Tomorrow’s news today, from The Church of England Newspaper:

Anger over South African animal sacrifice as new diocese is formed (Broken link.)

Snippets:

The Rt Rev John Austin Baker, retired Bishop of Salisbury and President of the Anglican Society for the Welfare of Animals [ASWA], stated he was ìglad of the explanationî that ìsuch slaughters are not thought of as sacrifices to God or acts of ancestor worshipî, but remained concerned by the ìneedless sufferingî they incurred.

ìEven the possibility of cruelty to a fellow creature should have no part in any Christian activity, ritual or other,î Bishop Baker said.

[snip]

A spokesman for the Church of Nigeria remained unconvinced, saying the ceremony smacked of ìidolatryî.

The director of the Church of Nigeriaís communication department, the Rev Canon AkinTunde Popoola, noted Nigeria had ìmore than 200 tribes with different culturesî and ìmost believe in life after deathî in some form.

However his Province was ìcampaigning against all forms of syncretismî and did not consider animal sacrifice as ìas mere culture. Instead we condemn all such appearances of evil that can lead people away from Godî.

ìPray we will not see a pagan communion with human blood soon,î Canon Popoola said.

The original article, which is no longer available, covered the other side of the argument. But, I agree with both people I quoted above. On the one hand, I’m also glad to know this isn’t done to the glory of God. On the other hand, I also remain unconvinced that this is simply about providing meat for the celebration — or that there is any precedent in this local custom for celebrating in this way at the innauguration of a new Anglican diocese. (In other words, it may be an ancient local culturally-ingrained custom, but it is new for the Anglican Church.) The comments by Canon Popoola substantiate my views that opposition to ritual animal sacrifice in the church is not an issue of “superior culture”, “colonialism” or “race”, but that it is a recent unilateral innovation by some of the church hierarchy; and that killing animals has no place in the liturgical worship of a Christian Church, even for the sake of retaining members. (And I’m generally labelled a “liberal”.) The following articles give some hints about of how this was introduced into the Roman Catholic Church in SA about 5 years ago, and is now practiced in the Anglican Church in SA. The reason I bring up the Roman Catholics is that they were mentioned in Archbishop Ndungane’s prepared statement, “AN APPEAL FOR UNDERSTANDING OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY”, in response to the opposition, and requests for him to intervene, and cancel the ox slaughter last week (after it was too late, anyway, as it turned out). One paragraph in his statement said:

“We have people like Bishop Dwane who have done a doctoral thesis on this matter ñ people like Archbishop Buti Tlhagale ñ a leading figure on inculturation in the Roman Catholic Church. Pope John Paul II called a Special Synod on Africa, which I attended, to address these matters ñ lots of literature is available.”

But I can’t find any (positive) information about ritual animal sacrifice as part of the Church’s liturgy on the Internet. To be as fair as I can be, (doing a search for information about the special synod that was called by Pope John Paul II), I found “DIALOGUE WITH AFRICAN TRADITIONAL RELIGION IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA:
THE CHANGING ATTITUDE OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH”, by Chidi Denis Isizoh which is a good background article. But I haven’t found anything that would indicate what the Pope’s opinion was on this specific issue of incorporating ritual animal sacrifice into a church service. There really is no mention of it in this article, from a church standpoint, anyway. But “closer to home”, I would like to know what the Anglican Communion’s consensus is about ritual animal sacrifice in any of our churches.

(If interested, here is a general Google search for “Tlhagale animal sacrifice”.)

“Animal sacrifice has a special place in the scheme of things and is celebrated in almost all African families. We have kept it out of God’s Church for too long.”
– Archbishop Buti Tlhagale

Christianity Today (2000):

Debate Continues on Incorporating Animal Sacrifices in Worship
Some Christians warn that African rituals to honor ancestors could subvert the Gospel message.
[This article quotes the Rev. Andrew Linzey, throughout.]

Christianity Today (2000):

Let Africans Honor Ancestors with Blood Libations in Mass, Says Bishop
‘Is there a way to integrate this custom with their Christian belief as a step towards meaningful inculturation?’

High points:

“Sacrifice to the ancestors continues to be a very common practice among Africans,” Archbishop Tlhagale said. “The slaughtering of an animalócow or sheepótakes place wherever there is a funeral or a marriage feast, or in times of illness, unemployment, family feuds or the birth of a child.”

The practice should be considered within the context of inculturation, according to which local, indigenous culture and values are a means of presenting, reformulating and living the Christian faith, he suggested.

[snip]

The libation of the blood of a slaughtered animal could be introduced into funeral rites at the home of the deceased, at the start of the night vigil, or the evening before a marriage, he said. “This should be linked to the word of the Gospel so that the ceremony clearly has a Christian stamp on it.”

Archbishop Tlhagale told ENI he was trying “to start a conversation” about how the African tradition of libation could be incorporated into the liturgy of the Mass in a symbolic way. He was not suggesting that an animal be slaughtered during Mass, he said. The blood of an animal slaughtered beforehand, or traditional African home-brewed beer, for example, could be used for the libation.

[Why can't they opt for people bringing their home-brewed beer to church, and call it a day on animal sacrifice. That would make everybody happy, wouldn't it? "BEER, NOT BLOOD!"]

“If used at Mass, its best position would be before the offertory [an early stage in the Mass], because the libation is a gift to the ancestors, not to God.” Archbishop Tlhagale said clergy would need to take care that worshippers did not confuse the blood of Christósymbolized by consecrated wineóand the blood of the sacrificial victim. “We know that the blood of Christ atones for all humanity’s sins, and we cannot attribute its redeeming effect to the blood of animals,” he said. “Perhaps we can overcome the difficulty by indicating that the animal blood is not an element in a true and proper sacrifice. It is only metaphorical as a prayer for a special request, such as health, well-being, peace, reconciliation or favor.”

[The blood of animals may be "metaphorical" to the Archbishop, but it is not "metaphorical" to the animals! There is no health, well-being, peace, reconciliation or favor for the animals he wants to kill. What an amazing article this is, that discloses his thought processes to find ways to make this innovation seem acceptably compatable with mainstream Catholic worship. Even the understanding of the "communion of saints" etc., could be celebrated without killing an animal. And he says, beer would work as well as blood if they need something "sacramental" for the "metaphor". So again, why not use beer?]

In a written statement, Archbishop Tlhagale added: “Ancestor veneration predates the advent of Christianity in Africa. It was indeed the cornerstone of the African religious consciousness, the basis of a true African spirituality.

“This belief is deeply rooted in the African psyche and will not be simply washed away by the water of baptism. So strong is this belief that most African familiesóeven among sophisticated urban Christiansócontinue to slaughter animals during the rites of passage. At marriage feasts, at funerals, at major healing ceremonies, animals are slaughtered.

“This custom, so basic within the African culture, can be kept out of the Church to thrive on its own, or be made part of our Christian belief and ritual practice,” the archbishop said.

[snip]

From Catholic.net World Watch (May, 2000):

SOUTH AFRICA
An African tradition
Animal blood in the liturgy?

[I'm posting the whole blurb, because it's hidden amid news from all over.]

One controversyócaused by the suggestions that the role of saints is similar to that of revered ancestors in African culturesóhad barely subsided among the Catholics of South Africa. Now a new dispute began, involving suggestions that African culture could be incorporated into Catholic liturgy through animal bloodletting during the Mass.

On the controversy over the status of ancestors, Archbishop Buti Tihagale of Bloemfontein drew a clear distinction, concluding that while respect for oneís ancestors is both natural and laudable, ìancestors are no substitute for saints.î But the Pretoria News implicated the same archbishop with the supporters of a proposal to include elements of animal sacrifice in the Catholic liturgy.

Father Smangaliso Mkhatshwa, a Catholic priest who is also the deputy minister of education in the South African government, was the first prominent figure to come out in support of the callsófirst introduced by some black priestsófor the incorporation of animal sacrifices into the liturgy. These calls must be seen against the background of the debate over reverence for ancestors, since the practice of animal sacrifice is used to honor ancestors in traditional African religions. Opponents of the practice have raised the objection that these sacrifices are elements of pagan worship, which have no place in Christian practice.

In response to press inquiries, Father Mkhatshwa said that he supported the calls by some African clerics to incorporate some form of animal bloodletting into the Mass. (The Pretoria News suggested that Archbishop Tihagale was among those calling for such a step.) On a practical note, he admitted that the architecture of Catholic church buildings might have to be ìreviewedî in order to accommodate the requirements of animal sacrifice.

Father Mkhatshwa has already shown his willingness to depart from orthodox Catholic teaching, voting in 1996 to support a proposal for legalized abortion on demand. His support for animal sacrifice is not likely to sway the opinions of Church leaders. Nevertheless, the National Council of Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals reacted with ìdisbeliefî to the proposal, and has already written to the South African bishops, seeking a clarification.

Shouldn’t a controversy of this type raise a red flag? Is it too late to add ritual animal sacrifice to the list of recommended Anglican moratoria, until there is sufficient consensus between the Provinces?…. [I would think that between the West (who is on friendly terms, but who has been accused of creating unrepentant unilateral "controversies" of their own, and who might be perceived as "colonialist" with attitudes of "superior culture") and the Global South (who would see this as incompatable with traditional Christian teachings, Revisionist, etc.) there might be little support for ritual animal sacrifice in the Anglican Church, if this were on the table at, say, a Primates Meeting, or the next Lambeth Conference.]