Matt Thompson of Political Spaghetti continues to do excellent work covering a proposed Nigerian law that would strip gays and lesbians of what we would regard as basic First Amendment freedoms. His previous coverage can be found here. The latest installmlent is: Why doesn’t the Anglican Communion Network come clean and speak out?
He writes:
Even more troubling than the Anglican Church of Nigeria endorsing the legislation, which would imprison the church’s declared theological enemies, is the acquiescence of Archbishop Akinola’s allies in the United States. As I said above, there is little I can do about anything in Nigeria, but it is certainly a worthwhile activity to point out to the conservative factions within the Anglican Church — which are currently undergoing a significant realignment out of the Episcopal Church and into other branches of the global Anglican Communion — that their compacency is suicidally short-sighted.
Perhaps the theologically orthodox Anglican Communion Network (ACN), which is the closest Church ally of Akinola in North America, feels that the lay people and clergy they represent have no objection to imprisoning homosexuals for their beliefs (let alone for their actions — “sodomy” is already illegal in Nigeria and subject to a far greater sentence). As far as I can tell, most in the ACN are unaware that the the Nigerian bill would do more than just ban gay marriage. (An aside: a bill to ban gay marriage, when no State in Nigeria currently allows it, is a pointless effort, anyway.) They don’t realize that its greatest effect of the bill would be to strip gay and lesbian Nigerians of civil rights that we in the US reserve for even the most odious (for example, the right to a free and fair trial is granted to all — ahem — regardless of how evil they might be).
The Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns, now the Anglican Church of Nigeria’s bishop in residence in the United States, provided a defense of the legislation that never mentioned the concrete prohibitions contained in the legislation, focusing instead on his belief that critics of Akinola were attacking him ad hominem. While Minns says that he “does NOT believe that criminalization is an appropriate response to those who understand themselves to be homosexuals”, his statement would have had much more force if he were to have stated clearly that endorsing legislation that would put “those who understand themselves to be homosexuals” in jail for their speech is not any way for a Church to behave. It reflects badly on Minns, it reflects badly on the Anglican Communion Network, and it refects badly on its supporters.