Chapter 4: Change Factors Peculiar to the C&S Church
On account of its peculiar circumstances, vis-à-vis its formation, development, and ministry, certain factors peculiar to the C&S have affected the evolutionary trend of its doctrines, norms, and practices. The word ‘peculiar’ is of course used only in a loose sense, not necessarily meaning that such factors do not exist outside the C&S but rather that it is more commonly to be found within the C&S, where prevailing circumstances provide somewhat conducive environment.
4.1. Internal Pressure, Jealousies, and other Base Human Factors
A considerable number of changes in doctrines, norms, and practices among the C&S Society, unfortunately, were brought about by negative factors such as growth of personality cults, internal wranglings, jealousies, and other base human factors.
As a result of the loose nature of administrative set-ups with little regards to establishment of proper spiritual coverings, most congregations evolved around charismatic personalities. With several hundreds or perhaps even thousands of independent “supreme” authorities, it is quite understood that various practices and doctrines incongruent with the foundational but ill-defined ones should soon spring up in endemic proportions.
In a typical C&S setting, it is an anathema to criticize the actions of the usually all-in-all leader and founder. All clear lapses of this leader must be explained off or excused. In the C&S church, the unwritten general belief is that a man or woman who works miracles (or at least, who is able to predict the future with some measure of accuracy) is special and deserves to be excused for some other human weaknesses of which everyone is supposed to have one in any case. Scriptures of course encourage us to ‘bear one another’s burdens’ (Gal 6:2), cover “multitude of sins” with charity (1 Pet 4:8), and generally honor those placed as shepherds over us (1 Pet. 5:5, Eph 5:19). Issues should consequently be addressed subject to these general principles. The problem in most C&S cases is that acquiescence is usually based on fear of men and ignorance of Scriptures, rather than on love of God and of the Scriptures. Such issues, left unaddressed, soon break out as festering sores in course of time, leading to yet another “independent” C&S schismatic faction.
It has been mentioned previously that the C&S Society in seeking a unique identity for itself, distinct from other Christian groups, was disposed to a variety of peculiar practices. The same is true even when new factions break away from parent bodies, especially when conditions for such breaking away were less than amicable. To emphasize their new independence and perhaps justify the breaking away as well as affirm their superiority, changes are introduced into the doctrines and practices of the new group. With the known geometrical rate of generation of schismatic groups, it is no surprise that vast changes in doctrines and practices should become visible on the macroscopic scale within the C&S Society in 70 years (as at 1995) of existence. Using the prayer gown as an example, the present wide array of colors of the once “simply white” praying gown could be traced to new schismatic groups dreaming up new, supposedly more spiritually functional, colors of praying gown. Today there are as many colors to praying gowns as can be compounded.
4.1.1 Origin of the Prayer Gown
However, even the concept of the
prayer gown itself, about the only common legacy among the C&S Society,
could be traced at least in part, to personality cult and base human factors.
How did the prayer gown spring up within the C&S Society? According to Omoyajowo1
“The Baba Aladura himself was the first to use a praying gown. This was an ordinary white cassock probably in imitation of the Ethiopian church in Lagos where this was already in use. Apart from Orimolade, the Praying Band were the first members to wear uniforms; later in the 1927 anniversary, as many members of the Society as could afford the cost used white praying garments”.
It is well known that the Praying Band was regarded as elitists and membership of the Band became a serious issue of contention. Indeed, it has been suggested that part of the reasons Orimolade formed the Patriarch’s Band was to mollify those who felt slighted in not being appointed into the Praying Band, and allegedly, one of the reasons why the E.S.O. C&S split into two after the death of Orimolade was that his nominated successor, Abraham Onanuga, “was accused, in particular, of admitting members into the Praying Banding in an unconstitutional way”. According to Miss S.A. Johnson, “the choice of the Praying Band, which should be proceeded by fasting for about three months before a few selections would be made from the candidates, was hurriedly made by the new Alagba”. It is therefore not difficult to see that with the Praying Band now sharing garb as the Baba Aladura himself, the white gown should be elevated to a new status.
The praying gown is definitely a good example of how C&S beliefs and practices have been fluctuating over the years, and it is interesting that members of the Society would later on see the white robe as their own special creation. The simple fact, however, is that the use of white gowns predated the emergence of the C&S. As early as June 1855, 70 years before the emergence of the C&S, David and Anna Hinderer had got the first five converts to be baptized as Christians in Ibadan to wear white robes for their baptisms. Also Peel mentioned the Sanctified Band whose members wore white gowns in the early 1920s. The appropriation of the white garment as a special creation of the C&S, could therefore be seen as another case of doctrines being changed to fit into practice based on mind–sets, as several scriptural justification and visions for its mandatory use, soon sprang up. Things degenerated to the point that in some C&S churches, as well as on several “holy shrines”, admission is forbidden to people not wearing prayer gowns. In this way the use of the gown changed from a socioeconomic role to a spiritual, even sacred one.
In recent years however, with everybody now allowed to put on the gown, its role as a symbol of status within the C&S has somewhat diminished.
Nowadays there are reports of several C&S churches putting less emphasis on the prayer gown. In fact in the Evangelical Church of Yahweh (another ‘White Garment Church’), the prayer gown is now worn only at special (perhaps annual occasions). This probably parallels what Moses Orimolade had in mind for the C&S considering his 1930 constitution previously mentioned.
The vast majority of changes introduced as a result of the factors under consideration are subtle or largely unsubstantiated; however, there are lots of illustrations. For instance, a specially – gifted prophet was reported to have explained his cigarettes smoking as a way to ward off the plethora of angels constantly swarming around him, thereby obtaining some respite! With his well-known charismatic gifts, few are willing to challenge this explanation. The number of alcoholics or fornicators parading themselves as “prophets” is simply legion; but as will be discussed in more details later, with the typical contemporary C&S, gifts are certainly more important (in real and practical terms) than the fruit of the Spirit.
However, the best example of how
personality cult affects doctrines and practices is the idea of some men
covering their head in the church which some factions of the C&S practice.
This idea almost certainly evolved from the fact that Moses Orimolade always
covered his hair. According to M.O Rufai (though disagreeing with the
practice):
“Moses Orimolade of blessed memory (was) a “Nazarethine” (with) hairlocks that were reputed of standing erect whenever he was spiritually possessed”.
It was therefore in order to be
like the Baba Aladura that “the highest ranking elders” got the “privilege” of
putting on caps in the church. This practice is not universal within the
C&S Society, and Rufai, even as an apologist of the C&S found the
“aping” of this practice by Moses Orimolade as “baseless”. This evolution in
Practice also has ripples of Doctrines.
The factions that follow this practice, hardly explain it as an “aping”
of Moses Orimolade’s practice [in which case, it might have to agree that
Orimolade was wrong]. Rather it traced it3 to the Aaronic priesthood
where priests were required to put on caps (turban and holy crown) in the Holy
places {Lev. 8:9}. This is of course a serious jump in doctrines but as
is usual in the C&S, liturgy and forms come far ahead of doctrines. The
incontrovertible fact that the caps were introduced by the successor of Moses
Orimolade, Abraham Onanuga, on very spurious reasons has been previously noted.
This sub–section will be incomplete without noting that base human factors were actually responsible for the initial fundamental deviation of the C&S from its original path. For according to several accounts, one of the causes of friction between Captain Abiodun and Moses Orimolade was the rivalry between members of the Praying Band and Captain Abiodun, with the Praying Band members seeing her as becoming too powerful and exerting too much influence on the Baba Aladura. After the parting of ways between Captain Abiodun and Moses Orimolade, the Praying Band members shifted attention to the other female figure having some influence with the Baba Aladura, one Olayinka Ijesha. The Praying Band later gave as one of their reasons for breaking away as the reluctance of the Baba Aladura to send away Olayinka Ijesha2 As is well known and universally acknowledged, Moses Orimolade, on his own volition, lived a strictly ascetic and celibate life. These base human factors, in reality contributed significantly to the C&S becoming what it is today.
2. LACK OF CENTRAL AUTHORITY, LEADERSHIP, OR SOUND SCRIPTURAL FOUNDATIONS
Once again this is a factor which probably has synergistically combined with other factors in leading to changes in the doctrines and practices of the C&S Society. The problem of lack of central authority before the C&S broke into three factions was dealt with in some details in the book “Diversity in Unity” by Omoyajowo. Lack of a central authority implies that no one could check the doctrines and practices in C&S ‘Churches’ and any church is free to determine her own standards.
A conspicuous example is in the hymns and songs of the C&S. Of the few original C&S songs, there are often contentions on several of these on doctrinal issues. As compromise situations are sought, changes inevitably crop up. In the C&S, the hymn book is placed almost on the same level as Scriptures as a medium of spiritual instruction.
As an example of how doctrinal
grounds are shifted via hymns, we consider the hymn (493, Apapo, 2nd
Edition3)
Olorun kan lo to
ka sin Only
one God should we worship
Ka si feran re
l’afetan And completely should we love Him
A ko gbodo bo
orisa We
must not worship idols
Nitori ohun asan
ni For
it is vanity
Ka ranti pe lati
ri igbala We
should remember that to be saved
O to ka p’ofin mo It
is right to keep the Law
Ti Olorun ti ko fun wa Which God has written unto us
This original song affirms that to be saved, it is proper that we keep the Law written for us by God. Later revision changed this requirement for salvation into “it is proper that we speak the truth” [O to ka s’otito].
Another popular example of this kind is in the hymn, “Olorun eleda to d’egbe Seraf, ati Kerubu s’orile ede aye”, which has as the concluding stanza:
Jesu Kristi Oluwa
oba ogo Jesus
Christ the lord, king of glory
L’opa iye
ainipekun wa lowo re Is
the possessor of the rod of eternal life
Yio ko gbogbo awon
to ba gbagbo lo He shall take
all who believe with him
Siwaju ite Baba
loke into
the presence of the Father’s Throne above
In later editions, this stanza was changed to read:
Moses Orimolade
Tunolashe, l’opa iye ainipekun wa lowo re . . .
(Moses Orimolade Tunolashe,is the possessor of the rod of eternal life. . .)
In the Iwe orin Apapo which was an attempt at unifying and harmonizing all C&S hymns and doctrines, the editors, it seems, could not agree on what name to use, so the troublesome first line in this [sixth] stanza is simply left blank – presumably to be filled by whatever name any faction prefers. (see Hymn No 114). An indication of the amount of emotions generated in the course of these kind of revisions – even if only ‘merely theoretical’ from the perspective of an average C&S member – can be seen in the writing of Famodimu in his book4
This lack of sound Scriptural foundations has led to the present situation where liturgy and form is given far more prominence than sound doctrines. While people may pay lip-service to doctrines, it is clear that what matters most was getting (quick) results – “practical Christianity” as members are quick to boast. Taking Fakeye5 as an example:
“Our religion is not just ordinary Christianity. We are practicing the practical habit of Jesus Christ”
While any Christianity that does not include “signs and wonders” can hardly be called Christianity at all, it is at the same time dangerous to set experience over Scriptures (cf 2 Pet 1:18-20). The two extreme positions were quite adequately demonstrated in the early Church where the Western church at Rome was caught in the web of doctrinal imbroglios while that at Constantinople gave all attention to liturgy and forms thereby neglecting to “keep the doctrine”.
Watchman Nee wrote on what ought to
be the ideal to seek out – LIFE:
“There is much false holiness in the world, and we can readily be deceived by it, but life is one thing that cannot be simulated. Is there life in me? Do I touch life in another? These are the questions. For life is something deeper than thought, more real than feeling and doctrine” 6
It would seem as if the C&S had the right balance between Scriptures and signs in the early days for according to Peel (in an interview with So Phillips)7
“How did the early members think of Seraphim Society? Prayer was the object. In our churches with their set services, there was not sufficient time for us to develop spiritually…… We Africans are so low in everything but by prayer we may win everlasting power in God’s Kingdom. In a word, practical Christianity”
Continuing, Peel
wrote8 :
“As the number swelled, the procession and prayer meetings were backed up by a network of Bible classes, each under its leader. The Bible was as important as prayer or visions; indeed, it provided the intellectual justification for them”.
Hardly can this description be applied to the typical C&S congregation today. Although a few congregations now are moving back to including specific times for Bible study in their schedule, most are still a very long way off from affirming the fact that “the Scriptures cannot be broken” (John 10:32) and using the Bible as the basis for “prayer and visions”.
With the lack of either a central authority or sound Scriptural basis, it is not surprising then to find the Society adrift in the sea of confusion vis-à-vis having a sound doctrinal basis for their practices. Most practices in the C&S Church thus derived directly from vision – visions unregulated by a uniform measure such as the Scriptures, and unstripped of individual limitations and biases, as will be discussed shortly in the next sub- section. This indeed forms the core of the differences between the Christ Apostolic Church (CAC) and the C&S Church, both of which developed from the same common Aladura revival in the 1920’s as well described by Peel.
The relegation of the Scriptures to a place secondary to “visions” and “practical Christianity” meant that issues such as holiness and righteous living, notable marks of the C&S Society in the early days, also became relegated to the back benches with the passage of time. One hymn-well revered in the C&S is the one that lauds men who are able to “compel God into acceding to their requests through prayers” (awon ti o fi adura mu ki Olorun gbo ti won). Of course, commanding Divine attention will depend on factors such as holiness, mandate/call, faith, and importunity. However, in the C&S context, the understanding over time, became that such prayers must be well-patterned and supported with the right ingredients and rituals - usually candles, incense, and depending on the background of the practitioner, several fetish objects.
4.3 Illiteracy and Adopted Ignorance
Another important factor, peculiar to the C&S, that played important roles in the evolution of doctrines, norms, and practices in the C&S Society is Illiteracy and Adopted Ignorance. Although in the early days of the C&S there were several fairly well-educated personalities, there was nevertheless an overwhelming number of illiterate members. Unfortunately, most of the well-educated people did not make the transition from the general C&S movements into the C&S Church proper. We have seen that the African Church Communion, the Methodist Church, and the Anglican church for instance had to officially forbid their members participation in, according to the African church, “the Seraphic group”. Most people who are literate enough to hold important positions in their churches would not even think of leaving their church for what was a mere evangelistic Society. This had been previously discussed. The failure of these key, well–educated godly men to move into the formalized C&S Church has at least a two-fold implication. First, like the early church which had lost the cream of its leadership under the intense Diocletian persecution just before the wide liberties given by Constantine in 313 AD thereby resulting in considerable confusion, the withdrawal of this calibre of membership gave the C&S Church a start on the wrong footing. This is because previously unprepared persons suddenly found themselves in key positions in the church. In this regard, illiteracy is not merely in terms of formal education alone but also with respect to theological training and understanding of general Church history and heritage, as opposed to the history of the local Church in Nigeria at a time when nationalistic feelings were quite rife.
Second, although the theologically literate churchmen never really withdrew their support from the C&S completely (and according to records, many of them actively encouraged their children to be part of it[1]), nevertheless they were not able to contribute maximally in terms of setting down doctrine and practices formally. It has already been suggested that J.K. Coker was a strong influence on Moses Orimolade in not only starting the Seraphim Society, but also in ensuring that the Society develops in completely indigenous manner. Though the C&S still had the few Sosans, the withdrawal of her cream of supporters and sponsors no doubts played important roles in later formulation (or non-formulation!) of doctrines.
However, it would seem that what is here referred to as Adopted Ignorance is even a far more important factor in the evolution of norms and practices in the C&S than Illiteracy. In Illiteracy, people did not quite know what to do. In Adopted Ignorance however, people who should know better decide to close their eyes to facts and enjoy the bliss of ignorance. Thus, all sorts of rationalizations are made to justify practices that should simply have been expunged.
With respect to the thesis in this book, the deliberate mis-interpretation of Scriptures is an important consideration. There are several Scriptures which are generally quoted out of context, but which have become accepted as established, even though almost everybody recognizes the wrong interpretation. Since this is a deliberately adopted attitude, we have here called it Adopted Ignorance.
Most of these cases are quite innocuous but a few are dangerous and have significant effects on doctrines and practices. Whatever the case, development of such lukewarm attitude to correct interpretation of Scriptures no doubts, as previously discussed, is capable of upsetting what should be the correct balance between liturgy and doctrine.
We should
make clear that here we are not referring to controversial interpretations of Scriptures,
but deliberately lukewarm attitude to correct use of Scriptures. By way of
examples, harmless accepted mis-interpretation of Scriptures will include the
following popular usage in C&S circles:
“Woo, mo gba fun o” (Genesis 21:17)
as meaning a commendation, (you are fantastic!) when the real meaning (look, I have agreed with you) is clear both from the context and of course the English Bible; or
“Touch not, taste not, handle not...” (Col. 2:21)
as meaning that we must not touch dirty or sinful habits. Useful homily no doubt, but a misuse of the Scriptures.
More
significant to the evolution of doctrines however are such passages as Jeremiah
10:2
“Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at
the signs of heaven..”
(“E mase ko ona awon keferi, ki ami orun ma si damu yin”)
which is often interpreted as meaning “do not learn the way of the heathen (i.e. do not change the doctrines of the C&S) so that the heavenly mark on you may not start troubling you”.
By thus
distinguishing themselves as having “special marks from heaven”, C&S
members are clearly, even if unwittingly, withdrawing themselves from the
General Assembly of the Saints (Heb 12:23) who presumably do not carry
such special marks. For Scriptures say no other foundation can be laid than
that which is laid already, Christ Jesus (1 Cor 3: 11; 1 Peter 2:6) and for
anybody who would add anything to Jesus, Jesus death is become of no value (Gal
5:2). In any case, most members of the C&S see
themselves as definitely superior to the “average Christian” as already noted.
Unfortunately, this superiority is usually conceptualized in the sense of
providing some exemption from punishment due to others, upon infringement of
certain Scriptural principles. It would
have been much useful had it been the kind of superiority espoused by the
Moravians, compelling them to go further in matters of holiness and
righteousness than what is required of “regular” Christianity. In any case, in the opinion of Watchman Nee,
all forms of Christianity not conforming to Scriptures is “sub-normal”.
Radiant, confident, life-yielding Christianity is then the only form of “normal
Christianity”.
Another
often widely-misquoted verse of Scripture is Isaiah 45:11c
“.. and concerning the work of my hands command ye me.”
[“E pase fun mi niti ise owo mi” ]
Following KJV and Yoruba translations, this passage wrongly suggests that we can order God on any issue as we wished. Such a belief makes nonsense of seeking God’s sovereign will or instructions, and conforming to them. (for example, the Lord Jesus at Gethsemane, Mark 14:36). In this view, God can be made to conform to whatever whimsical wish of any man, provided the right “eto” (rituals) are made. It is no doubts this kind of theology that has led several so –called “prophets” to the use of occultic books including the so-called 6th and 7th ‘books of Moses’.
This
emphasis of “agbara emi” has also led to warped angelology; and it is
not at all strange to hear in a typical C&S congregation, instructions such
as: “E fi ori bale fun maleka ti o sokale yi”; requesting that worship
be given to the ministering angel.
A catalogue of the “extravagant claims” of the C&S such as those by the Aiyetoro Community who claims that their community is the literal fulfillment of Christ’s teaching about the kingdom of God; or of Apostle Abana a leading theologian in the C&S who holds that “Jesus was one of the ‘twenty-five elders’ keeping the east gate of heaven, as can be read in Ezekiel 11: 1[2] are all well-documented in the book by Omoyajowo.9
The examples cited above under the factor under discussion, also show that what started as an illiteracy factor could become adopted ignorance later on. For instance, one generation could be excused where translations in the Yoruba Bible had been ambiguous and they had no other alternatives to cross-check with; while latter generations will be inexcusable, if they continue to propagate the same blunders, since there are various other translations in various languages, including even the original languages to use in resolving difficult passages.
The declining emphasis of Scriptures is certainly a strong factor in promoting Biblical illiteracy and adopted ignorance. It seems the average C&S member knew from experience that if “this and this” are done in “so and so” manner, “this and this” results would be obtained. Not really appreciating why such results are obtained, he therefore is scared of making any alterations to the forms (supposedly) “left behind by Moses Orimolade”. This explains a variety of common characteristics of the C&S – long hair, bearded face (in the ESO C&S only the Baba Aladura can have one; while in several other factions you are not yet a Prophet if you did not have the characteristic beard), restrictive menstrual laws, and similar practices.
4.4 Copying, Confusion, and Syncretism
These, as a factor, are closely related to the last factor discussed. Examples have already been cited of various doctrines and practices which were simply copied from other churches. The major problem with this in the C&S, leading to confusion, is the fact that the C&S did not evolve from any single existing church denomination in particular, but consisted of Christians from various backgrounds and several outright pagans. Captain Abiodun, as can be noted from Chapter 2 had a rich church background including Methodist, African church, Baptist, Catholic, and Anglican. There was therefore no particular organization of liturgies; and in many instances the reasons for particular forms or practices are not known. For instance, it is usual to hear many people describe the use of incense as related to the warding away of evil spirits, while others believe that incense do actually attract the ‘good angels’. It is more likely that incense was introduced after the practices in a few of the other churches, especially the Catholic church. Everybody therefore defends the practices as they found most convenient.
Without a solid teaching on the foundations of Christianity, many brought over several practices from their former denominations and religions into the C&S. This syncretism was necessarily a feature of all indigenous churches in the early days. For example, Peel10 noted that Akinyele (of the CAC) “noted in his diary for 1924… several recipes and medicine, including this verbal charm: ‘jaga (3) jakinrikisi (3) jalawonrinwo –jiwonrinwon (3), remove the illness which is on that person…’
Sosan
also was reported as recording all kinds of charms, incantations and medicine
in his diary listing entries like ‘experienced juju tricks all night through
the enemy, on that account was too weak to stand up in the service of this
morning.” Peel continued to list other
prominent Christians in other denominations who carried with them their
traditional beliefs and practices into Christianity. He wrote:
‘Rev. Dada, the host of Egunjobi, was a powerful native doctor, and exchanged recipes with some of the leading Christians of his day - Rev. Adejumo, Anglican pioneer at Ife, Dr. Oyerinde, founder of the Baptist Seminary at Ogbomosho, A.K. Ajisafe, an African churchman and Egba historian”
However, due to the peculiar nature of the C&S, the problem soon assumed epidemic levels instead of being checked. Ironically, if the report credited to the Bishop of Lagos is to be believed, syncretism was “unheard of in the beginning” of the C&S. However, in the C&S, use of Psalms, candles, water, river-bath and so on, soon became well-established. In the opinion of Omoyajowo on the use of water for example, the “C&S merely added biblical justification to an existing practice”. Noting that in several cases, the use of “water” may include specification of particular water sources, or, as noted by Omoyajowo, such injunctions as not talking to anyone before use, it is difficult to disagree with his interpretation. In the C&S world, coconut water, rain, running rivers, seas, wells, the dew etc. are all standard different water sources useful for different spiritual purposes.
In the other churches on the other hand, taking the CAC for instance, the leaders soon attained a level in their walk with Christ to understand the fundamental differences between Christianity and other religions. For instance, Akinyele, mentioned above, made his pledge “never again to use medicine” of 1 January, 1925. In fact, the CAC probably shot over to the other extreme as they, even up till today, officially reject any form of medicine, whether native (‘religious’ or not) or western. Also in the other denominations, the organization was sufficiently strong to prevent mass expression of syncretism. This is not the case in the C&S Society, and today perhaps only very few C&S congregations can be said to understand the fundamental differences between Christianity and other religions.
According
to standard mainstream C&S doctrine, there is hardly any difference
between Islam and Christianity. Indeed one important C&S hymn declares:
‘Itiju
pupo ni yio wa
Fun
awon Onigbagbo ati Onimole
Nigbati
Onifa ba wole’
[Several Christians and Moslems will be thoroughly put to shame when they found Herbalists entering (paradise, ahead of them)].
The point to note in the hymn is that both Christians and Moslems are seen as both automatically heading for heaven.
An
interesting example of how the C&S could be more prone to syncretism than
other established churches with more solid organizations is seen in the
following account of the origin of the C&S Church at Ewu town in Ishan
division of the old Bendel state. According to the story documented by
Omoyajowo11:
“Evangelists of the C&S came to the town in the early 1960s and performed miracles of healing. These impressed the Iyadi group and it consequently accepted conversion into Christianity, changing its name to Cherubim and Seraphim church”.
Although the Iyadi traditional religious group in this story were reportedly well-monitored and presumably taught the foundation stone doctrines of Christ, there are several cases where people are admitted into the C&S Church from heathenism and without proper inductions, these go ahead to occupy positions of leadership in no time depending usually upon their socio-economic station. In this kind of situation, it is very easy for the central distinguishing points of Christianity – the uniqueness of Jesus and concept of salvation by grace entirely - to be missed. (The author knows of a self-proclaimed C&S prophet who saw no fundamental difference in Christianity and the message of a popular mystic in South West Nigeria who claims to be the ‘living perfect master’. This same prophet is known sometimes to support his ‘visions’ and “prophecies’ with expressions such as “Ogun gbo” (an oath in the name of the local god of iron, Ogun, which most Yorubas will not dare to take in vain) in order to authenticate his “prophecies”.
As a
final example of copying, confusion, and syncretism, we refer to a sermon given
by Captain Abiodun and recorded by Omoyajowo in his
historical book on C&S12:
“On November 30, 1967 Captain Abiodun preached the sermon at the forty-second Anniversary of the Society at her section’s headquarters, Okesuna, Lagos. She did not announce a text, but she preached on the significance of Ramah which she described as ‘prophets’ city. She explained that Moses killed Potiphar to get Joshua released and then escaped; Joshua searched for him in vain until he was directed by God to return to Egypt. Most of the episodes she related concerning Moses, Joshua and Egypt were not based on biblical facts but rather on reminiscences from the popular film “The Ten Commandments”. She stated that God ordered Moses to go into the cave of Adullam, which, according to her, had seven steps, and put seven garments on Joshua. This done, Moses suddenly disappeared, and Joshua saw no trace of him … this is a traditional C&S sermon, especially since Captain Abiodun was reputed as a great preacher in the early years of the Society”.
The point being
made here is that for people who unlike Omoyajowo may not have known the source
of Captain Abiodun’s information in her message, they might as well assume they
were divinely revealed. And certainly only a few C&S members would dare question
a ‘spiritual message’ purportedly uttered by so great a personality as Captain
Abiodun. Thereby the chain of confusion continues.
Notes
2.
Talabi M.A.
Genesis and Use of Praying Gowns, Caps, Robes, Staff in C&S. in Proceedings of the Seminar on the History
and Practice on the Cherubim and Seraphim Doctrine. Pp 82-87.
3.
Iwe Orin Mimo fun Apapo egbe Mimo Kerubu ati Serafu
Gbogbo Agbaiye (Second Edition). Printed
and Bound by Temmy Adex (Nig) Lmiited. Somolu, Lagos.
5. PM
News Nigeria. "Tribute to Special Apostle, Prophet Olubunmi
Fakeye." PM News Nigeria, April 15, 2015.
6. Nee,
Watchman. What Shall This Man Do? Fort Washington, PA: Christian
Literature Crusade, 1966.
7.
Peel, J. D. Y. Aladura: A Religious Movement Among
the Yoruba. London: Published for the International African Institute by
Oxford University Press, 1968. Pg 73
8.
Peel, J.D. ibid. pg 75
9.
Omoyajowo, J. A. Cherubim and Seraphim: The History
of an African Independent Church. New York: NOK Publishers, 1982. pg 99 -
100
10.
Peel. (pg 116)
11.
Omoyajowo. Diversity in Unity pg
95.
12.
Omoyajowo . Omoyajowo, J. A. Cherubim and
Seraphim: The History of an African Independent Church. New York: NOK
Publishers, 1982. Pp. 153
[1] “For
instance, the famous Baba Aladura of the C&S Church movement (Northern
Headquarters), N.E. Coker, is the son of J.K. Coker, ‘Chief of Founders’ of the
African Church
No comments:
Post a Comment