This is called 'being economical with the truth.' Why do I go on being shaken and shocked when bishops and wot-not try this on ?!

What does "not present but represented" mean? Were they represented by someone selected by the primate of the province or someone selected by the organizers of the conference? Can we ascribe a statement by an observer who was present to the primate? Even including the representatives and not including the primate who has distanced himself from the proceedings, they lack a majority of primates. Considering they are not likely to pick up and of the remaining primates to sign on to their proposals, they have to be considered dead on arrival.

Thanks for this Simon. One of my concerns was whether there was going to be a repeat of last November where people were purported to have signed or been in agreement without their full knowledge or consent. I pray that they are not about to do the same thing again. But if they do, there would be a mixed blessing exposing excessive zeal.

Perhaps it might give Martyn Minns pause to realize that he has cast his lot with someone who will lie about who approves/signs a statement such as the Kigali communique.

Or maybe such lies don't count if one is so exalted as to unilaterally set aside the choice of another province's Primate.

If I remember correctly, this is not the first time that a statement following such a meeting has been represented as endorsed by people, some of whom later objected to having been counted as signatories.

Truth.

For me that is one of the prime Christian virtues, and our behaviour as sexual beings, amongst other human attributes, depends on our ability to be truthful with one another.

It isn't the first time and won't be the last that acceptable standards of Christian truth and behaviour have not been observed at the end of a meeting of Global South Anglicans.

The same inability to hold to truth was revealed in Canon Akintunde's post on the earlier Nigeria thread. He wrote:

"Ha..ha..ha Very laughable. Apart from myself and maybe the Bishop of Otukpo, the scam is a forgotten issue. It was not remembered talk less of deserving mention. Dare I repeat, if the Church wants to arrest Davies, he cannot avoid arrest for up to five days and still be in Nigeria. He remains free to continue duping those who refuse advice."

Canon Akintunde repeats yet again the false allegations against Davis MacIyalla. He has been asked repeatedly since he first published them in December to substantiate them. He has been able to supply no evidence. Regular readers will know we have provided plenty of evidence to demonstrate Davis's honesty. Canon Tunde adds a further unChristian dimension by prefacing his remarks with a sneering laugh.

Will Martyn Minns realise that he has cast his lot with a group, some of whom distort truth and tell lies? No. The evidence has been around for some time, but Martyn cast his lot and is now a bishop. Archbishop Njongonkulu is wise enough to know that he puts himself at risk attending such a meeting, when just this kind of dishonesty is sprung.

The behaviour of some of these primates, bishops and church leaders ought to be of serious concern. It is a scandal that they are attempting to destroy the unity of the Anglican Communion and to vilify the west for being Christian in its attitude to LGBT people. They are destroying much else in their wake.

It is a scandal that Canon Tunde is able to continue to post false allegations against another Christian. He apparently has no ability to question his own motives and behaviour. Having met Davis MacIyalla, I know that he fulfils his baptism commitment to a holy, devout and truthful life under God. Officers of the Church of Nigeria and some members of the Global South group deliberately publish lies and distort the truth. Yet I am made to feel a scandal in the church and these people continue to defame LGBT Anglicans.

“Perhaps it might give Martyn Minns pause to realize that he has cast his lot with someone who will lie about who approves/signs a statement such as the Kigali communique.”—Cynthia Gilliatt

There are those who believe Minns himself was the author. It reads like Network theology.

Colin ; given that this is going on, have you raised this with the Archbishop of Canterbury or those who should be aware of this sort of behaviour.

I am concerned that they seem not to be listening to you whilst doing all they can to placate them

The statement from Southern Africa displays clearly that this is not a simple issue of all from the developing world being on one 'side' of the argument (and clearly there are many in Malawi and other parts of Central Africa who also do not see this as a first-order issue in the least)

If this is a draft document, would it have been signed by anyone? What I don't understand is why they would publish the draft document, though. But perhaps this is another example of how strange this all is.

Mike,

I thought of adding +Rowan's name after Achbishop Njongonkulu as one of those who is perfectly well aware of what is going on in the behaviour of individual Primates such as Peter Akinola and the dynamics of last week's Global South meeting, the election of Martyn Minns, and the relationship between these African and American individuals and groups and the poisonous, unChristian atmosphere which they are capable of generating.

I doubt +Rowan has time to read Thinking Anglicans, but he does have close relationships with Primates, including the Archbishop of Cape Town, and +Rowan will be well briefed on all that has been going on.

+Rowan knows. +Rowan will have his own feelings about the way people are conducting themselves, his own thoughts about them in his personal capacity, and his ideas according to the strategy (such as it is, by his own admission) that he is following in his role as Archbishop of Canterbury.

As revealed last week, his strategy is in part to encourage bishops holding different views to meet as Christian leaders in the same room and engage honestly with each other. The problem is that some bishops and Primates refuse to meet at all in this way, and others, having met once, don't want to meet again. +Rowan will also see that (Sorry, your Grace, if you are reading these speculations on your thoughts and feelings).

I'm as frustrated and angry as anyone else with the abusive, manipulative, dishonest ways in which Communion leaders are behaving. That includes those who published the Global South statement, and the Communications Officer for the Nigerian Church, Canon Popoola, and everyone who supports action taken against TEC and LGBT Anglicans by groups using such unChristian methods.

The only effective action to take against these people is to expel them from the Communion, but the Archbishop of Canterbury doesn't have the power to do that, and quite rightly doesn't want to do that, even if he had the power. That is why we are in this unresolved and abusive situation and it will stay like this until some of the extremists have the courage of their convictions and leave, or the strategy works, and over time, people's attitude's change.

Here at Changing Attitude, where reports of the 8 diocesan groups in Nigeria arrive regularly, we're waiting for Canon Popoola to withdraw his accusations against Davis and cease searching for him. Davis, wisely, is continuing to mainain a low public profile, but the groups continue to meet and grow in numbers, very much as the early Christians in Acts. What they don't have is the access to money which comes so easily to the allies of the secessionist Americans.

I suppose what we're seeing is an extreme example of the application of the principle of 'double effect'. The problem with such a principle is that it reveals quite unambiguously the hierarchy of truths employed by the decision maker.

It seems to me slightly unusual that truth, human rights, justice, integrity, canon law and unity occupy such low ranking in the GS moral canon that they can be set aside in order to deal with the much more important issues of sexuality and so on — but I suppose that, as a white colonialist/imperialist, not only must I be missing something, it's probably my fault as well.

Colin Coward rightly uses the term "secessionist Americans."

There is a long succession of secessionists, especially in the 'spikey' former Diocese of Dallas (before the division into two jurisdictions), beginning with the PB John Hines era. It was the Civil Rights and anti-War Movements that negatively energized certain Episcopalians. N***** were to know 'their place' in American society and be content with menial jobs. Then there were those 'Communists' rooting for the Soviet Union by opposing military operations in SE Asia. The Standing Liturgical Commission in charge of Prayer Book Revision sought to reach out to those on both sides of the divide by including among its drafters Stanley H. Atkins (Eau Claire) and Donald Davies (Dallas-Fort Worth), William C Frey (Colorado), Joseph M. Harte (Arizona) as well as Otis Charles (Utah), Charles Price Donald Garfield et al. of a more liberal ilk. Yet that wasn't good enough! ECUSA was no longer 'orthodox', having rejected the credal traditions in 1976, when the Proposed Prayer Book was approved. Then, controversy over the admission of women to leadership positions in the Church tore the very fabric of ECUSA, inasmuch as women, as late as 1967, could not even be seated as deputies of GC! And, with Jack Leo Iker at the helm, women are still not eligible to be ordained priests in Fort Worth, nor is a female PB acceptable if elected by both Houses of GC.

It's really not about theology. It all boils down to issues of 'patriarchy' and 'power', the U.S.A. of the 1950s having been divinely ordered when everybody knew 'their place' in American society.

John Henry --
I support all you have to say (& have said much the same here, if with less detail) with one slight caveat -- the Presiding Bishop is elected by the House of Bishops and approved (or not) by the House of Deputies. I mention this because there have been proposals to change this (which I oppose -- the HoD does have veto power, even if they have never actually exercised it).

This is the Lord's work and we should rejoice in it! Can you imagine, once the dust has settled there will be conservative, racist, Americans under the care of Nigerian and Ugandan bishops. The "darkies" they wouldn't want their daughters to marry will be in positions of authority over them, far better than someone who may (Bishop Katherine et al) have once met a homosexual and been affirming and supportive of them. It's all so very sad and such a waste of time and I, for one, am sick of being held to ransom by a part of the "Communion" when I have so much more in common with the URC, Methodists, etc. than I do with other Anglicans. Enough is enough and we all have more important ministries to get on with. Let them go and be done with it. Titus.

Thank you, Prior Aelred, for the correction re. the process by which ECUSA's PB is elected. I should have been more specific.

Well said Titus !

TRUTH!

Now that there is yet another 'clarification' this time by the Secretary of the Global South body. One needs to ask whether someone travelled thousands of miles to attend a meeting he truly did not read its agenda. While some sections of the media focussed on the USA problems, let me quote from a September 9 post on the Global South website
“some 20 Provinces will be represented at the Global South Primates Meeting in Kigali, Rwanda, Sept. 19–22. They will be expected to address current Communion concerns like the proposed Anglican Covenant and its adoption process, response to GC2006, agenda for Lambeth 2008 and so on.
*However, top in the list of priority* this time round is to follow-through with the concerns raised in last October’s historic Red Sea Encounter in Egypt, including tackling poverty through economic empowerment, strengthening mission co-partnership and cooperating in Communion theological formation and education development. Apart from the Primates, other Province representatives will also be present to discuss and strategise for these areas.”
The communiqué I read did justice to the agenda. Not even the much hyped petition got a mention. It is a pity someone had to leave before the end of the meeting (was he excused, released or expelled? We need to know). Maybe if he had stayed, we might have ended up with a watered down version to accommodate him.

THANK YOU ++John Chew for the clarification.

Colin,

Apologies for getting into your hairs again. I laughed because there was the impression given that the Church of Nigeria was so unfocussed as to be distracted by your man’s issue. I was distracted, but am now relaxed about it.

On a serious note, I pray he manages to go frequently to church like Rose said she does. The mere fact that they claim they do so shows that contrary to western public perception, they are indeed welcome to worship in our churches. If they truly worship with us, I believe you will soon see GOD at work in some people’s lives.

On a lighter note, (Please do not say unchristian. Just trying to imagine what may be influencing you) ‘do try to source for as much financial support as possible. With the rapid increase in numbers, the next General meeting will require a lot more funds and then of course there is the security concern as Canon Popoola may try to attend. Who knows he may so desperate, he may come armed with a suicide bomber’s belt to eliminate us once and for all’ LORD HAVE MERCY!

Are you sure you still do not want me to laugh?

Indeed, Canon! I hope we do see God at work in people's lives. I pray that more and more gay people will become visible in Nigeria so that God can take the veil from your eyes and that you may see that we are real people, not some scum to be cast in prison for daring to be honest about how God made us. You may be right, God may have made us for celibacy, but you will never spread that message to gay people till you get rid of your hatred and malice. I pray God will do that. If it is His will, He will take the hatred from your heart so that you can find a way to preach to gay people in a way we can hear. Condemnation, jailing, and oppression are not the way to spread the Gospel, especially a difficult message like the one you claim God has for gay people. Celibacy is a hard demand to make of people, especially in a society that resoundingly says it is abnormal. I guess I would have to ask why it is that you don't try to find a more effective way of teaching the Gospel than throwing people in jail? Sure you're doing a good job for some, the Nigerian Church is growing by leaps and bounds, but you are leaving God's gay children in the dirt. Don't they deserve to hear the message of salvation too? Notice I am NOT saying you should preach the message you so object to in ECUSA, merely that what you believe to be God's will for gay people can be taught in more effective ways than what you espouse. Why is it so hard to do that?

Tunde wrote" "...Just trying to imagine what may be influencing you..."

Thank you for documenting that you contemplate that some of us are not influenced or motivated by God. It is no longer hearsay.

Canon Tunde, your posts always have a certain character.

You post in a jokey style. 'On a lighter note...' and 'Are you still sure you do not want me to laugh?' you wrote, as if I or Davis or any members of CAN are able to treat our sexuality and our concern for the Anglican Communion with anything other than real care and seriousness. No, I do not want you to laugh.

When I respond with comment or criticism to what you have written about Davis, and when you repeat your unfounded lies against him, you respond by telling me that you have got into my hairs again.

Yes, of course you have. You have repeated your lies about my friend Davis, whom I have met and respect a lot. You lied in the first place and you continue to lie, and I am very, very angry about what you have done and are doing. You get right under my skin and into my emotions. I endeavour to live a holy and Godly life, and you, Communications Officer for the Church of Nigeria, continue to make unfounded allegations about one of your own church members. You have never apologised to me since we published information about Davis MacIyalla which proved that most of the accusations you levelled against him were wrong.

Most seriously, you are putting his physical life at risk and your own spiritual life at risk by persecuting Davis and compromising your own Christian integrity.

Over 2,000 members of CAN worship in the Anglican churches in Nigeria every week. They sing in your choirs and contribute to the life of the church. They are abused by the Church. They are abused in the Global South statement. They are abused by the proposed Government law against gays. Because they are dedicated Anglicans and attend church doesn't mean they would be welcomed or would feel safe if they revealed that they are lesbian or gay. They wisely hide their sexuality because of the reaction they would encounter in church if they were honest. As I know well from my own years of secrecy, the fear is losing your place of worship, your family relationships, your friends, and fear of being abused, ridiculed, humiliated, accused. This is why homophobia is dangerous and the Anglican Communion in every Province MUST make a commtment to support and welcome LGBT Anglicans.

Wow! Colin, Forgive me for getting you angry.

I however have no apologies concerning your friend because all I wrote about him was true. All the ‘evidences’ you provided only strengthened the allegations and disproved what you and others read into the disclaimer. (Like saying he was never a member)

"the Anglican Communion in every Province MUST make a commtment to support and welcome LGBT Anglicans."

We welcome them (you now have 2000, you say) but the gospel constrains us like ++Rowan recently did, to demand a change in lifestyle.

Until that is done, as we do to polygamists, they cannot be ordained, nor allowed to hold any church office which projects them as role models

Tunde,
You are not merely requiring metanoia, you are encouraging imprisonment for anyone who can't make the change. It isn't the same thing. it is difficult to feel the love of God when His followers have thrown you or your friends into prison. I've asked before, and I ask again, why is it that you cannot preach what you believe is the Gospel's message to gay people in a humane, I'd even say Christian, way? Why the verbal assaults, why jail?

Tunde,

This is the oddest sentence:
"It is a pity someone had to leave before the end of the meeting (was he excused, released or expelled? We need to know)"

Is the Archbishop of Capetown a child who's been brought to the headmaster's office?

Excused? Released? Expelled?

The GS group was fortunate he took the time to meet with them at all, as a free participant, who can come and go as he pleases.

I note that in Ndungane's response to the communiqué, he took every opportunity he could to praise the work of GS group, and couched his criticisms in gentle terms (quite firmly, too, but not in a way that denigrated those who disagree). He talks to the rest of the group as colleagues, as peers.

I think he deserves to be shown some respect in return.

Colin, you should have worked out by now that the overriding tactical concern of the Nigerian Anglican hierarchy is to squelch gays. They believe that God is instructing them to do that, and therefore that any means used in pursuing that end is legitimised.

Tunde is incapable of acknowledging any wrong-doing on his part, even to the point of denying what he patently wrote ("The general public is hereby warned of the activities of a person who goes by the name of Davis (David) Mac Iyalla. He claims to be a homosexual member of the Anglican Church but extensive searches revealed that he is NOT registered in any of our over 10,000 local parishes as of the past two years. None of our over 6000 priests recognise him as an active member in any of their parishes" etc)because his a priori is the defeat of homosexuality, and that puts all other values/constraints/ethical considerations in the shade.

I suppose it may be compared (as a mind set) with the Inquisition, which saw the fate of heretics to be so dreadful that they actually believed it was merciful to torture them to death. Tunde is not morally culpable, though he may appear morally repugnant.

It's a red herring, but seems appropriate at this time. This article popped up on the internet last week http://allafrica.com/stories/200609260570.html It includes:

THE Chief Justice of Nigeria(CJN), Justice Salihu Modibo Alfa Belgore yesterday reflected on the nation's justice delivery system and declared it a disaster. In a damning analysis of the nation's jurisprudence, the leader of the bench explained that the country's body of law and its procedure are not only archaic, culturally irrelevant but that they also defeat the notion of justice in its entirety.

According to him, "the archaic laws we have with their obsolete phraseologies, albeit in foreign language which the givers have themselves abandoned, do no justice to legal practice; rather it distances the legality from reality."

"I submit that the rule of law means what it says. The opposite of it is impunity and lawlessness. The rule of law is the cornerstone, foundation and bedrock of development. In all honesty, the rule of law is not working well in Nigeria," Chief Agbakoba (SAN) said.

"The country, in a democratic regime, must now start doing things in a manner to reflect our aspirations based on our multifarious ethnic backgrounds and religious and cultural diversities, to achieve a cohesion in our approach not only in juridical way, but to see what were those good things in our past histories that were good but which we have abandoned in mimicking foreign things and mannerisms.

"The question always to my mind is whether before coming of alien colonialists with their notions as to correct culture and law, we had no law and culture of our own? It is true we had some bad cultures; but more of good ones--in actual fact, good ones predominated."

"There is need for a comprehensive restatement to take into account what is relevant for our retention. Our ethnic and cultural diversities, our various religious backgrounds, are the beauty of our nation; but we have not harnessed them properly for posterity.

David, Thanks.

You might want to consider the difference between "the past two years", "active member" and "never a member"

Chris,

I asked because he usually does not meet with them. No disrespect meant. If he was sent packing, including his province as participating would have been in bad faith. I now have the answer. He had to leave to attend to an unexpected matter back home and there was no bad feeling about his departure on either side.

Yes, he like all other primates deserve and obtain respect from each other. That is why I inferred the communiqué might have changed out of respect for his opinions had he been there to the very end.

We are in a hostile church that is never ready to change.

The church of nigeria is only encorraging us to be dishonest with our sexuality. The more we want to come out the more the church increases it attacks on us.

Tunde has nothing new to say about Davis so lets consentrate on our next General Meeting and forget about him.

Tunde and our church leaders knows very well that we are in every organ of the church of nigeria anglican communion.That is why they are supporting the Bill to ban same sex relationship in nigeria.I wonder if prayers does not work for them any more?

I do feel for Tunde, actually: as the communications bod for the archdiocese of Nigeria 'Tunde' doesn't exist as an independent entity, and whether his true feelings are those presented in public is irrecoverable.

'Tunde the priest' may be a different person from 'Tunde the servant of diocesan policy', and if I were in his position I'm not sure, even if I did have misgivings about what the archdiocese was up to, that I'd have the nerve to put my own livelihood on the line, in the knowledge that someone else would come along and do what was wanted by them at the top. There are victims of CHurch policy in all sorts of places....