The Lambeth Conference, that diennial display of purple that purportedly defines who is Anglican and who is not, made a promise at its 1988 gathering: to “listen pastorally to the experience of homosexual persons and … to assure them that they are loved by God…” and to “minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn the irrational fear of homosexuals…” (Lambeth 1988 1:10)
Testing whether that commitment is worth anything at all, the Anglican Communion has maintained an embarrassing silence in the face of Uganda’s impending legislation to imprison and execute homosexuals. That silence is even more stunning when you realize that the majority faith in Uganda is Anglicanism. Even though Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and Archbishop of York John Sentamu (a native Ugandan) have been implored by Amnesty International and other human rights organizations to take some action, none has been forthcoming.
I’m pretty much used to the Church (Anglican and otherwise) failing “to do justice, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with….God” (Micah 6:8), so I can’t say I’m surprised. But the Diocese of Upper South Carolina has an opportunity here. We have six candidates for Bishop, all of who have proclaimed their devotion to Lambeth’s promise and their acceptance of gay and lesbian people as full members of the Body of Christ. Will they issue an unambiguous statement, either jointly or individually, condemning the bill and calling for repentance from Ugandan church officials who support it?
4 thoughts on “The Bishops Candidates: Will They Speak Out Against Uganda?”
Perhaps someone will ask that question at the walk about(s). And perhaps those of us who won't be there will get to hear about what the members have to say. One can hope.
Karen, I intend to be at St. John's on Saturday, and if I have a chance, I'll try to ask that question for you and for all of us concerned. Thanks for caring enough to write. 🙂
Its quite informative. Thanks for such a good information.
Karen, I tried yesterday, but to no avail, I'm afraid. It felt like a stacked deck with the repeatedly bland questions that didn't address any real conflicts in depth, or make any demands for answers. 2 minutes only was allowed per q. and a. All politics, except for 1 candidate whom I won't name, but who I hope was really heard by voters. But I'm glad I went to see what really goes on at those gatherings. Thanks, tho.