All This Sound And Fury!
By
I have painstakingly waded through Professor Wole Soyinka's turgid article Beware of imitations which is his response to my reaction to his unprovoked attack on me and my Ministry. My comments will be brief as I do not want to be diverted from my goal, which is the restoration of cultists and the eradication of cultism, to writing essays. I will try to go systematically through from beginning to end, and respond to the points that concern me. In reacting to mistakes genuinely made, there is a marked difference between honesty and cleverness. An honest person admits his mistakes; a clever person tries to argue round them, and he often gets away with it if those around him are not sufficiently alert.
Wole Soyinka in his NAS speech says we are firmly persuaded. (Italics here and elsewhere are Soyinka's words). Is he included in the "we" or not? He clearly implies that he is not, but in the high school we attended together, Soyinka and I were taught that the pronoun "we" includes the speaker or writer. Now my friend says that the 'we' in question is clearly the Mr. and Mrs. Idi Oro Bus Stop gullible readership etc. etc. Such sophistry; such deceit! If Soyinka says we are firmly persuaded, I assume that includes him and I have the right to single him out and to ask him why he is so persuaded by what might be wrong. Even after being shown that he is wrong, he insists that it is surely gratuitous for me to expect him to verify what I was alleged to have said. I should be satisfied that he has dressed up his conclusion with caveats copiously inserted in (his) address. Such conceit! Why do we need copious caveats when I was just a phone call away? And if someone builds a case on premises which turn out to be false, what is he expected to do? Are we face-to-face with an ego problem here?
I am glad to now learn that the so-called vituperations were not even remotely addressed to me. But as Professor Soyinka says, his speech is on the Internet. So is my reaction, and I have been receiving feedback on them. Such feedback comments have not made a distinction as to whether the vituperations were addressed to me or to his Idi-oro Bus Stop crowd and those leading them astray by tendentious reporting. A Yoruba adage says Ti ika ba ro ejo, ika ko lo ma da - meaning that when a wicked man states his own side of a dispute, he will not also be judge in the dispute. In any case, should vituperation be the language of communication for someone approaching seventy years of age? My friend will be sixty-nine next month. ELEKE EEBU is the name the Yoruba reserve for children who compulsively resort to that form of language at the least provocation, real or imagined. That title does not sit well on our 69-year-old professor. Paul the Apostle, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit says: When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
There is a certain mellowness which ought to come with advancing years. Regrettably, one fails to find it in my friend, and this should not be so. Even wine, of which my friend is a connoisseur, mellows with age. The Holy Bible says: Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. The way to hell is indeed paved with good intentions. My friend says this is flatly contradicted by the fact that most good deeds are preceded by good intentions. I am afraid I do not see the contradiction. The English saying which did not originate from me, does not say that only the way to hell is paved with good intentions. This is a cautionary statement to show that good intentions are not enough to determine how a project just starting will end. See how the good intention of starting a student confraternity has brought out the monster that the cults have now become.
Soyinka confuses my comments about cults with my references to the original Confraternity (PC) we started. It is the fruit of the cults I am talking about and here I include the PC on the campuses, not the National Association of Seadogs-PC. The cults are known by their evil fruits. Soyinka says the meaning of the real issue of what constitutes a cult could imply a declaration of something (as) a theme for consideration. He goes on to hint that what I sent him, he threw into his waste paper basket. What I sent contained a list of published books on the cultism, not just our evangelical tract and our Newsletter. Newsletters come in various shapes and sizes and ours is not meant to be a learned publication, neither did I make such a claim for it, so I do not know what our friend is driving at here. If he cannot learn from tracts or newsletters unless they are fit for submission in learned journals, how about others? A newsletter is meant usually for a wide and varied audience and we know that others are benefiting from what ended up in his waste paper basket. This is a confirmation of the Bible truth that the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness to him. He cannot know them because they are spiritually discerned. The Bible goes on to say that God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise.
Professor Soyinka says some of my "facts" are patently false. Here is my response. Although Soyinka maintains the Pyrates Confraternity-NAS is registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission, the certificate which Soyinka's Association sent to us at the UI Anti-Cultism Campaign Committee threatening to sue us for defaming it does not contain the words Pyrates Confraternity. This is a fact. If there is another certificate containing this name, I have not seen it. If Soyinka has it, he should produce it. But if this other certificate existed when NAS wanted to sue us for libel, wasn't that the best time to produce it? As to when NAS was formed and when it issued the decree against Campus-PC, what I wrote was my understanding of the position. I was not actively involved in the formation of NAS. What however is the bearing of this sequence on the impotence of the NAS decree, and the existence of PC-Campus as a cult?
My most peculiar derivation of implication of Wole's statement on his views on Christian virtues is valid and I have nothing to add. Other derivations can of course be made. My English professor friend says there is a clear difference between Confraternity and Pyrates Confraternity, just as there is between Club and Dancing Club or Club Soda. This is elementary. But I thought the argument was about Pyrates Confraternity-NAS and Pyrates Confraternity-Campus. He says the latter does not exist and we say it does. He says we should produce evidence and I ask: Where? On the pages of newspapers?
The Pyrates Confraternity existing as cults on Campuses are not chapters of NAS-PC nor did I make such a statement. I am glad Soyinka now admits that miscreants can call themselves whatever names they want, so what have we been arguing about in this regard? Why was NAS threatening to sue for libel just because we maintain that some miscreants on Campuses call themselves Pyrates Confraternity? Or was he as supreme head not aware of this threat? My advice that NAS should drop the appellation Pyrates Confraternity was borne out of the worry exercising the NAS that every reference to Pyrates Confraternity is a reference to it, but if the Association is now prepared to live with the fact that it has no monopoly over the name, I have no problem with that. My reference to Soyinka as being full of the wisdom of this world is deliberate. It is not meant to be offensive but just in line with my faith which teaches that there is earthly wisdom, and there is wisdom from above. Since he is familiar with the Bible, he ought to be able to find where this is stated in the word of God, which also makes clear that Christ is our wisdom as Christians. It is obvious that this wisdom cannot be available to one who denies the existence of Christ who is the Son of the living God. But this wisdom is available to my friend if only he will submit to the Lordship of Jesus, who shed His blood for him also. I keep praying that this precious blood will not have been shed in vain for Soyinka and other humanists like him who worship the creature (man) rather than the Creator, the only wise God our Saviour.
There is some hyperbole intended by calling Soyinka's comments on me "the pillar" of his public lecture but this is unfortunately lost on him. In any case, why don't we try an experiment? I challenge Soyinka and any fair-minded person who has a copy of his speech to the National Association of Seadogs to remove every reference to me and my Ministry and see what is left of the speech. However, this "pillar" description has led Soyinka to the discovery of a deep-seated complex. Complexes are of different colours depending on who claims to discover them. Which colour is my friend's? The colour says something about the discoverer too. This may be clear as I end my comments with the reproduction of the letter I wrote to Wole after my response to his unprovoked attack on me and my Ministry, so that others who have read our exchanges can discover for themselves deep-seated complexes even when they are cleverly hidden under a lot of verbiage. Here goes:
Dear Wole, March 20, 2003.
Greetings. I trust that you have already received my e-mail. Coming across your e-mail address was by divine providence, and I believe God must have a purpose in re-establishing contact between us in this way. If you had not made an unprovoked attack on me and my Ministry in your speech at the NAS Anniversary Celebrations last December, we would have continued to go our separate ways.
Enclosed herewith is a photocopy of my speech which Godwin Ifijeh reported upon in THISDAY, and from where you got ammunition for your attack.
In your speech, you wondered about the definition of cult. Our Newsletter together with our evangelical tracts deal to some extent with the subject. Three out of many books which have been published on cults are: (i) Every wind of doctrine by Hobert E. Freeman, (ii) Larson's Book of Cults by Bob Larson, and (iii) The Kingdom of the Cults by Walter Martin. There are also many publications on the Internet relating to cults of all descriptions.
I got a copy of your speech through our mutual friends. Since I did not know the reach of the public lecture at which copies of the speech were distributed, I sent copies of my reaction to you and some media houses. I also sent our mutual friends a copy. Note to Reader: Our mutual friends' names are omitted from this publication.
I trust that after you have read what has emanated from my Ministry, you will have a better understanding of our mission in general, and our perspective on cults in particular. If the publications provide you with new ammunition for future attacks at least your aim will be more accurate, like the worthy hunter of aparo and other meat I knew you to be.
How is your wife? And how is the Wole Soyinka clan? I wish you well.
Yours sincerely,
(Signed) Muyiwa Awe.
After these distractions, I must return to the work God has committed into my hands through my Ministry, which is the deliverance of cultists from the power of Satan and his demons, by the power of the Holy Spirit. Hush! Hush! My friend mustn't hear this because he doesn't believe in the existence of the Holy Spirit or Satan, not to talk of demons. But our Father in heaven has assured us who believe that because He sent his Son to destroy the works of Satan, even the captives of the mighty shall be taken away and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered. And we say: Amen. Halleluyah. Glory be to God. I firmly believe that God has a purpose for bringing the distractions along my path that His name may be glorified in the end.
Awe is an Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Ibadan, and President, Fullness of Christ Evangelical Ministry (FOCEM).