This diocese has a companion link with a diocese in Rwanda. Last night we had a visit from Meg Guillebaud a CMS Mission Partner from the diocese in question who came and gave an excellent presentation about life in that country.
Over the last few years, I’ve met quite a few people connected with Rwanda – students studying aquaculture, aid workers, people studying Rwanda itself and those involved in Christian mission activity. They tell the most extraordinary stories. They tell of things that happened during the genocide which chill the blood. They also often tell of more hopeful examples of reconcilliation. Talk to someone from Rwanda and you often seem to hear of the best and the very worst of what it is to be a human being.
The more you hear, the more sympathy for the country you tend to have. As I’ve learnt about Rwanda, I’ve certainly found my sympathies growing. At the same time, I’ve learnt about the Anglican Church of Rwanda and I find increasingly my sympathies for that church evaporating.
Last week, we saw a further move from the Rwandan Archbishop to promote schism in the church. (It is important to recognise that the Gafcon movement is a schism within a schism – it is primarily a break away movement not from the Anglican Communion but from the Global South). The ugly words of the schism leaders are the ugly words of the Anglican Church of Rwanda. They are a reminder that almost half of the bishops of the Rwandan Church are now white Americans working in America to split the Church.
The news that our companion bishop from Rwanda was in Jerusalem for the Gafcon (ie alternative Lambeth) Conference (for which we are indebted to Gadgetvicar) turned my stomach.
In St Mary’s we are increasingly asking people to think about how they spend their money. That means thinking about fair trading practises. It means thinking about the environment when shopping. We recognise that what we do with our money is to express our values.
I find that I don’t much want to invest money in anything involving the Anglican Church in Rwanda any more. I’m happy to pray with them, share friendship with them, share bread and wine with them and all that. When in comes to money though, my money has more than just financial value attached to it. If I feel inspired by the stories of Rwanda to invest in that country I would prefer to do so through agencies which share the values that I have. Given the opportunity to invest in sending priests of the Rwandan church motorcycles so that they can get around the diocese faster, I find myself thinking that if I wanted to make a difference, I’d rather give a motorcycle to a local doctor than to the clergy of that church.
These are hard things to say and I’ve no doubt that they were not nice things for Meg to listen to last night. But the Rwandan church is making it clear where it stands.
Time for us to do the same.
THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN MOVED
Many thanks to Andrew who posted a comment here. I’ve deleted it from this place and will post it later in a separate blog post as I think it would make sense to discuss it away from the topic above.
KELVIN
> I find that I don’t much want to invest money in anything involving the Anglican Church in Rwanda any more . . . If I feel inspired by the stories of Rwanda to invest in that country I would prefer to do so through agencies which share the values that I have. <
I entirely agree with you.
Yes, sending money feels like handing a gun to someone who has promised to shoot you. Better to support directly or through some other agency.
I agree about remaining willing to share in prayer. This Sunday the Anglican Cycle of Prayer gave us ++Venables. He’s the villain in these parts, as our schismatic congregations and bishops have placed themselves under the authority of the Southern Cone. I could sense the rector twitch when the name was read, but we prayed on…
You are to be recognized for your courage to speak truth Kelvin, when there would be those who would think it not politically correct.
Even though the schism does not effect us directly here in Mexico, it weighs heavy on my own mind. I have had much of which to think, sometimes a dangerous thing for me, with all the real time information that has come from GAFCon, and then Lambeth.
Dan is a Canadian who participates on a number of the same blogs I visit, even OCICBW. He is preparing for a vacation trip to Africa this Fall and has been reading up on how to stay safe as a gay visitor in the various nations. He shared an interesting insight to a misrepresentation by the usual suspects in the African Anglican Gang of Six.
They often state that homosexuality does not exist in Africa, at least not naturally, but is an apostasy exported from the West which is infecting and seducing modern Africans. What is truly sad is that it is apparent that they have bought into a not-so-subtle racism of Christian missionaries of the 18th and 19th centuries.
The common knowledge of the day was that homosexuality was not observed, and so did not exist or occur in nature, in the wild, among lower forms of animals. Another common knowledge was that Africans were a lower form of human life, and closer, in fact, to the lower orders of animal life than white Europeans. So, by extension, Africans were subsequently taught the assumption that homosexuality did not exist among their peoples.
When in actuality, homosexuality and bisexuality not only exist in lower orders of animals, especially primates, but all human cultures as well in relatively the same mathematical numbers worldwide, and so not only existed in Africa, but many native African animist faiths respected and esteemed homosexuals as significant and held as special, as did many Native American cultures.
So, it is not homosexuality which has invaded or been imported to Africa, but European racism, homophobia, and for that matter Christianity itself.
_________
As a side note, too bad we did not send modern primatologists to Canterbury to study the strange behaviors of the Primates that occurred at Lambeth!
Sorry. It seems that I certainly put the quash on this discussion!
I think the motto ought to be (as in any transaction where you’re not getting ‘bang for your buck’): Don’t reward them with cash.
Supporting doctors and the like seems a far preferable option, or supporting another country. Let’s face it, there are plenty of people who need our help throughout the entire world.
In the end, it is the poor African folk who suffer as a result of the attitudes and corruption of their leaders. One thing our link does is show us that we are dealing with real human beings rather than “issues”. I am extremely uncomfortable about this post and its consequences.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting that we should stop taking an interest in the people of Rwanda. The debate, surely, is about the best way of helping them. I agree with Kelvin when he writes:
> Given the opportunity to invest in sending priests of the Rwandan church motorcycles so that they can get around the diocese faster, I find myself thinking that if I wanted to make a difference, I’d rather give a motorcycle to a local doctor than to the clergy of that church. <
But it’s beyond question that we should give the motorcyle!
And for the poor Anglicans, who worry about where their next plate of rice is coming from, rather than the “theology” of Akinola & Co, are they to be denied sacraments cos we don’t agree with their Bishop?
These are our friends.
No, of course not. Who’s suggesting that they should be denied sacraments? Have you ever turned anyone away from your altar? I’ve never seen it done. Would you hesitate to go to communion in Rwanda, or wherever you found yourself? I certainly wouldn’t. I think Desmond Tutu has got it right – this is a subject on which (for the time being, at least) we should just agree to differ.