mag pic

ONE of the most powerful figures in the Anglican Church believes that Africa is under attack from Islam and that Muslims are “mass-producing” children to take over communities on the continent.

Archbishop Okoh

Archbishop Okoh

Archbishop Nicholas Okoh, 56, was elected Primate of Nigeria last week and his elevation could exacerbate tensions at a time when Anglicans are working to build bridges with Muslims.

Dr Michael Nazir-Ali resigned as Bishop of Rochester earlier this year to work in countries where Islam is the majority religion. Nigeria is split almost half and half between Christianity and Islam.

There are about 17 million practising Anglicans in the country, but they face persecution in the Islamic north, while the two faiths vie with local religions for supremacy in the rest of the country.

Archbishop Okoh made his controversial comments about Islam in a sermon in Beckenham, Kent, ealier this year, but his remarks that there was a determined Islamic attack in African countries such as Uganda, Kenya and Rwanda seems only to have surfaced this week.

According to The Times, Okoh said:

They spend a lot of money, even in places where they don’t have congregations, they build mosques, they build hospitals, they build anything. They come to Africans and say, ‘Christianity is asking you to marry only one wife. We will give you four!’

Okoh described this as “evangelism by mass-production”.

He added:

That is the type of evangelism they are doing: mass-production, so if you have four wives, four children, sixteen children, very soon you will be a village.

Africa was “surrounded by Islamic domination,” he said, and he urged Christians to speak out now or lose the authority to speak.

One senior member of Britain’s Muslim community said:

The views presented by the Archbishop are extremist and overwhelmed by Islamophobia, and his elevation will certainly foster misunderstanding and extremism. Knowing the communal geography of Nigeria, he will be a massive danger to community relations and cohesion in his country, besides places like London.

‹‹
››

24 Responses to “Muslims mass-producing children to take over Africa, says Archbishop”

  1. He's right, of course. It used to be the Roman Catholics who dreamed of world domination. Now it is the Muslims – but point out the obvious and they scream "Islamophobia"!

  2. "The views presented by the Archbishop are extremist and overwhelmed by Islamophobia, and his elevation will certainly foster misunderstanding and extremism. Knowing the communal geography of Nigeria, he will be a massive danger to community relations and cohesion in his country, besides places like London."
    Oh the hypocricy!!!!! Poor little Islam being misunderstood. Where were the "outraged" masses to protest and blow themselves up? And was there also a not-so-thinly veiled threat there at the end?

  3. What a clever system Islam has: Every alpha male bags 4 wives each, leaving 3 nondescript types to a life of hapless wanking, livestock abuse, frustration and resentment. A ready-made explosive for the purposes of jihad. And of course, the alphas are pumping out up to 8 sons each, of whom statistically 6 will more hapless wankers …

  4. The prize is one global theocracy.

  5. The archbishop is exactly right of course. The trouble is it's rather like the red fox complaining that the grey fox has taken to raiding the henhouses he thought were his own. What they need is an atheist grizzle bear to get into those henhouses………..

  6. Nothing's black and white.
    I'd say its some sort of grey.

  7. Archbishop Okoh has clearly learned the Prime Directive of religious hypocrisy, usually used against nontheists but equally effective against opposition religions: To find the ultimate unspeakable evil of which to accuse an opponent, just look in the mirror.

  8. That's the first time I've heard the "OMG they're breeding so they can take over the world" BS from a non-white person. Usually it's coming from the RRRW rednecks who are whining that if we don't do something whites in the US will be a minority and we'll all be speaking Mexican (or similar nonsense).

    Marcusson was right, people are alike all over.

  9. Dear Buffy,
    Muslims are 100% FOR apartheid. Since most whites associate apartheid with skin colour and are not used to thinking of it in terms of religion/politics, it may take a while for it to sink in.
    However, unless you yourself are muslim – and practising taqiyya, as is your right and duty – then even you must find the idea that western universities are installing muslim only toilets and muslim only rooms disturbing?
    Its amazing, they say: "we want world domination" and people laugh and say "don't we all".
    You say "they want world domination" and immediately there are screams of Islamophobe.
    Well, apartheidophile, I protest.

  10. I think this is a different argument, Buffy. I believe – I hope! – it's about religion, not race. We know the Catholics have opposed birth control for centuries so that they can maintain their numerical representation in society, and now Muslims are dominating communities in the same manner. It's already happening in parts of Europe – it's not just a xenophobic fear!

  11. I'm not saying I have any affinity for the Muslims or their particular brand of whackjobbery, and I certainly don't condone or support anything they do in an effort to spread their particular virus. But this is little more than one religious group whining about how their "territory" is being taken over by another. Funny how the Christians consider it a *good* thing to go all over the globe and shove their religion into the darkest jungles. They've engaged in wars and taken the lives of millions over the course of history in their crusade to convert everybody to Christianity. Then when others do the same thing to them they're suddenly victims.

  12. So what's next: a competetion to see who are the fastest breeders? There's already enought sectarian violence in Nigeria, so breeding and killing might come to some kind of balance.

  13. Is this Archbishop Okoh being used as a church mouthpiece? If a white archbishop said this kind of thing there would be a widespread cry of racist! Use a black guy to say it and they can’t use that one.

  14. Wasn't this fella's predecessor the one whose argument for new legislation against gays in Nigeria boiled down to 'gays don't breed new punters for my church', and wasn't he also the one who cut a deals with Muslims to ensure that if the next Nigerian premier was a Muslim he'd leave 'respectable' Christian denominations alone and only crack down on evangelicals?

  15. He's Primate of Nigeria, abz , not Bishop of Southwark! I think you'll find that the vast majority of the population in that region are of "dusky hue"!!

  16. Archbishop Peter Akinola, who retires next March (and not before time!). I don't know about his "deal" with the Muslims, but he was a megalomaniac troublemaker with delusions of grandeur, and homophobic beyond belief. He seemed at one time to entertain the idea that he might realistically replace Dumbledore as the head of the C of E! He also contributed to community relations in Nigeria by stirring up Christians to engage in retaliatory violence against Muslims, who had, in their turn, rioted over those oh-so-offensive cartoons!! Read more about him on Wikipedia as well as here:

    http://www.petertatchell.net/r.....aki…

  17. There was an article linked to from the Dawkins website about a Christian woman who had produced about twelve hundred offspring by having something like fourteen kids and encouraging them to have large families too. The gist of the article was that atheists were doomed to be outnumbered as they are more likely to have small families. Of course the comment thread pointed out the flaws in the argument such as belief not being heredatry and the fact that numerically atheism is on the rise. Anyway, if the story was true, this is definately a case of the pot calling the lettle black.

  18. I've said the same thing before, Stoneyground. The evangelicals whom I knew had HUGE families! And while belief may not be hereditary, it is highly likely that children who have been brought up in that sort of hothouse environment (ie brainwashed) will continue "in the faith". You have no idea just how their religion permeates every aspect of their lives, as well as taking up so much of their time and energy. As I have also said elsewhere, they are very keen on recruiting "young people" to their cause – very often through friendships with their own children – but of all those of my generation who were once as keen as mustard, practically the only ones who continue are those who had the "benefit" of a Christian upbringing!!

  19. I commented on the RD website that a couple of generations ago, most of my family were active within the Methodist Church, now almost none of them are and the chapel that we used to attend has been converted into a house. The Methodists more gentle indoctrination obviously doesn't stick very often. If what you say about brainwashing is true, the future of religion is that it will only be carried on by really badly screwed up people.

  20. I agree entirely, Stoneyground. There's something about fundamentalist certainty that appeals to people, in an uncertain world. This, also, has been commented upon before. And to repeat something which I myself keep banging on about, it's not just fundamentalist RELIGIONS that many people find attractive, due to the sense of purpose, direction, identity, and personal prestige that they feel are bestowed upon them – not to mention the feeling of "belonging" – but ALL ideologies, be they religious, political, or philosophical.

  21. I agree entirely, Stoneyground. There's something about fundamentalist certainty that appeals to people, in an uncertain world. This, also, has been commented upon before. And to repeat something which I myself keep banging on about, it's not just fundamentalist RELIGIONS that many people find attractive, due to the sense of purpose, direction, identity, and personal prestige that they gain from them – not to mention the feeling of "belonging" – but ALL ideologies, be they religious, political, or philosophical.

  22. I agree entirely, Stoneyground. There's something about fundamentalist certainty that appeals to people, in an uncertain world. This, also, has been commented upon before. And to repeat something which I myself keep banging on about, it's not just fundamentalist RELIGIONS that many people find attractive, due to the sense of purpose, sense of direction, personal identity, and personal prestige that they gain from them – not to mention the feeling of "belonging" – but ALL ideologies, be they religious, political, or philosophical.

  23. You're also forgetting "Faith Schools", Stoneyground! Thousands of children from "unsaved" homes in Britain now attend Religious Academies, where fundamentalist ideas are being rammed down their throats. Look on the internet if you think I'm making this up. They are not receiving an education in the way that you and I envisage it. They are learning in a highly individualistic and structured way, without the possibility of questioning the facts with which they are presented. This is happening in schools in England even today! Work is going on, mainly in the US, to produce even more advanced computer programmes so that even more children, including those receiving "Home Schooling", will be able to follow individual programmes of study at their computers. This to me is a truly frightening prospect, as one can only guess at the sort of attitudes and values that these children will have when they enter society as adults! Many of them, sadly, are going to be born-again, happy-clappy, "Jesus Loves Me" Christians!!

  24. "Its amazing, they say: "we want world domination" and people laugh and say "don't we all".
    You say "they want world domination" and immediately there are screams of Islamophobe. "

    Well said gsw!!!

    Godless not gormless