posted 05 March 2004 17:08         

Over the past four centuries, scholars have been in disagreement regarding the role of the African God in human affairs. This notion that the “African God” is Deus otiosus (un dieu lointain et oisif, a remote and unnecessary God, a useless truth, a lazy and inactive God, indifferent to the plight of humankind, a God who is absolute Transcendence and therefore away from the world) is widespread in Western beliefs shared by both Christian theologians and secular scholars. Even some African scholars have subscribed to such a thesis.
1. Western Scholars
Thomas Blakely and Pamela Blakely
In their 1994 study published on the Bahemba, a group connected to the Baluba, Pamela A.R. Blakely and Thomas D. Blakely maintained that in the Bahemba religion, “the creator (Abezha Mbungu), remains quite distant and uninvolved, with little about the creator god thought to be relevant to contemporary human problems.”
In 1988, J. Masson maintained a similar idea with regard to African traditional religions in general.

2. African Scholars
Victor Chikezie Uchendu, (Nigeria, Igbo)
In his research in anthropology presented at NorthWestern University, this native Igbo scholar, wrote the following on Igbo religion:
The Igbo high god is a withdrawn god. He is god who has finished all active works of creation and keeps watch over his creatures from a distance. The Igbo high god is not worshiped directly. There is neither shrine nor priest dedicated to his service. He gets no direct sacrifice from the living ... He seldom interferes in the affairs of men, a characteristic which sets him apart from all other deities, spirits, and ancestors ... Is it any wonder that they (the Igbo people) sometimes fell that the distance between them and the high god is too great?

While the majority of scholars promote this doctrine of Deus Otiosus, their own writing often carry a profound contradiction. As John Mbiti rightly pointed out, assertions like those of Uchendo and the whole cohort of Western scholars are misleading, and the notion that Africans conceive God as deus otiosus is false. In the West, Ludwig acknowledges that although the supreme being is sometimes considered as far away, and has delegated many functions to spirits and the ancestors, “he is still approachable; people can call on him at any time without needing priests or shrines.” In Africa, Uchendu, himself, acknowledges that the Igbo who “sacrifice to any unknown and uninvited deities who might be present,” conceive the high god as “the ultimate receiver of all sacrifice made to the minor deities.” He also maintains that the Igbo appeal to the High God in their distress and stresses that
Although the Igbo feel psychologically separated from their high god, he is not too far away, he can be reached ...The Igbo recognize that the high god can do all things. Although the high god may be distant and withdrawn, he is not completely separated from the affairs of men. He is still the great father, the source of all good. He interacts with each Igbo during each reincarnation cycle. He sometimes intervenes in favor of the living...
Uchendu’s paradoxical views are symptomatic of the difficulty in translating the reality of God’s existence into human language; however, this is not a problem peculiar to African traditional religions. In African religions as in many other religious traditions, the difficult question of the relationship between the holiness or purity of God and his caring love for his imperfect creatures gives way to paradoxical statements about God. However, a careful examination of African religious beliefs indicates that Africans, like many other people, consider God to be at once “far” and “near.” In the poetic expression of the Lugbara people, it is fair to characterize the African God as Adro-Adroa; meaning, God is conceived as being near to people (Adro) and at the same time far away (Adroa). This same notion is found among the Baluba, who express the transcendence and immanence of God in a beautiful proverb, “Vidye kadi kula, umwite ukwitaba, umulonde bukwidila” (God is not far away, if you call him he will answer you, but if you try to walk you will never meet him).
We can thus conclude with John Mbiti that the doctrine of Deus Otiosus, which is a miscarriage of Colonial scholarship, stems from a superficial reading of African religion. This doctrine is false and must be abandoned once for all:
Many foreign writers constantly harp on the note that for African peoples God is ‘too remote’ and virtually excluded from human affairs. This assertion is false ... People consider God to be both ‘far’ and ‘near.’

As Mbiti rightly emphasized, African traditional religions, like other religions of the world, have faced the paradox of the transcendence and immanence of the Divine.