The View From Lagos
by Matthews A. Ojo
A few hours after Gene Robinson was consecrated as an
Episcopal bishop in New Hampshire November 2, Peter Akinola, the archbishop
and primate of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), called the
consecration unacceptable and declared that an overwhelming majority of the
primates in the Global South would not recognize Robinson’s office or his
ministry. This was, Akinola said, the beginning of a “state of impaired
communion” in the church worldwide.
On November 6, The Punch and the Guardian,
two of Lagos’ largest newspapers, gave front page coverage to Akinola’s
announcement that the Nigerian Anglican church had severed its relationship
with its United States counterpart over the issue. The Nigerian press, which
had been following the events keenly, also gave prominent coverage to what
other leading Nigerian Christians had to say on the subject.
On November 5, for example, the Lagos newspaper This
Day reported that the Rev. Nathan Nwachukwu, a Baptist leader in
Northern Nigeria, had lauded the Nigerian Anglican church for taking so
strong a stand against the ordination of homosexuals into the Christian
ministry. Similar statements were reported from John Onaiyekan, the Catholic
archbishop of Abuja, and Sunday Ola-Makinde, Abuja’s Methodist archbishop.
Ola-Makinde threatened that the African church would boycott the World
Council of Churches if a gay priest or bishop were ever found in attendance.
Religion is hardly a new focus of attention for
the Nigerian press. As I noted in these pages in 1999 (“In Lagos, Religion’s
Above the Fold,” http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RINVol2No2/Lagos.htm),
religion news moved into the forefront of press coverage between 1977 and
1979, following a great debate about the inclusion of Sharia (Islamic
law) in the country’s new constitution. Thereafter, the religious conflicts
of the 1980s and their socio-political implications in a pluralistic society
kept religion on the front pages. By the 1990s, in response to religious
revivalism in Nigerian society, many papers had begun publishing full-length
sermons by various religious leaders on a regular basis.
For the Nigerian press the story of
homosexuality and the Anglican Communion began at the 1998 Lambeth
Conference, at which the African bishops emerged as the most prominent
opponents of any form of approval of homosexual practice by the church. In
the process, they drew attention to the importance of African Christians
within World Christianity.
In contrast to the stagnation and decline of
Anglican membership in the West, the greatest growth in the Communion has
been in Africa, and especially in Nigeria, where the number of Anglicans has
grown from less than half a million at the beginning of the 20th century to
17 million today. In the past two decades, the Nigerian church has witnessed
remarkable institutional growth, with the number of its dioceses rising from
26 in the 1980s to 61 in 1998, 78 in 2002, and 80 in 2003.
Indeed, the 1998 resolution on human sexuality
was very much seen as a victory for the African church. From its standpoint,
this was the first time in over a century of Lambeth conferences that the
voice of African Anglicans had been heard and taken into account in reaching
a crucial decision in the life of the church.
No Nigerian publication has covered the
homosexuality story more closely than the Guardian, which is owned by
Alex Ibru, himself a prominent Anglican layman. Between June and September
the Guardian published more than 40 items on the subject, including
front page stories and multi-page take-outs. On June 21, for example, the
newspaper devoted six full pages to homosexuality and the church, featuring
the views of bishops from other parts of the world who have spoken against
homosexual practice.
On June 1, The Guardian first reported
that primates of the Anglican Communion meeting in Gramado, Brazil,
denounced the church’s involvement in gay marriages. This was seen as an
attempt to prevent the liberal bishop of New Westminster in Canada from
conducting same-sex marriages. When New Westminster went ahead and ratified
a same-sex liturgy, the Guardian and The Punch prominently
covered the Nigerian church’s decision to sever relations with the diocese
on the grounds of its noncompliance with the Lambeth resolution.
On June 15, after Jeffrey John, an openly gay
cleric, was nominated to the bishopric of Reading, England, the Guardian
reported Akinola’s statement that the nomination was “barbaric and not in
line with the natural law of creation.” (Under pressure from the archbishop
of Canterbury, John subsequently declined to accept the appointment.)
In two issues in July and August, the
Guardian outlined the Nigerian church’s grounds for attacking same-sex
marriages and the appointment of gay priests as bishops. Summarized, these
were:
1. That the Church of Nigeria (Anglican
Communion)’s adherence to the scriptures from an evangelical perspective is
nonnegotiable.
2. That homosexuality and homosexual practice
from the scriptural perspective is sinful and condemnable. (“While arguments
in the West for decriminalizing homosexuality is supposedly based on
Science, we would want to base our position on scriptures, which for us is
definitive and primary.”)
3. That the Nigerian church is not championing
an insignificant minority view created from cultural biases but the view of
a majority that has been held unceasingly for centuries by the church.
Hence, it is unkind to accuse the leaders of the Nigerian Anglicans as
suffering from homophobia.
4. That a satanic, secularist, materialistic,
self-centered spirit was behind the acceptance of homosexual practice and
its promotion by certain Western Christians.
5. That the church accepts and will minister to
homosexuals, if they see themselves as having fallen short of biblical and
Christian standards and seek repentance.
6. That the Nigerian church considers the issue
as very important and the acceptance of homosexual practice either as good
or tolerable can lead to a split in the church.
7. That the current homosexual debate is an
attack on the church, which if not strongly resisted will pollute the church
and weaken its power to preach the Gospel to a permissive society.
8. That marriage as instituted in the
scriptures is between a man and a woman. Anything besides this is a
perversion of God’s instruction and an assault on the sovereignty of God.
On August 10, the Guardian ran a statement from
the Nigerian Anglican House of Bishops that sought to convince the public
that several biblical verses condemned homosexual practice as a sin. To
strengthen this position, the newspaper published in full an article by Rev.
Dr. S. G. W. Andrews, the president and provost of Thorneloe University, an
Anglican institution in Sudbury, Ontario, arguing that the New Testament
condemns homosexual practice.
While The Punch made a show of neutrality, the
Guardian did not try to hide its support for the position of the
Nigerian church. Typical headlines were: “The Church is Under Satanic
Attack, Says Akinola,” “Gay Bishop: Nigerian Church Condemns Robinson’s
Confirmation,” “Nigerian Anglicans Battle Williams Over Gay Bishops.” On
June 15, the paper called the latest pro-gay ecclesiastical events in the
United States and Canada “strange developments.” Affirmation of same-sex
marriages in Canada and Robinson’s appointment as bishop were “a Satanic
attack on God’s church.”
All along, the Guardian has served as Akinola’s
mouthpiece, regularly quoting the archbishop’s denunciations of
pro-homosexual words and deeds. In September, after Archbishop Winston
Njongonkulu Ndungane of Cape Town criticized Akinola and his fellow Anglican
bishops for being intolerant, arrogant, and hypocritical, Akinola replied
that Ndungane was ignorant of all the issues at stake. This reaction was
mild compared to what Akinola had said in 1998 in response to a pre-Lambeth
Conference report on human sexuality that Ndungane had written. As reported
in the Guardian June 12, 1998, Akinola at that time called Ndungane
“a misfit, a wolf in shepherd’s clothing and one of the end-time agents of
the devil sent to lead astray those who would have believed in God.”
The Nigerian press reported the outcome of the special
Lambeth summit of October 16-17 as a partial victory for the hard-line
conservative position of the Nigerians. Under the headline “Anglican leaders
at Lambeth, regret gay bishop’s election,” the Guardian on October 17
reported that while liberals favored the acceptance of homosexuals fully
into the church, conservatives like Akinola of Nigeria were quoted as saying
that there “could be no compromise over homosexuality because ‘it is clearly
outlawed by the Bible.’”
The Monitor on Sunday of October 19 gave front
page coverage to the news and suggested that the church might break up over
Robinson’s ordination. The 12 months the primates gave themselves as
“thinking time” to find a lasting solution was seen as a way out of trying
to coax Robinson and the New Hampshire diocese to change their minds.
After the Lambeth summit, the Sunday Vanguard
reported prominently a press conference held by Tunde Adeleye, the Anglican
bishop of Calabar, to make clear that the Nigerian church would never ordain
homosexuals, who (according to the Sunday Vanguard) he said “were
worse than animals in the forest.” The Guardian reported that Adeleye
called homosexual behavior “devilish and satanic…. It comes directly from
the pit of hell. It is an idea sponsored by Satan himself and being executed
by his followers and adherents who have infiltrated the church.”
In order to understand the intensity of the
Nigerian reaction a number of circumstances need to be taken into account.
The position of Nigerian Anglicans has been
informed by the ongoing evangelical and Pentecostal revival within Nigeria,
which has roots in a number of evangelical parachurch groups previously
connected to the Anglican church. This revival includes a strong pietistic
strain, particularly on the part of the Evangelical Fellowship in the
Anglican Church (EFAC), a revivalist group that has been in the forefront of
promoting a conservative evangelical agenda for some years.
As a corollary, the burgeoning indigenous
Pentecostal churches in Nigeria had regularly recruited their membership
from the fold of nominal Anglicans, thus challenging the Anglican and other
mainline Protestant churches to a regeneration of spirituality. Without a
doubt, the Anglican church in Nigeria cannot adopt any different position
from the general pietistic orientation of contemporary Nigerian Christianity
if it is going to survive. Bishop Tunde Adeleye of Calabar clearly had this
in mind when, in an October 19 interview in the Guardian, he
cautioned other Nigerian Christians not to ridicule the Nigerian Anglican
Church because of what was going on in the Anglican Communion’s provinces in
the West.
Peter Akinola is himself a conservative
evangelical who spent much of his ministerial life in northern Nigeria,
where conservative Muslim opposition to the church has been strong, and
where many Christian leaders have been tested by religious persecution.
Akinola’s leadership in the current controversy should be seen as part of
his struggle to ensure the survival of the church in a hostile environment.
On top of this, homosexual behavior is strongly
condemned in many African societies, and particularly in the Yoruba society,
Akinola’s ethnic group. And despite the intrusion of Western values, this
traditional cultural view strongly persists among Christians and
non-Christians in African society. As Bishop Peter Adebiyi of Lagos West put
it in an interview with The Punch in July, “Homosexuality is alien to
the African culture.” The Nigerian Anglican Church is thus on solid ground
when it claims that the normative Nigerian cultural view on human sexuality
is that of a man and woman entering into sexual activity through
heterosexual marriage.
Finally, one should not underestimate the
desire of a very vibrant African church—one that has (contrary to some
reports in the Western press) for a long time been largely independent of
financial support from the West—to play a leading role. This is not simply a
matter of demographic strength. There are now many Nigerian Anglican bishops
who are scholars and theologians, some of them with training in Western
institutions, who are in a position to challenge Western liberal
traditions.
It is important to note that none of the
Nigerian papers ever considered the pro-homosexual positions. To be sure, on
July 27, the Guardian published a photograph of a demonstration
organized by gay and lesbian activists at a Church of England General Synod
held in York, noting that the protesters denounced the archbishop of
Canterbury for capitulating to Nigeria in withdrawing Jeffrey John’s
appointment as bishop of Reading. As far as the Guardian was
concerned, the capitulation of the archbishop was a victory for Nigeria.
Although this was a situation that originated
in the West, the Nigerian press portrayed the outcome as having wider
implication for the life of the church in Nigeria. There are two issues at
stake.
First, many African Christians are convinced
that the Western liberal position is an attempt to redefine what
Christianity actually is and to reinterpret Christian moral values in order
to make them compatible with the values of a permissive society. Secondly,
the major concern of the church in Africa is how to sustain its growth
through evangelism, missions, and the healing ministry that focuses on the
daily needs of millions of Africans. The debate on sexuality, therefore,
seems to be a diversion from these pressing needs.
In contemporary Nigeria, the Christian life is
often conceptualized as a ceaseless battle with the devil and his agents,
the demons. Equally, the Christian life is conceived and portrayed as a
source of great power, not only for overcoming demons but also for
subverting the entire kingdom of dark forces and their social
manifestations. The literal demonization of Western sanctioning of
homosexual relations is thus a familiar call to Nigerian Anglicans to
prepare their “prayer missiles” against an “enemy.” The Nigerian church has
triumphed in such previous battles, and it is unlikely that it will lose the
present one.
From the Nigerian media’s perspective, the
African church was standing on high moral ground, while the Western church
was morally bankrupt. In a global context, it became imperative for the
African church to lead the way to a moral recovery within Christianity and
in the world at large.
|