Joseph Kony and the LRA (ii)

[ by Charles Cameron — LRA, Muslim influence, biblical literalism, Machine Gun Preacher, the biker and the nun ]

.

There is much to be said about Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army, and I intend to write about the importance of a worldview imbued with magic — both in driving the LRA’s ferocious violence, and in providing subsequent healing for the victims and absolution and reconciliation for the perpetrators — in an upcoming post.  But there are a few things I want to have dealt with first — to clear the decks, so to speak.

Here, I want to mention three points briefly: (a) confirmation of a possible Muslim connection, or perhaps merely syncretism, in the LRA; (b) a fiercely literal form of biblical interpretation; and (c) the question of the “Christian Rambo”.

1.

In my recent post on the topic, I quoted Maya Deighton‘s DFID report about Kony’s “much-proclaimed conversion to Islam”.

My friend Jim Lai very kindly pointed me to another and richer datum on the topic. It comes from the 1997 Human Rights Watch report, THE SCARS OF DEATH: Children Abducted by the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda:

There is, of course, an apparent irony in Sudan’s support for the Lord’s Resistance Army: the Sudanese government is militantly Islamic, while the Lord’s Resistance Army is at least ostensibly Christian. But over time, it seems clear that the beliefs and practices of Kony and his followers have changed: in 1987, Kony’s group was closely identified with Alice Lakwena, and like Lakwena, Kony appears to have enjoyed substantial popular support among the Acholi. Huge crowds would gather to hear him preach. By May 1997, when we conducted most of our interviews, the testimony of the children we met suggested that many of the rituals common in Lakwena’s time had been abandoned or were only sporadically followed. Many children also reported rebel practices that appear to have been adopted from Islam: for instance, the rebels pray while facing Mecca, respect Friday as a holy day, and forbid the keeping of pigs.

The New York Times published LTC Richard Skow’s highly informative notes on the LRA, and these included (page 9) more than one injunction with a specifically Christian orientation, and at least one that seems to fit more closely with the Muslim model: “Wounded personnel are administered three sips of water mixed with shea butter oil – one sip for each of the trinity” (cf. Christian baptismal doctrine and Matthew 28.19) and “Before prayer they must wash at least their hands, feet and face” (cf Muslim wudu (ablutions) before prayer, and Qur’an 5.6).

As Jim points out, what’s being described here may best be described as syncretism rather than Islam.

So while I don’t think that paragraph by any means proves that the LRA is a “Muslim” organization, it certainly makes Limbaugh‘s portrayal of the LRA as “Christians … fighting the Muslims” – not to mention his headline, Obama Invades Uganda, Targets Christians — look even more clueless.

Thanks, Jim.

2.

My second point has to do with Biblical interpretation of the most literal sort.

Mark 9.43- 47 reads:

And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

There are, I imagine, more than a few Christian men who have looked on a woman to lust after her, and have therefore presumably committed adultery with her already in their hearts (see Matthew 5.28), but who have not seen fit to pluck out their eyes as a result. There are many modes of Biblical interpretation, and the application of Mark 9 to Matthew 5 in a literal sense does not appear to have been a popular one.

Page 1 of 3 | Next page