Kumuyi’s son’s apology over wedding stirs debate
The
controversy generated by the marriage of the second son of the General
Superintendent of the Deeper Life Bible Church, John Kumuyi, to his
heartthrob, former Miss Love Odih, has taken a new dimension.
John and Love had tied the nuptial knot
on June 15 in Jamaica, but
the ceremony had been a subject of debate on
social media over how the bride was dressed, in comparison to other
weddings held in the church. The church’s belief does not entertain
flamboyance in such celebration.
In the wedding pictures that circulated
widely on blogs, online forums, discussion groups and other social
networks, the bride, who happens to be the daughter of the National
Overseer of DLBC in Jamaica, was seen putting on a wedding gown, ear
rings, holding a bouquet and applied make-up — all of which are alien to
the church’s doctrine.
However, the couple tendered a letter of
apology to the church, saying they have “realised the effects of our
actions and omission’’; adding that they may have been distracted by
cultural differences, as both of them had lived overseas for many years.
The letter was read to the congregation
on Saturday during the church’s mid-year celebration programme held at
the Deeper Life Conference Centre, Lagos-Ibadan Expresway and broadcast
live to branches all over Nigeria and some parts of Africa via
satellite.
The letter, which was read on behalf of
the couple at about 8pm on Saturday, read in part, “John and Love Kumuyi
write to express our deepest and most sincere apology for the turn of
events, that have resulted on our traditional and wedding ceremonies,
that took place in Jamaica on 13th June and 15th June, 2013
respectively.
“We unreservedly and wholeheartedly
state that we did not intend that our acts or omissions will, in any
way, undermine the great works that God has done through the Deeper
Christian Life Ministry worldwide and more specifically, through our
Father in the Lord, the General Superintendent.
“We also use this medium to profusely
and sincerely apologise to the General Superintendent for the
embarrassment and heartaches, our actions have caused him, more so that
he has earlier declined to be at the events.
“This, notwithstanding, we fully accept
that having been nurtured, taught and brought up with the sound teaching
of the word of God, we should have been able to draw the line, which
we failed to do.
“We have now realised the effects of our
actions and omission and do plead with the church for forgiveness and
also appealing that any action that should be taken be directed at John
and Love, as we take this time to prayerfully reflect on our actions. We
take full responsibility for what happened, and this action should, in
no way, be blamed on the GS, or the leaders of the church in Nigeria,
United States, Jamaica or United Kingdom and beyond.”
The apology has attracted cheers and
jeers on social media from Nigerians, including many who claimed to be
members of the church.
The first set argues that John and Love owe no one an explanation because they had done nothing wrong. Commenting on nairaland.com,
a contributor with the name Soloter says, “My dear brother and sister
(John and Love), I am also a member of the church (a coordinator) but I
say, if not for the sake of pleasing those who felt offended, there is
no point apologising. You owe no man any apology.
“God is not angry with you for marrying a
woman. You didn’t marry a man. Hear Apostle Paul on a similar case;
‘Let no man trouble me, I bear the marks of Christ not men”. There was
no problem with sister Love’s dressing before God and men. The devil
only pushed outsiders to make unnecessary hullabaloo, which was
supported by a microscopic envious fault-finding brethren in the church.
May God forgive them all for making my brethren (John & Love) to
feel guilty for no cause.’’
Another commentator on the forum who
claims to be a member of the church with the name Dpresideo says,
“Personally and to the best of my opinion, they have nothing to
apologise for. The reason is that they have not sinned in any way and I
don’t see why they should be castigated or disciplined, as this would
only aggravate the level of hypocrisy in the church! I shall continue to
follow the General Superintendent’s (Kumuyi’s) doctrine of holiness and
not human principles and personal ‘puritanism’ which does not take you
to the gate of heaven, except holiness.’’
On the other hand, those who believe
that the couple owe the generality of members of the church an apology
argue that they (John and Love) were well grounded in the doctrines of
the church, but willingly chose to be rebellious.
One of them who called himself Ubong
writes, “Not accepted! Why did they use it in the first place? What
happened to their sense of morality then? Medicine after death!’’
One Anniettie ufia notes, ‘’Children of
nowadays, You want to tell me that in that church they don’t have
marriage committee and counselling team? Was there no inspection of the
so-called wedding gown before that day? I perceived they warned them,
but they wouldn’t listen, after all, na my papa get church wetin concern you? That apology is too late. Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.’’
But an anonymous reader on a blog,
kemifilani.com appears to have a different opinion. She says, “The only
apology that should be acceptable to members is to make wedding gown
legal in Deeper Life, now that the GS’s daughter-in-law has set the
pace. Let Deeper Life brides look good on their wedding days just like
Pastor William Kumuyi’s daughter-in-law does. Anything short of that
amounts to repression, double standard and hypocrisy.’’
Also, a Facebook user, Arowolo
Anuoluwapo, argues, ‘’In my opinion, that apology was not necessary.
The church should be the one to apologise for conducting a wedding they
would not allow for ordinary members. The apology doesn’t solve issues.
Traditions need to be reviewed if progress is to be made, or else the
future remains bleak.’’
Kumuyi’s son’s apology over wedding stirs debate
Reviewed by Unknown
on
00:43
Rating:
No comments:
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the comment writers alone and does not reflect or represent the views of Admin