May we be willing reapers of the Word,
not Sowers only!
Sometimes readers’ responses can take you a
little bit by surprise. In that
potential readers have been fairly warned that these essays are exercises in
free-style thinking rather than stated opinions, I find it pretty easy to not
take things too personally, but once in a while a negative reaction forces you
to delve a bit deeper in to a topic.
Such is the case with a short paragraph written on Ludovic-Mohamed
Zaheb’s intention to found a gay and feminist-friendly mosque in Paris, France
( see: French Mosques for Women and Gays? ).
I will carefully state that whether or not
you feel homosexuality to be a sin, and whether or not you feel that a gay or
lesbian person can be a Christian, the political interference of such
Evangelical groups in volatile situations such as Africa, incur a direct
responsibility for the impact of these activities in the lives of real,
everyday Africans – and that whether or not you are a supporter of gay rights,
in continuing to support, nay, in not speaking out against such activities, the
Evangelical church movement in the United States must accept responsibility for
the blood, the murders, the ruined lives and massive prison sentences, bullying
and abuse of the victims of this home-grown USA Evangelical propaganda.
References for USA role in Anti-anti-gay violence in southern Africa:
Gettelman, Jeffrey - Americans' Role seen in Ugandan Anti-gay Push
Gevisser, Mark - Homosexuality and the battle for Africa's Soul 04 Jun 2010
Smith, David J. - What is it about Africa and gay people? (25 Jan 2010)
May-Chang, Jody - Exporting Homophobia (08 Sept 2008)
 |
| (c) Matthew Wettlaufer, The Murder of Matthew Shepherd* |
The phrase, or I will admit, paragraph in question is as follows:
Not that we can be too hard on them. News coverage also indicates numerous Anglo-American Fundamentalist leaders stumbling over the question of whether or not practicing gays should face the Biblical death penalty – a situation American-backed “Christian” conservatives in Uganda seem too close to implanting. (Try placing that one in the Minnesota constitution!)
'Them' referring to violent anti-gay Islamic Fundamentalists in Europe and North Africa.
The point of contention being whether or
not anti-gay, often border-line hate legislation in some of Africa’s more
volatile nations is being generated and funded by Fundamentalist anti-gay
Christian groups out of the United States.
In this case, the clear answer is yes
– in fact, many of the more extreme anti-gay Evangelical groups in the United
States openly brag about their activities in Africa on their websites.
 |
| Pierre et Gilles, St Sebastien (1987) |
It is one thing for Salvation Army leaders
in the West to indicate that they believe homosexuals should be killed, for
American political religious leaders to claim that hurricanes are the judgment
of God for tolerating homosexuality, or groups such as the Mennonite Central
Committee (MCC) to claim that gays and lesbians must be excluded from society,
or that AIDS is a “gay disease” – in the
West. But to purposefully spread
such teachings and propaganda into places such as Uganda, Rwanda, Nigeria,
Sudan, Congo … places where such political rhetoric is likely to be believed
and implemented literally, these church groups must accept the simplicity of
the situation wherein Christ’s church has gone from being martyred to
supporting the killing.
As an internationalist, I would go so far
as to state that in crossing international boundaries with such propagandist
intent, these groups and individuals ought to become liable to the World Court
for their activities and be able to be sued by the victims in their home states
and nations. The activities of such
groups under such circumstances becomes uncomfortably difficult to distinguish
from similar activities by the Wahabi schools of the Middle East or
anti-feminist, anti-gay groups in Afghanistan, Indonesia or southern
Africa.
As always, I feel that
it is important for readers to do their own research and to reach their own
opinions. My concern with this topic is
that many persons are aware of neither the facts on the ground (in this case,
in Africa), nor the real-life impact what we consider to be a political opinion
in the United States and Canada, can have on real persons who are murdered,
maimed or imprisoned under harsh conditions elsewhere. The question in the United States is
more-or-less should you be forced to work with gays and lesbians or to allow
homosexual couples to be married – a question of social justice. The same question is often understood in
other nations as whether or not a gay person or lesbian should be killed,
maimed, raped, imprisoned, tortured or forced into exile from their homeland,
their family, their church and their loved ones.
To me, the key question is whether or not
the American Evangelical individual is willing to place his or herself into the
situation personally and directly in Africa and to bear direct responsibility
for the victims of these opinions in
their real life consequences. If your
conviction falls short of this, then my argument is that we need to stay out of
the debate entirely. If your conscience
calls for you to thus continue in your conviction, then that is a matter
between you and your lord. I am not sure
that a Peace church or its organs
(being the MCC and the various missions bureaus) can support these convictions
in the manner in which they are being interpreted in Africa, the Middle East,
Southeast Asia and other regions, and maintain the integrity of their ministry
or even their peace identity. MCC’s
position against gays and lesbians then becomes something similar to “we oppose
violence and the literally bashing in the heads of those with whom you disagree,
that is unless they are gay – in that case, go ahead and give them a good kick
and lashing for us as well.” Is that the
MCC mission we all wish to portray to the world? It is not the MCC with which I grew up.
As evangelical Christians, we believe that
we are sowing the Good News of the
Lord in the fertile expanses of the Mission
Field. While we are all entitled to
our opinions and our politics, one shouldn’t confuse one’s political platform
with the Gospel. We need to vigilantly
watch what we are putting out there in the name of Christ and of his Church. Be
careful what we sow, lest we reap the consequences.
Just my thoughts. And yes, I definitely understand and respect
those with whom I disagree – I just ask that you fully consider the consequences
of your political beliefs and aspirations on the real day lives of others.
‘tag. Bruderthaler
 | |
| (c) Melanie Nathan. Gay Flag South Africa meeting with ANC, 2012. |
Melanie Nathan article on African National Congress and Gay Flag South Africa meeting 30 Aug 2012
Matthew Wettlaufer series honoring gay martyrs
References for USA role in Anti-anti-gay violence in southern Africa:
 |
| (c) Denis Farrell, Gay Couple Kwa Thema, J'berg, SA |
Gevisser, Mark - Homosexuality and the battle for Africa's Soul 04 Jun 2010
 |
| American Evangelicals often leave little doubt as to their faith. |
May-Chang, Jody - Exporting Homophobia (08 Sept 2008)
Note to fellow students: – I am definitely
interested in the impact Rawlsian thought might have in this situation if
applied under a more secular, less religious context. I believe that
such strains of thought would naturally lead to different questions in
additional areas even beyond social justice to considerations of the fear and
motivations behind the concept of the world
court and international justice and its application or pertinence to
individual national foreign policies, which would then circle back and bring up
questions of Mennonite participation in the magistracy and whether MCC should
maintain a secular ethnic role or seek to spread religious ideals to those to
whom it ministers.
Secondly, I believe that this situation brings up questions relating to
the MCC and the concept of the Christian or religious witness. If
you are going to be a social justice witness – what is the relationship between
remaining silent on an issue and being an advocate? How do you choose to be active, passive or
silently aggressive? Does being silent
on issues such as anti-gay violence in Congo, South Africa and Uganda remove
discipleship Christians such as the Mennonites and Brethren from an
identification with the suffering Christ and place us rather in the power position
of Pilate or even Herod who either
remained silent or gave leave for others to do what they felt was right? What are the demarcation points? How can we speak up for puppy dogs and women’s rights but
not for the rights and safety of the LGBT population? What
are the points of similarity or dissimilarity that make us morally and
spiritually comfortable in our decision(s)?
No comments:
Post a Comment