The Role of the Church In
HIV Education And Prevention
Within The Liberian Community in Minnesota
By
Dr. Josef A. Howard
Executive Director
LMA & Resident Pastor, Bethel Minnesota
Over the years, the African Community in Minnesota has been plagued with the spread of HIV. According to Elizabeth Namarra of Sub-Saharan African Youth and Family Services in Minnesota (SAYFSM) , Africans are the hardest hit population by HIV/AIDS both in Africa and in Minnesota. She notes in her presentation on the epidemic that Africans in Minnesota represent below 1% of the population of the State, but they made up 21% of all newly diagnosed HIV cases in Minnesota in 2002 & 2003. According to this discourse, by 2005, more than 80 Liberians infected with HIV were living in Minnesota.
HIV, which stands for Human Immunodeficiency Virus, is the virus that causes AIDS. It attacks the body’s defense systems and gradually defeats them leaving its host defenseless against diseases that the body’s mechanism can not fight. The primary means by which HIV can be contracted are: a) blood to blood contact: needle/syringe; tattooing and body piercing; blood transfusion in underdeveloped countries for the most part and, organ transplant (which is extremely low in USA); b) Sexual contact; c) mother to child.
In the wake of the alarming reports of the increased number of Liberians with HIV in Minnesota, there has been a proliferation of groups who may or may not have received grants from different humanitarian or social organizations with the goal of educating the community of the spread of the disease, its impact on the community, how it can be prevented, and some of the challenges that HIV victims encounter as they battle
this epidemic. In trying to achieve their goal and reach the targeted community, many of these organizations have turned to community base Churches to create the platform for them to spread their message. These groups have real good intentions and we applaud them for the wonderful job that they continue to do in creating the awareness of HIV, educating the Liberian community in Minnesota of the devastating effect of this disease and, providing free testing for those who desire to know if they have the virus or not.
The key questions that continue to bother us as pastors and religious leaders within the Liberian community in Minnesota are: What is the role of the Church in spreading this message? Should the Church play a leading role in helping to educate the community, if so, what should be its message? By using the Church as a platform to spread the message of an epidemic that is considered, by the Church, to be generally a result of unacceptable biblical lifestyle, is the Church compromising its stand on holiness and embracing sexual immorality or, is the Church changing its position that sex is to be only within marriage (by one man and one woman)?
The questions mentioned above are some of the questions that our members have been asking and reflect the apparent conflict that has been going through their minds about the role (if any) the Church could play in curbing this epidemic, while at the same time being mindful not to compromise its integrity and position on holiness based on biblical teachings.
In order to address the questions raised above, I am of the conviction that the situation has to be addressed from two different dimensions. The first has to do with
whether the Church should be involved in educating the community about the disease and everything associated therewith. The second has to do with the role of the Church in preventing the spread of the disease.
A thorough analysis of the history of the Church over the centuries in light of the current situation leaves no doubt that the Church has and should continue to play a role in educating the broader community about this social plague and phenomena called HIV, which develops into AIDS. Hence, the question ought not to be should the Church be involved in helping to educate its congregants, in particular, and the masses in general, as the answer would then be emphatically, yes, it should be! The main question should be how should it? In other words, what role should the Church play in the prevention and spread of the disease? To answer the latter, it would be helpful to explore what should be the attitude of the Church in general towards those who have been affected by this virus.
First and foremost, the Church should be a place where people who feel abandoned, rejected, depressed, sick, frustrated, hopeless and homeless can come in order to find refuge. It ought to be a place of peace, love, acceptance, consolation, and hope. This means that the Church needs to love and reach out to those who have been affected by the HIV virus and help them by expressing God’s love to them. This can be done through praying for them, leading them to the saving knowledge of Jesus and financially helping to meet their needs (if possible). Jesus declared in the gospel of John chapter 13 verses 34-35 "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."
The second thing that the Church can do is to help in removing the negative stigma or label that has been placed on the disease, those who have been affected, and those who advocate that victims of the disease be treated with dignity. It is rather unfortunate that not only those who have been affected by the disease are maligned but even those who advocate that the victims of HIV need be treated humanely also suffer the same fate. I think that it behooves the Church to teach its members and those who come within its doors to understand the love of Christ and know how to extend that same love to those in need.
In addition, the Church can make its facilities available to those who have been trained to educate the congregants on how to spread the love of God to those who are sick, destitute, and or facing the prospect of death (Matthew 28:20). It is also important to note that there is a fraction of those affected with the virus that was not involved in an immoral lifestyle as condemned by the Holy Scripture. In this light, it would be really unfair to label everyone with the virus or those who have the disease as being immoral and therefore they deserve the judgment of the Church or should experience the wrath of God. The Church can communicate this message effectively and efficiently without appearing to compromise its position on holiness, righteousness and sanctification.
Third, the Church can host prayer seminars, revival and services in order to petition the kingdom of God to release God’s healing power and anointing to heal those who have been affected by this disease. In this light, the Church can teach people on the importance of prayer, how to pray, the hindrances to prayer, and the power of God that is released when the saints of God pray (James 5:13-16). We need to be constantly
reminded that in Exodus 15:26, the Lord calls himself Jahweh-Ropheka. It means, the Lord who heals you. It is God’s name! It signifies who He is, what He can do, and what He wants to do.
Obviously God can use different methods to heal, namely: a) laying hands and intercession of others; b) anointing with oil and faithful prayer of the saints; c) participation in the Holy Eucharist (communion) and; d) doctors and the use of medication. Since the Church does not know which of these methods the Lord could decide to use, it is incumbent upon the Church to use the methods made available to it by the Lord Jesus Christ (prayer and intercession, laying on of hands, anointing with oil, and the administration of the Holy Eucharist) as the body of believers petition God to release his healing virtue upon those who are sick. God reminded the children of Israel in 2 Chronicles 7:14 “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.”
Having stated above the general attitudes that the Church needs to exhibit towards those who have contracted the virus or are carriers of the disease, it is now time to address what the Church can do in educating its congregants about this epidemic.
The first thing is that pastors need to understand that this disease should be spoken about. No one can ignore the fact that it is severely affecting the Liberian community in Minnesota. Hence, pastors need to seek to be educated on the actual causes of the disease, why is it spreading, what can be done, who are the most affected and why, and how the Church can help. When pastors start to speak about the disease, it will help remove some of the predominant social responses associated therewith, namely:
fear, denial, stigma and discrimination.
These social responses have led to anxiety and prejudice both within and outside of the Church. However, when the Church changes its attitude towards those who are already affected, it might lead to compassion, solidarity, outreach, support, unity and ultimately, the salvation of souls. Moreover, it might help in removing the negative stigma associated with HIV or AIDS given the fact that this can lead to marginalization, exclusion, rejection, denial to basic social and community services, etc. In most instances, victims of AIDS are stigmatized because of the following reasons:
a)Little is known about the disease in many communities.
b)HIV/AIDS is a life-threatening disease without cure and there is a lack of proper understanding of its origin.
c)Those who have not been affected are afraid of contracting the disease.
d)Those living with the disease are often blamed for being infected.
e)The disease is associated with behaviors (such as sex between men and injecting drug-use) that are already stigmatized in many societies.
f)Religious or moral beliefs lead some people to believe that having HIV/AIDS is the result of moral fault (such as promiscuity or 'deviant sex') that deserves to be punished.
g)That the disease is a result of God’s judgment upon humanity in general, but specifically on those who have been affected.
Please do not misunderstand my argument. My intention is not to argue in favor of, or, against why victims contract or have contracted the virus. My point of reasoning
is that they are already sick and are being abandoned and ridiculed. God would want his Church to love them.
Moreover, it is important for the Church of God to understand that HIV and AIDS victims, their families and the wider communities are already suffering shame and humiliation because this disease is often associated with behaviors such as homosexuality, drug addiction or promiscuity and are perceived as being personally inflicted because of a chosen lifestyle to which the victim(s) consciously subscribed. Hence, the question is, should the Church continue to inflict additional pain and suffering or should the Church be a place of healing, love and acceptance? I hope we choose the latter.
Second, pastors and Church can be a voice of the destitute. The fact of the matter is that behind our statistic is a real face. Sometimes we get caught in serving the Church folks and forget that those who need us the most are the non-Church folks. Jesus said in Mark 2:17, “It is not those who are healthy who need a physician, but those who are sick; I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” Somehow, pastors need to understand the true meaning of “the Church.”
According to Saint Gregory (P. L., LXXVII, 740), the Church was composed of "Sancti ante legem, sancti sub lege, sancti sub gratia ("The saints before the Law, the saints under the Law, and the saints under grace"). The word “ecclesia” is what is used or interpreted as “Church.” It means the “called-out ones (ecc =out; kaleo =call). It signifies a civil body of select (called, elected) people who have been called-out, summoned, or appointed for a specific mission. It is important to note that this was a “hedonistic” or “secular” word and not necessary a Judeo-Christian word.
Therefore, the question is, why did Jesus use it? I believe that he was driving home a point. The “ecclecia” was a group of people tasked with establishing the same kind of government and socio-political system in a territory conquered by Rome. Hence, when Jesus said that he was building (establishing) his Church, “ecclecia,” he was referring to a group of people called out from the world, who are heavenly minded (ambassadors of his kingdom) who are tasked with establishing the same principles that are in heaven, here on earth. It meant an autonomous body of Christians under no king but Jesus; under no other jurisdiction but that of Jesus.
No man ruled them apart from Christ! And that was probably one of the reasons these same Christians ran into trouble with kings and rulers, were arrested, and some inescapably became martyrs. They dropped Caesar as their King and took up Christ. It can certainly be argued that the behavior of the disciples was in line with what they had been taught. It can be recalled that when Jesus was asked by one of this disciples how to pray, he taught to pray, “….thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven…” So what does it mean in light of the role of the Church in HIV prevention? It simply means that we need to understand that the Church is to be heavenly minded; the Church is to reach out to people irrespective of their medical condition with the goal of establishing the rule of God in their hearts; the Church is to love people as God loves them; the Church is to be a place of healing, comfort and acceptance, just as heaven is. The Church is therefore a group of people called by God to live godly lives worth emulating.
Hence the question is, do we see HIV and AIDS victims as part of the society that God has called us to evangelize, disciple and present to him as a bride on that last day, or,
do we see them as individuals with whom the Church should have no dealings? Maybe, some would argue that this is a moral issue. For me, this question is beyond what some might call a moral obligation. It really has to do with whether we see ourselves in relationship or if we see ourselves as a separate entity. A mother will do everything to save her child’s life or try to ease the pain of her child….not because she feels that she has a moral obligation to do so, but because she loves that child and has a relationship with the child. In other word, the child is a part of her and she is a part of that child’s life.
This means that the Church cannot separate itself from the society, even if it is a morally deprived one. Christ died for those who are “sinners” and those who are “righteous” and has called the Church “to died” for them as well.
I am sure that many true believers would not question the arguments that I have already made. However, what is troubling for many believers is the fact that in loving HIV and AIDS victims, the Church runs the risk of being perceived as not upholding biblical teachings regarding morality. Here are a few things that I must say in addressing this concern.
First of all, I cannot deny that by the Church embracing HIV and AIDS victims, it indeed might be perceived as being very liberal or, as lowering its spiritual standard of holiness and righteousness. However, the fact remains that the Church can still teach holiness and righteousness while at the same time loving and accepting. The two are not mutually exclusive. Jesus taught about holiness and righteousness. He told his disciples in Matthew 5:20, “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven”. At the same time, he said to the woman who had been caught in adultery in John 8:10-11 “Woman, where are your accusers? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more.”
Obviously, this ought not to be interpreted as if Jesus did not acknowledge that the woman had sinned; for indeed he did. The difference is that, when a sinful act is confessed and not justified, God reaches out to us and extends his love and forgiveness in accordance with his word in 1st John 1:9 “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Jesus said “Go and sin no more …” This means that if a person had indulged in sinful lifestyles that may have contributed to his infection, he ought to be confronted. Each sin has a name and must be called for what it is. If the individual repents, he should be forgiven by the Church and brought back into fellowship. From this point, he ought to be treated with respect and not ostracized even if he is living with the consequence(s) of this action.
The second thing is that the Church has to make its spiritual and ethical policies absolutely clear to its members and visitors along with community and social activists. I recall an incident where our Church allowed an HIV educator to help teach and sensitize our congregation on the risk of HIV in the African community in MN. He concluded his presentation by stating, “If you have to have unprotected sex, wrap it up.” The presenter had been informed before the presentation that the Church believes that sex is ordained by God only within the context of marriage and that outside of a marital relationship, one needs to practice sexual abstinence, however, he may have forgotten his audience or the previous conversation and his remark left me with no other alternative but to immediately restate the position of the Church after his presentation to those in attendance.
I believe that in educating members of the Church of the danger of HIV, the Church should not compromise its ethical standards, by promoting the use of condoms and other preventatives outside of marriage. The message of the Church is holiness, abstinence, and sexual faithfulness within a marital relationship.
Third, the Church has to teach its members what it considers a sinful act and what is not. For example, does the Church believe that homosexuality and lesbianism is a sin? If so, then why? How does this lifestyle contribute to HIV and AIDS? In other words, the Church has a responsibility to teach its members the Word of God that sets the standard for our daily life.
This means that, if the Church does not know what it considers sinful or not and does not take the time to communicate these standards to its membership, it could be perceived as lacking moral standards or becoming liberal.
In conclusion, I mentioned that reports are suggesting that there is an increase in the number of HIV and AIDS victims within the Liberian community within Minnesota and, social activists are turning to the Church to help them spread the message of how to prevent this disease.
The Church is struggling with how it can partner with these activists in combating this epidemic while at the same being mindful of not being perceived as embracing a lifestyle that generally leads to HIV and AIDS that is anti-biblical. I defended the fact that the Church does have a role to play in spreading the message and that pastors in Liberian Churches in MN should be willing to allow their members to be educated on harmful effects of this disease and how it can be prevented.
I also mentioned that the Church is expected to show forth the light of Christ in an immoral world and that the Church should embrace those who are victims of HIV and AIDS by sharing the message of salvation with them and helping financially (when possible). Finally, I indicated that the Church can and should still preach holiness and establish its ethical standard while at the same time be a loving and forgiving community; for indeed they are not mutually exclusive.
To end, let me remind us of the words of our Master as recorded by Saint Matthew in the first book of the New Testament chapter 25: 35-46: “For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.” Then the righteous will answer him, “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry and gave you food, or thirsty and gave you something to drink? And when was it that we saw you a stranger and welcomed you, or naked and gave you clothing?
And when was it that we saw you sick or in prison and visited you?” And the king will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.” 41Then he will say to those at his left hand, “You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not give me clothing, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.” Then they also will answer, “Lord, when was it that we saw you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not take care of you?” Then he will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.” And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
