The Theology Of Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah In The Context Aluta Continua

As a child, Kwame Nkrumah was baptised into the Roman Catholic Church and confirmed in the faith. This was made possible by his mother, Elizabeth Nyaniba who was a devout Roman Catholic. He was mentored in the Catholic faith and matured to become a servant of the church.

He confessed in his book Ghana: The Autobiography of Kwame Nkrumah that: “In those days I took my religion seriously and was very often to be found serving at Mass.” One may then see Nkrumah at the beck and call of the priest at the altar as he helps in the administration of the sacrament. During the procession at Mass, he would have carried the processional cross which would remind him of the vicarious death of Christ for the sin of world. He might have carried a blessed candle which may teach him the importance of the light of Christ or any other thing pertaining to Christ. Nkrumah would have carried incense or a thurible which may invoke in him the spirit of prayer. As he serves close to the priest, the reading of the Scriptures in the liturgy of the word, would have pierced his ears with the story of Christ. He would have confessed the Nicene Creed at Sunday Mass thus: “We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God; begotten not made, one in being with the Father . . .”

Nkrumah was, fairly, engrossed in Christian religious practices. If not for the path of politics he chose, as Kwame Sanaa-Poku Jantuah, a dear confederate of Nkrumah indicated in his writing, Nkrumah would have become a full-time servant of the church, a Roman Catholic priest. Perhaps, the historical Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah would have been known as The Reverend Father Kwame Nkrumah.

He had some concerns about the way worship is carried out in the church. He is not happy about “organised religion.” He thinks that dents his freedom. Freedom is at the very core of his persona. He would fight back at anything he regards as a threat to his freedom. Was he not a freedom fighter? This translated into a sacred thought that has relevance for Africa’s continual struggle for absolute liberation.

Theology as a field of study has distinguished itself as having the knack of birthing world changers by and large. The subject of theology used to be the preserve of the elite, a field of the brainy. To dare to critically have a say about God is to venture into the epitome of all learning.

The impact of movements started in theological seminaries on the world cannot be downplayed. As a student of theology myself, one benefit the student acquires from rigorous enquiry into revealed truth about God is the urge to speak to all issues that affects humanity. He who critically learns of God cannot hold his peace on socio-political and economic issues that affect the larger society. No wonder some have become critical of theology.

In his address at the 2015 convocation of Harvard Divinity School, Professor Harvey Cox conveyed this idea when he reminded the congregation of how due to the vociferous nature of the subject of theology, the department was the first to be moved out of Harvard’s main yard once upon a time. He insists that “Theology by its very nature is or should be troublesome.”

During his school days in the United States of America, Nkrumah, who has been recognized right from elementary school as a bright student, entered the study of theology completing in 1942 at the Lincoln Presbyterian Seminary, the seminary of Lincoln University. What would this degree in sacred theology teach him about God? Had he wanted to shape his knowledge of God towards a career as a preacher and minister of religion?

Jantuah noted that Nkrumah has preached in several African American churches. I suspect that these sermons that emanate from Nkrumah’s pulpit would be heavily laden with cases against imperialism and colonialism. These sermons would find resemblance with those of Marcus Garvey earlier and Martin Luther King later. Garvey had an influence on him. In those days he had already developed a strong desire to preach freedom to the black race. He placed his theology in the context of the liberation of Africa.

This study of sacred theology would expose him further to Christian tenets and his knowledge of the Bible would have broaden substantially. I think this contributed significantly to his many uses of biblical dicta in his political discourses. A common example is his “Seek ye first the political kingdom and all other things shall be added unto you”, which is obviously an adapted version of Matthew 6:33. This use of the Bible got him accused of blasphemy.

Because his Italian-made statue had this statement inscribed on its base, may have aroused the displeasure of some countrymen including Christians. In fact, the Church in Ghana was not happy with this move of Nkrumah as noted by John S. Pobee in his book Nkrumah and the Church in Ghana 1949-1966. In the February 24, 1966, military cum police coup d’état, Nkrumah’s bronze statue which stood at Ghana’s parliament house (old site). It must be inserted here that there was an earlier bomb attack on the statue back in 1961. However, it was the 1966 event that brought it down after almost 8 years of its inauguration.

Today, the vandalised statue stands at his memorial park in Accra with the head off. The ears on the head were broken. The left upper limb distal to the bicep region is off completely together with the rod or walking stick he was holding in the initial effigy. The phalanges of the right hand were lost. The left lower limb is intact, but the popliteal fossa of the right lower limb was destroyed. So vandalised was that part of the limb such that if it were human, the bones of the fossa, femur and tibia would have been broken into pieces.

If Nkrumah’s purpose was to make the bronze statue represent the political kingdom he speaks of, which is somewhat reminiscent of the dream Nebuchadnezzar had of the great statue made up of different materials representing different kingdoms (Daniel 2), then, the political kingdom indeed came crushing down, depicted in the extent of the vandalization of the statue. In Daniel’s interpretation, the bronze part of the statue Nebuchadnezzar saw tells of a kingdom which shall rule over the whole of the known world (at the time). Was this not the intrinsic political vision of Nkrumah for the whole of Africa or it was the commentators on his life and work who instigated such an idea?

This hunger for freedom in the worship of God must well be impacted by his sense of nationalism. He holds a theology that liberates. The critical question this raises for contemporary Africa is to what extent theology is positively shaping the socio-economic fortunes of the continent. Churches, governments, various institutions, opinion leaders and the public must be bothered by this question. Are we promoting a theology that enslaves, clouds the critical thinking of people, and makes people insensitive to the public space.

As the struggle for the total liberation of Africa continues, may we be reminded by this sacred ideology of one of the finest sons of the land; liberation that promotes public good.

   Comments0