Posted on 01/17/2007 5:38:38 PM PST by sionnsar
Whew. Glad to finally find all the facts conveniently gathered in one place:
Why the hell is Peter Akinola such a homophobe?
We all know there are basically two reasons. The first, was the possibility that he was molested by a homosexual as a child or young man. If this is the case then he needs to get a grip and deal with it (as have all of us who were molested as children). Like the sociopath serial killer who claims he/she was molested as a child, this is no excuse for such hatred or actions.
The other reason he is such a homophobe is theres something in his past. Rank homophobes are afraid of their own sexual orientation. Once again I go back to the Grand Inquisitor analogy, and burning the seductive young woman as a witch because she repulsed his sexual advances. Me thinks the Bishop protests too much. I am of the opinion by the time this is all over and horrible damage has been done, a few gay little skeletons are going to come tumbling out of someones closet and it wont be Gene Robinsons.
The Episcopal-Anglican Donnybrook - All You Need to Know - And Never Really Wanted to Ask
on Sat 06 Jan 2007 02:29 PM MST | Permanent Link
| Cosmos
I think it is time to put all the information about Bishop Akinola, the Episcopalian-Anglican snit, and the problems Akinola has caused into one place. Basically here is all the information you probably will need to make an intelligent decision. I must state up front it has taken me several years to come to a decision about how I feel with certain Anglican diocese stepping in to pick up break-away parishes. Until a few weeks ago I was more for it than against, but dreading the fact that my Rio Grande Diocese may be forced to make this decision. Now that Ive found the information Ive listed below, there is no way I can go along with it.
Ive combined several postings from the Pink Flamingo to make up this one. I think most of what you need to form an educated opinion of the goings on in the Episcopal church. I dont like it. I dont like the way we were put in this position by the liberal machinations of the supporters of Gene Robinson. But, two wrongs do not make a right, and what Bishop Peter Akinola is doing is just plain wrong. The other day I was reading that C. S. Lewis felt the sin of spiritual pride was the worst sin a Christian could commit. As you get into the information you will find that it is entirely possible Akinolas entry into the US as offering his Diocese of Nigeria as a way around all the liberal doings that lead up to Robinson an beyond was connived. I think it has absolutely nothing to do with being Christian and returning Christ to the Episcopal Church but more a way for Akinola to set himself up as a power-broker within the Anglican Communion.
Akinola has put himself in a roll that can only be described as the Anglican Communions version of the Grand Inquisitor. This in itself is a very bad thing, bringing with it all the negative connotations of the Inquisition, for this is indeed what he has begun. No where in his writings do you find reference to the Fruits of the Spirit
In my simple way of thinking, the way you judge a Christian is by the way he/she exhibits these attributes. No where in Akinolas writings do you find anything like this. I think he has started down a very dangerous road and in the process is leading the ECUSAs break-away parishes down the primrose path.
Two wrongs do not make a right.
Instead of condemning and vilifying, if Akinola were truly a man of God, would he not be trying to mend fences and bring about a reconciliation? Instead he is destroying. Christ taught that blessed are the peacemakers. What is the opposite of this for a Christian leader?
I have one more problem. When a person is so very much of a homophobe there are usually two reasons: First they were molested or attacked, second and the most frequent they are so deep within the closet they must reach out with hatred and destroy that which they most desire. Considering the fact that nowhere in Akinolas writings does he condemn child molesters, it sure makes you wonder!
Starting on December 26, 2006
You can blame Brit Hume for my rant today. I spent the morning looking up information on Bishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria and the problems he is causing here in the US for the Episcopal Church. I was shocked to discover Fred Barnes is a member of one of the churches that voted to succeed from the Episcopal Church and join with the ultra-conservative, homophobic Nigerian Church. After several hours of reading, you have all the links, I made a few interesting discoveries and finally, after nearly four years of soul-searching, came to several well-educated conclusions. I just want to say I do not like what I have found. I also want to say up until a few weeks ago when I started investigating Bishop Akinola, I was inclined to have voted along the lines of Fred Barnes. Im sure glad I had the opportunity to delve deeply into the subject and the personalities involved. Ive come to the heart-wrenching conclusion that Akinolas actions have absolutely nothing to do with the church or Christ.
If you follow the timeline presented below, you might be shocked, as I was, to discover Akinola was waiting, like a vulture, ready to swoop into the ECUSA within hours after Gene Robinson being elected as Bishop of New Hampshire. This alone should send up red flags warning we might be dealing with a very ambitious person who was interested in promoting his own personal agenda ahead of doing the blessed are the peacemakers thing and trying to heal the breach that had begun. Instead of healing, he took on something of the role of the Grand Inquisitor of old, ready to burn out any mention of homosexuality.
That brings us to the next question.
Why the hell is Peter Akinola such a homophobe?
We all know there are basically two reasons. The first, was the possibility that he was molested by a homosexual as a child or young man. If this is the case then he needs to get a grip and deal with it (as have all of us who were molested as children). Like the sociopath serial killer who claims he/she was molested as a child, this is no excuse for such hatred or actions.
The other reason he is such a homophobe is theres something in his past. Rank homophobes are afraid of their own sexual orientation. Once again I go back to the Grand Inquisitor analogy, and burning the seductive young woman as a witch because she repulsed his sexual advances. Me thinks the Bishop protests too much. I am of the opinion by the time this is all over and horrible damage has been done, a few gay little skeletons are going to come tumbling out of someones closet and it wont be Gene Robinsons.
Going back to the Grand Inquisitor analogy, I know of no more prefect example for Peter Akinola. Grand Inquisitors of the Spanish Inquisition were harsh, cruel, hate-filled individuals who exemplified the very worst aspects of Christianity. These were the men who ordered countless thousands of men and women to be executed because they were not acceptable to the faith. While Bishop Akinola has not gone that far, he has given his approval for gays and lesbians to be put in prison for the very fact that they are what they are. Not only does he hate the sin, but, contrary to the teachings of Christ, hates the sinner.
My other sister and I were talking about Akinola this evening. A mother, she struggles to live an example of a virtue for her two daughters, one of whom is a teenager. While I have no children, I have two nieces and a nephew. Ive spent many years of my life teaching young people about Christ. I cannot allow myself to stray from a path of virtue. Young people must have examples. In a world of anything goes, someone must stand for something. I stand for virtue. I do not stand for being narrow minded, bigoted, or homophobic. I do not approve of promiscuity. I think it is wrong. It does not matter what the gender or orientation. It doesnt matter. Immorality is immorality.
If Bishop Akinola were to come out and stand up for molested children and condemn pedophiles and the African practice of infant rape to cure AIDS I would have just a tad more respect for him. Unfortunately we see none of it, or as far as I can tell by Googling, nothing comes up. Why is it important to condemn homosexuals but give a pass to pedophiles and child molesters?
Lets be honest. The message against allowing gays and lesbians to marry is not a popular nor a politically correct one. Unfortunately, because I believe in the sanctity of marriage and happen to believe making any sort of change will open a Pandoras box of defining deviancy down, I must agree. I feel they should be allowed civil unions. I think we should also be prepared to accept the fact that the problems within the world-wide Anglican communion dealing with the issue of homosexuality have been worsened by Bishop Akinola. He shows no love. He is interested in blind ambition and must have his own way. Perhaps while we are praying for the ECUSA, maybe we need to accept the fact that Bishop Akinola is not showing the Fruits of the Spirit.
When one has Christ and the Holy Spirit within one has the following aspects of Christ: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control - and suffers long; is kind; does not envy; does not parade itself; does not get 'puffed up'; does not behave rudely; is not provoked; does not think evilly, nor rejoice in sin; rejoices in the truth; bears all things; believes all things; hopes all things; endures all things. true; noble; just; pure; lovely; of good report; of any virtue; worthy of praise; tender mercies; kindness; humility; meekness; patience; bear with one another; forgive one another; love; let the peace of God rule their hearts; be thankful; have the Word live in them; teach and admonish one another; sing with grace in their hearts.
How many of these aspects does Bishop Akinola display? Maybe we should be praying for his soul and his personal relationship with the Lord.
The transcript of Dec 18th Brit Hume discussion about the problems in the Episcopal Church and the back and forth between Juan Williams, Episcopalian and Fred Barnes, also Episcopalian and a member of one of the churches to vote to leave and go with Islamic appeaser Bishop Peter Akinola.
FRED BARNES, WEEKLY STANDARD: I do. I belong to the Falls Church. And my wife and I -- Barbara and I, both voted to withdraw from the Episcopal Church, or disaffiliate, which the word that seems to be going around. And one of my daughters and her husband did, as well. And it wasn't just Gene Robinson, the gay bishop, that was sort of a catalyst, here, but there's been a trend in the national Episcopal Church for the last 30, 40, 50 years to move away from the authority of scripture to move away from the belief in the divinity of Christ and the resurrection and that the way our lives are saved and we go to heaven is through faith in Jesus Christ. All that's been rejected by somebody in the National Church .
I am very disappointed in Fred Barnes. I thought he was a stand-up ally in the War for Civilization. Evidently homophobia and the hysteria that these specific parishes have created is more important than his standards on the war. Like I read the other day about a conservative pro-lifer in Iowa. We are at war for our lives. We cannot allow minor arguments to cloud the issue. Bishop Akinola is so determined to prevent homosexuals from coming to power in the Episcopal/Anglican Church he has made a deal with the Islamic devil in Nigeria. He has agreed to either support or not hinder the extreme Islamic laws imposed including execution for homosexuals. Akinola himself endorsed legislation promoting a position that gays and lesbians could not be allowed to dine together in public. This is Christian? This is upholding the teachings of Christ? Allowing monstrous laws that promote the abuse of women and children, and Christians has absolutely nothing to do with Christ. I am ashamed of Fred Barnes. I thought he stood for more than this. To be honest here, Akinola is very much against the extreme sharia of northern Nigeria and has been known to incite riots and violence against Moslems.
As an Episcopalian who has been heart-sick over this issue for the past three years, I have come to realize perhaps we, as a church, are being tested. Somewhere I read or heard the statement, The Devil has a very pleasing countenance. Bishop Akinola talks a good game with much smoke and mirrors about HIS version of Anglican theology being based directly on the teachings of Christ (like OURS isnt?) but he aligns himself with the enemy of all that his truly holy. How can this be a good thing? How can good, honorable men like Fred Barnes be taken in by his pragmatism. I am not that wise. I think Id much rather associate with Gene Robinson. After all, when Christ was here on earth, He hung out with sinners. There is something repulsively arrogant about Akinolas political positions and his determination to ram his extreme homophobia down the throats of the Episcopal Church here in the United States. If you go back to this excellent time-table, you will find he is the one who began making trouble not long after Gene Robinson was elected Bishop of New Hampshire. If Akinola had practiced love instead of hate, maybe we would be in a much better position today.
In the Episcopal Church we pray the following prayer, asking for forgiveness of our sins. I have a feeling Bishop Gene Robinson is quite aware of his short-fallings. But, does Bishop Peter Akinola ask forgiveness for the suffering he, through his
Have mercy upon us, most merciful Father;
in your compassion forgive us our sins,
known and unknown,
things done and left undone;
and so uphold us by your Spirit
that we may live and serve you in newness of life,
to the honor and glory of your Name;
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
Check in with Fr. Jake Stops the World and get a different version of this story. You also need to read the article from The Nation . I go back to my premise on illegal immigration. There is morality, there is the law, and there is basic right and basic wrong. I also go back to my favorite from the Bible The Sermon on the Mount.
To be fair and balanced, the following is a copy of the letter Akinola wrote to the parishes in Virginia. You be the judge. The site, Thinking Anglicans does an excellent job of covering the issue. You might want to read the Presiding Bishops Christmas address and compare it to the Archbishop of Canterburys address. If you want my personal opinion, this man is clueless.
Bishop Schoris address is a little too PC for me, but nowhere did I see a denial of the Divinity of Christ and Mr. Barnes has suggested is part and parcel of the total modern, liberal Episcopalian package. No, I dont like what is going on here. I have previously stated my objections to Bishop Robinson are due to the fact that he was given a pass for behavior that would be censured at the very least in a heterosexual priest. But, I do not like the high-handed, self-righteous, patronizing tone I read in the statements handed out from the Anglican end of the church. Perhaps those across The Pond had best remember what occurred the last time they became a little bit too high-handed with us Colonials. Can you say 1776? After reading through the postings over on Thinking Anglicans I think we are dealing with a heck of a lot more than the whole homosexual issue. Something else is going on here. I just wonder what it is.
Oh heck, I know what it is. So do you. So does Church Lady from SNL. Is it Satan? Going back to a 2005 posting over at ThinkingAngllicans.org. read what I just read. If you have a heart and a soul, I think it will sicken you. Read this and see what you think of Akinola. Poor Fred Barnes, he has been sucked into the pleasing, ultra, ultra conservative countenance of a man who has cast his lot with those who are against a far greater decency. There is morality and immorality. Homosexuality is immoral. Decency is treating such people as honorable human beings who are no more or no less flawed sinners than are the rest of us. Indecency is treating them like animals. Accepting gay unions is one thing, accepting and allowing a gay to be imprisoned for life just because that person happens to be gay is another story entirely. What is right and what is wrong here?
A gay Ugandan Christian has been denied a visa to enter Britain in order to attend a meeting at the invitation of the Anglican church next week because there is a warrant for his arrest in his home country where homosexuality is punishable by life imprisonment
Do you really think Christ would approve of this?
What do we really know about Bishop Peter Akinola? How about this commentary from Thinking Anglicans back in May of 2006. It isnt a story we were told back here in the States.
Two recent, egregious, examples: last week our old friend Archbishop Akinola waded into the inter-religious violence in Nigeria with all the abandon of a man waving a lighted match near a pool of petrol, threatening Muslims that they did not have a monopoly of violence. Who knows what the effect, but shortly afterwards Christian mobs in Onitsha started hacking people to death with machetes. The only people I can find who condoned the Archbishops remarks were on American blogsites. Even his fellow bishop Cyril Okorocha thought he was being inflammatory.
Akinolas hot on the Bible but he doesnt seem to have read the Beatitudes recently. Of course Christians were already under attack from Muslims but thats no excuse. The injunctions in Matthew 5 really take on their meaning when they are most difficult.
This of course is the archbishop who has just ostentatiously praised the Nigerian government for introducing draconian and inhumane legislation against homosexuals, thereby breaking that great holy writ of conservative evangelicals, Lambeth 1.10, but thats old news.
Lets take as our second example one of Akinolas allies, the Archbishop of Central Africa, the Most Rev. Bernard Malango, another primate who is quick to criticise the gay mote in England and America but slow to recognise the beam in his own eye.
Hes the man who recently absolved, without trial, Bishop Nolbert Kunonga of Harare. The list of 38 charges against the good bishop, who is a crony of Robert Mugabe, brought against him by his own black parishioners, include little matters such as incitement to murder, intimidation, ignoring church law, mishandling funds and proselytising for Zanu PF from the pulpit. He has also occupied a farm and evicted 40 families from a local village. A couple of months ago he even licensed the acting vice-president of Zimbabwe Joseph Msika, a man on record as saying that whites are not human beings, to act as a deacon of the church.
Archbishop Malango decided Kunonga had done nothing wrong after the case faltered in Zimbabwe, because of a little spot of harassment and intimidation. Thanks to that, he has not a stain on his character and is going round saying the charges were all got up by whites.
But thats not all Archbishop Malangos been up to. Hes also been persecuting the Rev. Nicholas Henderson, the London vicar who was chosen last summer as Bishop of Lake Malawi by members of the diocese impressed by his many years of close association and work with them.
Henderson was rejected by the archbishop as being of unsound faith because he had been secretary of the Modern Churchpeoples Union, a body so subversive that it has been undermining the church for only the last 108 years.
There were also unsubstantiated smears about the vicars sexuality, allegedly poured into the archbishops ear by conservative evangelicals and bloggers theyd certainly know all about him which were so devastating that even Mr Hendersons own assurances of his theological, ethical and sexual orthodoxy and, perhaps more to the point, the support of his impeccably evangelical bishop, Pete Broadbent, were not enough to save him.
Mr Henderson has recently been back to Malawi but was told he should not enter a church during his stay. Local Anglicans have been demonstrating in his support and insisting they want him rather than an old buddy of Malangos whom the archbishop wishes to instal instead.
Now these men have all been very hot on western decadence. They want the American Episcopal Church, and especially Gene Robinson, banned from the next Lambeth Conference, though I dont think Robinson has ever threatened violence against anyone
Lets try this again from Fr. Jake Stops the World blog. Now I dont know about you, but Im liking Akinola less and less. Lets also face the fact that we are dealing with the same knee-jerk RIGHT conservative mind-set that is promoting mindless and irrational anti-immigration laws. I cant see anything different here. Were dealing with the same people. They are so determined to have their own way that they cannot see the collateral damage they are causing. I dont care what political persuasion or religion you are, the events detailed above and below are just plain wrong. They are NOT CHRISTIAN.
...last week our old friend Archbishop Akinola waded into the inter-religious violence in Nigeria with all the abandon of a man waving a lighted match near a pool of petrol, threatening Muslims that they did not have a monopoly of violence. Who knows what the effect, but shortly afterwards Christian mobs in Onitsha started hacking people to death with machetes. The only people I can find who condoned the Archbishops remarks were on American blogsites. Even his fellow bishop Cyril Okorocha thought he was being inflammatory...
From the Catholic Information Service for Africa: ...Media reports say suspected mobs of Christians armed with machetes and guns roamed the streets of the mainly Christian city of Onitsha, in the south-east, killing at least 40 people in retaliation for Muslim violence in the north.
The revenge killings came a day after the country's leading Anglican primate, Archbishop Peter Akinola, warned Muslims that they did not have a "monopoly on violence." He said churches "may no longer be able to contain our restive youths should this ugly trend continue"... Abp. Akinola's statement is dated February 21. Here is a segment of a report regarding the violence in Nigeria that appeared in the New York Times February 24: ONITSHA, Nigeria - Dozens of charred, smoldering bodies littered the streets of this bustling commercial capital Thursday after three days of rioting in which Christian mobs wielding machetes, clubs and knives set upon their Muslim neighbors.
Rioters have killed scores of people here, mostly Muslims, after burning their homes, businesses and mosques in the worst violence yet linked to the caricatures of Prophet Muhammad first published in a Danish newspaper...
The main thoroughfare leading into the city across the Niger River was covered in carrion - the bodies of Muslim Hausas trying to flee rampaging bands of youths, witnesses said. Many of the victims appeared to have been beaten to death; most of the bodies had been doused with gasoline and burned...
...At the central mosque, rioters burned the building and hacked down trees.
Someone wrote in chalk on a charred wall: "Jesus is Lord. As from today know more Muhammad."
Thousands of Muslim residents fled the city, some on foot over the bridge leading to Delta state, taking refuge in neighboring cities. Thousands more huddled in police and army barracks in Onitsha and surrounding towns...
Contrary to his comments, Akinola has been working on this compromise with the Islamic leaders of Nigeria for months. And an excellent history of the whole affair.
There is more on the break-away Parishes in Virginia. Once again I think good minded conservatives have been manipulated and have been made to look bad. Father Jake Stops the World has a link to even additional information I keep repeating myself, I know, but surely Fred Barnes has investigated Akinola. If I can find out what he is, why not others, but then I have noticed the same problem when we are dealing with the anti-immigration people. I was talking to my friend Leroy today as he scalped me (looks good). I presented my theory that Akinola is so horribly homophobic because he fears himself. Leroy mentioned that it has always been his observation that people who are extreme in their anti-homosexual views are terrified of their own sexuality and the fact that have these tendencies. We also had a discussion about gays/lesbians and marriage. Funny, but Leroy, who has been in a committed relationship since junior high (seriously) dislikes promiscuity as much as do I. He views promiscuity as a sin.
Mary Katherine Ham trying to defend her Episcopal churchs decision to break with the ECUSA and go with the Nigerian church. Im sorry there is no defense for dealing with hate and ambition. No number of excuses and lies can cover the abject hatred and bigotry of Bishop Akinola. He is the Anglican version of the Grand Inquisitor, hated and all. We may have our problems and our gay priests and bishops, (no I do not approve of it) but Im sure glad I have opted to remain with the Episcopal Church and not aligned myself with someone like Akinola. This isnt a liberal or conservative issue here. It is right verses wrong. It is the fact that Akinola swooped in like a vulture to destroy not to heal. Christ taught, Blessed are the Peacemakers. Where is Akinola here? He violates every one of the Beatitudes. Christ is love. Love does not endorse draconian measures against segment of the population because of their sexual orientation, then lie about it has done Akinola. Anyone who deludes themselves into thinking it is because of the gay sex issue should be ashamed of themselves.
What do you know about the Spanish Inquisition? The practices endorsed by Peter Akinola in Nigeria are a modern version of it.
Although the Inquisition was created to halt the advance of heresy, it also occupied itself with a wide variety of offenses that only indirectly could be related to religious heterodoxy. Of a total of 49,092 trials from the period 15601700 registered in the archive of the Suprema, appear the following: judaizantes (5,007); moriscos (11,311); Lutherans (3,499); alumbrados (149); superstitions (3,750); heretical propositions (14,319); bigamy (2,790); solicitation (1,241); offenses against the Holy Office of the Inquisition (3,954); miscellaneous (2,575).
This data demonstrates that not only New Christians (conversos of Jewish or Islamic descent) and Protestants faced persecution, but also many Old Christians were targeted for various reasons.
The category "superstitions" includes trials related to witchcraft. The witch-hunt in Spain had much less intensity than in other European countries (particularly France, England, and Germany). One remarkable case was the case of Logroño, in which the witches of Zugarramurdi in Navarre were persecuted. During the Auto de Fe that took place in Logroño on November 7 and November 8, 1610, 6 people were burned and another 5 burned in effigy.[13] In general, nevertheless, the Inquisition maintained a skeptical attitude towards cases of witchcraft, considering it in contrast to the Mediaeval Inquisitions as a mere superstition without any basis. Alonso de Salazar Frias, who, after the trials of Logroño took the Edict of Faith to various parts of Navarre, noted in his report to the Suprema that, "There were no witches nor bewitched in the region after beginning to speak and write about them" [14]
Included under the rubric of heretical propositions were verbal offenses, from outright blasphemy to questionable statements regarding religious beliefs, from issues of sexual morality, to behavior of the clergy. Many were brought to trial for affirming that simple fornication (sex without the explicit aim of procreation) was not a sin or for putting in doubt different aspects of Christian faith such as Transubstantiation or the virginity of Mary. Also, members of the clergy itself were on occasion accused of heretical propositions. These offenses were infrequently paired with severe penalties.
The Inquisition also pursued offenses against morals, at times in open conflict with the jurisdictions of civil tribunals. In particular, there were numerous trials for bigamy, a relatively frequent offense in a society that only permitted divorce under the most extreme circumstances. In the case of men, the penalty was five years in the galley (tantamount to a death sentence). Women too were accused of bigamy. Also, many cases of solicitation during confession were adjudicated, indicating a strict vigilance over the clergy.
Inquisitorial repression of the sexual offenses of homosexuality and bestiality, considered, according to Canon Law, crimes against nature, merits separate attention. Homosexuality, known at the time as sodomy, was punished by death by civil authorities. It fell under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition only in the territories of Aragon, when, in 1524, Clement VII, in a papal brief, granted jurisdiction over sodomy to the Inquisition of Aragon, whether or not it was related to heresy. In Castile, cases of sodomy were not adjudicated, unless related to heresy. The tribunal of Zaragoza distinguished itself for its severity in judging these offenses: between 1571 and 1579 more than 100 men accused of sodomy were processed and at least 36 were executed; in total, between 1570 and 1630 there were 534 trials and 102 executed.[15]...
Now, what is the difference in Akinolas Sept 16, 2006 letter to the nation in Nigeria? ..Human Sexuality The Church affirms our commitment to the total rejection of the evil of homosexuality which is a perversion of human dignity and encourages the National Assembly to ratify the Bill prohibiting the legality of homosexuality since it is incongruent with the teachings of the Bible, Quran and the basic African traditional values
In October 2005, a brave group of gay and lesbian Anglicans in Nigeria challenged Archbishop Akinola:
Changing Attitude Nigeria achieved national awareness today by having an article published in the Daily Sun, Nigeria's national mass circulation newspaper. The article confronts the Primate of All Nigeria, Archbishop Peter Akinola, with the reality of gay and lesbian worshippers in Anglican churches across Nigeria. It reminds the church of the commitment made by the Primates, including Archbishop Akinola, to listen to the experience of homosexual persons in each province and reflect on these matters...
For their efforts, Director Davis Mac-Iyalla and eight members of Changing Attitude Nigeria were beaten and jailed. Undeterred by these draconian tactics, Changing Attitude proceeded with their plans to host the first General Meeting of the Changing Attitude Network in Nigeria in November 2005. It is estimated that approximately 1,000 delegates attended, although this number was strongly refuted by the Church of Nigeria, with some claiming that the event never happened.
Unable to block news reports that offered evidence of faithful gay and lesbian Anglicans residing in Nigeria, the Church of Nigeria then began a smear campaign against Changing Attitude Director Davis Mac-Iyalla. As the Church of Nigeria's website is down at the time of this writing, you can find a tamer version of this scathing "press release" here. The one posted on Nigeria's site mentions Davis Mac-Iyalla by name. The CofE Newspaper carried this story on these accusations.
Changing Attitude has asked the Church of Nigeria to provide evidence to support these allegations, and provided some evidence of their own to refute this attempt to defame the character of Davis Mac-Iyalla.
Rather than respond to what appears to be a case of "bearing false witness", today we are confronted with a new tactic being launched in Nigeria; same sex unions will be outlawed. Archbishop Akinola is quoted in the news report, as well as having his photo included. Note this line from the report:
...Justice Minister Bayo Ojo said the law would also ban "any form of protest to press for rights or recognition" by homosexuals, the AFP news agency reports...
In other words, Changing Attitude members are now identified as outlaws.
Peter Akinola is the most prominent conservative leader in the Anglican Communion. The actions of the Church of Nigeria in this one particular story alone would seem sufficient to give anyone, conservative, liberal or moderate, reason to seriously reconsider if this is the direction the Anglican Communion wants to move in the future..
As a true Episcopalian, I turn to the master for the last word. It should also be noted this Anglican bastion and thinkers best friend was gay. Christ died for men precisely because they were not worth it; to make them worth it C. S. Lewis. Or how about this one, " a cold self-righteous prig who goes regularly to church may be far nearer to hell than a prostitute"
What about this one? "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be 'cured' against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals. But to be punished, however severely, because we have deserved it, because we 'ought to have known better,' is to be treated as a human person made in God's image."
The Lewis Critique: We must frankly face the sins that stain the Christian church. Joseph Loconte
Lewis is brutally honest about the way in which religion can be used and abused for selfish purposes. "Of all bad men, religious bad men are the worst," he wrote in Reflections on the Psalms. "Of all created beings the wickedest is one who originally stood in the immediate presence of God."
We, as people of faith, sometimes forget that the founder of Christianity reserved his harshest criticism for the religious leaders of his day. The Pharisees, Saducees, the Scribesin the pecking order of respectability, no people were more outwardly religious. But their hearts were like stones, their inner life like a whitewashed tomb. The people who should have been the heroes of the parables of Jesus, the religious professionals, turned out to be the villains (parable of the Good Samaritan).
And Lewis was the first to admit that many of the world's greatest evils have been committed by Christians, or by people claiming the mantle of Christian faith. In the Screwtape Lettersthe fictional correspondence between a senior devil and his young protégéLewis attacks the self-righteousness of modern-day pharisees in the church. "The fine flower of unholiness can grow only in the close neighborhood of the Holy," advises Screwtape. "Nowhere do we tempt so successfully as on the very steps of the altar."[3]
Well, THAT guy is nutz.
Upset isn't he!
An object lesson there...
" We all know there are basically two reasons. The first, was the possibility that he was molested by a homosexual as a child or young man. If this is the case then he needs to get a grip and deal with it (as have all of us who were molested as children)."
Ummm...Developing same-sex attraction disorder (SSAD) is not what I would call "getting a grip and moving on."
It is rather to remain forever that molested child, but denying it by (a) pretending it's a good thing, or (b) becoming the powerful figure that molested (or some of a and some of b).
Which is why and how homosexuality propagates itself from generation to generation.
Protect the young from homosexuals and it disappears in one generation.
In "Romans" Paul refers to it, like all sexuals obsessions, as a kind of madness. He knew what he was looking at, since it was indemnic in pagan society.
Vain insane ramblings. No FACTS contained in any of it, just opinions and slander. This is the true face of evil. Jesus did warn us that this would happen. Love means telling the truth, not looking the other way when sin is enthroned.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.