The Reverend Daniel Webster’s recent article in The Witness really crossed the line. Certainly not because he voices an opinion contrary to most Orthodox. We may not agree with what he writes but we all defend his right to voice his opinion. And here we find the crux of the matter. Opinion is one thing but passing off unfounded rumor and gossip as proven fact falls into a whole different category. Not only is it misleading, it is downright harmful. These are Mr. Webster’s actual words as they appear in The Witness:
In 1998 at the Lambeth meeting of Anglican bishops from around the world, the female bishops were snubbed. Some misogynist bishops would not participate in events with the women.
This statement is an affront on so many levels.
Should we give Mr. Webster the benefit of the doubt and assume he doesn’t understand the meaning of the word misogynist? For if we don’t make that assumption, the only conclusion left is that Mr. Webster has specific knowledge that bishops – men who wear the collar of shepherd in the Anglican Communion - HATE women. You read that right. HATE. Harsh word – even harsher judgement. Regardless where you fall on the subject of women’s ordination, it is difficult to believe that those who oppose it are motivated by hatred of women. No amount of searching the internet for proof of this statement yielded anything other than more unfounded allegations which, of course, are as woefully short on proof as Mr. Webster’s remarks. Let’s move on to the next shocking remark from Mr. Webster:
And I’m told that most, if not all, the U.S. bishops treated the African polygamist bishops with respect and courtesy.
Polygamous bishops? Possibly this is so upsetting because it is a priest making these remarks. We sometimes forget that priests are human too and fall prey to the same temptations as we mere pew sitters. It is especially disappointing that he would use such a tired rumor for no apparent reason other than to cause harm and embarrassment to those with whom he disagrees. This is something we might expect to see from Daniel Webster on The Book of Daniel, the short-lived television show, but certainly not from a real ordained priest! Many would disagree with these tactics and some even believe it to be a form of race-baiting.
“While its true that bishops do not make the church, I’m deeply disturbed by a growing perspective that “bishops in developing nations don’t know any better”—this is at least disrespectful, if not outright patronizing. Personally, I also see current efforts to accuse African bishops of not condemning polygamy in their communities to be a form of race-baiting.” – written by Ethan Flad, former editor of The Witness.
Mr. Webster was contacted to give him an opportunity to either provide proof of his remarks or issue an apology and retraction. This was his response:
It is more than a suspicion. For nearly eight years the stories were everywhere of polygamist wives of bishops at Lambeth 98. I have asked several people who I know and trust. They have confirmed for me personally seeing and being introduced to these bishops and their wives. That, coupled with a de facto ‘no comment’ from the Anglican Communion News Service, prompted me to report this.
This response is totally inadequate to support such serious and scandalous accusations. It is unfortunate that Mr. Webster has not responded to further inquiries and The Witness closed off other lines of communication by deleting comments on their weblog and blocking further comments. We are assuming this action was taken because persistent comments asking for proof of the allegations were being posted.
Despite the silence from Daniel Webster and The Witness, such serious accusations deserve to be confronted. Considering Mr. Webster’s articles are followed by a statement that his columns address issues of justice, we find his remarks and actions to be particularly offensive. Is justice only allowed for causes Mr. Webster supports? One wonders how interested Mr. Webster would be in proof if these unfounded allegations were made about him. We think justice demands that his remarks be substantiated or forever rebuked.
According to Mr. Webster, this incident allegedly occurred at Lambeth 98. Surely, if such a thing had occurred at such a public event, it would have been deemed newsworthy by some reporter. Can you believe that not one single report turned up in a Google search? However, this summary report from The Christian Challenge, was found:
In the end, though, liberalism not only lost, but suffered a surprisingly shattering defeat, in a lopsided 7.5-to-1 vote for what may be Lambeth’s most strongly orthodox statement on sexuality since 1920. While prompted by and focused on the homosexual matter, the resolution also implicitly rejects divorce, adultery, fornication, pre-marital sex, polygamy and other sexual sins. Lambeth’s resolution affirms that sex is intended only for marriage between one man and one woman in lifelong union, and that abstinence is “right” for single people. It says that homosexual practice is “incompatible with Scripture” and speaks against ordaining or blessing those in same-sex relationships.
The Association of Member Episcopal Conferences in Eastern Africa also has this Policy Statement on the web.
Polygamy is practised both in its traditional and modern forms in Eastern Africa. We take a very firm stand against it because it is incompatible with the Gospel message.
In an attempt to leave no stone unturned, inquiries were sent seeking further clarification. These are the responses:
Peace!
I do not know of any polygamist bishop or priest. I doubt the possibility in Nigeria as I am aware of some members being denied Eucharist because of polygamy.
The Reverend Canon AkinTudnde Popoola
The Church of Nigeria Communications Department
Greetings in the name of our Lord and Savoir Jesus Christ
I speak on behalf of the Church of the Province of West Africa. In our province there in nothing of that sort and as a matter of fact, in Ghana where I live the church does not countenance this.
The Reverend Fr. Anthony Eiwuley
Provincial Secretary of the Church of the Province of West Africa
The ECS position on polygamy is very clear from the Provincial Synod Communique (para 13 refers) in January 2006 (copied below).
We believe that human sexuality is God’s gift to human beings which is rightly ordered only when expressed within the life-long commitment of marriage between one man and one woman. We require all those in the ministry of the Church to live according to this standard and cannot accept church leaders whose practice is contrary to this. Valuing our belonging to the one holy, catholic and apostolic Church and out of love for our brothers and sisters in these churches, we will continue to call for repentance while listening to all voices within the Anglican Communion.
We are not aware of any additional people attending the last Lambeth Conference.The Reverend Joanna Udal
Assistant to the Archbishop Marona
The Episcopal Church of the Sudan
I am not aware that this is the case. African churches generally seem to abide by the Lambeth Conference resolution, and accept polygamy only in converts (so that they do not divorce and thus condemn to poverty their secondary wives), but they do not - I am told - permit polygamous unions contracted after conversion, nor ordain anyone who is polygamous. I am told that this official position is sometimes not rigorously enforced on parishioners, and that many “informal arrangements” do exist, although there is only one formal marriage in the eyes of the Church, but I know of no primate or clergyman who is in this situation, and would be interested to learn if the facts were otherwise.
The Reverend Canon Gregory K. Cameron
Deputy Secretary General of The Anglican Communion Office
We agree with Canon Cameron. We would be greatly interested to learn if the facts were otherwise. If an individual in a polygamous relationship has been ordained or elevated to the episcopate, the Communion needs to know this. Just as importantly, if someone has this knowledge and has failed to denounce it but instead kept it as fodder for backroom snickering and racist baiting, then the Communion has a lot more problems it needs to address. Lambeth 2008 may need to consider instituting a re-certification for our clergy.
This charge of polygamous bishops has been floating around the revisionist Episcopal community for years, yet no evidence for it has ever been offered. We call upon the Reverend Daniel Webster either to come forward with evidence for his allegations or immediately retract the charge and issue an apology. If Mr. Webster won’t comply, then it is incumbent upon the editors and staff of The Witness to provide the proof or a retraction and apology.
As to the many others who have made this accusation, we ask the same question. Simply stated—on what evidence did you base your accusation? For without evidence to support your allegation, you are trafficking in cheap gossip - plain and simple. Strange, but the last time we looked, there wasn’t much difference between lying and polygamy. Both require repentance.
29 Comments •
"Strange, but the last time we looked, there wasn’t much difference between lying and polygamy." Well, there is one difference - bearing false witness against your neighbour has a whole Commandment devoted to forbidding it.