I'm sorry but I just laughed out loud when I read this, especially the clinching argument about Sodom and Gomorrah. For sheer ignorance it just about takes the biscuit.

What a sad testimony, to bring our faith so low by qualifying it in such terms.
And what of this?
"(vi). We also wish to make it quite clear that in our discussion and assessment of the moral appropriateness of specific human behaviours, we continue unreservedly to be committed to the pastoral support and care of homosexual people. The victimisation or diminishment of human beings whose affections happen to be ordered towards people of the same sex is anathema to us. We assure homosexual people that they are children of God, loved and valued by him, and deserving of the best we can give of pastoral care and friendship."
Dromantine Communique (Feb 2005)

Good heavens - it really is an idee fixe with the Nigerian Church!

"The Church in the West had vowed to use their money to spread the homosexual lifestyle in African societies and Churches; after all Africa is poor. They are pursuing this agenda vigorously and what is more, they now have the support of the United Nations."

- Archbishop Okoh, Primate of Nigeria -

This is just further evidence of the unbalanced theological stance of Abp. Okoh - on matters about which he clearly has little understanding.
His insistence that there is some kind of liberal 'funding' for the 'spread of homosexual teaching' in the continent of Africa is nothing less than risible, and a clear misunderstanding of the real situation.

While such prelates exists within the Anglican Communion, there can be little hope of any sort of rational discussion of the important issues of geneder and sexuality. Human development is one of the subjects that some of the African Anglican Provinces have yet to come to terms with, and until that happens, there will be no progress in any coherent understanding of sexuality as one of God's gifts to all people - regardless of their cultural, societal and religious background.

Thank God the Province of South Africa was led and brought into the modern world by the wisdom and insight of people such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu and it's present Archbishop in Capetown. Theological Education on the place of gender and sexuality in creation is sorely needed in other African contexts and settings.

Since all the clergy are to be educated within the ( presumably safe ) confines of the Crowther Graduate Theological Seminary in Abeokuta things seem unlikely to change.it would be interesting to know what the ordinands are taught? not much biblical criticism one fears.

"the invading army of homosexuality"
If this were not so vicious and horrible, it would be funny. "Onward Homo Soldiers, marching as to war..."

"The Church in the West had vowed to use their money to spread the homosexual lifestyle in African societies and Churches"

Actually, of course, many TEC dioceses have companion ministry relationships with African dioceses, working for potable water, food, medicine, giving out masquito nets etc., whereas the antigay money pours forth from Scaife et alia.

But hey, who needs facts when you can make up your own?

Waiting, as usual, for any word from Lambeth.

I guess Martyn Minns stopped writing the speeches for the Primate of all Nigeria

And 'Canterbury' has his just reward in the contempt shown to him by those whom he has spent so long trying to placate...

This so called 'Bishop' is the one beyond all human understanding, and the enemy of Christs Gospel. It is laughable if it were not for the fact that many families, and young people believe his words, and become bound in those very chains that Christ woulod release us from. Pray for the people, and pray they may hear the true Gospel, and their children be free to rejoice in the many varied ways God has created us.

Fr John (SCOTLAND)

I, an American Anglican, considered myself a moderate in the matters of the Great Anglican Divorce for a long time. Comments like this, however, have completely obliterated any desire to "make a deal" with the conservative Provinces. While the ECUSA is often condemned, especially by +Canterbury, for failing to work with the Communion, I rather think the Communion has completely failed to offer us any compelling reason to deal.

Lovely chap isn't he!!!

It seems that any association with the Church in Nigeria and other GAFCON churches will interfere with the Church of England’s efforts to spread the Gospel at home. Therefore, for the sake of protecting the credibility of the C of E (& other Anglican provinces), the Archbishop of Canterbury must publicly dissociate from churches that are pretending to represent the true version of Anglicanism. Of course, he will not do this, which is a pity. He is allowing provinces such as Nigeria to run amok with a revised and distorted definition of Anglicanism.

"Since all the clergy are to be educated within the ( presumably safe ) confines of the Crowther Graduate Theological Seminary in Abeokuta things seem unlikely to change.it would be interesting to know what the ordinands are taught? not much biblical criticism one fears."

I presume some of our homegrown clergy train there too.

I was away for a couple of weeks "on holiday" with my partner and her family enjoying God's Creation in Western Colorado, and came back just in time for Abp. Okoh.
With no apologies whatsoever, Abp., the "sin" of homosexuality, it must be reemphasised, is NOT what destroyed the communities of Sodom and Gomorrah. A very long rabbinical tradition of exigesis, I believe supported by many Christian theologians, is that inhospitality and cruel treatment of the strangers in their midst is what condemned Sodom and Gomorrah.
But why let the real traditions of two faiths interfere with inhospitality towards the stranger you don't like?

"The Church in the West had vowed to use their money to spread the homosexual lifestyle in African societies and Churches"

What can one say of (much less, *to*) a man so disconnected from reality?

Someone (obviously not TEC) needs to spread the "lifestyle" of SANITY to Archbishop Okoh!

No, Michael there is a wide belief at Lambeth that Archbishops Okoh and Orombi are extremists, but these people also think TEC and New Westminster are out on a limb.

Remember Nigeria and Uganda were the leaders of the Lambeth Conference boycott, both have disparaged the leadership of Rowan Williams and attacked the CofE, Orombi has turned up his nose at the ACC and the Joint Standing Committee - both have criticised the outcomes of Primates Meetings. The thinking of Lambeth Palace apparatchiks is that the power struggle is between these extremes and their supporters, so their tactics have been to try and bring all to heel, to reduce their influence with supporters - create a firm "centre" always accepting that they would be willing to loose the cash from TEC and the numbers from Nigeria and Uganda if the would not comply and they could be isolated enough to allow them to effectively cut themselves off.

So I think that there are those who might say that Williams has allowed TEC etc to "run Amok" with "distorted Anglicanism", this is the problem we are all facing.

Of course the analysis was wrong (in large part) and the Lambeth Commission just the start of a disastrous series of mistakes from there on ..... we are all now suffering the consequences.

Clearly this new Nigerian Anglican leader will tow the party line, funded and shaped by the far religious right in USA policy and money streams. He commits the key sin of Sodom-Gomorrah in his hostile lack of hospitality, no doubt wishing to hunt out the visiting strangers whom he otherwise claims not to know at all. Queer folks are substitute scapegoats in this uneasy scenario.

I cannot take at all seriously his facile, rote ascription of deep dangers (per his Nigerian mythology about queer folks) and real modern queer life - as if suddenly anybody, anybody at all, can inadvertently find themselves involved sexually by happenstance as it were, with a same sex life partner? We all know the violence the archbishop has self-righteously prepared for queer folks as targets.

Next, we are supposed to reinterpret his border crossings as heartfelt concern to save USA far right folks from the horrid-liberal workings of TEC. As if. Has Nigeria no real scholars, no thinking pilgrims left?

Alas, Lord have mercy. Flat earthisms, start to finish. I'd assign the new archbishop to shadow PB KJS for six months, minimum. No back talk, just lots of daily note taking to make sure details are recalled, and debriefing with nearly any combination of Bible scholars and social scientists from any of our top twenty university faculties. Minns and the far USA religious right, excluded from the debriefing team; we already know what their views mistake so proudly about any number of Anglican hot buttons. Then, similarly, I'd ask him to shadow in similar fashion - six months again - either Bishop Glasspool in Los Angeles or Bishop Robinson in New Hampshire. Those debriefing teams would have to include two lay leaders from the diocese discernment processes.

Then. Revisit this whole flat earthed Sodom and Gomorrah business. Bad Bible scholarship makes for very bad sermons. Alas, Lord have mercy.

Abp Okoh said, "including speaking out against the invading army of homosexuality, lesbianism and bisexual lifestyle under any guise."

But our army isn't (yet) allowed to knowingly have known gay soldiers!

We should remember this if Nigeria ever needs UN assistance with their own blossoming regional conflicts . . .

Frankly, I hope the Archbishop holds many more similar press conferences in the future. I hope he loudly rails against the evil, queer-enabling UN being in cahoots with the West to threaten the precious bodily fluids of Nigerian youth. And I hope he gets lots and lots of press coverage abroad for it. Nothing - absolutely nothing - is better PR for the Gay Agenda than the sincere, honest, hateful, crazy ravings of its opponents.

On the subject of boundary crossings he is (as CoN always has) admitting and proudly embracing the truth -- that CoN has and is doing them.

Is he saying that Kearon has been in touch to double check?

"Crowther Graduate Theological Seminary in Abeokuta"

I tried to find a web page for this place via Google and another search - only found a few references in speeach by Akinola and something else tangential.

Selective acceptance of authority - never!

How will he ever sign up to a covenant??

"Revisit this whole flat earthed Sodom and Gomorrah business. Bad Bible scholarship makes for very bad sermons. Alas, Lord have mercy."

Please re-read Jude 7. And may the Lord have mercy on *you*.

Dan,

Are you saying that we should listen to Jude about Sodom and Gomorrah over modern scholars? That Jude, one of the twelve apostles hand picked by Jesus after praying all night, whose mind was opened by Jesus himself to understand the scriptures at Jesus' resurrection and who was empowered by God the Holy Spirit to preach to the world and martyred for it was actually right? Really? But surely the liberal revisionist scholars in the thriving and healthy western part of the Anglican Communion know better now. I mean, just look at the fruit of their teachings... at how many souls they have saved... at the growth... at the healing... at so many lives transformed... at well, never mind.

Gee, okay, Thanks for asking.

As it happens I have read Jude, in parts and in whole, along with the rest of the NT and OT literatures. Jude is even more years removed from the original events than the direct citations in the OT story (written fairly long afterwards, but not so long afterwards as Jude?) - so, Jude read as long-removed from the original; and rehearsing what most scholars agree was one of the going beliefs of the day (now long removed from us, critically and culturally?) ... about angels, strange flesh, and so forth.

I prefer looking a bit closer-critically and more widely-comparatively across all the other relevant bits; and I more or less choose to bank on the OT Prophets, where we are clearly told that the great sin of Sodom was cruelty, exploitation of those nearly archetypcal ancient near eastern widows and orphans and strangers - folks without proper male tribal headship that had an ice cube's chance in the tropics of giving them protection from a generically hostile and cheerless society (countryside, and city);and a facile self-serving violation of the great ancient near eastern covenants against violence and life-threatening inhospitable-ness. Refusing shelter in your home and the tribal safety-protection that went with it could literally take the life of a stranger in those days, around thereabouts, ancient near eastern.

I stand simply by my reading that the archbishop is seeking pretty much to do to the queer folks he so fears and mistakes and despises, just about what the unruly men of Sodom who surrounded Lot's protecting house were intending towards the visiting angels. That is, the archbishop deeply intends to assault and violate them, period. Or so his repeated threats, along with his flat earthism clearly communicate.

Also, the scholars I've taken to heart urge us to read the S-G story in context with similar OT passages where a striking parallel violation of the concubine is committed, albeit in what most of us would read as a heterosexualized ancient near eastern tribal context.

Bank all your reading on Jude if you like; hopefully in great, good conscience. I will still advise holding you simply responsible for any Okoh-like violence and error you say is authorized by Jude or something else from scripture and tradition.

In any case, your sincere example simply underlines and highlights the other responsible alternatives in reading, in understanding, these hot button issues, scripturally.

There are no British asylum seekers in Nigeria
( rather than the other way around) because it is such an awful place. The Church of 12 million Anglicans ( alleged numbers) has no effect on that nation at all.

As long ago as 1955 Dr Sherwin Bailey showed that the sin of Sodom was inhospitality, something my (ordained) RE teacher told us when I was at Grammar School in the 1960s. I would love to know that my stewardship giving was being used to spread the homosexual lifestyle in African societies and Churches. Perhaps my diocesan authorities know something I don't?

Dr Dan has spoken the Truth! A Gnosticist writ, one of the youngest of the New Testament. Late 2nd century.

Jude 7 does indeed accuse the people of Sodom and Gomorrah of 'going after strange flesh' - humans seeking sex with angels, an echo perhaps of the passage in Genesis 6 about the 'sons of God' marrying 'daughters of men', just before the flood. But I would assume that this is unlikely to be less of a temptation to present-day Christians than inhospitality, and that the Gospel references to Sodom in the context of rejection of Jesus' followers - unfamiliar people offering new truths, see Matthew 10, Mark 6, Luke 10.

Anyone up for starting a "homosexual army?"

"at how many souls they have saved"

That's funny - I was under the impression that only Jesus Christ could save one's soul, and that the idea that it's something that people do to other people was pretty unAnglican.

The idea goes back to the prophet Ezekiel, who says "Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy."

Sorry, I should have written 'likely' rather than 'unlikely'. Ezekiel is indeed also relevant in a world of great inequality.

Savi H is correct. Jude says nothing about same-sex relationships except in inaccurate translations. The "strange flesh" is that of angels, not men. Jude was drawing on the Enoch / Jubilees / Testaments of the Patriarchs language that makes the link to the "Watchers" explicit. Interestingly enough, the Greek word translated in the KJV as "strange" is "heteros"! What it at issue is heterocarnality, at least according to Jude.

Yes, Counterlight, I want to sign up ..... But there will be an awful tussle for the Chaplains job!

"Jude 7 does indeed accuse the people of Sodom and Gomorrah of 'going after strange flesh' - humans seeking sex with angels, an echo perhaps of the passage in Genesis 6 about the 'sons of God' marrying 'daughters of men', just before the flood."

Or maybe a reference to the fact that Lot's neighbors wanted to rape the angels. It's not the gender of the intended victim that's involved here, but their being strange, in a couple of senses of the word - they're strangers (to whom is owed hospitality) and they're not human.

Rob + wrote "Jude, one of the twelve apostles hand picked by Jesus after praying all night"

That letter is written by Jude the Apostle is improbable. Brevard Childs writes "..the pendulum has clearly swung in the direction of those who view the letter as post-apostolic and pseudepigraphical. Indeed, the large majority of Catholic scholars (Schelke, Knoch, Vogtle) now support this latter position which was once defended by radical protestant. Still the interpretation of the letter is far from settled by the decision regarding its authorship and dating." (B. Childs. The New Testament as Canon An Introduction. p. 489-90) One may applaud Jude's defense against heresy, but such does not require accepting his interpretation of Sodom and Gomorrah--especially since he is (a) not an apostolic witness and (b) his interpretation of Sodom and Gomorah has nothing to do with a witness to the the ministry of Jesus (see Raymond Brown. "The Birth of the Messiah" Appendix VII p. 562 [see also footnote 11 same citation])