Akinola’s statement reads like a recipe for another civil war. Why am I not surprised?

This is very sad. I would ask the Bishop to stick with Jesus's teaching to love thy enemy and turn the other cheek. I can understand how extremely difficult this is, but a further escalation is the last thing that is needed. It's a crazy, mixed up world that we live in. I know nothing about Nigeria, but the little I have read suggests that the Muslims have responded viciously to the cartoon controversy, and also to disagreements with the central government by taking it out on their Christian neighbours, and the youth of the Christian communities have responded in kind, even though this goes against the teaching of Christianity.

I await with some interest any comment from Canterbury about Archbishop Akinola's thinly veiled invitation to violence by Christians. This morning's Washington Post carried a wire service story saying the those who had killed Muslims were now burning the bodies. In any human terms, this is outrageous. I wonder because I do not know - would this be a particular outrage in terms of Islamic practice?

Akinola is clearly making a call to arms.

I can understand this from a human, Nigerian civilian perspective, but not from the Primate of All Nigeria's perspective.

Have I got my expectations all muddled up? Is it an apostle of Christ's responsibility to rouse a population to civil war?

Has the Anglican communion reached a consensus where we agree that our bishops become warmongers?

How long will the rest of our pathetic, spineless ethicless communion stand by whilst the likes of Akinola make a mockery of Christianity, let alone Anglicanism. I'm getting really, really bored of Anglicanism. It's a scratch-its-arse-while-someone-sets-fire-to-its-head club.

This is not my Christianity, Williams' God of consensus is not my Christianity. Neo-puritanism is not my Christianity. I'm starting to suspect I'm not actually an Anglican. I'm starting to feel relieved.

That said, don't know what the hell I am then.

Now, let's just watch while the Christians of Nigeria get whipped up into a bloody frenzy.

More tea vicar? Thank God for the Clergy, eh?

It makes one wonder if the growth of the church in Nigeria is due to effective evangelism or cultural polarization.

This really does sum up what is wrong with the Nigerian church.

They are a mirror-image of the fundamentalist Muslims they so oppose.

No way would I support stirring up violence and retribution, though I can imagine that I would want to defend my family and my community if this were happening here. I don't think we should be so quick to condemn!

However, as many virtuous liberal contributors to TA convinced that they would react differently, maybe they would like to visit northern Nigeria to show the Christians there how to respond properly to physical attacks ? But if you're not actually willing to do what you tell them to do, at least show a little bit of sympathy for those suffering fear, violence and loss !

Very good comments on the situation in Nigeria and why Anglicans ought to be wary of aligning themselves with ++Peter Abuja. Too bad among Episcopalians in the Red States (U.S. states that support George W Bush) ++Peter Abuja is still an icon of a saintly and godly bishop, who simply can't do any wrong. Nor can their godly President who has disgraced the United States by resorting to torture and the violation of human rights at Guantanamo, Cuba. I am looking forward to the day when ++John Ebor succeeds in having the international court of justice indict George W Bush and his Neo-Con henchmen of the ilk of VP Dick Cheney, who "shoots first" and deals with the consequences of his shooting afterwards, the whole Neo-Con gang being above the law. At least ++John Ebor has the guts which ++Rowan Cantuar lacks as the latter panders to the likes of ++Peter Abuka and the U.S. Anglican Network bishops.

Mr. Henry, I'm a resident of Sodom-on-the-Hudson, and even I found your generalization about Episcopalians in the red states to be sweeping to the point of grossly unjust. I personally know several Churchmen and -women in the red states who find Akinola and his cohort as unsavory as I do, and I would hasten to point out that there is more than one diocese in the blue states (Albany, Pittsburgh, and Quincy come most readily to mind) where remaining loyal to the Episcopal Church is a daunting task these days.

Please keep in mind that religious and general regional political loyalties are not always the same.

The self-righteousness of some of these posts - when brothers and sisters in Christ are paying with their lives - and have been doing so for many years - is shameful and sickening.

Neil

I notice that there are also conservative expressions of concern: did you listen to what Bishop Cyril Okorocha said on the radio clip? I don't think he can be classed as a "liberal".

There is a difference between expressing concern - which of course anyone with an ounce of human compassion, let alone Christian conviction, shares - and expressions which cast outlandish aspersions and sound dangerously like "ha, ha, serves them right" or "See! nothing good can come out of Nigeria"! I find the undercurrents shocking and lacking in balanced perspective. How about us supporting our brothers and sisters in Christ? How about praying for peace, for restraint for all but particularly Christians, for Christians' assurance in the face of persecution, for wisdom for Christian leaders who must be under huge pressure?

The issue under discussion is NOT the tragedy of violence between Christians and Muslims in Nigeria. It is over the "coming out" of ++Akinola as a violence monger. It was easier for many to ignore this fact when he was just bashing gays. Now he is advocating violence against Muslims. Those who support him should be embarrassed.

Pete, I think you'll find most of the articles above don't mention Akinola.
If you're right, my point is made: the discussion is self-righteous and unbalanced in its focus.

Neil
I am quite confused by your comments. Are you criticising the reports linked in the original blog article, or are you criticising the comments posted by TA readers?
If the latter, then most do mention Abp Akinola either by name or by reference to "the bishop" etc.

The Lord God and His Risen Son are the safe harbor. He does not turn any way, not a one.

This is the Good News. Not, "be careful or we will tell our young boys to go after you."

As primate, Akinola must know this, or he should. But he has other designs than preaching the Word.

In contrast, for true Christian leadership in Nigeria on this issue, we must look to the Catholic bishops. Because certainly no one is looking towards Akinola. What a disgrace.

This sticking of pins into dolls of Akinola would be really quite laughable if it weren't serious.

My point was:
The articles report the terrible events going on in Nigeria and a minority mention Akinola's comments. Yet the ONE issue focused on in most of these posts (and on other threads too) is not the tragedy or the scandal of the whole situation, nor empathy with members of our Christian family for their ongoing suffering and persecutions, nor concern for Christians who may be provoked to retaliate. Most posts have engaged in venomous mud-slinging against the one who is the object of hate for other reasons and most were holier than thou.

It seems that it's acceptable to "inflame" on TA but not on the ground in Nigeria.

It is difficult to find words to begin to discuss the complex and tragic situation of the tribal, religious, political violence happening in Nigeria at the moment. People IN NIGERIA are not sure what the reasons are for this sudden rise (the cartoons are not enough to justify it), as some of the other Nigerian clergy are saying (see later reports included in Simon's entry here http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/001564.html )

I imagine most of us don't know what to say about such a confusing situation on the other side of the world. Maybe when more firm facts begin to come out of it, people will feel more able and inclined to discuss them. For myself, all I feel able to do is keep an eye on it and pray and hope that peace will come sooner rather than later. To post comments that would probably just be echoing EVERYONE'S feelings, like 'oh, how awful' and so on, seems pointless. I would guess this is why most don't feel inclined to comment on the conflicts themselves. Not because they are unfeeling or uncaring or obsessed with their own anti-Akinola agendas.

It is particularly astonishing that, against the background of increasing religious (ostensibly) violence, the leading Archbishop of that country is using language which is clearly inflamatory. That we can all understand, and so are able to comment on. It is also, to many of us, contrary to what we would consider 'of the Spirit of Christ' and so as Christians, we feel urged, even duty-bound, to question that language and criticize the man.

Archbishop Akinola is in an extremely powerful position and is actually able to have an impact on the crisis with his words.

Our comments are going to have ZERO effect on the crisis - or even on the mad and bad career of Akinola, sadly.

I'm not persuaded by your inference that, because I have previously disagreed with Akinola's behaviour, and I do not feel able or urged to to analyse the complex and (even to Nigerians) confusing situation there, or to make largely pointless empathetic noises into cyberspace about sentiments of concern for all the people of Nigeria which (I would have thought) it goes without saying all of us are feeling, that I (or others) should be disallowed from criticizing objectional behaviour by someone with the power and authority to influence events 'on the ground'.

Akinola is an important man, to diminish people's genuine concern about the effect his words might have on the situation by dismissing their objections as partisan 'sticking pins into dolls of Akinola...' and 'self-righteous' seems a little too cynical, Neil.

It's very good to see more reasonable words coming from other Nigerian Bishops (see same link as before). I might well disagree with their theology, and their take on other issues, but I am VERY glad to be able to credit them for speaking peace into the situation rather than war. It really is obviously a very bad time to have a man such as Akinola, making statements such as the one criticized here, as the head of the Anglican Church in Nigeria - I would say that for this issue alone.

Judging by the latest reports, other Nigerian Bishops (by their actions) seem to disagree with Akinola's approach too.

"Mr. Henry, I'm a resident of Sodom-on-the-Hudson, and even I found your generalization about Episcopalians in the red states to be sweeping to the point of grossly unjust. I personally know several Churchmen and -women in the red states who find Akinola and his cohort as unsavory as I do, and I would hasten to point out that there is more than one diocese in the blue states (Albany, Pittsburgh, and Quincy come most readily to mind) where remaining loyal to the Episcopal Church is a daunting task these days."-- Douglas Hayes

Sodom-on-the-Hudson? Is that anywhere near My Old School in Annandale-on-Hudson?

Dear Neil, I think that the reactions of our liberal friends to the situation in Nigeria demonstrates how completely they have liberated their faith from it's biblical roots. Not only do they reject every moral teaching that doesn't agree with current thought, but they also reject the people who persist in believing and teaching bible morality. Hence the vehement anger and hate of one of the most powerful conservatives - Akinola (though I guess ABp Jensen would get similar treatment if he were in the news).

How about some generosity towards what Akinola said ? Fat chance... Even the key principles of Jesus' teachings, that until recently liberals said were the core of Christianity, are now rejected. Hence 'love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you' are not at all evident in these discussions..

Gosh! Where was I? Actually left this site for some time.

If you have prayed, fasted, sweated, and see God grant an opening for the Gospel. If you have seen people's lives changed and see them devote themselves to Christ despite oppositions. If you have watched people where families surviving on less that two dollars ($2.00) a day struggle to put up a place of worship and regularly go there every morning and on many evenings. If, you have had to go back there only to bury some of them and provide blankets for survivors whose homes and businesses were burnt. If, on many occasions you have had to tell them to forgive and 'turn the other cheek' If nerves are calmed after your leaders are shown on National TV shaking hands with leaders of the group that killed and destroyed your flock, If no open rebuke is ever given to those groups and year in year out the cycle continues, maybe then, you will even view the warnings contained in the reaction as too mild. To the Nigerian Christian, their spokesman is finally speaking up for them. To the Nigerian Muslim, it is a warning that further slaughters may not be tolerated. To the Government, it is a call to live up to its responsibility.

But of course if you have a reason to hate someone. If he stands for a truth that you will rather have coloured, if, having him around upsets you like John the Baptist and Herod’s family. If you are bent on discrediting him so as to justify yourself, then you must look for mud to sling.

What the reaction did not explicitly show but only implied was that as usual, peace envoys had immediately gone out to try to calm Christians. (We lost a Bishop on a similar trip last year.) Also it would not show the frantic efforts made to forestall the spread of the riots and the vigils kept by Christians who could not sleep for fear of attack.

Thanks to those that understood, stood by us and prayed for us. May you never have to stand alone. Amen