I’m so glad they were quick to act in Rwanda . . . never mind

Well, at least they were quick to protect albino afrikans from the superstition that their fingers/toes/etc were full of magic properties . . . never mind again

tell me again how it is not all about the homosexual agenda

Occasionally the Executive Council may get it right.

The earlier Nigerian legislation was at least focused on gay marriage and organizations receiving government recognition. It also could plausibly be argued that the alternative would have been a harsher bill drafted by Muslim legislators.

Neither of these factors hold true in Uganda, with its Christian majority. The bill’s penal provisions go well beyond what I hope most of us would consider acceptable. When I read something like Bishop Joseph Abura’s statement, I find something uncomfortably reminiscent of Robert Mugabe’s language about the western threat to African values. Bishop Abura doesn’t seem bothered that the legislation would strike at the root of confessional and pastoral confidentiality, nor does he appear to recognize that there is at least an equivalent threat to national stability from heterosexually transmitted AIDS and the Lord’s Resistance Army. Why not call for similar penalties for fornicators and adulterers (of whom one suspects there are rather more in Uganda).

Having rightly challenged Global North conservatives to defy their culture, some Global South bishops now appear to be failing to see their own universal responsibilities to assert a different set of catholic Christian values. I’ve always had a lot of respect for Henry Orombi, but if this sort of thing occurs on his watch I am troubled. The Church has a responsibility to defend the integrity of its belief system but it also has to take some responsibility for dissenting minorities. In Africa, if it doesn’t, who will?

Catholic and Reformed

Their concern might have had some credibility had there been the slightest similar concern for the fate of homosexuals in the 47 Muslim majority countries in the world.

How fortunate we are to have a group with the high moral authority and immense respect by the entire church as the Executive Council of The Episcopal Church to be able to speak with such clarity for all of us.

I am sure we will hear what they have to say with all the esteem and respect that such a group deserves, and indeed they will be able to guide our opinions impeccably and influence public opinion as they deserve.

I am quite sure that the might of the Executive Council will call in their markers for all those chicken dinners that they plied upon those backwards Africans. After all it is THE Episcopal Church….
Intercessor

Though I’m generally minded to oppose anything TEC’s Executive Council advocates, in this case I agree that this proposed legislation amounts to an abrogation of basic human rights which is unconscionable. In general, no one can choose to be attracted to someone or not. However, it would be hard to deny that TEC exists of, by, and for women and LGBT people, with a tiny smattering of men of color included within the charmed circle, as well.

Like Sarah and Intercessor (although I expect for very different reasons) I question how much impact a statement from the Executive Council of TEC will have in this context.  On the other hand, it would be indefensible for Christians not to speak clearly against this kind of legislation, wherever it is being contemplated.  Bishop Abura’s statement in the link from Jeremy is appalling.  I would hope that any Anglican group in the United States with ties to the Church in Uganda would vehemently and openly voice their disagreement with his support for the measure.

Senior Priest, “In general, no one can choose to be attracted to someone or not.”  But are people automatons who must act on every “attraction”?  The proposed laws in Uganda would not punish a person for their being “attracted”, but only for acting on the attraction in a reprehensible way.
Generally speaking, most of us are a bit too willing to put our collective noses into other people’s business and would do better and live holier lives by thoughtfully minding our own.  Frances Scott

The Polity! What about the polity!

I note that the CoU is coterminus with its government just as the ECUSA/TEC is with its government and that what one does the other necessarily approves 100% absolutely forthwith and that this has been the case since the inception of this country and undoubtedly Uganda as well.  When a Province meets a Province a’coming through the rye…

Churches don’t need to be established to exert considerable influence in Africa; plenty of Global South scholars have documented that. The Church of Uganda today has far more influence, I suspect, than did the Episcopal Church in its heyday.

Of course you pick your battles and exert your influence behind closed doors, but sometimes the taking of unpopular stands needs to be public. Being counter-cultural in the Global North involves one set of testimonies and in the Global South another, but the ultimate values asserted are the same.