by the Adventist church whose role is to lead the church to the Bible. The following is a her commentary and understanding of the events that took place in Acts 21:19-30.
Paul had just finished recounting to the leaders in Jerusalem the good things God had wrought among the Gentiles (21:19,20). When they heard this, they glorified God. While the praise was still in their mouths, they brought the allegation to Paul that he is said to be undermining the Law of Moses by teaching that Jews were not to be circumcised. On the surface it appears that the leaders did not believe this and gave Paul and advice as to how to dispel all these rumours. It is this advice that led to Paul’s imprisonment and later premature death.
Ellen G Whie (18: 403,404) comments that the counsel that was given to Paul indicated that the leaders still cherished a feeling that Paul “should be held largely responsible for the existing prejudice”. Instead of standing with Paul and defending him, they sought a compromise which in their opinion would remove all cause for misapprehension. This according to E White was a “fruit of cowardice”. This was done to gain favour and acceptance from their fellow Jews, and was not a principled decision.
Paul on the other hand realized that this could be the only way of dispelling prejudice from the leading members in Jerusalem. The advice looked attractive as it would remove obstacles to the success of the gospel. “Paul was not authorized of God to concede as much as they asked” writes E White. Instead of accomplishing the desire object, these actions only “precipitated the crisis, hastened the predicted sufferings…. Depriving the church of one of its strongest pillars, and bringing sorrow to Christian hearts in every land”.
It can be argued that the church has displayed signs of capitulation and serious compromise under the guise of evangelism and intentions to remove obstacles to Christian witness. The observation made here is that most Xhosa-speaking Adventists still believe in the efficacy and the life changing virtue of this ritual. The jury is still out on the impact that this compromise has for the Xhosa-speaking Adventist church. At a time when even the traditional Xhosa-speaking people are looking for a solution to the problems currently being experienced around this ritual, the church is by default preaching and defending the value and importance of this ritual.
There is a general fear that those who do not undergo circumcision will exhibit sign of abnormality later on in life. The only to prove that this is not true is illustrate it by having our children on display. Those we want to win to our faith may never fully understand our message if we loose the opportunity to exhibit the power of the gospel.
Douglas Webster in his thought provoking article entitled, “Evangelizing the Church” points out that the problem with the church today is that it has been secularized by the culture it seeks to reach with the gospel. He later suggests that “if we want to evangelize our culture we must begin by evangelizing our churches” (Webster 1995: 195,201).
Webster again quoting Steven Hauerwas and William Willimon in his direct warning to the Christian church says, (Webster, 208):
The inevitable loss of cultural respectability on the one hand and popularity on the other should not concern us. Both losses are necessary, and really gains, if we are to experience the power of the gospel. What is true for individuals is also true for churches. We could gain the world but lose our souls”
The creeping syncretistic tendencies observed above coupled with the tendency to undermine and devalue Biblical conversion, are clear signs that the Xhosa-speaking Adventists are losing their souls with the hope of gaining the world. Indeed the loss of cultural respectability should not concern a church that ought to be more worried about losing its soul than about gaining the whole world.
The Xhosa- speaking community is waiting to see what will happen to a boy who is not circumcised. The Adventist church has the answer, are we courageous enough to give it to the waiting community?
PEOPLE AND GROUPS INTERVIEWED
Cancele Newly Initiated group, August, 2004.
Cancele Parents, August 2004
Kulla Charles, May, 2004
Motherwell Seventh-day Adventist Congregation, April 2004
Mpendu S, February 2004
Mdaka S, January 2004
Mafani Hlanga, August 2004
Karabo, February 2004
Maxengana M, April 2004
Sa-sda (Web-based discussion forum for Adventists), March 2004
Zeeman, November 2004
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Andreason, Niels-Erick. 2000. “Death: Origin, Nature, and Final Eradication”. In:
Dederen Raoul (ed). 2000 Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology.
Review and Herald Publishing Association, Hagerstown, Maryland. USA p.
314-345.
Arrington, French L. 1988. The Acts of the Apostle. An Introduction and Commentary.
Hendrickson Publishers, Massachusetts.
Barrent, C.K. 2002. Acts. A shorter Commentary. T&T Clark, London.
Bediako, K. 1995. Christianity in Africa; The Renewal of a Non-Western Religion.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University.
Bruce F.F. 1982. Commentary of Galatians. Wm Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand
Rapids, Michigan.
Brown, Raymond. E. 1997. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York:
Doubleday.
Bosch, D. J. 1995. Transforming Mission; Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission.
New York: Orbis Books.
Bruno, B, 1954. Symbolic Wounds. Free Press. New York:” USA
Daneel, M.L 1987. Quest for Belonging: Introduction to a study of African Independent
Churches. Mambo Press, Gweru Zimbabwe.
Davidson, Richard M. 2000. Biblical Interpretation. In: Dederen Raoul (ed). 2000
Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology. Review and Herald Publishing
Association, Hagerstown, Maryland. USA. p. 58-102.
Document, Box 1, Xhosa Customs. National Heritage and Cultural Studies Centre,
University of Fort Hare.
Driver, Tom F, 1991. The Magic of Ritual: Our Need for Liberating Rites that Transform
Our lives and Our Communities. HarperCollins Publishers, New York.
Dunn, James D.G. 1996. The Acts of the Apostles. Trinity Press International, Valley
Forge, Pennsylvania.
Dunn, James D.G. 1998. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Edinburgh: T. T. Clark.
Ebeling Gerhard, 1985. The Truth of the Gospel. An Expositions of Galatians. Fortress
Press, Philedelphia, USA.
Froise, K. 1999. Zion Christian Church; A Study to Evaluate the Theology and Practice
of South African Zionists with a View to Designing a Strategy to win them for
Christ. (Columbia Biblical Seminary and Graduate School of Mission, M.A
dissertation.
Gonzalez, Justo L. 2001. Acts. The Gospel of the Spirit. Orbis Books, Maryknoll, New
York.
Gitywa, V.Z. 1976. Male Initiation in the Ciskei: Formal Incorporation into Bantu
Society. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Fort Hare University.
Harrison F Everett, 1986. Interpreting Acts. The Expanding Church. Academie Books,
Grand Rapids Michigan.
Hendriks Jurgens, H. 2004. Studying Congregations in Africa. Lux Verbi. BM,
Wellington.
Johnson, L. T, 1992. The Acts of the Apostles. The Liturgical Press, Collegeville
Minnesota.
Kiernan, J. African and Christian 1990: From Opposition to Mutual Accommodation. In
Prozesky M. ed. Christianity in South Africa. South Africa: Southern Book
Publishers. p. 9-25.
Kiesler, H. 2000. The Ordinances: Baptism, Foot washing, and Lord’s Supper. In:
Dederen Raoul (ed). 2000 Handbook of Seventh-day Adventist Theology.
Review and Herald Publishing Association, Hagerstown, Maryland. USA. p.
582-607
Kline Meredith, G. 1967. By Oath Consigned. Wm Eerdmans Publishing Company
Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Ladd, G.E. 1994. A Theology of the New Testament. Wm Eerdmans Publishing
Company. USA.
La Fontaine, J. S, 1985. Initiation: Ritual Drama and secret knowledge across the world.
Viking Penguin: New York.
Hesselgrave D. J. 1991. Communicating Christ Cross-Culturally; An Introduction to
Missionary Communication. USA: Zondervan Publishing House.
Lausanne Commmittee for World Evangelization. 1981. The Willowbank Report. In
Winter R.D. & Hawthorne S.C. eds. Perspectives on the World Christian
Movement. p. C-162-C-192.
Ludemann Gerd, 1987. Early Christianity according to the Traditions in Acts. A
Commentary. SCM Press.
Luzebetak, L.J. 1988. The Church and Cultures. Orbis Books, Maryknoll New York.
Magubane, Peter. 1998. Vanishing Cultures of South Africa. Struik Publishers Cape
Town.
Makapela, A. 1995. The Problem of Africanity in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Adelphi University, Garden City, NJ.
McCraken Grant, 1990. The Long Interview. Sage Publications. USA
McComskey, Thomas E, 1985. The Covenants of of Promise. A theology of the Old
Testament Covenants. Baker Book House Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Meintjies, Graeme, March 1998. Manhood at a Price: Socio-Medical Perspectives on
Xhosa Traditional Circumcision. Institute of Social and Economic Research,
Rhodes University Grahamstown.
Mills W.G. 2001. Missionaries, Xhosa Clergy and the Suppression of Traditional
Customs. In Bredekamp H & Ross R. eds. Missions and Christianity in South
African History. South Africa: Witwatersrand University Press. p. 153-167.
Ministerial Association General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. 1998. Seventh-
day Adventists… 27: A Biblical Exposition of the Fundamental Doctrines.
Review and Herald Publishing Association, Hagerstown, Maryland. USA.
Ngxamngxa, A.N.H, 1971. “ The Function of Circumcision Among the Xhosa-speaking
Tribes in Historical Perspective” in De Jager, E.J. (ed): Man: Anthropological
Essays Presented to O.F. Raum. C. Struik (Pty) Ltd., Cape Town.
O’Donovan, W, 1992. Biblical Christianity In African Perspective. Paternoster Press,
UK.
Okure T. 1990: Inculturation of Christianity in Africa. Kenya: Amecea Gaba
Publications.
Pauw B.A. 1975. Christianity and Xhosa Tradition. Belief and Ritual among Xhosa-
speaking Christians. Oxford University Press, London.
Polhill B John, 1992. The New American Commentary, Vol 26. Broadman Press, Nashville Tenesse.
Pretorius Hennie & Jafta Lizo, 1997. “A Branch Springs Out”: African Initiated
Churches. In: Elphick Richard and Davenport Rodney (eds). Christianity in
South Africa A political, Social & Cultural History. David Phillip Publishers,
Cape Town.
Ridderbos N Herman, 1979. The New International Commentary on the New Testament.
The Epistle of Paul to the Churcheds of Galatia. Wm Eerdmans Publishing Co.
Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Robertson O Palmer, 1993. Covenants. God’s way with his people. Great Commission
Publication, USA.
Siaki P. 2002. Christianity in the New South Africa: Another Look at the statistics. In
Kritzinger D. ed. No Quick Fixes. p. 31-60.
Smalley, W.A. 1981. Cultural Implication of an Indigenous Church. In Winter R.D. &
Hawthorne S.C. eds. Perspectives on the World Christian Movement. p. A-4-A-
63.
Soga, H. J. 1931. The Ama-Xosa Life and Custom. Lovedale Press, South Africa.
Spencer, S. F.1997. Acts. Sheffield Academic Press, England.
Stott, J, 1990. The Spirit, The Church and the World. The Message of Acts. Intervarsity
Press.
Sundkler, B. 1948. Bantu Prophets in South Africa. London: Butterworth Press
Gaebelein F & Douglas J.D. (eds) 1981. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary Vol 9.
Zondervan.
Young, Frank W. Initiation Ceremonies: A Cross-cultural Study of Status Dramatization.
The Hobbs-Merrill Company Inc. New York.
Van der Vliet, V. 1974. “Growing up in Traditional Society.” In W.D Hammond-
Tooke: The Bantu-Speaking Peoples of Southern Africa. Routledge & Kegan
Paul, London and Boston.
Van der Walt, B.J. 2003. Understanding and Rebuilding Africa; From desperation today to expectation for tomorrow. South Africa: The Institute for Christianity in Africa.
Verkuyl J. 1981. The Biblical Foundation for the Worldwide Missions Mandate. In
Winter R.D. & Hawthorne S.C. eds. Perspectives on the World Christian
Movement. p. A-4-A- 63.
Walton John H, 1994. God’s Purpose Covenant God’s Plan. Zondervan Publishing
House. Grand Rapids, Michigan.
Webster Douglas, 1995. Evangelizing the Church. In: Phillips T.R & Okholm D.L (eds)
1995. Christian Apologetics in the Postmodern World. Intervarsity Press,
1996. Downers Grove, Illinois.
White, E.G. 1891. Gospel Workers. USA: Review and Publishing Association
Witherington Ben, III, 1998. The Acts of the Apostle. A Socio-Rhetorical
Commentary. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids,
Michigan.
Wilson B Geoffrey, 1973. Galatians. Adigest of Reformed Comment. The Banner of
Truth Trust, USA.
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- christianity and biblical interpretation in india
- one of the identifying marks emphasis that can be observed
- lesson plan overview for biblical worldview esv
- advisory editors
- biblical concepts on miracles
- leviticus a working bibliography
- dr paul f ford
- may our ancient sense of justice be renewed
- 1984 close reading questions sedro woolley school district
- writing grammar 7 3rd ed lesson plan overview
Related searches
- she s one of the guys
- questions that can t be answered by science
- questions that can t be answered
- one of the things synonym
- one of the grammar
- one of the most grammar
- events in chapter one of the outsiders
- one of the kind
- free printable calendar that can be edited
- thing that can be recycled
- antiretrovirals that can be crushed
- bank statement templates that can be edited