(Nigerian Catholic Church) Church position on gay people explained


Mar 17, 2014
The position of the Catholic Church in Nigeria in respect of same sex union and other moral vices is in consonance with that of the universal Church and in conformity with the Social Teachings of the Church, the President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria, Most Rev. Ignatius Kagama has declared.

Archbishop Kaigama who gave this explanation in his opening address to declare this year’s Catholic Bishops’ Conference First Plenary open in Abuja, stated: “It is a mischievous and faulty generalization to reason that because we resist same-sex ‘marriage’ we differ from our Pope who said: ‘If a person is gay and seeks God and has goodwill, who am I to judge?’ The Archbishop continued: “Our compassion for the weak, the marginalized and those who suffer discrimination is unwavering and uncompromising. We minister to all.”

The theme of the Conference was: Church and State Partnership in Providing Quality Education for the Nigerian People, and the ceremony took place last Sunday, at the Conference Hall of the Our Lady Queen of Nigeria Pro-Cathedral, Area 3, Abuja.

The Metropolitan of Jos Province further explained: “We stand for the promotion and protection of human rights which are consistent with our religious and cultural values. Legalizing same-sex ‘marriage’ will open the flood gates to so many moral issues that can seriously compromise our African culture and becloud our evangelization efforts in Nigeria.”

He added: “:Nigerian Catholics do not hate men and women who are of biologically gay orientation, but strongly affirm that gay unions or ‘marriages’ are simply not in conformity with our Christian theology or traditional Nigerian morality.”

The explanation of Archbishop Kaigama became necessary following the attack from some quarters on the Catholic Bishops’ Conference for commending President Goodluck Jonathan for signing the Anti-same –sex Bill into Law.

According to him: “When the CBCN sent a letter commending President Goodluck Jonathan on the stand against same-sex union or ‘marriage’, we did so to uphold the age-long biblical and traditional morality of our people that marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman. Same-sex unions or so-called ‘marriages’ are alien to us and we resist the idea but we will always extend compassion of Christ to men and women with biological orientation that is gay or lesbian and defend their rights just as we have constantly defended the rights of all persons discriminated against.”

Archbishop Kaigama therefore called on “individuals, pressure groups and governments from abroad who are very anxious to fight for the rights of gays in Nigeria” to “first help us deal with the menacing activities of terrorists who claim that it is their right to kill and destroy, and have caused so many deaths of innocent Nigerians.”

The ceremony, which was attended by President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, the Papal Nuncio to Nigeria, Most Rev. Augustine Kasujja, John Cardinal Onaiyekan and over 50 members of the conference, the Senate President, Senator David Mark, priests, religious, Knights of the Catholic Church, lay faithful and other invited dignitaries from all walks of life, took place at the hall of the Our Lady Queen of Nigeria Pro-Cathedral, Area 3, Abuja.


Great for them. And as he said, the West ought to be more concerned about the atrocities of “Boko Haram” (haram indeed :mad:) then about legalized sodomy.

What you are saying is like telling a cop “why are you giving me a ticket when there’s people robbing bank and homes. You should be looking for them instead.”
Wrong is always wrong and hurtful now more and more to children.

Archbishop Kaigama was ignorant saying it is biological, there is no evidence that says, a person has to behave that way (no gene found). Colored people look in the mirror and have to be colored but a LGTB can look in the mirror and accept their tendencies and renounce that behavior.

Respect for the misguided individuals is not acceptance, so often in our western culture people give inclusion but they don’t mean to accept the behavior. An example is having a backyard party and including LGTB people but not wanting an proselytizing of the lifestyle. Too often inclusion means acceptance of what LGTB stands for and this is not so.
Trying to do the right thing is not always popular

FYI, ‘biological’ means a lot more than genetics. How their neurology influences their hormonal system would be biological.

And simply stating that the causes are biological does not imply causality of action, or draw inference where there is none.

Current evidence is leaning towards something going wrong during the pregnancy during when the brain is sexed. That of course doesn’t mean they have to act on it.

Given the utterly terrible track record heterosexuals have at maintaining chastity when not married (heck, even when married) I think this law is grotesque given a simple kiss, hug or holding hands can get you ten years in prison. Catholic bishops started trying to get sodomy laws repealed in the West over half a century ago, so why are there bishops supporting far more draconian laws that basically create a witch hunt for LGBT people?

A lot of people had something going wrong at birth or in development that does give them a propensity toward things like fishing, being outdoors, adventure or an attraction to slot machines.
There is no biological justification that accepts these behaviors when there are other family obligations that are more important, these types of people are asked to abstain, so too should the GLBT. Children need good natural law role models.

Why should it be legal for a man to engage in sex with women he is not married to, but punishable by ten years imprison if a man is caught kissing another man on the lips?

Which Bishops did this in the West?

The English bishops. It should also be noted that sodomy laws in England were introduced by Protestants. In Catholic countries they were abolished much earlier, for example in Italy they were abolished in the 19th century.

Why should someone go to prison for life for a non-violent crime like shoplifting as in the horrendous 3-strikes law in California? There are unfair laws everywhere. :shrug: The “civilised” West has some pretty horrid laws. Some of the mandatory minimum sentences in the U.S. are absolutely kafkaesque.

The three strikes law in California only mandates life sentencing if the third strike is 1) a felony and 2) a serious or violent crime which is not unreasonable.

I understand the background and how the law came to be; it was based on good intentions, but it has resulted in some tragic miscarriages of justice.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.