Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Manufacturing a president in Cote d’Ivoire

Cote d’Ivoire is in a political impasse after the presidential elections that were supposed to reunite the country. What went wrong?

After the failed coup of 2002 and the ensuing military takeover of the northern part of Cote d’Ivoire by rebel forces, there was a round-table discussion in Linas-Marcoussis, France, during which 10 political groups agreed to create a coalition government and a total disarmament of all the rebel groups and militias.

This would be enacted under the supervision of the French and West African forces in preparation of a free and fair presidential election. A new independent electoral commission was created, composed of representatives of the political parties.

The independent electoral commission during these past elections was composed of a total of 461 members, out of which only 42, that is 9 percent, are pro-Laurent Gbagbo, who is Cote d’Ivoire’s incumbent leader. And 419, that is 91 percent, are pro-Alassane Ouattara and the opposition.

The president of the commission, Youssouf Bakayoko, is pro-Ouattara. To offset this imbalance, it was agreed upon that the commission function by consensus and that ballots should be counted both manually and electronically.

The country’s constitution stipulates that the electoral commission should announce the temporary results consensually agreed upon within 72 hours. The Constitutional Council is the only legal authority that will announce the final results, taking into account all irregularities and complaints. It is important to note that the government did disarm all militias in the southern zone under its control. The rebel forces in the north of Cote d’Ivoire did not disarm.

The current deadlock in Cote d’Ivoire stems from the massive fraud that the electronic tally-ups revealed from the votes in the areas of the country still under the control of the armed rebellion. The voting records submitted from these areas showed that there were more voters than were registered.

And, from the testimonies of African election observers, accredited by the Independent Electoral Commission, voters were intimated, pro-Gbagbo voters were physically attacked (including cases of murder), and ballots were being supervised, stuffed, and carried by rebel forces, contrary to election rules. The tally-up of the Bandama voting district under the control of the rebellion was a textbook showcase of vote rigging and a well-defined example of where the electoral commission was having problems finding a tally consensus.

The opposition candidate appeared to receive the following votes from this particular electoral map: Katiola (38,416); Bouake (42,070); Beoumi (19,058); Dabakala (34,398); Sakassou (15,656); that is, a would-be total of 149,598.

However, Sangare Moussa, the head of the Bandama voting district, reported a total of 244,471 votes, which means there were 94,873 surplus votes in favor of the opposition candidate Ouattara. When the ballots were closed, all observers and those of the two candidates asserted that the voter turnout was 70 percent. Hours later, the electoral commission put it to 81 percent, a jump of 11 points.

Then, out of 20,073 manual tally-ups of the votes submitted to electronic verification, 2,000 were rejected for over-stating the numbers of voters compared to the registered voters in the districts, and, altogether, the overestimated voters were more than 600,000.

Out of the 19 electoral maps, the votes from 15 of them were consolidated, but the commission was having problems consolidating the votes in the remaining four areas under the rebellion’s control, where voting irregularities were observed.

In addition to those tally irregularities, the spokesperson of the Independent Electoral Commission, acting without the consensus of (and in spite of the objections of) the Constitutional Council, unilaterally invalidated all the absentee votes from the 28 districts of France (nominally because of fighting among Ivorians in three voting areas in Paris) in both the initial election and the run-off election.

These votes, as well as the voting irregularities in the northern region of Cote d’Ivoire, where the African election observers had also documented beatings, killings, intimidation, and women being publicly stripped of their clothing, should have been submitted to the Constitutional Council for review.

Because of all these irregularities, and because the Electoral Commission could not constitutionally proclaim, within the constitutionally prescribed deadline period, the provisional results that were to be validated by the Constitutional Council, its mandate was terminated, leaving the Constitutional Council to handle these matters.

But, while that procedure was in progress, the president of the defunct Independent Electoral Commission was ushered to the headquarters of the opposition candidate at the Golf Hotel to illegally proclaim Ouattara the winner before the French state and foreign media and the U.N. representative.

The Constitutional Council stated that the defunct Independent Electoral Commission had no right to declare Ouattara the winner, as constitutional electoral procedures had not been followed.

It deemed illegal the U.N. representative’s ratification of would-be provisional results that were illegally proclaimed. The U.N. representative was to ratify the final results that the Constitutional Council would have certified.

The Constitutional Council then analyzed all irregularities and tallies, partially validated some of them and, after the adjustments were completed, proclaimed Gbagbo the winner. Cote d’Ivoire thus descended into a post-electoral nightmare.

Ekra Miezan, Ph.D., is an assistant professor at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul. He can be reached at ekra@hufs.ac.kr.

Monday, December 27, 2010

The Cameroon supports President Gbagbo


Published in the Rue 89 | Monday, December 27, 2010

In the streets of Yaounde, the debates rage between those who denounce the `foreign interference in Ivorian elections and those who criticize the forcing of Laurent Gbagbo. In October 2011, Cameroonians will elect their President `s. This December 21, 2010, Cameroonians have not won `n of their screen. All followed the debate on post-election crisis in Cote d `Ivoire organized by the first private television station in Yaounde, Canal 2 International. Since the face-to-face televised history of 25 November between Laurent Gbagbo and Alassane Ouattara, the political situation in Cote d `Ivoire is followed closely by brother country. The Cameroon is taking up the cause of Laurent Gbagbo.

Jean-Claude Awono, writer, explains: "This is happening TODAY in Ivory Coast as Africans interested in all this is happening to our brothers there might as well happen in Cameroon. But beyond this explanation, it `is the crystallization of mainly nationalist and pan-Africanist sentiment that mobilizes the masses. Jean-Michel Nintcheu, MP at the Social Democratic Front (SDF), the main opposition party `s" Street Cameroon, which mostly seems to support Mr. Gbagbo, isn `t basically pro-Gbagbo, but anti-French. "The first case involved in the Ivorian` s `are also good party` s opposition in Cameroon. Thus, the African Movement for New Independence and Democracy (MANIDEM) plans a march in the coming days to support Laurent Gbagbo. Similarly, the Union of peoples of Cameroon has taken up the cause of Ivorian President outgoing. On 4 December, the party sent a letter of congratulations for his "brilliant victory which is the crown of a struggle of the Ivorian people." But within the SDF, the Ivorian situation is making waves. While the party has officially recognized the victory of President Gbagbo, Jean-Michel Nintcheu argues that "African Presidents Paul Biya [President of Cameroon, ed] in mind, would benefit from learning the culture of the alternator. "Radio and TV multiply emissions.

Street and the media `s not beyond the` fad. Coup d `State` s electoral coup against constitutional government, "as The Messenger," Trading Places ", said the newspaper Mutations," The Ivorian crisis shakes the SDF, "we read in La Nouvelle Expression, or" All the agreements that have gutted the power of Laurent Gbagbo, "according to the newspaper Emergence. While radio and television stations multiply interactive programs. Between those who see `s attitude of the international community an interference which is aimed only to` remove Gbagbo from power, and others who think it is a bad loser, mobilization of Cameroonians is felt even in the streets.

As before a newsstand in the Cameroonian capital, Tuesday, December 21, which fuse a particularly vigorous exchange between two clients: "You accuse white people want to hunt Gbagbo. Tell me if they are the ones who voted for Ouattara. - It's not the whites who voted but tell me where Ouattara has found the silver to complete his entire campaign and why the French media support it that way. " Celine, a student: "Laurent Gbagbo has publicly agreed to abide by the verdict of the polls. It must not stand TODAY the nationalist card because he has lost. " But for his comrade Eric: "The international community must respect the Ivorian institutions. It `s the Constitutional Council announces the final results. And this institution has declared Gbagbo the victor. We must respect this result. " As tension mounts in Abidjan, the streets of Yaounde `s inflame the situation in countries of the Elephants ...

Rawlings calls for a peaceful approach to the Ivorian crisis


| Monday, December 27, 2010



rawlings.jpg (320×240)Former President Jerry John Rawlings has reiterated its call for an extreme restraint in the management of he crisis in Cote d 'Ivoire. In a message released Thursday, three days after he called for restraint and aturity on the part of all actors in the crisis, President Rawlings said the situation in Ivory Coast was not a imple electoral conflict, but a tangle of ethnic and political complexities that must be handled with tact and iplomacy rather than by open allusions to the use of force.

The former president said that the disputed results clearly indicate that the Ivory Coast is sharply divided on ethnic lines, a fact which should be concerned stakeholders such as ECOWAS, the AU and the UN at the time, they exploring options to resolve the impasse. "The two men at the center of the conflict have indicated their willingness to accept a recount or re-verification of results by neutral observers. Is there a hidden reason for not wanting to accept the offer made by both parties? "It is also important that we do not rush into any kind of intervention force. This does not guarantee a final resolution of the crisis and may actually exacerbate an already volatile situation that could result in a complete civil war with disastrous effects on the populations of entire sub-region.

"Attempts to gather support for military intervention were unfounded and instead expose the hypocrisy of the UN, ECOWAS and the AU. "The most outrageous election results took place without intervention. How can we justify an intervention in this case, when the results are so tight and divided along ethnic lines? Let us explore all options available to peace rather than military intervention, which can not reach a peaceful political transition in Côte d'Ivoire. "The situation is certainly an embarrassment to Africa, but equally disturbing is the fact that international media have chosen to overlook many things.

Reports of some major election observers condemned the conduct of elections in several parts of the country have been totally ignored by the international media. "In some regions the number of votes cast is greater than the total number of voters. In one region, there are 159,788 votes to 48,400 votes. This, added to the fact that in some areas, the staff of the electoral commission and some election officials were not allowed to control the process, calls for a proper investigation is urgently conducted. "There are so many crucial questions unanswered. The details of the report of the envoy of the African Union, President Thabo Mbeki, should be made public to help better understand the nature of the situation. "It is also imperative that ECOWAS convened an emergency meeting to urge both sides to the center of the crisis as well as representatives of all the observer missions that have covered the election to present their case. This has been done in the past and this will move us a big step in finding the solution. "We must act with care for the good of the people of Ivory Coast who are the real victims of this tragedy. I urge ECOWAS and other international institutions involved in the crisis to analyze the situation with the utmost attention and do everything in their power to resolve in a peaceful manner, "said President Rawlings

France And The Ivory Coast-The Empire Strikes Back


Currently there is an impasse in the runoff of the Presidential elections in the Ivory Coast. The French-linked and funded electoral commission declared that Allasane Outtara won the election while the Constitutional Court declared incumbent President Gbagbo as the victor.

The ‘international community’ of Western countries, NGOS, UN appeasers, and a variety of Francafrique cowards and bed-wetters support Ouattara even though massive fraud has been demonstrated at the polls in the rebel-held North.

This result should be no surprise to anyone. There has been no effective disarmament of the tinpot rebel warlords of the North and no unification of the country in anticipation of the election. A ‘security’ dividing line between the North and the South has been maintained by the occupying French forces pretending to be U.N. troops. Even so-called peacemakers like Blaise Campaore of Burkina Faso pretend to be neutral. Campaore, an unindicted war criminal with a track record of subversion, arms smuggling and war profiteering in Liberia, Sierra Leone and the Ivory Cost is somehow portrayed as a neutral.

When arms were being shipped to the West African wars by Chirac and Ghadaffi they arrived at their destinations after having passed through the hands of Campaore and Tandja (who both profited on the deliveries), Ouattara, known as the “Father of the Rebellion” in the Ivory Coast was sustained by operating from a safe haven in Burkina Faso when he was not busy maintaining his close personal ties to Sarkozy’s first wife in Paris. There was no mystery about the Ouattara-Campaore joint effort. Several hours of tapes exist which recorded the meetings called by Campaore in Burkina Faso which garnered support for Ouattara among the Northerners and actively plotted with two French military officers sent from Paris to attempt coups against the Gbagbo Government.

Voter fraud and deception was the rule in the North for over seven years. Even when the AU originally appointed Banny as the interim Prime minister ad Thabo Mbeki as the mediator the frauds persisted. President Mbeki visited the Ivory Coast and invited the warring factions to meet with President Gbagbo in Pretoria where two sets of agreements were made. These Pretoria Agreements achieved a resolution of most of the outstanding issues between the two sides, because President Gbagbo made concessions to achieve these ends. The most important point made in Pretoria was that there would be disarmament of the rebels.

This was, indeed, a requisite of the original cease-fire agreement at Linas-Marcoussis , Article 3 (g) “In order to contribute to restoring security of persons and property throughout the national territory, the Government of National Reconciliation will organise the regrouping and subsequent disarming of all forces. It will ensure that no mercenaries remain within the country’s borders.”

Some links showing the protests:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsgZ75aCr2A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rKMEAzpFyc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcOmw624suM

Thank you

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Is Ivory Coast becoming Frances’ ‘Iraq’?


In the run up to Iraqi invasion US manipulated the UN organs, mobilized her allies into join her quest to attack Iraq and institute regime change. Few nations saw through this ploy or had the courage to register effective protestation. This was in the name of Iraqis and human rights and danger posed to the world. To day we know better! But we are on the precipice of falling into a similar situation Africa with France pulling the UN. Will Côte d'Ivoire fall victim to this syndrome: where for Iraqi oil, lies and conspiracies of "international community" were handy to oust Saddam Hussein? Will the UN again, on behalf of geo-strategy, cover genocide or conceal greed in Côte d'Ivoire?

The UN Security council resolution of 9th Dec 2010 backed Alassane Ouattara as the winner of Ivory Coast’s disputed Nov. 28 presidential election, bolstering his challenge to incumbent Laurent Gbagbo and besides condemning the position taken by the Gbagbo, the council also said it would impose “targeted measures” against those standing in the way of the peace process or UN efforts in Ivory Coast. Russia took a very clear position on the condemnation of Ivory Coast. The absence of presidential statement in New York, as Susan Rice, who currently chairs the Security Council for the USA, which had been expected was loud. Russia allowed the release of this press communiqué, on principle, but did not agree and maintained her stance regarding the sovereignty of Côte d’Ivoire – saying that the Unites Nations are not commissioned to state results of presidential elections of a sovereign country. The Chinese government also released a communiqué saying that the law has to prevail, institutions should be respected and that the political dialog should take place.

The media though is awash with the notion that the whole world has isolated Gbagbo’s government, yet divergent views like that of China, Russia and even South Africa and also Angola, and Libya are not being heard for not chorusing the ECOWAS’ nor the African Union’s opinion…The media buzz: to make people believe, via the media, that President Gbagbo is isolated has failed to cause a revolt in the country . There was a general expectation that the population will pour into the streets, demanding that Laurent Gbagbo step down that he had lost according to the provisionary results. On the contrary most of the people in the south divide of the country voiced support for Gbagbo vowing to die to the last man should the country be attacked. The street demonstrations are needed to raise the temperature which saw the calls to match at take over the Ivorian national Radio and Television Station headquarters. This met a rock hard response from Ivorian forces and has now led to rearming of supporters of Mr. Alassane Ouattara, whom the international community overwhelmingly recognises as the legitimate president.

The question that begs an answer is this; Why UN and US through the French forces are arming the rebels? The reason for Gbagbo to order UN and French forces to leave the country was precisely this. According to the Ivorian government sources foreign dispatch, No. 0026 of 21/12/10, "the U.S. government brought in mercenaries in Bouake, via Algiers through Ouagadougou with sophisticated equipment for endangering the lives of legal authorities "of Côte d'Ivoire. UN forces have been reported on RTI giving catches to rebels.

How will the UN achieve its goals if it undermines the very principles of its mission? Might it be the problem of global governance? Where permanent member states of the Security Council, with very important responsibilities, to bring back peace in the world would, on the contrary use the United Nations for their own benefit and serve their agendas. The start of the Côte d’Ivoire crisis in 2002 coincided with the challenge of Iraq. The United Nations was tasked with solving the problem in Côte d’Ivoire and instead of bringing peace in Côte d’Ivoire, France, following the Marcoussis Agreemments, had the Agreement endorsed by the United Nations and has continuously attempted to eject President Gbagbo instead of solving the problem of peace and reconciliation in Côte d’Ivoire.

The United Nation, through France and the United-States, applied pressure for these elections saying that President Gbagbo does not wish to hold them. It was France the author of the Côte d’Ivoire resolution project that would not yield to President Gbagbo objection, that elections be held after the disarmament of the North and the reunification. The Ouagadougou Agreements (APO) pointed out that Ivoirians be mobilized by the help of President Compaoré and that: the elections were to be held two month after the disarmament and reunification.

Why would they ignore the institutions that Cote d’Ivoire has established leave alone her sovereignty? It will not be easy to just remove Gbagbo from power without shedding blood. Who should be responsible for plunging Ivoirians to blood bath? We must expose stand against the bias shown in this case if by it the crisis in Ivory coast could be solved.

Canon Francis Omondi

Anglican Church of Kenya.

Friday, September 10, 2010

Cheap cross


Cheap cross, cheap cross! Buy now …

It was towards the end of Thursday during the passion week and here a man was selling his last stock of palm crosses to the faithful Christians, with time running out and the stock still high , the man chose to drop the price, oblivious that that very evening the church and Christians were remembering how high the price of their salvation was and now they are called to follow in the foot steps of others who faced rejection and were ostracized and lived like aliens in the world in hope of life in the world to come. Through this, world was has had Christ proclaimed in all the world.

Even though our stand on human sexuality is well documented and clearly articulated we have not escaped the tag of being ‘the church that condones homosexuality’ a fact that has soiled us on both fronts: in the world wide communion [where we opposed it] and locally [where we are tagged to it].One can be forgiven to think that the real occupation of the Anglican Church has been the issue of human sexuality in general and homosexual …specifically owing to the frequency with which we have held discussion, the passion with which we have defended our position, the influence and weight with which we have tried to convince on our position and now it has billed that the final schism of the communion will spring from here.

To this day the official Anglican position on Sexuality is the Lambeth Resolution 10.1: Of all the four themes put forward at Lambeth 1998 the question of human sexuality emerged top and of the 63 page resolution[1] none has been quoted and discussed like this, to the extent that the Archbishop of Wales Barry Morgan singled this as the main problem. He reasoned that:
“The ordination of a practicing homosexual as a Bishop in the USA and the blessing of same sex relationships in Canada might not have had the repercussions they have had, if the Lambeth Conference in 1998 had not had such an acrimonious debate about sexuality.”

This position can obscure the implications these two acts had on our understanding and practice of missions.

One of the most telling parts of the 1998 Lambeth sexuality debate was during discussion of the amendment (Resolution V.35) proposed from the West Africa Region which stated ‘homosexuality is a sin which could only be adopted by the church if it wanted to commit evangelical suicide’. In response, Bishop Roskam of New York said, ‘If affirming homosexuality is evangelical suicide in [Africa], to condemn it is evangelical suicide in my region.’

What was clear in this exchange was the difference in understanding of missions and evangelism and how we practice in different contexts in the communion and therefore create different meaning to either.

The debate here will be lost if we begin and carry this argument in cultures, unless sufficient bridges are erected to enable us cross the gulfs of cultural assumptions. Besides, this [culture] is not good enough too to determine the gospel content, rather than how we ought to communicate. Being diverse, cultures often polarize our perspective and understanding of issues. I must hasten to add that we cannot ignore cultures either since God did not shout from the blear blue sky a culture free message, his word was revealed in cultures and we are reading it in different cultures today, calling on all of us to study and correctly interpret the message of scriptures.

Our argument on missions therefore, must begin with Christ whose mission we are an extension of, and on whose behalf we are called to carry it out.

We may not know what is in the mind of our Lord, but that the scriptures tell us of this we are able through the revealed word chart our direction.

His words lend us what he thought on mission: ‘As the Father send me so send I you… (john 20:21)’ gives the contours of how we must understand and practice mission in the pattern he himself was sent.

As he was in the world –to proclaim the love and judgment of the father to a sinful world, lost and rebellious creation, to heal, care and give his life in holy and consecrated service for the sake of the Father’s love- so we are sent by him. We too, if we are willing to do God’s will, will know what he requires of us. As a famous Ghanaian theologian says, we may not claim him and at the same time make his meaning and example obscure. The problem will show up when we too want to please our selves at the same time please him, while really unwilling to surrender our selves and wills, our so called personal freedoms, to him.

I suggest that we turn to scriptures to settle this, since this would be the surest way to know what is in the mind of our Lord I have chosen these three passages to help us in the study missions in Christ way.., and to help me in this I seek to use three passages talking on Missions.

. Mathew 28:18-20 this is a well known passage often known as the Great Commission, here our Lord laying on the apostles the task of discipling the nations. The task is discipling of things that make people into nations or communities. The shared processes of thinking, shared and common attitudes, world-views, perspectives, languages cultural habits of thoughts, social and political behavior and economic practices- all those things and the lives of the people in whom those things find expressions are meant to be with the call to discipleship. This implies that the great commission is not about numbers, nor about statistics, important as those are, nor about percentages of national populations that confess the Christian faith, valuable as those are. The Great commission is about conversion, the conversion of things that make people into nations, in effect the conversions of cultures. And conversion is not the overlay upon the old habits, attitudes and rebellious wills, of some regulations, requirements and solutions that do not answer to these realities. Rather, conversion is turning to Christ all that we are and bring all that we are into discipleship to him.

The second text is Acts 2:5-12, which describes the events of the Day of Pentecost. This l take to be the launch of the process of discipling of the nations that is laid out in Mathew 28. Pentecost in Acts was the counter to Babel in Genesis 11. Babel symbolizes the separation and parting among the nations and peoples, entrenchment of differences into virtual hostility. Genesis 11:4 indicates the abuse of a global language and a global culture in the goal of making a name for oneself, seeking a global reach and therefore, hegemony and world dominion, rather than seeking the glory of God.

Pentecost on the contrary is where the reconciliation of the nations is achieved and that only in Christ and for Christ. This is actualized through the Holy Spirit and leading to the glory of God.

how amazing that we all hear in our own languages the great things God has done’ (Acts 2:11). Pentecost was not the dissolution of cultural diversities, rather it was the divine demonstration that different cultures can and do have one and the same Lord and savior and therefore are under same discipleship. For the part of the miracle of the Holy Spirit was enhanced communication among crowds of people who spoke different languages. God who has no linguistic favorites determined that this purpose should be achieved through different languages. Pentecost is thus the demonstration that the Gospel is about all of us, speaks to all of us, summoning us all to repentance and faith; that the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ is and can become Father to us all. And therefore we do ourselves incalculable harm if we should willfully refuse to heed to what God says, speaking our language.

The third text is Revelation 7:9-12, describing the crowd that no one could number, drawn from every race, tribe, nation, and language, and singing the same song, in their different languages. Mathew laid out the true dimensions of missions, and Acts launched the process of missions, then Revelation 7 shows the end and the goal of mission. For here in the light of the end of all things, mission is not about the salvation of only part of our human existence but much more. The goal of all missions is our total redemption, the cleansing of all our social and cultural forms of life and expression so that they come to express praise, adoration and our total consecration to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Here then is the true end of discipling of the nations.

Mission seen from this light or point of view, as deep mission, is clearly more demanding than we may perhaps assume and it calls for resources far beyond what we tend to allow for in our normal priorities. Mission requires commitment and levels of sacrifices in time, disciplined spirituality, intellectual vocation, and often long term engagement with persons and communities .- levels of sacrifice and discipline that few of us probably are prepared or willing to make. Yet the truth remains: can we be engaged meaningfully in the discipling of nations unless we are also, like the first apostles, disciples of our Lord?

The passion of the debate over human sexuality is rooted in a common desire for service to God’s mission according to the authors of True Union in the Body?

We need to note at the very beginning of that work:

The call to bless same-sex unions arises because some (mainly in the West) believe this is an appropriate and loving response to people who seek the Church’s support, and so should be an important feature of the Church’s pastoral practice and a vital part of the Church’s contemporary mission. Many, however, see it as a major challenge to the Church’s identity, potentially overturning her traditional understanding of scriptural teaching about human sexuality and faithful Christian discipleship. Especially in the non-West there is the added fear that it effectively undermines the Church s mission in their context and denies the gospel.

Ian T. Douglas and Michael Poon

Our context:

Islam sees this as an outright sin:

Human beings are capable of many forms of sexual expression, orientation and identification. The existence of such a variety again is not found in any other species and thus further demonstrates our uniqueness among God's creations. The potential for behavior, such as homosexuality, does not mean that its practice is lawful in the eyes of God. Therefore, individuals are expected to control themselves and not act on their desires if such action is contrary to the guidelines of Islam. Homosexuality, like other forms of sexual relations outside of heterosexual marriage, is thus prohibited. In any discussion of prohibited acts follows the question of what happens if they nevertheless occur. The Qur'an and hadith are explicit regarding severe punishment by the State if a person is convicted of such a crime. However, in order for conviction to take place, the individuals must confess or be accused by at least four eyewitnesses of the act of actual intercourse. Obviously, the likelihood of these criteria being met is small which means that most couples who engage in unlawful acts will not be punished by the State. They will then deal with the consequences of their behavior in this life and will be accountable to God on the Day of Judgment. How He ultimately judges is known only by Him. [ 1996, Muslim Public Affairs Council]

Our African community sees this as anathema we are left with no where to turn.

Eg. the treatment of those who support gay movement here has been inhumane and appalling. Even though there are no laws enacted against them the atmosphere is so charged against them actively practicing.

Content:

Where does the missionary get his authority to preach; from the Gospel which is the scriptures [ OT. pointing to Jesus Luke 24, and the accounts of the gospel telling of his works and words , and the NT acc. Also affirming the witness of those who believed

In the New Testament the teaching of Jesus as a whole is about caring for the outcast as a test of righteousness and in his own ministry he dealt with those on the margins.

There is a bias in the New Testament to inclusivity and those who have been excluded by others because of their sex, race, health or religion. Jesus’ inclusive community consisted of women, children and those outside the cultic regulations - Gentiles. His ministry was one of hospitality and generosity to all whom he met.

It could be argued that gay and lesbian people are the marginalized people of our age, because according to the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement many refuse to attend any place of worship because they feel they are not accepted and welcomed.

Ecusa’s report to the Anglican Consultative Council at Nottingham in 2005 spoke of gay people being portrayed as perverted, promiscuous, sinful and untouchable by many Christians. Gay people have been personally rejected, socially ostracized, subjected to intense discrimination, violence and even death. They have seen the rejection of their sexuality as a rejection of them as persons. (American Report ‘To Set our Hope on Christ’ p28).

The source of this thinking is in the teaching that Gentiles, regarded as impure and second-class as compared to Jews according to the Holiness Code, is put aside in favor of the view of a God who accepts impure people. In other words the ritual and purity laws of the Old Testament are seen as purely temporary and cultural and are set aside. Christianity becomes an inclusive community welcoming those not normally welcomed into the household of faith.

The Cornelius story as those regarded as unclean accepted, has been pushed as a model for accepting the gay people for God accepts them for who they are.

Christ invitation was into His Kingdom and being born again the shift and transformation of life was key for entry he accepts Nicodemus but lays condition for entry by water and blood. And when one is in the Kingdom it is seen and known by their fruit of new lifestyle.

Even though Abp. Rowan William at Nottingham, there is no sign by which you can tell in and of yourself that you are acceptable to God. There is nothing about you that guarantees love, salvation, healing. But there is everything about God in Jesus Christ that assures you and so if you want to know where your certainty lies, look to God, not to yourself”

It is Paul in Galatians and several others that bring the moral teaching of life in the Spirit

The Kenyan thinking is that there is need to embrace Homosexuals but help them enter the kingdom of the transformed where they are not the center around which the scriptures are to be interpreted and church be formed [deifying love for HS] but we both face God to be made more like him Christ is the basis of our ethics and morality.

Our in ability to invite them in will reflect also on our in-ability to love and welcome those of other faith.

Conclusion:

We are at a junction of Christian History:

A great body of disciples is emerging in the South America and Africa. It may be for them to show the way for human kind as they walk fully in the yoke with Jesus. But they will never do this or even solve the problems of their peoples, if they take the spiritual attainments of the Western church as the height of Christian possibility. In the first world countries Christianity simply do not advance very far into the health and strength of Christ. Psychological counselors frequently find little difference between the basic attitudes, actions and afflictions of their unbelieving clients and the believers with whom they deal. …Dallas Willard in The spirit of the disciplines – understanding how God changes lives [ san Francisco: HarperCollins, 1988, rep. 1991]

Rev. Francis Omondi

Anglican Church of Kenya



1. [1] “It commends to the Church the sub-section report on human sexuality;

2. In view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage;

3. Recognizes that there are among us persons who experience themselves as having a homosexual orientation. Many of these are members of the Church and are seeking the pastoral care, moral direction of the Church, and God’s transforming power for the living of their lives and the ordering of relationships. We commit ourselves to listen to the experience of homosexual persons and we wish to assure them that they are loved by God and that all baptized, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ;

4. While rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture, calls on all our people to minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn irrational fear of homosexuals, violence within marriage and any trivialization and commercialization of sex;

5. Cannot advise the legitimizing or blessing of same sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions;

6. Requests the Primates and the ACC to establish a means of monitoring the work done on the subject of human sexuality in the Communion and to share statements and resources among us;