Reform or retreat? The Catholic church in Africa after Pope Francis
I am a theologian who has studied the development of Catholicism in Africa, especially under the leadership of Pope Francis. In my view, the church after him will be defined by two forces, which will be at play during the process of choosing a new pope.
First, those who embrace Pope Francis' wide-ranging, modernising changes in the Catholic church. The reform-minded pope made it possible to advance a new church culture that respected the voice and agency of the non-ordained. He pushed for a servant leadership, and a more pastoral, missionary, and accountable exercise of authority.
In the second camp are those Catholics who oppose the reforms introduced by Pope Francis. They see cultural evolution and social change as destroying the traditions and teachings of the church. They would like to restore the Latin Mass with its ancient church rituals and male clerical culture.
Read more:
These camps are entrenched in their positions. The 138 cardinals (18 of whom are Africans) who will elect the new pope will voice their views at meetings held ahead of the conclave. These processes will determine who will be elected.
The 18 African cardinal-electors will be fully aware that the divisive issues in contemporary Catholicism often neglect the concerns and needs of Africa. These concerns include a continued colonial structure, and racialised thinking and mentality that sees Africa as one country rather than a continent of diversity and pluralism.
My hope is that the cardinals will find among their ranks someone in the mould of Pope Francis who has a far-reaching vision. Someone with the courage to continue reforming the ecclesial systems and structures to meet this moment with the gospel of love.
Pope Francis often pointed to Africa, which is seeing the highest growth in population in the Catholic church, as the continent of joy and hope. A continent where the world can see how religious faith can bring about a different attitude to human relationship, communal resilience, solidarity, and global fraternity.
But African Catholicism has been severely affected by the polarisation in the broader church. This is particularly true on issues of marriage and family life. Other polarising issues include same-sex marriages, climate change, the place of women in leadership in a patriarchal church, and the autonomy of local African Catholic dioceses from the central authority of the Roman Catholic Church.
The Catholic bishops of Africa need to be united in addressing these issues. In particular, there is a growing consensus that the most pressing challenge facing African Catholicism is how to wean itself from being dependent on resources from the west.
The Catholic church in Africa – despite its exponential growth – is still treated as a 'mission territory', in need of institutional, theological, pastoral and material support from Rome. As a result, it receives financial support for its activities, and the running of schools and social agencies, from the Roman Church and other western Catholic charities.
This dependency has affected the growth and autonomy of African Catholics and churches in setting forth and implementing priorities and projects that address the unique situation of Africa. As mission churches, African Catholic churches are 'under the protection' of the Roman agency in charge of evangelisation. As a result, there are limits to what African churches can do on their own without the permission and supervision of the Roman office.
A self-reliant Catholic church in Africa that's free from the control of Rome would be able to stand strong in world Catholicism. A less dependent African Catholic church could be an alternative staging ground for new forms of faith that meet the spiritual hunger of today's world. This would mean providing vibrancy of worship and a sense of community through the social and spiritual bonds that exist in African churches.
Read more:
Given the changing demographics in the world church – where a majority of the 1.4 billion Catholics live outside Europe – it's clear that Africa and the rest of the global south can no longer accept being dominated by Eurocentric Catholicism. Catholicism cannot be reduced to a single cultural or ecclesial form. It is not a western prototype that has to be replicated in Africa and the rest of the global south without regard to the social, spiritual and cultural contexts of churches in these regions.
Viewed in this light, the future of Catholicism in Africa must be built on the agency of African cultures, religious values and traditions. Not on a rigid centralisation of power that reduces African dioceses, institutions and congregations to outposts of Rome.
The Catholic church in Africa must take the lead in promoting human rights, good governance and the empowerment of women. It needs to reflect the values of inclusion through its leadership, structures and priorities.
Pope Francis' attention to the poor and the victims of history, and his commitment to global solidarity and fraternity, captured the imaginations of many. In my view, the power that the Catholic church or the next pope will wield won't arise from the power of position or a rigid doctrinal formula. It will come from the power of non-transactional and self-effacing love through gospel non-violence. This promotes reconciliation, justice and compassion.
Catholicism suffers when it narrows what it means to be Catholic to rituals and repetitive communal practices and devotions, without attention to people's personal experience and encounters with God, nature and others. Or when it interprets as normative and divine revelation those traditions, laws or structures that are the product of history, culture and human attempts to meet the challenges of a bygone age.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Stan Chu Ilo, DePaul University
Read more:
Pope Francis's death reveals a hidden truth about public grief
How Pope Francis became a climate change influencer
Pope Francis began the process for Antoni Gaudí's sainthood – an architect explains why
Stan Chu Ilo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
North Korea wired an agent $2M to smuggle weapons, tech and disguises out of California
Shenghua Wen, 42, was sentenced to eight years in prison in connection with the scheme that earned him $2 million from North Korean handlers. It comes after he pleaded guilty in June. North Korean agents paid a Chinese national $2 million to smuggle U.S. weapons and technology that were to be used for a surprise attack on South Korea, federal prosecutors said Aug. 19. Shenghua Wen, a 42-year-old illegal alien living outside Los Angeles, was sentenced to eight years in prison for the scheme, the Department of Justice announced. He was tapped by North Korean handlers to export guns, ammo, sensitive technologies and eventually disguises, court papers show. Wen smuggled three shipping containers of guns and ammunition to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) before he was caught, prosecutors said. "Wen's crimes jeopardized the national security of the United States and that of its ally, South Korea," prosecutors said in a sentencing memorandum in the Central District of California. "Defendant's conduct was bold, and the purpose of his mission was alarming. According to defendant, he was charged with procuring the weapons and sensitive technology for North Korea so North Korea could prepare for a surprise attack against South Korea." In addition to the three shipping containers' worth of arms, Wen planned to send 60,000 bullets and sensitive technologies, including a device to identify chemical threats, a thermal imaging device to be mounted on aircraft and an engine meant to be the precursor for a North Korean drone program, according to court papers. The North Korean asset also planned to send military uniforms that the DPRK could use to disguise troops sent into South Korea, prosecutors said. Wen's sentencing comes after he pleaded guilty on June 9 to acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government and conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which regulates trade with nations hostile to the U.S. DPRK handlers paid Wen around $2 million for the scheme, which dates back to 2022 when he was first contacted online by North Korean officials, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. In a letter to the judge, Wen's lawyers said the Chinese national accepted responsibility for what he had done. "Mr. Wen is truly a book that is not best judged by its cover," his public defender Michael L. Brown II wrote. "The offense conduct suggests that he is someone sophisticated and bold as the government claims when in reality he was a lowly agent, without much agency, in desperate financial straights when he committed the offense conduct." Wen's lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for additional comment. A surprise attack in the making Wen came to the United States in 2012 on a student visa, according to prosecutors. His lawyers said he was seeking asylum after Chinese authorities had persecuted him for practicing Catholicism, which has been outlawed to varying degrees in communist China. Prosecutors say he was already planning to become a North Korean asset at that point. Wen told the FBI in interviews that before moving to the U.S., he met with DPRK handlers at a North Korean embassy in China, court papers show. North Korean officials contacted Wen online about 10 years later, provided him the money for a Federal Firearms License to allow him to deal arms and the California-based DPKR asset began making trips to Texas to buy guns. Wen exported the weapons from Long Beach, near LA. He told U.S. authorities he was shipping a refrigerator, court papers show. He "admitted that he believed the North Korean government wanted the weapons, ammunition, and other military-related equipment to prepare for an attack against South Korea," prosecutors said. Investigators also found many images on his phone of U.S. military uniforms. Prosecutors said the photos were related to a plan to provide North Korean troops with disguises for the eventual attack. U.S. arms in foreign hands Wen's case is just the latest in international arms dealers making use of the American firearms market. The top five weapons manufacturers in the world as of 2023 were all American companies, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Lockheed Martin's $60.8 million revenue was greater than the top three Chinese companies combined. But American firearms have a way of making it into the hands of the nation's adversaries, from North Korean soldiers to cartels south of the border in Mexico. The FBI regularly catches foreign nationals in the United States exporting arms to places around the world that American authorities consider hostile. In March, federal officials charged a pair of men in Cleveland in connection with an operation to sell around 90 rifles and a machine gun to undercover agents posing as cartel members. Mexico sued U.S. gun manufacturers over the avalanche of American guns that wind up south of the border, although the Supreme Court eventually ruled against the U.S. neighbor. In April 2024, the Department of Justice charged a pair of foreign businessmen with conspiring to send anti-aircraft rounds, grenade launchers and automatic rifles to Iraq and Sudan.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
2025 SCOTUS Decisions That Could Affect Your Wallet
While the Supreme Court is the highest power of America's judicial branch, it might not be thought of as a force that dictates economic policy. However, many of the Court's decisions — particularly those related to the tax system — can definitely have an impact on your wallet. Check Out: Also See: As Shane Lucado, attorney and founder/CEO of InPerSuit, told GOBankingRates, 'When the Supreme Court turns policy into precedent, it rattles risk forecasts, freezes capital and creates trillions in downstream effects that are rarely accounted for in the headlines. … That ripple affects capital markets within hours, pricing strategies within days and litigation exposure within weeks.' Below are a few cases from the highest court's 2024-25 term, as well as cases from the upcoming term, that could affect your wallet. Catholic Charities Bureau, Inc. v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission In this case, SCOTUS unanimously decided that the state of Wisconsin had violated the First Amendment when it denied tax exemptions to the Catholic Charities Bureau (CCB). Initially, Wisconsin had denied tax exemption because the CCB, while a religious organization, did not actively proselytize Catholicism. SCOTUS ruled that denying tax exemptions to religious organizations that choose not to proselytize is a form of discrimination and a violation of First Amendment rights. Bishop James Powers said the ruling enables the church 'to continue serving those in need.' On a larger scale, the decision could cause revenue losses for states as a result of more nonprofit organizations being able to claim religious tax exceptions (which increases the taxpayer burden of others), as well as allow for costly litigation against states that similarly discriminate against organizations like the CCB. According to a 2021 Tax Foundation study, religious exemptions already cost the federal government — and thus taxpayers — $2.4 billion annually. See More: Also Read: Commissioner v. Zuch On June 12, 2025, SCOTUS ruled to limit taxpayer access to the U.S. Tax Court. Essentially, the Tax Court cannot oversee IRS collection disputes once the debt has been settled — such as through a refund offset, as happened in this case. Taxpayers must challenge refund offsets in federal district court instead — which can cost a lot more and be prohibitive for people without the financial means to advance such a legal challenge. Chad D. Cummings, attorney and CPA at Cummings & Cummings Law, told GOBankingRates that the decision 'gives the IRS a procedural advantage by allowing it to cut off Tax Court review through internal adjustment. As a result, taxpayers will have less time to request hearings or file petitions, making early engagement with counsel and prompt filing of Tax Court petitions more critical than ever.' Discover More: D.V.D. v. Department of Homeland Security This is an instance in which SCOTUS ruled in favor of the Trump administration, allowing for the White House's continued push for the deportation of undocumented immigrants. Specifically, the SCOTUS ruling undoes a lower court order that blocked Trump's administration from deporting undocumented immigrants to other countries (not their countries of origin) without first allowing the immigrants to make the case that such deportations might lead to persecution or death. While a clear victory for Trump and the Department of Homeland Security's continued efforts to curtail undocumented immigration, these mass deportations also could have a deleterious impact on the average American's wallet. As the Herman Legal Group has reported, an increase in immigration enforcement typically leads to labor shortages, specifically in the fields of agriculture, construction, restaurants and hospitality, housing and cleaning, and factories and manufacturing. Such labor shortages create decreased production and disrupted supply chains. The ultimate result of all that? Consumers pay more for groceries, for meals at a restaurant, for construction costs and more. The Herman Legal Group suggests the loss of immigrant workers could lead to 'federal and state tax losses in the range of $25 billion annually due to the departure of workers, reduction in consumer spending and the closure of immigrant-owned businesses.' Trump's recently passed spending bill earmarks as much as $170 billion for immigration and border security — a cost that taxpayers will shoulder for the rest of the decade. Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo In this case, SCOTUS overturned a previous 1984 ruling, Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, holding that courts are no longer required to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous laws. Only judges can decide what laws mean, in an effort to prevent bureaucrats from shaping the laws. This could create a wave of costly litigation challenging various previously established federal regulations, especially in the realms of health care, labor, consumer rights and environmental protection. It also could lead to reductions in the enforcement of things like worker safety, healthcare and student loans. As the Public Health Law Center at Mitchell Hamline School of Law has noted, the ruling 'will impact the work of federal agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, likely making it more difficult for such agencies to pass important regulations that protect public health.' This could lead to increased healthcare costs or even expensive lawsuits if legally actionable public health outbreaks were to occur. Moore v. United States In Moore v. United States, SCOTUS ruled that the Mandatory Repatriation Tax (a one-time tax on foreign company profits) is constitutional, even if the taxpayer never receives income from the profits being taxed. Chad D. Cummings, attorney and CPA, made clear to GOBankingRates that this ruling 'cements existing MRT liabilities and underscores the necessity of maintaining liquidity for tax obligations that may arise without a corresponding cash distribution. … Individuals with substantial foreign holdings, closely held businesses or large investment portfolios should view this as a prompt to revisit tax strategies now, before similar measures are enacted that could impose significant, unexpected financial obligations.' Find More: TikTok Inc. v. Garland By unanimous decision, SCOTUS upheld the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. At its core, this SCOTUS decision will force ByteDance, the Chinese owner of TikTok, to sell off the social media platform. If ByteDance does not sell, TikTok will be permanently banned in the U.S., making it inaccessible in America to over 170 million users (including many influencers who profit from the app). President Trump has continually extended the deadline, which is currently Sept. 17, 2025. A TikTok ban could be devastating to the social media influencers who have monetized the platform. A recent Ziprecruiter study found that the average successful American TikTok influencer makes approximately $132,000 per year via the app. In America in 2023, TikTok reportedly generated approximately $16 billion in revenue. Speaking to GOBankingRates about other consequences of a TikTok ban, Sapana Grossi, managing partner in venture capital at the Shah Grossi Law Firm, said TikTok's absence would be especially hard on micro-brands, 'because it will be much more expensive to operate.' 'When the platform went down for a short time earlier this year, the ad prices on other platforms spiked almost immediately,' Grossi said. 'For example, the price for impressions on Meta shot up by 10%. Based on that experience, we know that a ban could raise advertising costs significantly and make it almost impossible for micro-brands, or brands that entirely rely on TikTok's algorithm, to stay in business.' Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment In the Supreme Court's upcoming session (which begins in October), the Court will hear Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment. Sony (among others) has sued Cox Communications, accusing the telecommunications giant of enabling copyright infringement via its customers, some of whom engage in illegal file sharing while utilizing Cox's internet service. Sony maintains Cox has not done enough to prevent such criminality across its broadband service. Even if Cox wins, the case will be a costly one, forcing the company to potentially spend millions to defend itself. Yet if it loses, Grossi told GOBankingRates, 'Customers should expect to pay more as (Cox) will likely offset their increased expenses. (Cox) would essentially be acting as online police and monitoring accounts aggressively …(cutting) off households and public networks due to illegal activity by someone on the network. 'As a result, (Cox) will have to invest in larger compliance staff, monitoring/filtering software, and in-house legal departments to deal with a rise in litigation. It's very likely they will try to recover these costs through a quiet steady climb through higher monthly rates, administrative fees and reconnection charges. … Such fees rarely disappear, which means that a broad ruling here could lock in higher internet costs for years to come.' Cox's current internet connection plans range from $50 to $100 per month — whether those prices remain the same could hinge on this case. Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety This 2025-26 session case seeks to determine whether a person may sue a government official — rather than the governmental body that official works for — over violations of federal law regarding the religious rights of incarcerated criminals. The case stems from Damon Landor, a practicing Rastafarian who was forced by his prison's warden to have his dreadlocks cut off. As a result, Landor has argued in federal court that his religious rights were violated by the warden. If Landor were to win, it's possible that the taxpayer burden could be increased to cover the legal defense costs of government officials. Currently, the Prison Policy Initiative estimates the total U.S. government cost of prisons and jails to be $80.7 billion yearly. Also See: Louisiana v. Callais Louisiana v. Callais is a 2025-26 redistricting case that will dictate the state of Louisiana's congressional map going forward by deciding whether the creation of a second majority-Black congressional district in 2024 is a Constitutional violation or if it upholds the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. After the 2020 census, Louisiana drafted a congressional map with six districts. Black voters made up the majority of only one district in that map, despite the fact that approximately one-third of Louisiana voters are Black. A new map was drawn in 2024, adding a second majority-Black voting district. This case could have serious political implications, both for Louisiana and other states. Redistricting and gerrymandering is already a deeply contentious issue, with the makeup of congressional maps having the power to determine the outcomes of local, state and national elections. The financial impacts could be wide ranging. If Black voters are underrepresented, it could lead to less funding for healthcare, social services, etc., in their districts. Uncertainty around voting rights can affect investor sentiment in areas perceived as politically unstable. And the taxpayer costs of these political battles continue to add up. National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission Another case of major financial import is National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, in which SCOTUS will decide to uphold or strike down its 2001 ruling in Federal Election Commission v. Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee. That ruling upheld federal limitations on political parties with regards to campaign advertising. If SCOTUS were to strike down the original ruling, political party influence on elections could increase by a substantial margin, with far fewer constraints on political advertising. Like the aforementioned Louisiana v. Callais, this is a case that has the power to sway presidential elections, which in turn could dictate the economic future of the nation. Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates 5 Old Navy Items Retirees Need To Buy Ahead of Fall 7 Tax Loopholes the Rich Use To Pay Less and Build More Wealth This article originally appeared on 2025 SCOTUS Decisions That Could Affect Your Wallet
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Italian priest refused entry to Israel, deported due to 'public security reasons'
The priest, Don Nandino Capovilla from Venice, was set to take part in a pilgrimage to Bethlehem along with fifteen others. An Italian priest was refused entry to Israel at Ben-Gurion Airport over 'public security issues' and deported to Greece, Italian media reported on Monday. The priest, Don Nandino Capovilla from Venice, was set to take part in a pilgrimage to Bethlehem, Jerusalem, and the West Bank along with fifteen others, under the leadership of Archbishop Giovanni Ricchiuti, the president of Pax Christi Italy. Pax Christi is a Catholic peace movement with 120 member organizations worldwide. Capovilla was formerly the national coordinator of Pax Christi and has consistently spoken about 'the genocide of the Palestinian people.' He recently co-authored a book with Betta Tusset featuring a compilation of stories about life in the Gaza Strip. According to the online news site Veneto TourGuide, Capovilla was stopped immediately after stepping off the plane. The Italian daily newspaper, Corriere della Sera, reported that Capovilla was then presented with a form titled 'Decision regarding the refusal of entry into Israel,' which he refused to sign. The form reportedly read: 'He is not permitted to enter Israel,' with the reason for refusal cited as 'Considerations relating to public security, public safety, or public order.' It further stated that 'the person will be removed from Israel as soon as possible and in the meantime will be held in a designated facility.' Flight back to Italy Corriere della Sera added that Capovilla spent the remainder of the day in a facility pertaining to the Israeli authorities near the airport before flying to Cyprus, then to Italy via Frankfurt. On his Facebook page, Capovilla said he spent seven hours in a holding facility before having his phone and suitcase returned. He called on journalists covering the story to dedicate just one line to his well-being. The rest, Capovilla said, should be devoted to 'demanding sanctions against a state that bombs mosques and churches as part of the 'errors' it makes.' 'I do not authorize any journalist to interview me about my seven hours of detention unless they also write about the people who have been prisoners in their own land for seventy years,' he added. Ricchiuti, who successfully reached Bethlehem with the rest of the delegation, told the newspaper that he was not told what the specific reason for Capovilla's deportation was. He believed, however, that it was due to a book that Capovilla recently published, named Under the Gaza Sky. The blurb of Under the Gaza Sky condemns those who reduce the 'ongoing massacre' of Palestinians 'to something that started on October 7, 2023.' Within the book, the chapters are called 'When They Take Away Your Freedom to Leave,' 'When They Take Away Your Roof,' 'When They Take Away Your Bread,' and 'When They Take Away Your Water.' As for the Pax Christi 'pilgrimage of justice in the Holy Land,' it has taken a decisively anti-Israel stance. The website calls on the Italian Parliament and government to condemn Israel, suspend all weapon shipments to Israel, and recognize a Palestinian state. 'We tried everything, pulled every string, but it was no use, unfortunately,' Ricchiuti said regarding the refusal to allow Capovilla entry. 'We're here, from Rome and Venice, on a pilgrimage as part of our campaign for justice and peace: [build] bridges, not walls.' The Jerusalem Post reached out to the Population and Immigration Authority for comment. Solve the daily Crossword
