On August 23, 2022, Archbishop Andrew Nkea celebrated the ecclesiastical funeral mass of the mother of Minister Atanga Nji, Mammy Marcelline Neza Atanga who died at the age of 96. The funeral mass took place at the St. Josephs Cathedral in Bamenda in the presence of Bishop Michael Bibi, Bishop Nkuo, Bishop Abangalo and Bishop Agapitus. Some people who are terribly disappointed with Minister Atanga Nji, (an English-speaking Cameroonian from Mezam Division) appallingly criticized Archbishop Nkea for celebrating that funeral mass because according to them, Minister Atanga Nji does not enjoy a public reputation of honesty. They wished that Archbishop Nkea had delegated the vicar general to celebrate the mass due to his bad – dishonest reputation which Minister Atanga Nji has earned for himself with regards to the two terrible lies he publicly expressed on the Anglophone Crisis which has taken away the lives of countless English-Speaking Cameroonians. Before I carry out a profound research on the subject in order to objectively find out whether Archbishop Nkea was canonically right to celebrate the mass of the mother of minister Atanga Nji, permit me to state with facts why Minister AtangaNji has earned a bad reputation of a dishonest man worldwide?
Dishonesty of Minister AtangaNji: No Humanitarian Crisis in Cameroon and No Anglophone Problem
Minister Paul AtangaNji, National coordinator of the Emergency Humanitarian Assistance Plan ironically denied the existence of a humanitarian crisis in Cameroon meanwhile documented facts and figures from aid agencies and NGOs affirmed that there is a humanitarian crisis. This is what Minister Atanga Nji said: “No, there is no humanitarian crisis in Cameroon, the situation is under control and it is well managed”. Well managed? By who?What terrible lie. These were the words of Paul AtangaNji during a press statement he made on the Humanitarian Situation in the North West and South West Regions on Saturday December 28 2019 in Yaoundé to dispatch a special Christmas and New Year gift of 100 trucks of humanitarian aid (food stuffs, sanitary kits and beddings) from the presidential couple to internally displaced and affected persons in the two English speaking regions of Cameroon. He made the contradictory statement in order to refute allegations of an ongoing serious humanitarian crisis in the two concerned regions. According to minister Paul Atanga Nji,“For some time now, some ill-intentioned political actors and Non-Governmental Organisations manipulated by government detractors and some partners animated by bad faith have been struggling to push through unfounded information to the international community that the situation in the North West and South West Regions has led to a humanitarian crisis in Cameroon.” On September 30, 2019, Dirke Köpp wrote an article titled: “Cameroon holds dialogue on Anglophone crisis”. He notes in the article that one of President Paul Biya’s most important confidants, Paul Atanga Nji, even said at the time that there was no Anglophone problem and that the protesters were busy bodies who could be manipulated with money from abroad.
These two lies have terribly angered countless English-speaking Cameroonian. In addition, Minister Atanga Nji, CPDM attempted to defy the population by organizing the CPDM celebrations in honour of Paul Biya on 6 November, 2022 in Bamenda only to meet a fierce opposition from the public that turned violent. Becoming a minister does not mean entering a new nobility; being a Latinist, the word minister comes from the Latin word – minister, ministeri,meaning “a servant.” Minister Atanga Nji has not followed the footsteps of late Prof. Dr. Bernard Nsokika Fonlon who has been considered as a minister with distinguished integrity and eminent reputation. The two lies of Minister Atanga Nji have been terribly detrimental to the sons and daughters of the English-Speaking part of Cameroon. It could be important for Minister Atanga Nji to publicly apologize to the born and unborn sons and daughters of English-speaking Cameroon for those two public lies. That is why these people were wondering aloud why Archbishop Nkea celebrated the funeral mass of Minister Atanga Nji’s late mother.
Canonical Analysis
Given these two facts about Minister Atanga Nji’sdishonest reputation which I have just elucidated above, let us now see whether Archbishop Nkeawas canonically right to celebrate the Funeral Mass of Minister Atanga Nji’s mother despite the dishonest reputation of Minister AtangaNji. Witness that the funeral was for the mother of Minister Atanga Nji, thus, our attention should be focused on Atanga Nji’s mother, not on Minister Atanga Nji. First, we must distinguish between “offering a funeral Mass” and “celebrating a Mass whose intention is the eternal repose of a particular soul.” Since the latter is basically the private intention of the priest, albeit offered at the request of a particular person, and since there are practically no limitations as to whom we may pray for, almost any intention can be admitted. In cases that might cause scandal, especially if the person were denied a funeral Mass, it would not be prudent to make this intention public.A funeral Mass on the other hand is basically a public act in which the Church intercedes for the deceased by name. A funeral Mass is one which uses the formulas found in the Roman Missal and the ritual for funerals. Some of these formulas may be used even if the deceased’s body is not present. Because of its public nature the Church’s public intercession for a departed soul is more limited. A funeral Mass can be celebrated for most Catholics, but there are some specific cases in which canon law requires the denial of a funeral Mass.
Book 4 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, titled: “Function of the Church,” dedicates the second part titled: “The other acts of Divine Worship,” under title 3 “talks on the ecclesiastical funeral from Canon 1176 to 1185. Canon 1176 §1 stipulates that the “deceased members of the Christian faithful must be given ecclesiastical funerals according to the norm of law.” Paragraph 2 states that “Ecclesiastical funerals, by which the Church seeks spiritual support for the deceased, honors their bodies, and at the same time brings the solace of hope to the living, must be celebrated according to the norm of the liturgical laws.”
Further, Canon 1181 states that “regarding offerings on the occasion of funeral rites, the prescripts of can. 1264 are to be observed, with the caution, however, that there is to be no favoritism toward persons in funerals and that the poor are not deprived of fitting funerals.” The mention of canon 1264 refers to number 2 of that canon which states that it is the competence of the bishops of the province to determine the amount of the offerings to be given on the occasion of the administration of the sacraments and sacramentals, unless another law prescribes something else. The caution against depriving the poor of a funeral is akin to that of canon 848 in reference to offerings for the administration of sacraments. (Cf. John M. Huels, O.S.M, Canons and Commentary, in Beal, Coriden, Green,). However, precaution is also to be taken against any favoritism towards persons. (Cf. SacrosanctumConcilium 32). For example, it will be unlawful to celebrate a funeral mass only for contributing parishioners while limiting others to a liturgy of the word celebrated by a deacon or lay person. Deacons may celebrate the funeral liturgy without mass, or lay persons may celebrate funeral rites in accord with the law in situations of pastoral need (Ordo Exsequiarum 19, Order of Christian funeral, Washington, NCCB, 1989, OCF 14).
Further, canon 1184 §1 state that “Unless they gave some signs of repentance before death, the following must be deprived of ecclesiastical funerals: 1) notorious apostates, heretics, and schismatics; 2) those who chose the cremation of their bodies for reasons contrary to Christian faith; 3) other manifest sinners who cannot be granted ecclesiastical funerals without public scandal of the faithful. “§2. If any doubt occurs, the local ordinary is to be consulted, and his judgment must be followed. These three cases of deprivation of ecclesiastical funeral rites apply only to persons who were baptized Catholic or who were received into the Catholic Church. Funeral may not be denied to someone who gave a sign of repentance before death. The sign of repentance should in some way indicate that the person wanted to be reconciled to God and the Church, such as summoning a priest at the time of death, making an act of perfect contrition, or stating a desire to die in the state of grace. It is not sufficient that the person merely makes an act that indicate belief in God, since even heretics, schismatics, and many apostates believe in God. If the deceased had manifested a sign of repentance, this should be made known if it would preclude scandal (Cf. SCDF, decree Patres Sacrae Congregationis, September 20, 1973, AAS 65 (1973) 500; Documents on the Liturgy, 1963, DOL 418).Cases in number 3 require the presence of two conditions:1) that a person be a manifest sinner, that is, be publicly known to be living in a state of grave sin; and 2) That a church funeral would cause public scandal. Cases when both of these conditions are verified are rare but they do occur.
Further, Canon 1185 states that“any Funeral Mass must also be denied to a person who is excluded from ecclesiastical funerals.” In fact, these structures are rarely applied. In part, this is because many sinners do show signs of repentance before death. While canon 1184 speaks of the deprivation of the official funeral rites of the church, which includes the funeral mass, canon 1185 adds that any funeral mass is excluded. Thus, it is not lawful to have a public Mass for someone who is to be deprived of a church funeral, even if the body is not present and the special rites not observed. Although a Mass celebrated later, such as on the anniversary of death, is not excluded, this should be done only without publicity so as to preclude scandal or wonderment. (John Huels, page 1410-1411).
Likewise, the canons are open to some interpretation. In canon 1184 §1, notorious would mean publicly known. Therefore, someone who had abandoned the faith and joined some other group would be denied a funeral; someone who harbored private doubts or disagreements would not. The most delicate cases are those in canon 1184 §1.3 where a myriad of canonists say that for denial of a funeral, the person must be both widely known to be living in a state of grave sin and that holding a Church funeral would cause scandal. For example, in Italy, the Church denied an ecclesiastical funeral for a nationally known campaigner for euthanasia who requested and obtained the removal of his life-support system. In this case the request for a funeral for someone who was only nominally Catholic was in itself a publicity stunt for the organization behind the campaign. Likewise, someone subject to excommunication or interdict (for example, a Catholic abortionist) would be denied a funeral.Given the severity of the requirements for denial of an ecclesiastical funeral, people in irregular marriages and suicides should not usually be denied a funeral. In such cases denial of the funeral is more likely than not to be counterproductive and cause unnecessary misunderstanding and bitterness. The Church intercedes for the soul and leaves final judgment to God.
Conclusion: The mother of Atanga Nji, we are told lived an extraordinary Christian life. In addition, she was not a notorious apostate. She was not a heretic. She was not a schismatic. She did those chose the cremation of her body for reasons contrary to Christian faith. She was not a manifest sinner who cannot be granted ecclesiastical funerals without public scandal of the faithful. (Cf. canon 1184 §1). Therefore, she was not supposed to be deprived of ecclesiastical funeral irrespective of the dishonest reputation of Minister Atanga Nji. Therefore, Archbishop Nkea was canonically correct to celebrate the ecclesiastical funeral mass of Minister AtangaNji’s mother irrespective of the bad reputation of Minister AtangaNji.
Nchumbonga George Lekelefac, Doctorandus, Universityof Münster, Germany; Europe/ US Correspondentof“TheSunNewspaper”; Founder/ CEO ofthe “Nchumbonga Lekelefac InstituteofResearch, Documentation, Language and Culture, USA.