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.
Actually Ryan, quite a lot of us guys are not up for a gap year in Rwanda.
As for Kenny’s claim that not investing in the Rwandan church is colonialism, I think we would find that chosing not to invest in bullies, tyrants and those who advocate human rights abuses is not usually called colonialism these days. In the UK and in most of Western Europe, it’s called an Ethical Foreign Policy.
Do folks really believe that God is dependent on the clergy to bless his people sacramentally? Whatever became of the Kingdom of Heaven? Lodata Maria, e sempre sia.
Kelvin, I was thinking more of the SEC’s many evangelicals; obviously no-one would expect someone like you to serve in a country whose church does not accept you. You do far more for God and his people here in Glasgow than you would as a martyr.
Hmm, as a lurking atheistic humanist around here. How and should one apply Luke 6?
[27] “But I say to you that hear, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,
[28] bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you.
[29] To him who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from him who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt.
[30] Give to every one who begs from you; and of him who takes away your goods do not ask them again.
…
[33] And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same.
Enlighten me please. Why does it seem that Kenny is always the contrarian here?
Thank you ERP – a helpful question indeed, and I do like when atheists know their Bibles.
To start with, I think we know that most Christians don’t take Jesus’s words literally – they tend not to give to everyone who begs from them.
Notwithstanding that, it is clear that Jesus’s presumption is that we should repay the badness of our enemies with generosity rather than reflecting their hatred back at them.
I think in the case of Rwanda, I made a pretty good case for doing good to those who seem to be opposed to me. Blessings, prayers, shared communion, friendship and support for sending medical aid (for example) all seem to fall within the categories.
What I think I would struggle with is an interpretation of Luke 6 which suggested that in order to do good to enemies we had to give them resources with which they could harm others and damage the wider church. My judgement at the moment, is that giving money to the Anglican Church in Rwanda and particularly passing cash to its hierarchy would do precisely that.
Jesus told us to do good to our enemies but that is not the same as indulging them.
I think one way out of the dilemma (but it takes a bit of work and research) is not to give money via the hierachy but directly to a project. In Falkirk we no longer send our our donations to Nyakinoni in Uganda via the diocese but direct to the clinic account. Not only do we avoid propping up the “establishment” which makes the homophobic statements, the cash doesn’t sit in a diocesan account for 6 months before going to pay for the nurse.
Rereading the post, I should point out the bishop to your companion diocese may not have had much choice about going to Gafcon (and not going to Lambeth) without irritating his primate (and the primates in Rwanda, Nigeria, … seem to have a lot more clout than those in Scotland or England). I would certainly agree that sending money (or goods) directly to medical clinics and schools is the best method (but then I have a dim view of religious hierarchies in general).
I suspect in part the bishops were strongly discouraged from going to Lambeth so as to not let them be exposed to gay friendly bishops in an intimate and extended environment such as a multi-day Bible study group. People working closely with the ‘enemy’ often learn to see them as fellow humans. Perhaps +Williams should have had the groups cook and eat together also for one meal a day (assuming sufficient numbers of bishops can cook edible meals) to really force them to work together.
Erp, I’m glad to say we don’t have Primates at all in Scotland! The last one we had was Archbishop Paterson of Glasgow, who died in 1708.
Robin, we don’t have Archbishops but we do have a Primate– right now +Idris, our Primus. Same role. Different title (though of course what it means to be a Primate will also vary from one place to another.)