Bishop Orama maintained that the skill acquisition and the Small & Medium Scale Enterprises programmes of the federal government can be properly executed if the government partners with the Church.
On the political situation in the country, the Anglican bishop commended the present democratic dispensation for constituting the Electoral Reform Panel which he hopes, will help to guarantee credible elections in the future.
Also, speaking on the recent publication on the internet about an homophobic statement attributed to him in his recent synod address, Rt. Revd. Isaac Orama lamented over what he called a false statement published on the internet and called on the media to desist from publishing wrong statements for public consumption.
Read it all. Bishop Orama has been accused, tried and found guilty in many Anglican quarters of saying something he did not say . We have his text and what was purported to have been said was not in the text. So far as I am aware, there has been no audio or transcript of the bishop’s interview with reporters but both the bishop and the reporter said it was an incorrect quotation. UPI pulled the story. The reporter has made a statement which in part reads as follows:
The Bishop was wrongly misrepresented and misquoted and I hereby render my apologies to him, the Anglican Diocese of Uyo and the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion) for embarrassment caused them by the report.
Look, I will continue to try to denounce language which is disrepectful of human dignity when I read of it or hear it. But where is the sense of justice from those who claim the mantle of justice for finding someone guilty of something he clearly did not say? Greg Griffith and I were both careful to couch our intial statements with the caveat that we were going by the report but that the report may not be correct. Many reappraisers did not. So where are the statements from them about this injustice now that it is very clear it was a false report? KSH.
The statement from Canterbury looks particularly embarrassing now. Will it be rescinded with apology?
“So where are the statements from (Many reappraisers) about this injustice now that it is very clear it was a false report? KSH.”
Now, I suppose, we are being judgemental and legalistic. 🙂
Well, we might find one to prepare a 60 page report on why we don’t really understand what they were initially saying and that we have no right to judge on the issue, and……..
If these apologies do not come, it will continue to reinforce the view that Western Bishops get one standard used for them and non-Western another.
Imagine the screaming which would occur if reasserters had done this to a reappraising leader and it was then shown that the report was false. People like Fatherjake and Ms. Russell would be up in arms.
I see no reason why Canterbury should apologize. The Archbishop’s statement was made in the same good faith as Kendall’s original denunciation of the sentiments. It would be appropriate, I think, for Canterbury to issue a statement of satisfaction at the bishop’s denial, as Kendall is satisfied with the follow up reports.
It would also be good for the reporter to explain how he came up with the comments that he attributed to Bishop Orama and is now retracting with an apology. What ever possessed him to write these words? That is the one puzzling matter that has not been cleared up.
Canterbury should apologize for not couching its remarks with any sense of the statement’s possible lack of veracity. there is a tremdous lack of respect show there.
I agree with Bob in #4 that the ABC should also issue a statement of relief and mention the bishop and reporters statements.
RW looks very foolish. The statement came very late, too, which is another example of his non-leadership.
This episode actually may prove to be useful. Progress happens in part because collectively we learn from our screw-ups. We learn imperfectly, sometimes painfully, often at terrible cost, but we learn nonetheless.
Who knows, maybe that’s one of the ways the Holy Spirit guides us into all truth . . . .
It would also be good for the reporter to explain how he came up with the comments that he attributed to Bishop Orama and is now retracting with an apology.
It would indeed and if we keep waiting for that, we can delay expressing regret to the bishop for harsh words directed at him based on one unconfirmed press report.
For once (and probably the last time), I actually agree with Bob from Boone. I’d like to know how those words were put into Bishop Orama’s mouth, by whom and for what purpose. Not knowing creates a more sinister picture than is probably the case.
Alice,
As I read Bob’s comment, I don’t get that his drift is the same as what you are suggesting it is. I didn’t get that Bob was looking for an external source — you’re suggesting that Bob is including the idea of someone out to denigrate Bp Orama, and I think Bob is asking the question of human conscience and psychological motivation.
Or were you just agreeing that you are curious, and then asking your own question? It’s not easy to keep all the tongue-in-cheekness straight around here sometimes.
RGEaton
Bob from Boone,
You’ve got to be kidding?! A journalist that sensationalizes something (falsely) in order to bring attention to himself? Is that a new thing for you?
Look again at the newsprint publications at your grocery store check-out stand when you go again. Not only do these rags sell falsehoods, half-truths, and doctored photos, but “we” buy them.
One word to answer — it was sinful.
Hopefully his public repentance will lead to personal reformation, as D.C. suggests is a possible outcome.
RGEaton
RGEaton, I’m curious yes. Something about this entire story is fishy. And I am asking my own question, trying to give dear Bob the benefit of the doubt, although I know he suspects the Nigerians of being political motivated and control seeking (which I regard as an example of transference). I agree that it’s hard “to keep all the tongue-in-cheekness straight”.
Oh, you mind readers! Alice, surely at some point you and I will completely agree on some point for the same reasons.
Meanwhile… at various reappraiser sites:
Crickets are chirping… when reality strikes – we just pretend it doesn’t exist!
But where is the sense of justice from those who claim the mantle of justice for finding someone guilty of something he clearly did not say?
It is no more vlear that he did not say it than it was that he did. Once +Orama says “Homosexuals are not satanic and they do not deserve to be killed.” then I will apologize. Otherwise, his hateful quote stands unchallenged.
#6; “Progress happens in part because collectively we learn from our screw-ups. We learn imperfectly, sometimes painfully, often at terrible cost, but we learn nonetheless.”
What do you mean ‘we’, white man? This is a really mealy mouthed statement, DC. All you omitted was ‘We need to move on from this.’
Gordian [#15], I take it then that you profess to learn neither from your own mistakes nor from those of others? That would make you an unusual creature indeed.
DC, I sometimes learn from my mistakes, and sometimes keep repeating them. What I was objecting was the inclusive ‘we’ which is used often to avoid blame rather than to acknowledge it (‘Hey, we’re ALL to blame! Let’s learn from it and move on, forget about it etc’), an attitude of generosity to one’s own that is often absent when one’s ‘opponents’ are found to be amiss.
For the record, I thought Kendall was a little hasty in condemning a news report before it had been confirmed. But I will also add that I have little doubt that Orama thinks homosexuality deeply injurious to the soul (as my own sins are).
Brian from T19 :
Brian until I hear you say, “I really did not say I hate all the people on Titus 1:9 and wish they were dead” I will not believe you said it.
Of course, you never said it in the first place – but that doesn’t matter, does it?
This is the pith of your logic there.
I WILL believe you said it – I mean –
FWIW, my impression of the reporter, based on how the retraction was worded, is that he is of a very conservative Christian mindset. I would guess that the opinion originally attributed to Bishop Orama more accurately reflect the opinions of the reporter. That is my supposition anyway.
Agreed, #20 – as would any reasonble person reading this hwole case.
And I hold the words of that reporter and the hatefulness of those who still condem the good Bishop in equal contempt.
Eclipse writes in no. 18:
“Brian until I hear you say, “I really did not say I hate all the people on Titus 1:9 and wish they were dead†I will not believe you said it.”
Eclipse, purely for the sake of complete parallelism, that’s not really the same as Brian’s requested statement (mutatis mutandis, of course).
The precise parallel would more accurately be:
“Brian until I hear you say, “I really do not hate all the people on Titus 1:9 and wish they were dead [regardless of whether or not I [i.e., Brian] have ever actually voiced such a wish]†I [i.e., Eclipse] will not believe you do not hate said group of people.”
We now return you to your regularly scheduled jousting, already in progress. 😉
“Hey, Brian from T19, precisely when did you stop beating your wife?”
That’s about the level of fairness and just plain common decency your comment #14 rises to. If someone slandered or libeled you, I bet you’d be up in arms and probably sue for justice. Don’t expect anything but a final, irrevocable split with your hard-hearted attitude.
Nadine Kwong :
I like that – and then, don’t forget to put it on 14 websites with headlines like:
Brian from T19 HATES Orthodox people!
The Evil People on Fr. Jake’s site will not repudiate Brian’s T19’s statement!
Susan Russell strangely silent on Brian’s announcement
And then when it’s proven to be false – just forget to put that on the web… not really worth reporting..
Good post, Canon Harmon.