Archbishop Okoh on Various Subjects

In sermon notes about the topic of “Jesus is Lord,” Archbishop Nicholas Okoh of Nigeria says:

The implication of the Lordship of Christ on Family and human sexuality:

– We, our church, will work to protect and promote sound, scripture-approved marriages, which is a gift of God from creation (Gen. 2: 18 ff).
– We shall continue to promote and support marriage between a man and a woman.
– At the moment there is a great deal of effort, a huge sum of money being spent to pervert and undermine this institution. It is being presented to us to accept the homosexual lifestyle and same-sex union as normal alternative to marriage between male and female.

The recent view of the Bishop of Liverpool is not acceptable to us. It establishes two authorities in the church, the scriptures and “The Canon” of deviant sub-culture. It is intended to destroy the Judeo – Christian understanding of morality as revealed in the Bible.

For whom does he speak – himself, his diocese, certainly! But Akure Diocese? The Anglican Communion? Is the covenant intended to achieve a globalization for the easy spread of the homosexual lifestyle? Liverpool has chosen to speak at a wrong time!

Are you homophobic? Do you suffer from homophobia? It is an ingenious device designed to club anyone holding a contrary view into conformity. To accept it is conforming to the world Rom. 12: 2. If you are accused of homophobia, accuse them of gunephobia (inordinate fear of women, and relationship between men and women). For those with homosexual lifestyle we promise to provide pastoral care and counseling. We strongly believe in the power of the Gospel to transform lives.

On the Anglican Communion, the Most. Rev. Okoh states:

·GAFCON/FCA – We remain committed to this body and seek to promote all that it stands for.

·GLOBAL – SOUTH – We shall continue to be part of this body as long as it remains on the clear part of orthodoxy, without any discernible subterranean agenda.

·CAPA – We are part of CAPACAPA in order to enhance the integrity of its discussions, decisions and mission.

My curiousity is piqued by his reference to the Global South and ‘subterranean agendas.” What is he talking about?

Conference Statement from the first Divine Commonwealth Conference

Conference Statement from the first Divine Commonwealth Conference held at the National Christian Center, Abuja, Nigeria, 7th-11th November 2011

In the name of God: the Father, the Son and Holy Spirit.  Amen

The first Divine Commonwealth Conference was held at the National Christian Centre, Abuja, from Monday 7th to Friday 11th November 2011.  It was an international, non-denominational spiritual conference initiated by the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion) under the leadership of the Most Reverend Nicholas D Okoh, Primate.

We, the participants, numbering over 5,000 Bishops, Clergy and Laity, deeply appreciated words of encouragement and goodwill from notable leaders from Nigeria, other parts of Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, including the retired Primate of the Church of Nigeria, the Primates of West Africa and Kenya, the Methodist Archbishop of Abuja and the General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God.

1    We gathered as the People of God and members of the Divine Commonwealth determined to celebrate our oneness in Christ and reaffirm our unity around the fundamentals of the Christian faith; recognizing that we have been called into ‘One body … one Spirit … one hope … one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all.’ 1 We reaffirmed our commitment to uphold our faith, loyalty and obedience to the Sovereign Lord of Heaven and Earth, and to prove ourselves faithful in season and out of season as His worthy disciples in all places and circumstances.  Continue reading “Conference Statement from the first Divine Commonwealth Conference”

Ending the Anglican Alphabet Soup

With the creation of the Anglican Church in North America, the time has come to end the various sub-groups which were necessary for the time of trials just passed through. Part of me doesn’t like this much because I think that parts of the AMiA are the best current representation of what a Biblical Church should look like. But it seems to me that every dollar spent on maintaining separate organizational structures is wasted. Why have a separate communications structure for CANA, AMiA, REC, etc? It’s waste of effort and money. And yet we see Bishop Minns saying:

Since Day 1, CANA has been and will continue to be a full participant in the life of the new province, and will continue to maintain our own identity.  We will encourage groups of congregations when they are ready, to establish themselves as free-standing dioceses.  Our goal is to support the work, mission, and ministry of the gospel on this continent and bring our own particular distinctive to that task.

Bishop Murphy has said similar things about AMiA continuing in something of a “Canterbury and York” model. Indeed, as I was writing this I received an e-mail from AMiA where Bishop Murphy says:

As a founding member of both the Common Cause Partnership and the emerging province, we will continue to fully participate in ACNA.  As we have consistently explained, however, we remain a missionary outreach of the Province of the Anglican Church of Rwanda under the authority of Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini.  This allows us to enjoy dual citizenship, a similar relationship to that of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA).

But I think we need to ask whether in ten or twenty years we will need all of these separate groups? It’s great for AMia and CANA to continue missionary efforts, but they should be able to do this as some kind of missionary diocese under ACNA, without needing their own leadership and headquarters. How much of this division is due to leftover animosities between bishops and churches?

I do understand some legitimate reasons for staying apart. As my friend Jim said to me, many folks won’t want to be under a Bishop who approves of women’s ordination, for example. But these issues need to be worked out from within ACNA unless it becomes obvious that it will never change and is un-reformable, which is hardly the case right now at its inception. I think good Anglican in all the bodies that make up ACNA should voice their desire for unity to their leaders and pray for change.