The Nation reports on Kenyan bishops in England by Kenneth Ogosia:
About 10 Anglican Church of Kenya bishops are in England, raising fears that they will attend the Lambeth Conference that kicks off today, the Nation can reveal.
The Kenyan church alongside other conservative provinces, have decided to boycott the conference, protesting the laid back handling of gay clergy in the Anglican Communion.
Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi has said that he is aware of the collaboration programmes of the bishops with other churches in Europe and expressed confidence that none of them will attend the conference.
However, he said that no specific action would be taken against any bishop who decides to attend the conference on an individual capacity.
“It is upon their synods and personal conscience because morality is the pillar of Christianity,” he said.
Addressing the Press in his office, Archbishop Nzimbi said that all Orthodox Anglicans were not attending the conference since they could not preach wine and drink something else.
The bishops for Bondo, Nyahururu, Nakuru, Kericho, Machakos, Mt Kenya, Mbeere, Taita Taveta, Embu and Mumias are meeting diocesan partners in England.
He said that since it takes 10 years for all the Anglican bishops in the world to meet at Lambeth, bonding sessions take place even two months prior to the official opening of the talks.
Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Nigeria are unanimous that none of their bishops should attend the conference.
“If we allowed immorality to take place, then soon some African clergy will demand to break their vows of marriage to enter polygamy,” he said.
He said that the 1998 Lambeth Conference made a resolution rejecting homosexuality, which was not enforced by the head of the Anglican Church.
Archbishop Nzimbi pledged to ensure conservatives were united in fighting immorality.
A priest, the Rev Kenneth Wachianga, however, urged the bishops to attend the conference, saying that boycotting it would be tantamount to abandoning sinners. The priest said the mission of the church was to change sinners.
“Jesus died for sinners and left us as fishers of men. You cannot help sinners by running away from them,” he said.
And from the Standard Lambeth boycott betrays our homophobic prejudice by Kang’ethe Mungai
There is a short CNN video interview with ++Nzimbi in which he explains why he’s not going to Lambeth – he just about holds back from saying some provinces are ‘sinning’ 🙂
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2008/07/17/mckenzie.kenya.bishop.nzimbi.cnn
And on a brighter note, there’s another CNN report on Gay Christians in Nigeria:
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2008/07/17/purefoy.nigeria.gay.church.cnn
““If we allowed immorality to take place, then soon some African clergy will demand to break their vows of marriage to enter polygamy,” he said.”
Priceless and beyond parody.
Refreshing to read a diversity of opinions about Lambeth from such African sources. Appreciate the links.
“It is upon their synods and personal conscience because morality is the pillar of Christianity,” he said.
hahahahahahahahaha!
Really, you can’t make it up.
And here was me thinking belief in the saving power of Jesus Christ was the pillar of Christianity.
“Priceless and beyond parody.”
Honestly, I don’t see why.
But if African Christians can rise above their culture re. polygamy, why can’t Americans re. homosexuality?
“”Priceless and beyond parody.” Honestly, I don’t see why.” You might want to look at the post immediately above yours. Then stop and think why it is that you have unquestioningly accepted that sexual morality is the core of Christianity. Consider how the issue of sexual morality in Scripture is a much more complicated thing than “If one is monogamous in marriage one is a good person”. Consider that GAFCON seems to think that agreement on a conservative position on sexuality takes precedence over Christology, ecclesiology, and sacramental theology as definitions of orthodoxy. Consider how they decry others for “innovation”,… Read more »
“protesting the laid back handling of gay clergy in the Anglican Communion”
Are there positions in which handling gay clergy would be acceptable to them?
“But if African Christians can rise above their culture re. polygamy, why can’t Americans re. homosexuality?” – Dan
Because monogamy is easier than celibacy?
“But if African Christians can rise above their culture re. polygamy, why can’t Americans re. homosexuality?”
Because polygamy is wrong?
“…But if African Christians can rise above their culture re. polygamy, why can’t Americans re. homosexuality?”
Isn’t that exactly what we’re doing? Our culture taught us for more than 2000 years that homosexuality was immoral, ugly, icky, etc.
We’ve risen above that to discover that it can be– when pursued in a loving, monogamous relationship–as proper and spiritual as a loving, monogamous heterosexual relationship.
Polygamy is extremely harmful to women, and indicates a society where women are valued only as property. Monogamous gay and lesbian relationships do no such thing. In fact, they enhance the value of women, since lesbian relationships value women and gay men, who are stereotyped as being effeminate, also challenge sexism.
Why is that, Erika?
[Since we’re all taking a crack at Misses-The-Obvious. ;-/]
Polygamy is a CHOICE, Dan. Homosexuality ISN’T.
In Christian morality, polygamy has been determined to be a *sinful* choice. Monogamy—for those called to it (as opposed to celibacy)—has been affirmed as a healthy, righteous choice.
The only problem, has been getting that healthy, righteous choice extended to homosexual couples, as it has been to heterosexual ones.
[The cultural question is a red herring: healthy homosexuality, and sinful polygamy, are found in BOTH Africa and (the U.S. of) America!]
Trooper, Polygamy makes sense in extremely poor countries where women are not allowed to support themselves financially and where rich men are called on to support more than one woman. But that’s still no reason to combine looking after people with sexual exploitation. If you read women’s accounts of their experience as one of many wives you will find much heartache. The feeling of being no longer loved or valued when a young beautiful wife comes along. The feeling of being only second or third best because you were chosen (or given away by your father) later. The difficulties of… Read more »
Do the bishops really speak for homophobic hordes? I saw a Malaysian bishop claim that homosexuality was taboo in his country — something wildly at variance with the facts. I suspect that these bishops need to learn to listen to their own people first. Kudos to those who came to Lambeth despite outrageous bullying from their fellow-bishops. Only one province is unrepresented there now!
“”Priceless and beyond parody.” Honestly, I don’t see why.” You might want to look at the post immediately above yours. Then stop and think why it is that you have unquestioningly accepted that sexual morality is the core of Christianity. Ford, (1) I wasn’t referring in any way to the post above mine. (2) You have assumed without any proof that I agree with the perspective cited in that post. (3) I don’t. (4) The fact that you jumped to the conclusion that I do, says quite a lot about yourself. (5) Said post wasn’t even written at the time… Read more »
“But if African Christians can rise above their culture re. polygamy, why can’t Americans re. homosexuality?” – Dan
Because monogamy is easier than celibacy? (Hugh)
Not to JFK it wasn’t! Plus you’re ignoring that many homosexual men (including the man at the eye of this whole storm) do actually marry and sire children. Maybe they should be better termed bisexual?
“But if African Christians can rise above their culture re. polygamy, why can’t Americans re. homosexuality?” Because polygamy is wrong? (Erika) Try maintaining that to Muslims and Mormons from the Bible alone. You’ll have your work cut out. But once you’ve done all you can on that front, just try turning round and telling them that the Bible says nothing against homosexual practices per se. Both groups will laugh their heads off. Consider: (1) Which is ever explicitly provided for in Biblical moral law, and which isn’t. (2) Which was undoubtedly practised by persons undoubtedly in covenant with the true… Read more »
“…But if African Christians can rise above their culture re. polygamy, why can’t Americans re. homosexuality?” Isn’t that exactly what we’re doing? Our culture taught us for more than 2000 years that homosexuality was immoral, ugly, icky, etc. We’ve risen above that to discover that it can be– when pursued in a loving, monogamous relationship–as proper and spiritual as a loving, monogamous heterosexual relationship. (Pat) I believe you’ve committed a fallacy involving a manifest anachronism. Correct me if I’m wrong, but ECUSA/TEC only started ordaining known practising homosexuals once homosexuality became normalised among that narrow social/cultural section of the US… Read more »
“Polygamy is a CHOICE, Dan. Homosexuality ISN’T.”
You’re not comparing like with like. An inclination to polygamy or homosexuality may not be chosen, but the decision to act or not act upon that inclination definitely is. Not saying whether it’s hard or not – that’s a different matter.
I object to the moral defeatism implicit in the post, to the effect that even with the resources Christ makes available to us we can’t control our urges and are somehow fated to be driven by them like a ship before a hurricane.
Dan:
No, I don’t think I’ve committed that fallacy. And even if it were true that “…ECUSA/TEC only started ordaining known practising homosexuals once homosexuality became normalised among that narrow social/cultural section of the US population from which the membership of that province is principally drawn…” (and I don’t think it is true), what does that say about TEC? To me, it says that TEC was in the lead in the recognition that homosexual love–in a respectful, monogamous relationship–is as much a gift of God as heterosexual love is.
Why is that the traditionalists always want committed, monogamous homosexuals to “control their urges” to follow the inclinations God gave them, and never ask committed, monogamous heterosexuals to do the same?
Dan, “You need to chill out man ;)” Indeed I do. But for the last two years here, I and others have repeatedly had to explain the truth about gay people to those who refuse to acknowledge the facts of our lives. Instead, they defend, often with pseudoscience bordering on propaganda, the most eggregious lies against us. Surely you can see the difference between acceptance of gay people and polygamy. So why make the statement you made? Yes, I need to chill, but how do I do that when every single conservative with whom I communicate refuses to listen, claims… Read more »
Dan
why should anyone fight the urge to have a loving relationship?
Apart from the untenable idea that God might not like it, there just is not a single credible reason for anyone to reject love and stability.
Dan “Try maintaining that to Muslims and Mormons from the Bible alone. You’ll have your work cut out. But once you’ve done all you can on that front, just try turning round and telling them that the Bible says nothing against homosexual practices per se. Both groups will laugh their heads off.” I don’t particularly care whether Muslims or Mormons laugh their heads off because of my reading of Scripture. I am neither a Muslim nor a Mormon. What I am is a Christian who is applying the time honoured Anglican formula of Scripure, Tradition and Reason to her understanding… Read more »
“An inclination to polygamy or homosexuality may not be chosen, but the decision to act or not act upon that inclination definitely is.” See, Dan, you start out all reasonable and tell me to chill, then you come out with this. You reduce my relationship to an “inclination” to do a bit of the nasty once and a while. We have been called by several Lambeth Conferences to listen to gay people. I can only assume from this you haven’t listened, and are thus as “disobedient” to Lambeth as the conservatives accuse TEC of being. Conservatives here have compared my… Read more »
“You’re not comparing like with like. An inclination to polygamy or homosexuality may not be chosen, but the decision to act or not act upon that inclination definitely is.”
No, YOU are “not comparing like with like”, Dan.
The *rational* comparisons, are
1) Homosexuality with Heterosexuality (morally neutral, depending on one’s innate orientation)
and
2) Monogamy with Celibacy (Both blessed states of life—manifested in accompanying righteous actions— depending on one’s call)
Polygamy, adultery, man-on-dog (etc. etc. ad nauseum) are SINFUL BEHAVIORS, which have NO place of comparison in a discussion of the above orientations and callings.
Quit blowing smoke, Dan!
I’d like to hear more about Kang’ethe Mungai.
Does this *eminently reasonable* person have any standing in the Anglican Church in Kenya? (and if not, why not? ;-/)