At Arizona State University, a chilling directive has emerged: faculty must “decolonize our curriculum.” This command, cloaked in a veneer of progressivism, boldly claims to challenge power dynamics and advocate for marginalized voices. However, the underlying intention is far more insidious.
“Decolonization,” as interpreted by academic radicals, is not about addressing injustice; it is an assault on the very foundation of the Christian worldview. This movement seeks to deconstruct Western civilization—not from a position of moral critique, but as a means to dismantle its biblical roots.
In today’s academic institutions, decolonization acts as a guise for destroying the core principles that have underpinned Western thought. This approach, heavily influenced by Marxist ideology, positions society in a perpetual conflict between oppressors and the oppressed, where redemption is found not through faith but through revolutionary upheaval.
Christianity champions ideals of compassion, justice, and humility—virtues that stand in stark contrast to greed and exploitation. Yet, “decolonization” targets the very essence of Christian morality—creation, sin, redemption, and divine authority. To strip these foundational beliefs away creates a vacuum that is readily occupied by Marxist or postmodernist ideologies, all disguised as progressive liberation.
The Church Follows the University
This same narrative is now unraveling the Church of England. The appointment of Sarah Mullally as archbishop of Canterbury—the first woman in this role—is heralded as a triumph of equity and representation. Yet, this move has torn the Anglican Communion apart, as churches in Africa and the Global South refuse to recognize Canterbury’s authority.
The leaders of these congregations argue that the pastoral office is strictly a male domain, a calling rooted in biblical tradition rather than patriarchal oppression. What we witness is a tragic irony: the same church that proudly sent missionaries to Africa now prescribes its own theological views in the name of “decolonization,” imposing a discredited European moral framework on cultures that are thriving in their own biblical faith.
The Logic of ‘Liberation’
The academic justification for these radical changes is disturbingly clear. In decolonization theory, patriarchy is vilified as a mechanism of control that must be dismantled in the name of liberation. Yet, true Christian leadership redefines authority as a servant’s burden, not a power trip.
This critical distinction is essential. Ancient pagan societies may have had female priests wielding power, but biblical Christianity redefined priesthood through obedience and sacrifice. To equate service with subjugation is to fundamentally misunderstand the Christian model of leadership.
The Irony of ‘Progress’
Leftists hail the new archbishop as a victory for progress; however, this so-called victory accompanies the church’s decline. Church attendance is plummeting across England, and genuine belief is becoming increasingly rare. The light they claim to wield has all but extinguished.
Remarkably, Christianity flourishes in those very regions criticized for their “backwardness.” African churches remain steadfast, vibrant, and deeply theological—a continuity that reaches back to St. Augustine of Hippo, the African theologian whose contributions shaped European Christianity for centuries.
If decolonization truly sought to redistribute power, it would mirror Augustine’s model: a faith rooted in scripture, transcending geography, anchored in divine order, not social theory.
The Lesson
When my university demands I “decolonize” my teachings, I respond: into what ideology? If the answer points to Marx, Freud, or Foucault—reinvented colonizers—then it is merely a name change, not a true decolonization.
However, if the objective is a return to the biblical truths of creation, fall, redemption, and Christ-centered service, then let’s embrace decolonization. We must reclaim what has been stolen by ideology. The alternative is an empty church, trading divine revelation for fleeting relevance—merely a shell with nothing meaningful to preach.
Christians must heed this warning: the darkness descending on Canterbury will not remain confined to England.
