Begs the question of just how much longer TA should continue to cover Orombi and the denomination he leads (as it does not cover every other ex-Anglican splinter group).

I have no doubt, however, that there remain (some) faithful *Anglicans* in Uganda, and they should receive our prayers and support.

With all the problems Uganda faces, it's hard to figure out why its prime minister considers homosexuality so important.

Well in between the lines of these passing remarks about homosexuality in Uganda, we can get provisional glimpses of the transitional state through which they possibly pass.

That is, it is just barely starting to dawn upon them that (A) there is a higher incidence than the popular imagination presumed was at all possible (echoes of USA and the Kinsey studies?), plus (B) a struggle to forcefully reassert that even if there turn out to be lots more Ugandan folks who are queer folks, they must be defined as nothing but problems, problems, problems, or better - danger, danger, danger, plus (C)the backhanded yearning to keep it all from unraveling into any of the various modern glimpses, i.e., that queer folks are gifts not problems, that Ugandan queer folks may get tired of being trash talked to the point that such Ugandan assert their human rights to be the best they can be instead of living down to majority expectations and definitions, and a great deal else that possibly peaks through.

African believers will not be able to stay disconnected from the rest of the planet, no matter what they preach. There is no openly holy justice yet for queer folks in Uganda, and the OT prophets are still crying in all the streets.

Even with all that, no progressive believer is trying to get Uganda dismissed from participating in the global Anglican fellowship of church families. That is Uganda, trying that one.

Alas. Lord have mercy.

“When he acts contrary to the Word of God, we resist because we know he is wrong.” Orombi of Uganda

Makes my head spin as this "decider" of right and wrong initiaties a purge of Anglicans/Christians and others throughout his superstitous, rampantly corrupt and war-torn land...sure, blame the school fireburnings/deaths on LGBT Christians too..no sense trying to face and STOP REAL atrocities from being committed in Uganda when YOU can divert attention from a truly vile national character, and everyday behavior, with a deadly WITCH HUNT...no Bishop Orombi, persecuting LGBT Christians/others won't make YOUR TROUBLES go away.

"Nsibambi asked the clergy to fight homosexuality"

This reference in New Vision to the statement made by the Prime minister of Uganda to a meeting of the Anglican Bishops, and the response of Archbishop Orombi, would seem to highlight the difficulties being faced in several African Provinces of the Anglican Communion at this point in time.

What the Communion has to decide is whether the issue of the human rights of homosexuals ought to be addressed by the Communion as a whole - or should local custom be allowed to dictate polity in the local Churches of the Communion.

It would appear that local Churches have made their own response on this issue, and that the Communion needs to understand what is happening - in terms of local need. The question seems to be: Does local culture dictate moral principle, or is there a more general understanding of what the Gospel demands in the light of modern scientific knowledge?

You know, Ugandans must find homosexuality awfully alluring, considering how every institution in Ugandan society apparently has to wage a constant and desperate fight against it.

Have these people given any thought to how they are presenting themselves to the rest of the world?

So, tell me again how it's the Americans who are too closely allied with their culture.

“When he acts contrary to the Word of God, we resist because we know he is wrong.”

This is a perfect moment for all those Lambeth bishops who occupy the middle ground to play their part in the moratorium process.

How many will now stand up and say, loud and clear, that it is possible to resist and oppose homosexuality on theological grounds, but the issue is HOW you do it?

Father Ron, I have no problem with allowing different cultures to have different views on this, but it is important that all Christians, including African ones, understand that certain standards about truth, love and compassion apply regardless of ones culture.

Regardless of how they see homosexuality, all Christians must support human rights for homosexuals, especially the right to live free from fear for their lives.

The Prime Minister and the Archbishop ought to re-read 1 Samuel 18, 1-4 and 20, 30-34, and announce that the Psalms of David will no longer be read in Ugandan Churches. King Saul was right!

Orombi repeated his stand against homosexuality. While acknowledging Canterbury as an historic See, Orombi said the Archbishop of Canterbury had no jurisdiction over the Ugandan Province.

Um . . . So tell me again how it is that +Orombi, +Akinola, +Venebles, et al think they can exercise authority in the U.S. and Canadian provinces?

I'm reminding of sitting on a merry-go-round as a child and feeling sick from all the spinning.

Erika,

I absolutely agree with you that it is now up to the Bishops of the Communion to present a united front on the issue of homosexuality - from the point of view of its clearly-established human rights angle. To my mind, this is a purely Gospel issue - no different from other issues of human rights, which the Church ought to be affirming.

However, as we all know, one of the reasons the Global South Bishops were not present at Lambeth -preferring instead their own private Gaffe-Conference - was that they are unprepared to hear any argument that could place homosexuality within the compass of God's natural order.

Until the Church agrees to really listen to it's members who happen to be gay, there may be no further movement on this need for education. The real question is - how long will this take?

Father Ron
"However, as we all know, one of the reasons the Global South Bishops were not present at Lambeth -preferring instead their own private Gaffe-Conference - was that they are unprepared to hear any argument that could place homosexuality within the compass of God's natural order."

You see, I don't think this has anything more to do with GAFCON bishops. They are so far on the extreme that talking to them is absolutely pointless.

What riles me is the silent majority of Bishops who all met at Lambeth, who are all part of the AC, and yet who rarely ever speak about homosexuality at all. The debate is led entirely by the strong supporters and the strong refusenics.

Now this majority of bishops have asked TEC for a moratorium on SSBs and on the consecreation of gay bishops.

The only way this makes sense is if they, too, being to deliver their part of the process.

And that means that, whereever they personally stand on the issue, they have to point out human rights abuse, actual lies about people, dehumanisation etc.

If the middle section of the church doesn't make itself heard, the whole question will remain one of extremes forever.

It's when a large number of decent people stands up to criticise actual abuses that we can move forward.

Erika,

We both remember how long it has taken the Church to acknowledge the place of women amongst our clergy. It will take even longer for our Mother Church - the C. of E. - to ordain a woman Bishop.
This acceptance of the critical place of women in the Church required a change of heart amongst many of us who, formerly, were convinced that God could only call men into the Sacred Ministry.

The Churches of Rome and our Orthodox (genuinely Orthodox, that is) sisters and brothers are still not yet convinced of that possibility - more on the ground of Tradition than either Scripture or Reason.

This is why it may take some time to convince some parts of the Church, even our own Church, which is supposedly accepting of Scripture, Tradition and Reason (cf. Hooker et al), that the continuum of human sexuality allows a legitimate diversity in God's creation, and therefore a sacred element of our common human life.

That being the case, the position of FOCA, CANA, and the various other para 'Virtue-on-line' no-shows at Lambeth 2008, who have declared their hand in their response to Lambeth; may yet prove to have been an unscheduled bonus for the triumph of Truth over the Agenda of the New Puritans.

If they are not prepared to accede to the call of the Windsor Continuing Group Moratorium - on their incursion into TEC and Canada by clergy ordained in foreign jusrisdictions for that specific purpose - then they may automatically have resigned from the Communion - by default. This would leave the rest of us free to pursue the mission of the Church - to include all people including women and gays into the life-stream of their Church communities - without prejudice.

One still longs for a unified Church, but how can this come about when there are still prelates who will not even share the Eucharist? However, it is God's Church, and God will have the final Word.

Father Ron

Yes to all you say.

But there has to be a middle development too, which is that even those who do not yet accept full equality of gays in the life of the church have to recognise what it appropriate treatment of the people they believe to fall short of God's grace, and what isn't.
And when they recognise inappropriate treatment, they must speak out. Loudly and clearly.

It is time the centre made itself heard.

"Softly, softly, catchee monkey" - this old proverb from somewhere, I feel, says much about the way in which the Church works. another parody of a well-loved Hymn of the Church says it even better: "Like a mighty tortoise moves the Church of God". It has ever been so.

Two days ago, I sat amongst a phalanx of bishops, clergy and laity for the Enthronement of Bishop Victoria Matthews, a member of the W.C.G., who is committed (at this time) to the various moratoria issuing from Lambeth 2008, in the Cathedral of Christchurch, Aoteroa/New Zealand. She was right royally welcomed by the Indigenous People - after a fire alarm was raised by the unaccustomed use of incense in the Cathedral.

I think it was because of her 'middle-ground' status in the Communion that she was welcomed gladly into our local Diocess from the Anglican Church of Canada. Like most Anglican Dioceses around the world, we needed a Bishop of integrity who would act as reconciler of the two positions in the Church at this time - Liberal & Evangelical

Bringing with her, her deeply-held Anglo-Catholic spirituality, I believe that God has sent us a Bishop, +Victoria, not only to heal wounds but to proclaim the Gospel of radical Inclusivity in the Church, both at the national and the internationl level. Bishop Victoria's commitment to the Gospel could be seen in her humble prostration at the altar step before her Insallation as Diocesan Bishop. This is something radically new for us in Aoteroa/New Zealand. A thing that resonates with both Old and New Testament validity.

I could not help thinking as the Eucharistic Rite continued - and as Bishop Victoria took the Blessed Sacrament outside to people gathered in the Cathedral Square - that we who were present were all aware of the Glory of God: "My heart is inditing of a good matter".

Vivat Victoria, and Deo Gratias!

Fr. Ron, for years I believed that the leadership of the Anglican Church of Canada just didn't get it. The issue was OOW. No bishop or priest seemed able to conceive of, or perhaps didn't feel comfortable with, the idea that God might actually have a hand in it. It was all about rights, not at all about vocation. I still felt that way when I started going back to Church. The I heard +Matthews speak! She is one, at least, who gets it. You are so lucky to have her.

"We could not make religious education compulsory because that way, it can be resented. Religion is sacrosanct and we do not have to force it on people,” he stated…"

The promotion of secular Social Policies à la America and Rome are obviously OK, though ;=)

Erika wrote: “It is time the centre made itself heard.”

But Erika, what if the centre is being heard? What if callousness and not caring and not loving is the centre? What if cultural (= Gnosticist) prejudice is the centre?

What if the lesson of the last Evil Times, the 1930ies, have not been heard the way we pretend?

Göran
that is indeed a terrifying thought.

I hope and pray that you are wrong.
I have only my own personal experience to go by, and in my village decent Christians are completely involved in their local parish life. They may occasionally read the Church Times but they don't know much about the politics played in their name.
They are a mix of liberal and conservative but not extreme.
They are as little worked up about the gay debate as they are about lay presidency, and probably believe that the true hot button problems for us today are interfaith relations. poverty and the environment.
My family and I are living and worshipping among these people, and while we know that some approve of our relationship and others don't, this is not a major issue for anybody.

I agree, they are represented by Bishops who know better what is being done, but who also know that they can get away with sitting on the fence still.

But I would hope that if the battle came close to my parish, most of the parishioners would refuse to join the witchhunt. Their only "fault" is that they have yet to see the seriousness of the issues at stake for their church.

But then - I've always been an optimist.