Church rejects MP Alice Alaso's wedding
Dec 31, 2007
THE Church of Uganda does not recognise last Saturday’s controversial wedding of Soroti Woman MP, Alice Alaso, to Johnson Ebaju. Alaso, who is the secretary general of the opposition Forum for Democratic Change, was wedded to Ebaju, an official of the Uganda Revenue Authority
By Alfred Wasike
THE Church of Uganda does not recognise last Saturday’s controversial wedding of Soroti Woman MP, Alice Alaso, to Johnson Ebaju.
“The canons, the doctrines and the dogmas don’t agree with that kind of wedding. My brother, Charles, wedded them against the canons of the Church. Only the one who wedded them might recognise it,†the dean of the Church of Uganda, Bishop Nicodemus Okille, told The New Vision.
“The position of the Church of Uganda is clear. The divorcees are not supposed to be wed by any cleric from the Church of Uganda. We are categorically barred from doing that.â€
Alaso, who is the secretary general of the opposition Forum for Democratic Change, was wedded to Ebaju, an official of the Uganda Revenue Authority, by Soroti Bishop, Charles Bernard Obaikol, during a tightly-guarded ceremony at Idupa Primary School in Soroti.
“We talked to Bishop Obaikol about it, but he wedded them against the cannons of the Church of Uganda. I will leave his fate to the pendulum of the Church,†Okille said when asked what action the Church was going to take against the bishop.
On the fate of the wedding, he said: “I cannot tell you that I am here to nullify that wedding. It is up to the aggrieved party.â€
Drama ensued at the wedding as the groom’s first wife, Christine Ikiria, stormed the venue to try and stop the wedding, quoting the Bible.
Ikiria and Bishop Obaikol engaged in a heated verbal exchange as the prelate insisted on wedding the couple.
“Yes, you are quoting the Bible but we are following the laws of Uganda and a court decree that dissolved your marriage,†he argued.
“We shall proceed with the wedding in respect of the law. If anybody has to stop this wedding, he should produce a court injunction.â€
Bishop Obaikol pointed out that the court issued the first divorce order on April 23 and allowed six months for the unsatisfied party to challenge it before the final divorce order was given on October 24.
THE Church of Uganda does not recognise last Saturday’s controversial wedding of Soroti Woman MP, Alice Alaso, to Johnson Ebaju.
“The canons, the doctrines and the dogmas don’t agree with that kind of wedding. My brother, Charles, wedded them against the canons of the Church. Only the one who wedded them might recognise it,†the dean of the Church of Uganda, Bishop Nicodemus Okille, told The New Vision.
“The position of the Church of Uganda is clear. The divorcees are not supposed to be wed by any cleric from the Church of Uganda. We are categorically barred from doing that.â€
Alaso, who is the secretary general of the opposition Forum for Democratic Change, was wedded to Ebaju, an official of the Uganda Revenue Authority, by Soroti Bishop, Charles Bernard Obaikol, during a tightly-guarded ceremony at Idupa Primary School in Soroti.
“We talked to Bishop Obaikol about it, but he wedded them against the cannons of the Church of Uganda. I will leave his fate to the pendulum of the Church,†Okille said when asked what action the Church was going to take against the bishop.
On the fate of the wedding, he said: “I cannot tell you that I am here to nullify that wedding. It is up to the aggrieved party.â€
Drama ensued at the wedding as the groom’s first wife, Christine Ikiria, stormed the venue to try and stop the wedding, quoting the Bible.
Ikiria and Bishop Obaikol engaged in a heated verbal exchange as the prelate insisted on wedding the couple.
“Yes, you are quoting the Bible but we are following the laws of Uganda and a court decree that dissolved your marriage,†he argued.
“We shall proceed with the wedding in respect of the law. If anybody has to stop this wedding, he should produce a court injunction.â€
Bishop Obaikol pointed out that the court issued the first divorce order on April 23 and allowed six months for the unsatisfied party to challenge it before the final divorce order was given on October 24.