Christianity’s role during colonialism in Africa should be open to criticism without people automatically treating it as an attack on Christianity itself.
I’ve been thinking about this again after revisiting reactions from a couple months ago to comments made by Tobi Adegboyega about Christianity and colonialism in Africa.
A lot of the backlash seemed to assume that questioning the historical role of Christianity during colonialism is the same thing as attacking the faith itself. I don’t think those are necessarily the same conversation.
My point isn’t that Christianity is false or that African Christians today aren’t genuine in their beliefs. Clearly millions of people practise Christianity sincerely and find meaning in it.
But at the same time, I don’t think it’s historically controversial to say that religion and colonial power were often connected in parts of Africa. Missionaries frequently operated alongside colonial systems, and religion was sometimes presented as part of a broader “civilising” project tied to European rule.
We openly discuss the impact colonialism had on:
• borders,
• language,
• economics,
• education,
• governance,
yet religion often feels like the one area people become extremely defensive about discussing critically.
To me, that’s interesting.
I think part of the reason is because religion is more personal than those other systems. For many people it’s tied to identity, morality, family, and culture, so criticism of its historical role can feel like criticism of the people who believe in it.
Still, I think there should be space to discuss the historical relationship between Christianity and colonialism without the conversation immediately being dismissed as anti-Christian.
Context clip: