Guardian Stephen Bates Gay Ugandan Christian denied visa to visit UK (well OK it’s just as much a story from the UK about the Foreign Office)
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.
Chris Stentaza, a headteacher at a church school who was dismissed from his job and forced into hiding after speaking at a conference of gay Christians in Manchester 15 months ago, has been rejected for a visa by the British high commission in Kampala, the capital of Uganda, apparently because of his sexuality.
He had been invited to join a delegation due to meet Canon Gregory Cameron, the secretary to the church’s commission responsible for last October’s Windsor report, investigating ways of keeping the worldwide communion together after the row over the promotion of gay clergy.
Update Monday 31 Jan
Today, the Guardian carries a letter about this Christian persecution
Chris Stentaza’s experience of persecution (Gay Ugandan Christian denied visa to visit UK, January 29) has become extremely common among gay Christians in Africa.
The most recent wave of imprisonments and beatings in Uganda started in 1999 when President Yoweri Museveni launched a crackdown on homosexuals, publicly supported by the Anglican archbishop.
Just last month, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission reported that the persecution of homosexuals in Uganda had intensified following the Anglican church of Uganda’s aggressive campaign against homosexuality that was launched as a direct response to the American church consecrating a gay bishop.
Throughout Africa, gay Christians are frightened, isolated and desperate. Those who are open about their sexuality are commonly excluded from church life and refused baptism and communion. They can be subjected to verbal abuse by their priests and bishops. Those working for the church are sacked.
The Anglican church has committed itself to listen to the voices of lesbian and gay people. Yet the church attacks and excludes them as soon as they make their voices heard. The bishops of the Anglican communion must make it possible for listening to take place and engage in the dialogue that it has been so repeatedly promised.
Rev Colin Coward
Director, Changing Attitude
Rev Dr Giles Fraser
Chair, Inclusive Church
Rev Kelvin Holdsworth
Changing Attitude Scotland
Rt Rev Barry Hollowell
Bishop of Calgary
The Rev’d Susan Russell
President, Integrity USA
East African Standard, Nairobi African Anglicans firm on gay bishop
African Anglican Archbishops yesterday rejected the apology by the American Episcopal Church over the ordination of a homosexual bishop and the wedding of gay couples.
The clerics, representing 50 million faithful, asked their American counterparts to repent instead.
“They have only apologised and not repented,” said Dr Reverend Bernard Malango, the Archbishop of Zambia.
“Apology does not make sense to us, the biblical word is repentance,” said Kenya’s Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi.
They were speaking late yesterday at a news conference in Nairobi at the end of a two days meeting skipped by South Africa’s archbishop Njongokulu Ndungane, the only pro-gay voice in Africa.
The meeting dubbed third Trumpet, was chaired by the Nigerian Primate archbishop Peter Akinola was also attended by representatives of representatives from South East Asia, Latin America and Asia.
or this report from Associated Press Anglicans Abroad Say Apology Not Enough
Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola noted the U.S. bishops apologized to individual church members in a letter issued earlier this month expressing “sincere regret” for consecrating V. Gene Robinson in November 2003 as bishop of New Hampshire without full consideration of other Anglicans’ objections. But Akinola told journalists they failed to repent for an act he said was contrary to their faith.
“That gives us a very big question mark whether we are together or not,” said Malawi’s Archbishop Bernard Malango.
Akinola spoke after a weeklong meeting to discuss recommendations by an Anglican commission to resolve discord within the communion over homosexuality.
In a report issued in October, the panel urged the U.S. branch not to elect any more gay bishops and called on conservative African bishops to stop meddling in the affairs of other dioceses.
In Kenya Friday, church leaders were circumspect about their views on the recommendations, saying they did not want to pre-empt a meeting of all Anglican archbishops in Ireland next month.
About 15 archbishops attended the gathering in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi.
Daily Champion, Lagos Tinubu, Odili Speak On Role of Clerics in Governance
GOVERNORS Peter Odili of Rivers and Bola Tinubu of Lagos states have hailed the positive roles of the clergy in secular governance, describing same as elevating.
In a brief speech that lasted five minutes, Gov. Odili said both religious clerics and secular rulers had common goal which, according to him, was serving the people and so they should co-operate.
…Gov. Tinubu, in his own speech, lauded the position taken by clerics, urging them to speak the truth always.
…The governor maintained that the church had a social responsibility to crusade against all vices, insisting that it was only by doing so would Nigerians feel challenged and retraced their steps, if they are on the wrong track.
Both Govs Tinubu and Odili praised the Anglican Church for standing firm against gay practice, saying that it was an indication that the church had come of age in Africa.
Update Sunday
Here is another item from the Standard Anglican bishop urges all faiths to reject gay unions
Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Saturday, 29 January 2005 at 2:51pm GMT | TrackBackChristians were yesterday exhorted to intensify the fight against gay relationships in the church.
Mombasa Anglican Bishop Julius Kalu made the clarion call yesterday, urging all religions to come out against homosexuality and lesbianism.
“Homosexuals have invaded all religious institutions, including non-Christian ones,” said the bishop.
In a statement issued just a day after Anglican Church of Kenya bishops rejected an apology by the Episcopal Church in America over the ordination of an openly gay bishop and its support for same-sex unions, the bishop said: “We call upon all denominations to come out and condemn this evil, which is against the commandments of God.”
The bishop also expressed concern over the rampant practice of lynching suspected witches in parts of Coast Province.
Several suspected witches have been killed in Kilifi, Kwale and Taita Taveta districts over the past few months. In the latest incident, a middle-aged woman in Voi Division, Taita Taveta District, was set upon by an angry mob which beat her senseless before setting her ablaze.
A community in Kaloleni Division, Kilifi District has also put up a list of 11 suspected witches, whom it wants eliminated.
Bishop Kalu pointed out that the government has enough machinery to deal with those involved in the vice and proposed that they should be charged in court or placed in seclusion.
When I read the headline (from the _East African Standard_) "African Anglicans firm on gay bishop," I was struck by the word "firm". *Firm*: as in hard. As in hard-hearted. As in *Pharaoh*.
Hey, wasn't he African too?
Oh, and look: Nigerian Governors Odili and Tinubu are praising the Anglican Church (leaders) for "standing firm against gay practice". Ah yes: must keep those *worldly powers* happy! Just who, exactly, is the lord of the Nigerian Church again? The one whom has dominion over the world?
[Note: I don't want to harangue African Anglicans. Nor do I wish them (their hierarchy) to harangue me. Rather, I want us *both* to follow Jesus, and heal the sick (w/ HIV/AIDS), and chase out the moneychangers (of global debt), and preach the Good News of God's Love!]
Posted by: J. C. Fisher on Sunday, 30 January 2005 at 6:30am GMT"I don't want to harangue African Anglicans".
But oh, I can't help myself so I'll imply they're like Pharoah......
How deliciously ironic! A parallel between the orthodox African Anglicans and Pharoah? And Gene Robinson is Moses I guess....
The Apostle Paul uses the judgement of God on the unfaithful Israelites in the desert after the Exodus as a warning to the church in Corinth against (amongst other things) sexual immorality. (1 Cor 10:8) And he goes on to warn against complacency v12: "So if you think you are standing firm, be careful that you don't fall!"....
You argue for live and let live but the Africans are simply reiterating God's own warnings in Scripture.
You're right, Neil: the equation to Pharaoh, *merely* on the basis of both being Africans (note: a century ago, European and American Egyptologists would have denied that the Egyptians _were_ African. "Too advanced a culture" and all that racist BS), would have been a cheap shot.
But hardness of hearts knows no geographic or ethnic boundaries(neither does a *passion for justice*: see +Desmond Tutu, or his able successor +Njongokulu Ndungane).
As far as sexual immorality goes, Neil, I'm agin' it, just like Paul. But as *Paul says nothing against homosexuality*, I'm thinking we, his spiritual descendents, shouldn't either (simply speak against promiscuous or abusive acts, done by persons of *whatever orientation* . . . and equally hold up *faithful, committed relationships* of whatever orientation as well).
That's the way I see it, anyway. I'd like to believe it's "God's own" way also, but I humbly wait for a Higher review. (I "stand firm" ONLY in the mercy of my Savior: nothing more)
Posted by: J. C. Fisher on Tuesday, 1 February 2005 at 5:05am GMTHi JCF.
As I said before, claiming that “the Bible says nothing about homosexuality” is just playing with words. The bible doesn’t use the word homosexuality, but you can't honestly claim that we can find nothing of relevance in the bible!
There ARE moral/ethical issues facing us today that were not addressed at all in the bible (human cloning for instance) but even then we can extract principles from the bible to help us in understanding what God’s attitude might be.
However, in the case of homosexuality there is direct comment on same sex desire and on same sex acts. There are several instances where men having sex with men is mentioned.
Now, you might think that the bible’s writers didn’t realise that MSM isn’t “un-natural” for some people, or you might think that they were just plain homophobic and wrong, but they clearly thought that MSM should be condemned (along with adultery, fornication, incest, perversions, orgies and the like… and even plain old lusting - Jesus and the Apostles were very tough on sex issues!).
Posted by: Dave on Tuesday, 1 February 2005 at 6:38pm GMTI cannot bring myself to entertain the idea that the African Anglicans are in any way showing hardness of heart by contending for the faith passed down to them. In fact almost without exception the non-Western parts of the communion are experiencing phenomenal church growth and that suggests quite the opposite of hardness of heart - not resisting God but remaining faithful to God. They have a passion for justice and righteousness. We all know the Africans are sinners – as much as any of us. But they are repentant sinners - standing firm only in the mercy of our Savior. And the need for repentance is precisely the Africans’ point.
Posted by: Neil on Tuesday, 1 February 2005 at 10:06pm GMT"Playing with words," Dave? What do you mean by that?
"but you can’t honestly claim that we can find nothing of relevance in the bible!"
Not at all: there's plenty of relevance in the Bible (especially when that "in" is the Bible *en toto*).
As far as specific pericopes? I think we have to be very careful here: it can too quickly devolve into those Gideons-type pamphlets of non-canonical "canons": "If you have questions about ______, then see ______." Who gets to make up these canons? (And even more importantly, who has been left out of making them?)
But I will confess that certain texts "come to mind," when I think about how to live _my_ sexual morality. I Corinthians 13, for example. How then, should I love? If my love is genuinely *self-sacrificial*, I tend to think that questions of whom I may lovingly, _pleasurably_ touch will sort themselves out (FWIW, that group would be precisely *no one* at present, I'm afraid: God has not seen fit to give me a life-partner as yet. I keep prayin' though! ;-P)
"However, in the case of homosexuality there is direct comment on same sex desire and on same sex acts."
. . . and as I keep saying, Dave, w/o any understanding of *sexual orientation*, these texts applicability to "homosexuality" is ZERO. Would you please address this? Because otherwise, we keep talking in circles.
**********
"I cannot bring myself to entertain the idea that the African Anglicans are in any way showing hardness of heart by contending for the faith passed down to them."
In this case, Neil, I would, um, "contend" that certain African Anglican hierarchs are attempting to impose "the faith that certain conservative Episcopalians emailed to them." It's barely any more "historic", "traditional", or "orthodox" (choose your particular mantle of _Shut Up and Do It My Way!_) than that.
"experiencing phenomenal growth": a perennially sticky wicket. How do we interpret it? The "work of the Holy Spirit, spreading like wildfire"? Or "sinful masses falling to the world, leaving only a holy remnant"? It's only too easy to see it the way one wants to. I pray I stand firm in the Gospel, whether it proves popular OR not.
Posted by: J. C. Fisher on Wednesday, 2 February 2005 at 7:44am GMTfact almost without exception the non-Western parts of the communion are experiencing phenomenal church growth and that suggests quite the opposite of hardness of heart - not resisting God but remaining faithful to God.
Umm, not necessarily. There are *many* reasons for conversion, not all of them motivated out of a genuine love for Christ and the teachings of the church. High numbers of baptisms are always good (make disciples of all nations...) but too often catechesis, instruction in holy living, and long-term follow through get lost in a drive for numbers (...teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded yoy.) When I see stats like those coming from Africa I sincerely pray that the necessary follow up is being done. Else the numbers are just numbers.
Posted by: Derek Olsen on Wednesday, 2 February 2005 at 3:11pm GMTJCF Wrote ". . . and as I keep saying, Dave, w/o any understanding of sexual orientation, these texts applicability to “homosexuality” is ZERO. Would you please address this? Because otherwise, we keep talking in circles."
Hi JCF
The bible's writers thought that MSM (ie homo-sexual action) should be condemned - though I would would not single it out as the only sexual orientation that was severely restricted.... Jesus and the Apostles were also very tough on things like incest, fornication, perversions, orgies and the like…(so I guess that hits on bisexuals, SM and polyamory) as well as adultery and plain old lusting (ie any orientation you like!).
They didn't think that it was ok if you did it in a loving way! It was both "what you do" AND "how you do it" that were moral issues!
Some homosexual people do MSM, others abstain because of their wish to follow the teachings of Jesus and the apostles.
ps "ZERO" applicability?... you're just saying that because you're a liberal!
Derek, church growth in Africa cannot be written off so easily – I don’t deny nurture and discipling and growing in maturity are essential, and nor would the Africans. However the point was that, as we rejoice at what the Holy Spirit IS doing on that continent, it is ridiculous to suggest that the Africans are hardening their hearts against the LORD! Contrast the supposed “new thing” the Holy Spirit is doing in the West and how it is emptying churches? The statistics of course don’t say everything, but they do say quite a lot!
And JCF:
The faith passed down to them, for which the Africans contend, is the faith entrusted to them in the Scriptures. The suggestion that certain conservative Episcopalians emailed it to Africa is incredibly insulting and some could easily interpret as racist.
And your desire to stand firm in the gospel regardless of popularity is of course shared by the Africans: their standing firm is hardly making them popular!
Dave wrote, "...you’re just saying that because you’re a liberal!"
Oh *that* settles it now, doesn't it ?! Stay back! it's one of the demon *liberals* ! (cough) argumentum ad hominem (cough)
http://datanation.com/fallacies/attack.htm
Posted by: Simeon on Thursday, 3 February 2005 at 2:56pm GMT"The faith passed down to them, for which the Africans contend, is the faith entrusted to them in the Scriptures."
Opinion, unsupported by the facts.
And who are "the Africans" anyway? I *always* qualify my comments along the lines of "certain African Anglican bishops" or "some members of the African Church hierarchy" or somesuch. I can point to my *lifting up* two African bishops (+Desmond and +Njongokulu) in _this very thread_! It is *you, Neil*, who are lumping "the Africans" together in a most dubious fashion!
Dave: what the heck is "MSM"? Etymology, please?
_I say what say---and do what I do---because I am *trying* to faithfully follow Jesus Christ_. Period.
Posted by: J. C. Fisher on Saturday, 5 February 2005 at 5:41am GMTAnd now we’re getting desperate:
“Unsupported by the facts”?!
There was never a more contemporary message for the church today:
"Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a licence for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord. Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home - these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire."
“I always qualify my comments along the lines of “certain African Anglican bishops” or “some members of the African Church hierarchy” or somesuch.”
“I would, um, “contend” that certain African Anglican hierarchs are attempting to impose “the faith that certain conservative Episcopalians emailed to them.””
Lots of qualification there!
I think my point about where growth is happening and where it isn’t has been made well already, in this very thread too – and it applies within the continent of Africa too. If my intention was to rubbish or dismiss Africans, then lumping them together would indeed be wrong. However I HAVE qualified my comments already in this thread by pointing out that the very Africans who you are equating to Pharoah are concerned not just with mercy but with repentance too. I accept there is not unanimity on the continent.
Perhaps you would prefer me to be precise in your terminology: “the vast majority of Africans - apart from the small minority who have received the anti-God virus in an email from the liberal West”.
Posted by: Neil on Saturday, 5 February 2005 at 11:30am GMTTwo comments in this thread got posted to the following item in the blog: I have rescued them and show them below, but unfortunately they are now out of time sequence, and I don't know how to fix that quickly, so please accept the deficiency :-(
-------
Comment
"You only thing that because you're a liberal." Hmmm. I think its the other way around, sort of. Because of a collection of beliefs and values, one could be identified as a liberal. On the other hand, I'm somewhat disturbed at the discounting of what someone says or believes simply because someone else has tagged them with a certain label. I'm sure that this is not what the Lambeth resolution or the Windsor Report mean about listening to the experiences of Gay and Lesbian Christians. Rob
Posted by: Robert Leduc on Thursday, 3 February 2005 at 7:46pm GMT
-----
Comment
Hi Rob, I agree that we should all try to understand each other - and try to do it in the framework of understanding of the person speaking, not just in our own personal framework. In the post you refer to I was specifically referring to JCF's assertion that, without a proper understanding of sexual orientation, biblical prohibitions on men having sex with men (MSM) have "ZERO" applicability to people with a homosexual orientation. "ZERO" is a bit strong !! It's the sort of extremely off-hand treatment of scripture that I think too many liberals do to fit with their (often unspoken) assumptions.
Posted by: Dave on Saturday, 5 February 2005 at 4:56pm GMT
Posted by: Simon Sarmiento on Sunday, 6 February 2005 at 6:21pm GMTI am not desperate, Neil, but I confess it is sometimes difficult to avoid giving into *despair*---when I see Scripture quoted in a way to justify bigotry.
For example:
"Dear friends, although . . . " (et al in Jude v.3-7): speaking personally---and, I think, for every other LGBT Anglican---I neither deny Christ (as "our only Sovereign and Lord"), nor allow any sort of rape. Why do you cite this text to me? How does it explain the prejudice that some (whether Africans or any others) have against us?
"Lots of qualification there!"
I qualify my terms, Neil, because God, in His infinite wisdom, has made each and everyone of us *unique* (and uniquely in His Image). There is no more the "African _this_" than there is the "gay _that_"
"Perhaps you would prefer me to be precise in your terminology: “the vast majority of Africans - apart from the small minority who have received the anti-God virus in an email from the liberal West”."
How do you know what "the vast majority of Africans" believe? I only know that the two bishops I cited (+Desmond and +Njongokulu) learned and lived *their* faith, while surviving the excruciating trials of apartheid. (I will not even contemplate that you are referring to them as "anti-God." I should think that IF anyone said that, they *must* be demonically-possessed)
Posted by: J. C. Fisher on Tuesday, 8 February 2005 at 4:09am GMT