Thoughts on reading the paper.

I was leafing my way through my beloved London Times snoozepaper (OK, I know it's owned by the Dirty Digger, but better that than the Pornmeister in Chief of the Daily Excess!) when I began to chew over their comments on the introduction of the Same Sex Marriage Legislation in the Holyrood Palais de Comedie. 

 

They first posit that Our Glorious Leader, Chairman Eck risks "infuriating the Churches" with this.  Well, he'll certainly annoy the RC hierarchy in Scotland - all 3 of them currently in office and not sick, retired very smartly at 75 or currently off praying in a monastic institution somewhere in Europe.  Aberdeen, Argyll and Glasgow are the only 3 sees operating on full power at the moment.  Given that an awful lot of laity seem to ignore Catholic teaching on contraception, I suspect most ain't too bothered about what LGBT's do re marriage.  Will he annoy the Kirk or only the 10 congregations talking of leaving out of a total of 1400?  OK, he'll really annoy the Wee Frees.  But then again, nearly everyone seems to do that.  And the Piskies? We're really difficult to annoy.  And we're playing moderate to canny in public.  Officially we seem to say that Canon law does not permit SSM's to be celebrated in Church.  Which is true.  It also glosses over the fact that it is fairly easy to change Canon Law and we could fairly quickly reposition ourselves in the event of the Civil Law changing.

 

The commentary by a former editor of the Scotsman slightly baffled me.  "In the modern era it has long been accepted that gay couples have the same civil rights as heterosexuals when it comes to forming partnerships".  Really?  Assuming the modern era started in 1960 (when sex was first discovered by the general public), then it was 1967 when making love ceased to be a jail sentence if you were a male aged over 21 and some 30 years later when the age of consent was finally equalised.  In Scotland, male homosexual acts (or bonking as we used to call it) even in private between consenting adults were totally illegal until 1981 (1982 in Northern Ireland).  The age of consent only equalised in 2001.  In 1990 I wrote a paper with 2 colleagues arguing for the legal recognition of Same Sex Relationships at the request of the then Convener of the Scottish Young Liberal Democrats. I was the Vice Convener (no pun intended).  Willie is now the Supreme Leader of the Scottish Lib Dems (I had a coffee with him at Holyrood a wee while ago).  One of my co-authors is now dead and the other is happily Civilly Partnered to the Chief Exec of Manchester Pride!  The fact that we were still having to argue for legal recognition of any form in 1990 - a mere 23 years ago suggests that LGBT couples have only been seen as having the same civil rights as the rest of the populace  for a very short period of time by a good many people. Civil partnerships are less than 10 years old.

 

The fact is we've come a very long way in a relatively short period of time.  It can feel that the current climate of relatively positive attitudes towards LGBT people has been there forever.  It hasn't.  Indeed, in may less enlightened and socially progressive corners it is still a long way off.  But I suspect the momentum that has now built up is irresistible and the opposition of the least progressive elements of the Churches will in due course be overcome.  After all, some bits of the Church were very slow to follow Wilberforce on abolishing slavery.  But we all now celebrate him as a hero.

Uganda and Martyrdom

James Hannington and the Martyrs of Uganda
29 October 1885

Among the nations of Africa, Uganda is the most predominantly Christian. Mission work began there in the 1870's with the favor of King Mutesa, who died in 1884. However, his successor, King Mwanga, opposed all foreign presence, including the missions.

James Hannington was sent out from England in 1884 by the Anglican Church as missionary Bishop of Eastern Equatorial Africa. He was apprehended by emissaries of King Mwanga. He and his companions were brutally treated and, a week later, 29 October 1885, most of them were put to death. Hannington's last words were: "Go tell your master that I have purchased the road to Uganda with my blood."

The first native martyr was the R C Joseph Mkasa Balikuddembe, who was beheaded after having rebuked the king for his debauchery and the murder of Bishop Hannington. On 3 June 1886, a group of 32 men and boys, 22 Roman Catholic and 10 Anglican, were burned at the stake. Most of them were young pages in Mwanga's household, from their head-man, Charles Lwanga, to the thirteen-year-old Kizito, who went to his death "laughing and chattering." These and many other Ugandan Christians suffered for their faith then and in the next few years.

In 1977, the Anglican Archbishop Janani Luwum and many other Christians suffered death for their faith under the tyrant Idi Amin.

Thanks largely to their common heritage of suffering for their Master, Christians of various communions in Uganda have always been on excellent terms.

written by James Kiefer

Prayer

O God, whose blessed martyrs in Uganda

opened in the heart of Africa

the new and living way

of your Son our Saviour Jesus Christ:

Grant us, who cherish their remembrance before thee this day,

to remain steadfast in our faith in him,

to whom they gave obedience unto death;

even the same Jesus Christ your Son our Lord,

who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit,

one God, now and for ever. Amen.

I really do feel for Uganda, the one part of Africa I have visited. It is a beautiful, rich and fertile land with wonderful people. It has also suffered terribly in the past and is doing OK now. But it is not a good or a safe place if you are gay or thought to be gay. Indeed, the Government seem to be hell bent (a phrase I use quite deliberately) on passing a law allowing the death penalty for "aggressive homosexuality". And a 3 year jail term if you do not inform the authorities if you know someone is gay or working for LGBT rights. And in this, the most Christian country in Africa, the Church is devastatingly silent. It appals me that the Church of Uganda, so swift to call for compliance with the Lambeth 98 Resolution on certain matters like moratoria, is so quick to ignore the bit of Lambeth 1:10 that condemned violence against LGBT people. And just why has the Anglican Patriarch of Canterbury so stunningly silent on this? It would be an ideal chance to remind African Anglicans that 1:10 has more than one bit. Believing something is immoral and preaching against it is one thing (arguably legitimate for a start) but supporting (even by silence) a law that is actually far far more explicitly vicious than those of Nazi Germany quite another. Dammit, if they replaced the word Gay with Jewish, all hell would break loose internationally. But no, silence reigns.

God bless Africa.

And save her from herself.

PS Go and read this if you think I'm exaggerating

http://gayuganda.blogspot.com/2009/10/christian.html

and this from a more objective standpoint

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2009/10/28/ugandas_do_ask_do_tell?page=0,0

But this says it rather more pithily than my musings:

http://web.me.com/pwhalon/Bp_Pierre_Site/Blog/Entr%C3%A9es/2009/10/29_What_would_Bishop_Hannington_say.html