What use is the Archbishop of Cantebury?

Ruth Gledhill, whose column usually has me wanting to fling shoes at her head* has managed to squeeze a quote on the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality legislation out of Lambeth Palace.

Said quote:

Today, Lambeth Palace told me: ‘It has been made clear to us, as indeed to others, that attempts to publicly influence either the local church or political opinion in Uganda would be divisive and counter productive. Our contacts, at both national and diocesan level, with the local church will therefore remain intensive but private.’

Ruth goes on to add,

In fact, we can take for granted that Dr Williams is against the draconian new law. But speaking out publicly to this effect could indeed, as he says, have the opposite effect to that intended. It would almost certainly be seen as white-led colonialism of the worst possible kind, as a misguided attempt to impose western liberal values upon traditional African culture.

And I? Am calling bullshit on the ABC.

Brother-man thinks it’s okay to meddle in The Episcopal Church and try and impose his Old World Old School values on this former colony and our increasingly brown church**, but he’s afraid boo hoo scaredy-pants of being called a colonial for saying “Don’t be a dick and murder people” to Ugandans? Especially when there’s oodles and oodles of evidence this legislation is being backed by white men in suits handing out money and grabbing for power, ecclesiastical and political?

Bullshit. You’re useless, ++Rowan. Get us a primate with a pair in here, yo.

Oh, why hello there, ++Katharine!

The Episcopal Church joins many other Christians and people of faith in urging the safeguarding of human rights everywhere. We do so in the understanding that “efforts to criminalize homosexual behavior are incompatible with the Gospel of Jesus Christ” (General Convention 2006, Resolution D005). […]The Episcopal Church represents multiple and varied cultural contexts (the United States and 15 other nations), and as a Church we affirm that the public scapegoating of any category of persons, in any context, is anathema. We are deeply concerned about the potential impingement on basic human rights represented by the private member’s bill in the Ugandan Parliament.

Many thanks to Fr. Jake for the heads-up.

*What? That’s pretty much the definition of Anglicanism, isn’t it? “Where two or more argue passionately and angrily in the parish hall but line up for the Eucharist next to each other in the Sanctuary”

**As the cat macros would say, I’m in your church, reducing the average age in the pew and ethnic-ing y’all on up in here.


1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

One response to “What use is the Archbishop of Cantebury?