AHIARA AND OWERRI INSTALLATION - A FLASH BACK OF WHEN THE TRUTH DID NOT PREVAIL


Greetings in the name of Jesus the just, righteous and truthful.

All protocols observed.
I have tried to contain the fury and scandal inflicted in my psyche by present Nigerian Church leaders, but to no avail, and of managing and massaging the prudence, pretence and silence of the "good loyal priest" mentality, but to no effect. This is because I was initiated in the baptisimal anointing words of the priesthood of Christ, "As Christ was anointed priest, prophet and king", which is the anointment of prophetic truth and sacrifice, I therefore prefer to speak as "sacrificed priest" than a silent and subservient "good priest", aware that I am already under arrest for this audacity, or foolhardiness? I speak because silence in the face in impunity is the sin of complicity and promotion of injustice, and never a virtue.

The atrocities committed against Ahiara from 2012 - 2022, is comparable to the sin of David against Uriah, under cover of secrecy and superior intimidation, of which, to further cover up, other attempts have been character assassination and malignment of Ahiara Mbaise priests/people, similar to the bloody assassination of Uriah, to silence the deed and the oppressed. But it is now remarkable that, like in the case of Naboth, "the same place dogs licked Naboth's blood, there will it also lick Ahab's" has been fulfilled in recent happening in Rome.

For those who do not know, Ahiara diocese was denied the status of a diocese by late bishop Mark Unegbu, the then bishop of Owerri, even as those who applied later than Mbaise were elavated and let go as diocese. The reason was that, in their dynamism and industriousness, Mbaise priests and people, were seen as so indispensable that the authority wondered who would work up Owerri diocese, if they were created and allowed to leave. It was felt that Mbaise should not be allowed to leave soon, but be used as development machine for the diocese. False impression was given that the delay to ceate Ahiara/Mbaise diocese was the making of Rome. But it was later discovered that Rome was not responsible. It was rather a conspiracy theory and tactics to hold Mbaise work force in the string of Owerri diocese like the Israelites in Egypt. Ahiara was only created under pressure and force of protest and boyecott of all diocesan activities and contributions to Owerri diocese, which later resulted in its creation in 1987.

It was like Pharoh and Egypt letting Israel go, only on the confrontation by Moses. Then, they told Mbaise to "go and kill yourslves". Ahiara became the only diocese in the province that was created under force of protest for unjustly depriving it when it was conspicuously reasonable to do, because their vibrancy and industry was exploited to develop Owerri diocese. They triumphantly left, and instead of killing themselves, they translated the force they used in Owerri and worked up the diocese to an enviable status and admiration of many.

When the first bishop died, the powerful saw it as excuse to connive and contrive the mechanism of propaganda to take over Ahiara with armed security in an unusual and unprecedented manner. There has never been such experience where the Catholic bishops of a whole country or any civilized people, used national armed security to harrass and intimidate a people just to impose one ordinary priest as bishop. So was the ordination also flooded with Nigerian sophisticated forces, just to perform a sacred and religious action. How is it morally justifiable for the Church to use armed tool to install a spiritual office? This is exactly where Cardinal Onaiyekan's statement that, "...something happened in Ahiara that even in Rome they had not experienced. With the experience of the Church over 2000 year, they have not got that kind of experience. It was something really unexpected and because it has not happened before, there was this attitude of hoping and expecting that things would change very soon". Remember too that Peter Okpaleke was not a bishop when he was rudely and fraudulently thrown into Ahiara and ordained in the Seminary with national security. This was the first of its kind ever. The presumption was that, the moment he is ordained bishop, Ahiara will, in respect of his new status, stop the agitation. But that did not happen, because the status was not there when he was forcefully foisted by episcopal intimidation that was too strange and unusual.

A priest is therefore correct to say that the Holy Spirit inspired the Cardinal to make the above statement. He was inspired to reveal that it has never happened before that an ordinary priest was clandestinely secreened in another diocese/province and given to the Pope to appoint a bishop in another diocese/province, with a hidden knowledge of his identity from the intended diocese and province, and ordained with armed security. This is really where the title of the book, "Let the truth prevail" actually gets its meaning. Because such action was strange, so the reason for the level of unprecedented brigandage and force to achieve it. The intensity with which Ahiara followed the struggle was because they had no bishop to speak with fellow bishops. So they needed to apply extra tenacity to hold on, making things not change soon.

No doubt, that some Ahiara priests did the dragging other dioceses had done in the past to delay the replacement of their bishop. Yet, that was not enough to justify the inter provincial flinging of a priest, even from a diocese that, at the time in question, already had their indigenous bishops spread all other provinces/dioceses, including Owerri province. For resisting this anomaly universal conspiracy and propaganda was formed to blackmail and combat Ahiara for rejecting the obnoxious plot. The entire brigandage then was accent to violent grabbing of office.

Cardinal Onaiyekan was expected to resolve Ahiara impasse with a dialogue, which he personally promised on his visit to Ahiara on Saturday, May 4th, 2013. After listening to Ahiara priests, he was sober, and confessed that he never had such information about the two provinces and current bishopric incident. He was convinced that something was wrong and volunteered for dialogue. Unable to take up the dialogue in respect of "episcopal solidarity" against the poor, he was eventually made the administrator of Ahiara in 2013, to execute the imposition and installstion without dialogue, while also holding the office of Abuja metropolitan See. His immediate observation was that "Ahiara priests are dangerously United", and he tried his best to dislodge the unity in order to disarm their resolve. He used the eight priests who supported the bishops, whom he personally observed and called "priests of questionable character" as his confidants to work against Ahiara. When all the tactics to install the bishop failed, his mandate was dissolved with the announcement of the resignation of the impeded bishop in 2018.

The attitude of the Nuncio to the Nigerian bishops on the day of the annoucement of the resignation and substitution with bishop Ugorji, to mark the final resolution, was said to be an overt displeasure and disrespect to the hierarchy, as it was alleged they were not allowed to comment prior to or after the pronouncement. According to bishop Ugorji in his maiden meeting with Ahiara priests, the atmosphere of the announcement of resignation was mournful. He expressed their grave yard mood that day in the words, "if a pin drops on the ground, you will hear the sound". Why? They were shocked at the resignation, and Nuncio's attitude signaled ambush and grievance or displeasure against them.

Following the resignation of bishop Okpaleke, a new diocese of Ekwulobia was specifically created to placade and accommodate his ambition. All other dioceses, such as Aba and Abakaliki, whose problems were traceable to Ahiara issue, were settled and restored. Auxiliary bishops have been appointed and installed for both Owerri archdiocese and Umuahia. What has defied every understanding is the contradiction in the settlement of the impasse through papal fiat, and the continous holding down of Ahiara by those who are supposed to be loyal to the Pope and uphold his directive. Is there a religious cabal, or those who act at variant and in their own whims against the wish of the Pope and Vatican? Or, did the Pope limit the process of the resolution of the crisis to Ahiara until they are punished enough? Of significant, all the appointments in these dioceses followed the template Ahiara agitated for, and for which they are being persecuted for twelve years.

It was at the raging of the bishopric imbroglio that the late man of courage and truth, bishop Joseph Bagobiri of Kafanchan, roared like a lone voice in the wilderness and made the world know that the Nigerian hierarchy was wrong in their dealing with Ahiara. Remember, his dissenting voice was not tolerated at the meetings of the hierarchy, hence, his speaking to the public outside the hierarchy. They harrassed and demanded apology from him. But the higher authority thought that, for a bishop to single himself out to defy the collegiality and solidarity of his fellow clergymen and risk the conviviality of their brotherhood, there must be something more serious than mere revolt and dissension. Therefore, subsequent to his public condemnation of the "blind obedience" imposed on Ahiara, he played guest and spoke to both the nunciature and the Vatican, to expantiate and defend the truth. It was immediately after he let the cat out of the bag that the process for resolution that culminated in bishop Okpaleke's resignation in February 2018 commenced. There is therefore, a significant correlation, cause effect and accepted truth datum between bishop Bagobiri's disclosure of the real truth of Ahiara's action with the papal demand for resignation shortly after his disclosure. This truth was unknown to the Pope who they said "appointed him"

For the first time, Rome got right and clearer information of the nuances of the appointment that made Ahiara tenaciously defiant. It is simply the case of Naboth and Ahab, David and Uriah, Esau and Jacob, and John the Baptist and Herod. Prior to bishop Bagobiri's awakening crow, there were hide and seek, threats and blocking of information, that the true and whole reason for the rejection was never disclosed to Rome. All that was sold to them was cordinated propaganda of disobedient, ethnicity, dissidence and disloyalty to the Pope and Church, to catch the sympathy of the gullible world against Ahiara. Therefore, bishop Okpaleke was seen as victim and Ahiara as villain and defiant rebel.

The Fallacy of appointment and Ahiara Persecution.

We accept the citation of bishop Ugorji's ordination homily on May 21, 2013, that, "the code of 1917 asserts the right of the Pope to freely appoint bishops, the papal legate....in the process of Episcopal appointments...it must be said loud and clear no Cardinal, Archbishop or Bishop; no Episcopal Conference, whether national or provincial can appoint a bishop. It is the Holy Father who has the final say in the appointment and posting of Bishops in the Catholic Church". True, the Holy Father has the final say. But this assertion is acceptable, only to the extent that the "final say" is not dissociated from the Pope appointing from and appending his signature on the one, or one of those selected and proposed by the discretion of the Cardinal, Archbishop, or bishops of appropriate and relevant national or provincial body and the influence of relevant people who work, reside or influence actions in Rome. The Pope does not appoint in a vaccum and outside the proposal and interest of the above. Nor would he know the contextual rules peculiar and applicable to the local Church involved. In his innocence, and unschooled in the Nigerian character, the Pope would trust and have no reason to suspect any foul play, the intrigue and circumstances in the process. There must be a human leverage, influence or intermediary, (what the Church knows as human element) in the selection. While this would not invalidate the appointment, it greatly facilitate it rightly or wrongly. To assert otherwise is the fallacy of appointment and catechesis of the kindergarten.

In Awka, Okpaleke was alleged to have had similar dragging with fellow priests who also rejected his imposition in 2011, similar to the one alleged in the case of Ahiara, which delayed the relpacement of their bishop. Hence, the desperation to fix him into Ahiara episcopal list without the rigours of righteous protocol. Okpaleke did not actually send himself to Ahiara. He was arbitrarily foisted to indict Ahiara for their alleged dragging and delay. This is the crux of the matter. To achieve this, external inducement, simony, politicking and short cuts were all in involved in the process. Every warning, including the private letter by Msgr Emmanuel Ogu to the Nuncio, on the hissing rumour of imposition was ignored. The letter was openly read to the nuncio, who was already in the cligue of the disingenuity and arbitrariness of the process preceding the "final say" of the Pope. Anthony Obinna collaborated this in the lamentation for his disfranchaisement in the appointment in 2013, when he said, "the ball was played over my head", by those who arbitrarily "fixed" Fr. Okpaleke for the Pope to appoint. Again, he said, "my hands are tied", by who and with what in the selection and appointment? These are incontrovertibly deep statements confirming the treachery.

On invitation in his house in 2013, to appeal to me to stop writing of the Ahiara case on public newspapers, the former archbishop told me that in a matter of hours and days, he was actually expecting the announcement of the name of Ahiara priest as bishop, when with shock and surprise, he rather heard the most strange name of Peter Okpaleke. Therefore, the process of appointment was from inception and grass root, unholily determined by bishops, archbishops and Nigerian Cardinals, etc, and not the Pope, contrary to the ordination homily assertion. After another bishop was elevated to the position of a provincial archbishop he was alleged to have boasted to an audience, that there is no appointment of any bishop in the province that will not pass through his table. This means, he will determine what the Pope will have a final say on, unlike archbishop Obinna who signified he was not allowed that chance by those who had the power to swindle the process. Were his hands probably tied with promise of "higher office", like Cardinalate or something else as was suspected, and by who?

The Pope does not even know most of those working closely with him, not to talk of priests in remote Mbaise, Owerri, Awka, or Abuja in Africa, for him to determine, select and directly appoint. Ahiara did not reject Okpaleke on grounds of ethnicity as bandied by false narratives. Nor did they doubt that the Pope finally accepted and appointed him without knowing the skewing involved in the process. The cause of the rejection, unknown to the Pope, was not disobedience, but what late Bagobiri revealed that changed the music. Disobedience is the most appropriate ecclesial language for a subject who refused the superior to do the wrong thing, or concede his right to the superior.

Prior to the controvertial appointment, there had been decades of modality, procedure and template for the appointment of bishops, at least in our local provinces, as has been honourably done by the Nuncio, Antonio Fillipanzzi in recent appointments. This involves local, internal/grassroot inquiry about the acceptability, character and uitability of the candidate in the diocese he will shephered and work with. Wthin this frame work, those approached would say if they know the candidate or not, and if he is suitable or otherwise. In the case of Okpaleke, the obvious response was in the negative, since he was not even remotely known in the province, to talk less of Ahiara. But the enquiry was stage managed in his favour. He was claimed to have been screened in and for Awka, Onitsha province with the backing of committee of Vatican connected friends. He was rudely thrown to Ahiara in far Owerri province, and frantically announced on social media as an ambush, to preempt and forestall possible question and scrutiny. The only certified condition was desperation to hurriedly make him a bishop on the presumption that Ahiara priets quarrelled, were divided and delayed to replace their bishop on time, and that the only one recommended declined. Presumptiously therefore, they would unquestionably accept anyone imposed on them to settle their scores, and Rev. Fr. Peter Okpaleke was wrongly ready and pushed by the masters. This is ecclesial Rebekah against Esau, whose resistance was disobedience.

The ordination went amidst contention, on presumption that the agitation will stop in respect of his new status. In the word of the Cardinal, "there was this attitude that things would change very soon", but it did not because the appointment is the first rascality of its kind in the history of the Nigerian Church and beyond. The template of being chosen from one's presbyterium, among his people and the consideration of result of inquiry among the people/priests was suppressed and flouted because, already rejected by his own presbyterium in 2011, they needed anywhere for compensation. It was this and the injustice involved to achieve the episcopacy by all foul means in another province/diocese where the death of a bishop created opportunity and loophole that engendered Ahiara action.


But trying to justify the appointment, the homilist of Ulakwo seminary ordination unknowingly exposed the very truth that gave impetus and justified the rejection, given the unprecedented infractions under cover of secrecy, when he said, "The existing norms and procedure guiding the appointment of bishops to a large extent, check politicking, scheming, inbreeding and power struggle in the appointment of bishops. It is to be noted that the strict confidentiality surrounding the process of episcopal appointments is meant to give those consulted the freedom to express their honest opinions "Coram Dei" (before God) about the candidate being proposed for episcopal office without undue external pressure or inducement..." Can the homilist of the ordination tell the world one person in Ahiara that was consulted and given the freedom to express his/her honest opinion about the identity of the candidate and his appointment for Ahiara, and what was the response?

Again, in 2013, the former bishop of Umuahia acknowledged that, "because of the secret nature of this thing, people tend to manipulate it". That means he conceded to the proclivity of norctunal manipulation, and still insist on persecuting those who refused to comply with the manipulation. He said this to concede to Ahiara priests their right of anger and to share their justified feeling, in order to appease them to comply, since the bishops have admited their fault. On the same seat at Ahiara Cathedral in 2013, archbishop Obinna accepted that, "shi abala abaa, o ga foro ikpowa nkita" (the ecreta has already been defecated, the only remedy is to call the dog to clear the mess). That is, the mistake has already been made, the evil has been committed, the only remedy is to find a solution. In their opinion, the solution was to allow it be, because, "Rome has spoken"?


Corroborating the same truth at St. Brigid's Nnarambia Ahiara in 2013, archbishop Kaigama, on listening to Ahiara priests on narration in the two provinces, acknowledged to the priests, "you have made a legitimate point". A point is legitimate when it comforms with the fact, truth, logic and right claim. Yet, of all this, they insist on blackmailing, Ahiara unless they comply with illegitimacy, feeling that after conceding Ahiara their "legitimate complaint", they should not further disgrace them, but back down to save their face and that of the church by making sure their candidate remains a bishop.

In the first provincial meeting at Ahiara, during the crisis, bishop Solomon Amatu, a kinsman of the embattled bishop, also expected Ahiara to succumb as others had done in similar situations in the past. Thus, calling Ahiara priests "touts in the motor park", and jeering that Ahiara case is not their first time of seeing similar rabble rousing, he boasted that they will, as usual, surrender like others in the past. The greater sin of Ahiara is that they did not surrender as others did other places in the past. It must be pointed out, even at the cost of laicization, that the leaders of the Church did what they did in Ahiara with clear consciousness of its impunity and culpability, but completely predicated on the conventional supine religious obedience of priests and usual Nigerian attitude of the oppressor/elite expecting the oppressed to always give a nod of "yes sir" when oppressed. That is simply the import of the Cardinal's expression that, "From all that I know, if there was any mistake on the part of the Apostolic Nuncio, it is not the Ahiara priests who should point it out. There are people in Rome who appointed the Nuncio". This is embarrassing misplacement. Naturally, it is the victim and the one who bears the brunt of a mistake or crime that should point it out, and not the other way round. But when they knew of it and did not want to correct their mistake, we pointed it out, and they asked us to apologize.

Ahiara and the Nunciature.
The coming of the Nuncio, Antonio Fillipanzzi, and his handling of the appointment of bishops, reopened a Vista of hope for transparency and propriety after the crisis. In his restoration of sanity, he strictly appointed each bishop of the dioceses from either among his people, his presbyterium or province, such as bishop Echema of Aba, bishop Peter Chukwu of Abakaliki, bishop Michael Ukpong of Umuahia, bishop Moses Chikwe of Owerri, bishop Okpaleke of Ekwulobia and bishop Lucius Ugorji, who also hails from Naze Owerri, respectively. In the case of bishop Ugorji, many expected and wished that, to give a good example of change begigining with oneself, and to correct "Ahiara abomination" for asking for an indigenous bishop from their presbyterium, he would have shown courage and virtue and heroically reject being appointed for Owerri, his native archdiocese, and insist for other bishops, like Ukwuoma, Amatu, etc, who are not Owerri indigenes to succeed archbishop Obinna, in order to correct Ahiara anomaly. But he gladily obliged to go to Owerri, to prove Ahiara right. He is now both the son of the soil and indigenous archbishop, succeeding an indigenous archbishop. Oh, mother Church! Is this the reality of interest of power or double standard?

Given his initial steps, we all hold the Nuncio on high esteem. Our surprise and scandal popped up only when he did nothing about Ahiara after settling the rest, and did not invite Ahiara priests or lay faithful as his children in faith, to see him and hear from them until another administrator now exited Ahiara without any solution. Is this the true heart of "mother Church" even for convicted sinners? But should we totally blame the Nuncio? They might have probably satiated and satisfied him with what the powerful who have an edge and privilege of audience over the voiceless Ahiara want him to hear. However, the Nuncio's visit to Ahiara on the 19th of March, 2021, kindled the hope of Ahiara priests to touch the fringe of his clothes. But no. Courtesy of his host, he was completely cordoned off from interracting and speaking with Ahiara priests, and carefully sneaked to Umuahia and catechized of the unworthiness and intransigency of Ahiara. Did he tell him that the work load is overwhelming for him, and that Ahisra is good to go?

The blocade of the chief shephered of his latitude from interracting with the faithful and priests whose fame and infamy have rang international bell aggravated our sense of bad shepherdship in the Nigerian church. At the end of the ceremony, elderly men and women were seen with cringing faces, cursing the Church and her insensitivity for saying and doing nothing about Ahiara substantive bishop, while teaching forgiveness and compassion as mere profession than practice.

The puzzle is, for what reason did the train of restoration of the dioceses stop at the exclusion of Ahiara, while one single person is symaultaneously clad with multiple positions and powers of archbishop of Owerri, administrator of two dioceses of Ahiara and Umuahia and president of Nigerian bishops? I believe it may not be the Nuncio's personal conscientious conviction and volition to join conspiracy against the voiceless, to abandon and stand on them to celebrate the elevation of multiple powers in one person, and now another as Cardinal. Who has been convinced that everything said of Ahiara case is the truth against Ahiara, and that the Nuncio should not care even to talk or listen to them? Is anyone convinced that the Nigerian global infamy of elite corruption and oppression against the poor is exclusive of politicians and that the religious elite are exonerable?

One may not totally indict the Nuncio, knowing that there are Nigerian hierarchical personalities, like cardinals, resident in Vatican and Nigeria, whose influence and psychology of rank could disable his independent decision and action on Ahiara. Could he have been cautioned to play along with their Nigerian condition of sitting on and crushing the voiceless while insensitively accumulating more powers? But he is a Papal emmissary. His visit in Ahiara and the way he totally sidelined and circumvented the "brother priests" and was bundled to Umuahia, does not represent personal volition, conscious character and good shepherdship. Just as the Nigerian hierarchy believe that the "ordinary priests and people" have no right of audience, opinion or dialogue when oppressed, but must subserviently and submissively take and obey command, they might have prevailed on the Nuncio not to give Ahiara audience or intervene in their case, untill they have used the crisis to consumate the apex of ecclesial powers to determine their fate.

Ahiara and the absurdity of presumption

Irrespective of the danger that lies in stock for me for speaking out, I am bound in conscience to inform the world that a lot were and continues to be presumed, covered up and suppressed in Ahiara case, while promoting themselves to power and the voiceless and unrepresented Ahiara is repressed and enslved to keep the Church going. What has been presumed is that the injurious corruption and cover up in Nigeria is limited to Nigerian politicians, and that religious leaders are above board, even in Ahiara case. It is also presumed that obedience or submissiveness is the highest and cardinal virtue in life and the Church, than truth, justice and giving of freedom, as it is playing out in Ahiara persecution. I dare object to this fallacy, that obedience is a superior virtue to truth, justice and equity. As good as obedience is, it is not inclusive in the four cardinal or theological virtues thought to us by the Church, but justice and charity are. Jesus himself teaches that the greatest of the laws is love and not obeduence. But these virtues are completely undermined in the dealing with Ahiara, because obedience is usually weaponized against the voiceless.


If Jesus, the Paragon of righteousness, did not emphasize and prioritize justice, forgiveness, fairness, liberation, truth, compassion and mercy over obedience and submissiveness in his spirituality and mission of salvation, I would have honoured the supremacy of obedience and those traumatizing Ahiara for framed disobedience. What has been falsely presumed in Ahiara case is that those on power have the monopoly of truth and expression and cannot be wrong or questioned, and with dogmatic immunity, certain people are covered and elavated to the apex of power, while the cause of the unranking poor is ignored and their guilt presumed and exaggerated. This is the truth of Ahiara case and the present provincial installation and elevations in the Church at the exclusion of the just complainant. A lot of thundering allegations have been flashed on the high and mighty, both in relation to Nigerian politics and in the church, but were flipped over, dimmed and suddenly silenced, while Ahiara case is most highlighted, because power, and not the truth prevails.

Ahiara and the psychology and Advange of power

What has prominently prevailed and triumphed in Ahiara case is the psychology and advantage of the right of the powerful and superior intimidation rather than the truth. This is why the book titled, "Let the truth prevail", written to castigate and criminalize Ahiara has remained a bunch of integral contradiction in title and content, given all that are expressed about the voiceless Ahiara. Whoever has the advantage of position, privilege of the corridors of power and affinity with highest authority, has the audience and cannot be wrong, and automatically determines the tune and fate of the less privileged, from Rome to Nigeria. This is what has prevailed in Ahiara case, while the truth, love and justice suffer and the oppressed gets more guilty.

But let it be made clear that, as long as the mission spirituality of forgiveness, salvation of soul and truth of Jesus is concerned, the Church leadership and all the administrators sent to Ahiara, failed like Nigerian leaders and politicians in Nigeria. They all cared most for procurement, sustenance and elevation of their positions, ranks and power than for truth and justice. Contrary to the truth they know of the territorial and jurisdiction separation and demarcation of the church, somebody in Rome and Nigeria insinuated Okpaleke into the fathomed "universality of the Church, to be the bishop of Ahiara, as ambition swayed over truth. Then Ahiara kicked and jeopardized his trespassed ambition. Then the godfathers kicked to make Ahiara co victim with him. For this, they presented bishop Okpaleke to Rome as the victim and persecuted, and Ahiara as the villain, the disloyal and dissident, since Ahiara has no voice, solicitor or access to Rome.

On a contentious argument years back in Lagos, for and against Ahiara and the hierarchy, a well respectable priest of Lagos archdiocese opined that his sympathy tips for Ahiara on the basis that a certain Nigerian Cardinal and kinsman of the impeded bishop, is habitually and pathologically selfish and fond of conglomerating position for himself and immediate kinsmen, and that could be the cause of Ahiara case. At the pic of the crisis, the same henchman at the Vatican was alleged to have boasted and tauted of Ahiara people that, "they have nobody and no money, what can they do?" Few days to the controvertial episcopal ordination, he flew down and preached an invigorating and fortifying retreat for the CBCN to engender them for the ordination of his brother which was done with amories. Was this mere coincidence? It is belieced that, he, like the mother of the sons of Zebedee, always want his tentacle and immediate kinsmen and cronies (not even the entire Nigeria or Igbo people) spread in the Vatican and Nigeria. For this the ire and fanatical tool of the stooge of the Knights of St. Mulumba and the powers that be were evoked against Ahiara, to blackmail, suppress the truth and antagonize Ahiara to the world and the Church.

It must be reiterated that Ahiara Mbaise does not hate Okpaleke, Awka, Anambra or Onitsha province. But they know the truth of territorial demarcation, episcopal procedure, and that a brother should not, by any guise, like the sons of Zebedee, be allowed to take over and occupy everywhere belonging to brothers. This is the contention of Ahiara, like the disciples of Jesus against the sons of Zebedee. But this was taged ethnicity and disobedience on Ahiara. But beyond obedience, Ahiara foresaw the zebedean shrewd and pragmatism, that if you concede Ahiara to those with powerful ecclesial connections, Owerri province and the rest will be eventually annexed too. This has been proved true.

Ask those who combated Ahiara to suppress the truth about the latest happening in vatican today. How and by what process and determination? No, there is no process for choosing a cardinal, but by the same customized Awka Holy Spirit and Pope in Rome. The Pope wakes up and without any human contact and consultation, he chooses a person. But Why could no other one from any other province or diocese in Nigeria without connection in Rome not have been chosen for the cardinalate? While the rest are in Nigeria dealing with Ahiara, a vatican residential Holy Spirit might have been busy midwifing a second cardinal to replace a retiring one from the same place without Kaigama, Obinna, Kukka or Ugorji.

Don't question the Spirit, your ways are not my ways, nor your thoughts mine is the answer. What if those who presented Ahiara as dissidents have by affinity of position, presented the "persecuted victim" of Ahiara incident and insinuated for compensation and reward of loyalty with cardinalate? Or, what if the Vatican authorities thought that, for accepting to resign, he deserves a reward above those that justified and canonized his ambition? Only after eight years of episcopate, he has a new diocese and is a twin cardinal to a kinsman. Just my freedom of speculation. He is now the Joseph of Egypt over his brothers who insisted on his episcopacy over Ahiara. A child whose father empowered to steal breaks the door, including his father's, with his leg.

When the Administrator of Ahiara came back with a bagful of elevation of powers, he asked Ahiara to "reconcile" with Okpaleke, to enable him feel comfortable to come to any part of this place, perhaps for the installation. Meanwhile, nothing is being done for Ahiara to attend the same installation with dignity as happy members of the household of the province/church, but as convicted captives.

In the critical moment of the Ahiara conflict, we got filtering gossips from friendly individual bishops, who in their privacy agreed with Ahiara contention, blaming and exonerating themselves for their roles in Ahiara case. Apart from late bishop Bagobiri who openly expressed his mind, there were others who were in disagreement with the hatchet and rough work that brought Okpaleke to Ahiara. The bishops know them. In individual capacity, they expressed their misgiving but castigated Ahiara in episcopal solidarity and collegiality, in order to save the collective face of their institution at the expense of known facts and the orphan, Ahiara. Some allegedly and prudently spoke unofficially in their convinced understanding of the relationship of the two sister provinces. Ninety eight percent of priests of Owerri archdiocese, Orlu, Aba, Okigwe and Umuahia, even individual priests from Awka, who know why Ahiara resisted, supported them with hidden solidarity like Nichodemus.

Many lay faithfuls of Onitsha province who read my personal write ups and insightd on Ahiara crisis, rang my phone and praised my frankness and truth, some anonymously and some mentioned their names. A man who introduced himself on phone as indigene of Onitsha, Anambra state, who was excited by my exposition, rang and praised me in 2013, and roghly berated their Cardinal as the cause of Ahiara crisis. This is not out of personal hatred for the Cardinal, bishop Okpaleke or his province, or because these people support "disobedience", but because, they know the truth and believed that the "real truth should prevail".

Priests of Owerri archdiocese resisted the ordination of the embattled bishop in their Cathedral in 2014. The priests of Seat of Wisdom Seminary did not allow him a minute in the Seminary after the episcopal ordination. Many of them were sanctioned and sacked by church leaders for not participating in the ceremony. These actions were not motivated by personal hatred for Okpaleke and his province, nor is it for their love for Ahiara as Mbaise. But because they know the truth, the nuances, politics and injustice of the appointment. The bishops also know the truth in their innermost recesses, but mobbed and ganged up against Ahiara, because, to rescind on their decision on Okpaleke would be creating a dangerous precedence for their inviolable authority. Thus, the person of Okpaleke became their metaphorical totem, while Ahiara is antagonized with the whole world. Like in the Nigerian characteristic of desimating the voiceless and submerging them in their power, Ahiara has been kept in oblivion and sideline of events and their destiny becomes the ladder on which people acquire more powers for purpotedly defending the Church. This is not different from the insensitivity of the Nigerian politicians who stand on the impoverished masses to sqaunder one hundred million naira on interest form for more powers, unmindful of those on the ground.

As many jeer at Ahiara's "disobedience", "dissidence" and "disloyalty" while rejoicing at the installation and elevations, let them know that it is the seat of power which Ahiara wrestled for and for which they are being persecuted, that they are being installed on. Perhaps, the story would have been different, if Ahiara surrendered as others did in the past. Will true sons and daughters of Mbaise in and outside Owerri, in the face of the treachery, humiliation and deprivation being meted to Ahiara, be in the mood to attend the installation of those that have neglected, crushed and grounded their diocese to acquire more powers and elavate themselves at their expenses? How would psychologically balanced personality of Ahiara sow a ceremonial uniform and head to Owerri to jubilate?

The newly elavated archbishop showed his open hatred and resentment for Ahiara and their priests for rejecting their appointment. He treated the priests with selective justice and coded hostility, and never reconciled them with the bishops, but sat on their problem negotiating for higher elevations. Elderly and outspoken priests, perceived to be pro Ahiara struggle were tactfully clamped upon, humiliated and some retired with ignominy. How would Ahiara rejoice at the installation as slaves of the Church on 23rd of June, 2022? Could anyone describe the mood Ahiara/Mbaise people would wear at the celebration in the midst of liberated Nsukka, Aba, Abakaliki Owerri, Umuahia, and those who have treated them as slaves, war captives, castes and sheeps that deserve no shepherd?

Will Ahiara sing in Owerri, the Zion's song they were never allowed to sing in their soil? Remember that they were unofficially expelled, ostracized and disgraced out of Owerri province for resisting what they evidently believed to be unfair, unjust and stage managed. Will they now gather at the province as beggarly and dejected misfits and "murderous tenants", whose children are unworthy of the episcopacy and are slaves in the household of God for acting in conscience? That will be the height of pretence. How would Ahiara priests and lay faithful use their humiliated presence to justify that they are truly "murderous tenants", and listen to allusions of homily that will extol "obedience" against the virtues of truth, justice and honesty, which were suppressed to cow them and climb to the apex of powers? How would any person from Ahiara/Mbaise sincerely smile, clap, rejoice and jubilate with those who have treated them the most unchristian and uncharitable way to climb to higher offices? How would they take gift with gladness to the altar as "disobedient", people, whose defiance against the zebedean grab made them the only people without a shephered in the Nigerian Catholicism, and must continue to be administered as slaves from the archdiocese? Is it real and just to expect Ahiara, still to mention at mass as their administrator, one who left them as they are, transformed as archbishop in another diocese and still remain as their administrator, and for how long more? What an insensitivity and slavery!

Is Ahiara really the slave heir of which St. Paul says, "as heir, during the time while he is still under age, is no different from a slave, even though he is the owner of all the property; he is under the control of guardians and administrators until the time fixed by his father" (Gal. 4:1-2). I foresee the installation being attended by some Ahiara people on the condition of curiosity and observance status, or as acquiescence to slavery, or those without sense of shame or care for dignity.

If the disciples of Christ resolved the crisis of the Hellenist widows and the imposition of circumcision in favour of the oppressed and complainants and restored them to dignity and confidence in the church, how do Ahiara feel for those who refused to resolve their problem and restore their dignity after twelve years? If the leaders of the church gladly preach Stephen and Jesus as forgiver of their executioners at death point, and if Ahiara are considered sinners for standing against injustice, how have the Church leaders expressed their Stephenness and Jesus' character as vicars of Christ? Who is taking glory in the revenge and frustration of Ahiara? Is it the one who has been presented by collegial solidarity as holy innocent and victim of Ahiara, and is now elavated over his promoters? Is it the current metropolitan of Owerri, who did not reconcile Ahiara with the hierarchy until after acquiring all the paraphernelia of power? Now, something might coincidentally happen for Ahiara, to indict the predecessor who could not do it? Let them know that the truth they know but covered up to fight the poor Ahiara, to keep their power sacrosanct and inviolable in the protection of one of their own, is now bumeranged through the same Vatican Holy Spirit they aided to swindle Ahiara. Let the world know that it is not disobedience that is in contention in Ahiara case, but the intimidation and subjugation of the powerless, similar to the treatment of Naboth the orphan, for begrudging Ahab the king, his piece of land.

This is why, the assertion, "Remember the old parlance "Roma locuta causa finita, "Rome has spoken the case is closed", in Cardinal Onaiyekan's book, 'Let the truth prevail', is not prevalence of truth and justice, but an expression and weapon of intimidation. It is an assertion on the dealing with a people with emperial power than justice. But, is the Church operating with the benignant spirit of the Holy Spirit and justice of Jesus, or the belligerent spirit of old Roman political emperor? Be it known that, not the truth, but force and power have prevailed in Ahiara case. But it is scandalous and disheartening, that those who should lead us in the part of righteousness and family life, should sit on part of the family and celebrate the exclusiveness of family, where a part is a slave for questioning an action.

Written on personal reflection and responsibility,
by Rev. Fr. Ben Ogu.

Nice Post. Thanks for sharing the Post. Keep Posting. Get more information on the same at TSPSC Group 1 Coaching