₦airaland Forum

“The duty of the Church is not to govern the State. The duty of the Church is to remind those who govern that power is a sacred trust and that leadership must always serve the common good.”

The recent visit of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the Presidential Villa has generated more controversy than many expected. During the meeting, the bishops presented their concerns about Nigeria’s worsening socio-economic conditions, insecurity, political climate and national direction. President Tinubu defended his administration’s policies, insisting that his reforms were yielding results despite the hardships many Nigerians continue to face.

Days later, Cardinal John Onaiyekan explained publicly that the bishops had simply conveyed the realities they encounter among ordinary Nigerians. According to him, the bishops told the President that the economy was becoming increasingly difficult for millions of citizens, while the President maintained that his economic reforms were beginning to produce positive results.

Ordinarily, such an exchange should have sparked a healthy national conversation about governance. Instead, much of the public discourse shifted away from the substance of the bishops’ concerns and toward the bishops themselves. Some government supporters accused them of partisanship. Others alleged that they were sympathetic to Peter Obi or the Obidient Movement. A few even suggested that Cardinal Onaiyekan should be disciplined by the Church.

These reactions are neither new nor surprising. What is surprising is how quickly many Nigerians forget history.

This controversy raises an important question:

Has the Catholic Bishops’ Conference suddenly become political, or has it always spoken whenever governments failed in their responsibilities to the Nigerian people?

History provides a clear answer.

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria has never functioned as an opposition political party. Neither has it acted as a department of government.

Its mission has always been much simpler and much more difficult.

To speak the truth.

Whether that truth is welcomed or rejected.

Whether those in power wear military uniforms or agbada.

Whether the President belongs to the PDP, APC or any other political party.

Whether criticism attracts applause or insults.

For decades, the bishops have regarded it as part of their pastoral responsibility to speak whenever governance threatens human dignity, justice, peace, democracy or the common good.

Their communiqués have criticized military dictatorships, condemned corruption, challenged electoral malpractice, spoken against religious violence, defended democratic institutions and consistently called governments to account regardless of who occupied Aso Rock.

The names of presidents have changed.
The principles have not.

It evaluates public policy through the enduring principles of Catholic Social Teaching: respect for human dignity, justice, the common good, solidarity, accountability and a preferential concern for the poor.

Whenever government policies undermine these principles, the bishops believe they have both a constitutional right and a moral obligation to speak.

That obligation did not begin with President Tinubu.

Nor did it begin with President Jonathan.

It has existed throughout Nigeria’s post-independence history.

This commitment to independence also helps explain why, in January 2013, the Catholic bishops suspended participation in the national meetings of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN). The Catholic Secretariat made it clear that this was not a permanent withdrawal but a suspension while longstanding concerns were addressed.

Among those concerns were reports that CAN was becoming increasingly associated with partisan politics, a development many Catholic leaders believed could weaken its moral authority.

The bishops consistently maintained that the Church must remain “the conscience of the nation” and “the voice of the voiceless.” An institution perceived to be aligned with any political interest risks losing its ability to challenge every government with equal credibility.

The CBCN has worked deliberately to preserve that independence.

Those accusing the bishops today of suddenly becoming political would do well to revisit the record of the Jonathan years.

2011: Support Accompanied by Responsibility

Following the election of President Goodluck Jonathan, the bishops congratulated the new administration while reminding it that electoral victory carried a moral obligation to confront corruption, insecurity, unemployment and poverty.

It was encouragement, but never a blank cheque.

2012: Rising Insecurity

As Boko Haram attacks intensified across northern Nigeria, the bishops repeatedly condemned the inability of government to protect innocent citizens.

They also warned that corruption was steadily weakening the nation’s institutions and eroding public confidence.

2013: Governance Under Scrutiny

As national challenges deepened, CBCN communiqués increasingly highlighted:

* worsening insecurity;
* youth unemployment;
* corruption;
* weak governance;
* declining public confidence in public institutions.

These were not attacks on democracy.

They were calls for government to fulfil its constitutional responsibilities.

September 2014: The Warri Communiqué

One of the strongest CBCN interventions before the 2015 general election came during the bishops’ plenary in Warri.

The bishops declared that government was not doing enough to contain Boko Haram and lamented the continued killings, displacement of communities and insecurity affecting millions of Nigerians.

They also condemned corruption, poverty and the abuse of public office, warning that Nigeria could not achieve peace without justice and accountable leadership.

February 2015: “Good Families Make Good Nations”

Only weeks before the presidential election, the bishops issued another landmark communiqué titled “Good Families Make Good Nations.”

They called for:

* free and fair elections;
* impartial security agencies;
* rejection of vote buying;
* political leaders to avoid violence;
* protection of human life;
* stronger action against corruption.

Perhaps the most memorable line from that communiqué remains:

“No ambition is worth the blood of any Nigerian.”

President Jonathan attended the opening ceremony.

Yet the bishops did not soften their message.

They spoke honestly because that is what they have always done.

The Same Pattern Under Other Governments

The record did not begin with Jonathan, nor did it end with him.

Long before the emergence of today’s political parties, the bishops criticized military governments for human rights abuses, authoritarian rule and economic hardship.

During General Sani Abacha’s regime, several Catholic bishops openly challenged dictatorship despite the personal risks involved.

Under President Olusegun Obasanjo, they questioned corruption, governance and social injustice.

Under President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, they continued issuing communiqués on electoral reforms, justice, national unity and responsible leadership.

Under President Muhammadu Buhari, they repeatedly criticized worsening insecurity, kidnappings, killings, economic hardship and what they considered the government’s inability to adequately protect lives and property.

Now, under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, they have once again expressed concern about insecurity, hunger, economic hardship, political pluralism, electoral integrity and the suffering of ordinary Nigerians.

The pattern has not changed. Only the government has.

It is easy to applaud religious leaders when they criticize governments we oppose.

The true test of democratic maturity is whether we still defend their right and indeed their responsibility to speak when the criticism is directed at leaders we support.

Independent institutions do not exist to comfort those in power.

They exist to remind those in power that public office is a trust, not an entitlement.

If Nigerians applauded the bishops when they challenged previous administrations but condemn them today simply because the government has changed, then perhaps the issue is no longer the bishops.

Perhaps the issue is consistency.

Democracy requires more than periodic elections. It requires courageous institutions willing to speak truth to power, even when that truth is unpopular.

That has been the role of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria for decades.

Presidents come and go.

Military rulers rise and fall.

Political parties win and lose elections.

But the Church’s moral responsibility to comfort the afflicted, challenge injustice and remind those in authority that leadership is ultimately a sacred trust remains unchanged.

That responsibility is older than Tinubu.

Older than Buhari.

Older than Jonathan.

And, if history is any guide, it will remain long after today’s political arguments have faded into memory.

@PigTormentor @Seunmsg @Flokii @Lithiumite

The reason Nigeria is still where it is today is because we refused to accept the truth, if we see people that boldly tell truth to power, some sycophants will start criticizing them.

Every office you find yourself, you are not meant to examine yourself, definitely you must give yourself pass mark, you can't just be judge in your own case. The work you have done will speak for you if you are doing well. Tinubu/APC and their supporters/Sycophants kept judging themselves and giving themselves pass marks. If things are moving well definitely citizens will feel it but life is terrible currently, people are dying on daily basis from insecurity and Tinubu is telling us that things are moving well. Seriously we don't have to blame him because he lacks nothing, he is swimming in the pool of public money, he doesn't know what we called "Hardship"

Judemarco31:
The reason Nigeria is still where it is now is because we refused to accept the truth, if we see people that boldly tell truth to power, some sycophants will start criticizing them.

Every office you find yourself, you are not meant to examine yourself, definitely you must give yourself pass mark, you can't just be judge in your own case. The work you have done will speak for you if you are doing well. Tinubu/APC and their supporters/Sycophants kept judging themselves and giving themselves pass marks. If things are moving well definitely citizens will feel it but life is terrible currently, people are dying on daily basis from insecurity and Tinubu is telling us that things are moving well. Seriously we don't have to blame him because he lacks nothing, he is swimming in the pool of public money, he doesn't know what we called "Hardship"

You are absolutely correct. I’ve come to realize that the issue may not be Tinubu alone, but also the people around him. If those closest to a leader are unwilling to speak honestly, or if they believe he is not receptive to uncomfortable truths, then meaningful feedback becomes impossible.

The recent visit of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) reinforced that concern for me. It appeared to highlight a leadership environment where criticism is too easily dismissed rather than carefully considered.

Unfortunately, many of those surrounding the President seem more interested in defending every government action than in offering sincere advice. Whether out of loyalty, fear of losing their positions, or the desire to preserve their privileges, they often choose praise over honesty.

Equally concerning are citizens who defend every policy solely on the basis of tribe or religion, regardless of its impact. When political support becomes unconditional, accountability suffers, and it is ordinary Nigerians who ultimately bear the consequences.

Everyone is entitled to support a political leader, but that support should never come at the expense of truth, constructive criticism, or the national interest.

I have never felt as insulted to be a Yoruba man as I have in recent times. Reading some of the comments and arguments from those bending over backwards to defend this government has left me deeply disappointed.

The descendants of Odùduwà, are renowned for the Omolúàbí ethos: truth, integrity, wisdom, fairness, courage, objectivity, respect, accountability, and the ability to speak truth to power, regardless of who is in authority. We are taught to judge issues on their merits, not through the lens of blind loyalty or partisan sentiment.

Sadly, some have abandoned these timeless values. They defend every action, excuse every failure, and attack anyone who dares to ask legitimate questions. That is not the Omolúàbí way.

I remain immensely proud of my heritage, but I am deeply ashamed of those who have traded objectivity and integrity for political convenience. I cannot identify with such people or with those sophisticated morons who mistake blind loyalty for intelligence and propaganda for patriotism.

An Omolúàbí does not defend a leader at all costs. An Omolúàbí defends the truth, even when the truth is uncomfortable.

The Catholic Bishops have been speaking truth to power for years, it didn't start under Tinubu. The difference is that the Tinubu regime hates hearing the truth. It sees accountability and transparency as threats, not democratic virtues.

ibabz:
“The duty of the Church is not to govern the State. The duty of the Church is to remind those who govern that power is a sacred trust and that leadership must always serve the common good.”

The recent visit of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu at the Presidential Villa has generated more controversy than many expected. During the meeting, the bishops presented their concerns about Nigeria’s worsening socio-economic conditions, insecurity, political climate and national direction. President Tinubu defended his administration’s policies, insisting that his reforms were yielding results despite the hardships many Nigerians continue to face.

Days later, Cardinal John Onaiyekan explained publicly that the bishops had simply conveyed the realities they encounter among ordinary Nigerians. According to him, the bishops told the President that the economy was becoming increasingly difficult for millions of citizens, while the President maintained that his economic reforms were beginning to produce positive results.

Ordinarily, such an exchange should have sparked a healthy national conversation about governance. Instead, much of the public discourse shifted away from the substance of the bishops’ concerns and toward the bishops themselves. Some government supporters accused them of partisanship. Others alleged that they were sympathetic to Peter Obi or the Obidient Movement. A few even suggested that Cardinal Onaiyekan should be disciplined by the Church.

These reactions are neither new nor surprising. What is surprising is how quickly many Nigerians forget history.

This controversy raises an important question:

Has the Catholic Bishops’ Conference suddenly become political, or has it always spoken whenever governments failed in their responsibilities to the Nigerian people?

History provides a clear answer.

The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria has never functioned as an opposition political party. Neither has it acted as a department of government.

Its mission has always been much simpler and much more difficult.

To speak the truth.

Whether that truth is welcomed or rejected.

Whether those in power wear military uniforms or agbada.

Whether the President belongs to the PDP, APC or any other political party.

Whether criticism attracts applause or insults.

For decades, the bishops have regarded it as part of their pastoral responsibility to speak whenever governance threatens human dignity, justice, peace, democracy or the common good.

Their communiqués have criticized military dictatorships, condemned corruption, challenged electoral malpractice, spoken against religious violence, defended democratic institutions and consistently called governments to account regardless of who occupied Aso Rock.

The names of presidents have changed.
The principles have not.

It evaluates public policy through the enduring principles of Catholic Social Teaching: respect for human dignity, justice, the common good, solidarity, accountability and a preferential concern for the poor.

Whenever government policies undermine these principles, the bishops believe they have both a constitutional right and a moral obligation to speak.

That obligation did not begin with President Tinubu.

Nor did it begin with President Jonathan.

It has existed throughout Nigeria’s post-independence history.

This commitment to independence also helps explain why, in January 2013, the Catholic bishops suspended participation in the national meetings of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN). The Catholic Secretariat made it clear that this was not a permanent withdrawal but a suspension while longstanding concerns were addressed.

Among those concerns were reports that CAN was becoming increasingly associated with partisan politics, a development many Catholic leaders believed could weaken its moral authority.

The bishops consistently maintained that the Church must remain “the conscience of the nation” and “the voice of the voiceless.” An institution perceived to be aligned with any political interest risks losing its ability to challenge every government with equal credibility.

The CBCN has worked deliberately to preserve that independence.

Those accusing the bishops today of suddenly becoming political would do well to revisit the record of the Jonathan years.

2011: Support Accompanied by Responsibility

Following the election of President Goodluck Jonathan, the bishops congratulated the new administration while reminding it that electoral victory carried a moral obligation to confront corruption, insecurity, unemployment and poverty.

It was encouragement, but never a blank cheque.

2012: Rising Insecurity

As Boko Haram attacks intensified across northern Nigeria, the bishops repeatedly condemned the inability of government to protect innocent citizens.

They also warned that corruption was steadily weakening the nation’s institutions and eroding public confidence.

2013: Governance Under Scrutiny

As national challenges deepened, CBCN communiqués increasingly highlighted:

* worsening insecurity;
* youth unemployment;
* corruption;
* weak governance;
* declining public confidence in public institutions.

These were not attacks on democracy.

They were calls for government to fulfil its constitutional responsibilities.

September 2014: The Warri Communiqué

One of the strongest CBCN interventions before the 2015 general election came during the bishops’ plenary in Warri.

The bishops declared that government was not doing enough to contain Boko Haram and lamented the continued killings, displacement of communities and insecurity affecting millions of Nigerians.

They also condemned corruption, poverty and the abuse of public office, warning that Nigeria could not achieve peace without justice and accountable leadership.

February 2015: “Good Families Make Good Nations”

Only weeks before the presidential election, the bishops issued another landmark communiqué titled “Good Families Make Good Nations.”

They called for:

* free and fair elections;
* impartial security agencies;
* rejection of vote buying;
* political leaders to avoid violence;
* protection of human life;
* stronger action against corruption.

Perhaps the most memorable line from that communiqué remains:

“No ambition is worth the blood of any Nigerian.”

President Jonathan attended the opening ceremony.

Yet the bishops did not soften their message.

They spoke honestly because that is what they have always done.

The Same Pattern Under Other Governments

The record did not begin with Jonathan, nor did it end with him.

Long before the emergence of today’s political parties, the bishops criticized military governments for human rights abuses, authoritarian rule and economic hardship.

During General Sani Abacha’s regime, several Catholic bishops openly challenged dictatorship despite the personal risks involved.

Under President Olusegun Obasanjo, they questioned corruption, governance and social injustice.

Under President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, they continued issuing communiqués on electoral reforms, justice, national unity and responsible leadership.

Under President Muhammadu Buhari, they repeatedly criticized worsening insecurity, kidnappings, killings, economic hardship and what they considered the government’s inability to adequately protect lives and property.

Now, under President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, they have once again expressed concern about insecurity, hunger, economic hardship, political pluralism, electoral integrity and the suffering of ordinary Nigerians.

The pattern has not changed. Only the government has.

It is easy to applaud religious leaders when they criticize governments we oppose.

The true test of democratic maturity is whether we still defend their right and indeed their responsibility to speak when the criticism is directed at leaders we support.

Independent institutions do not exist to comfort those in power.

They exist to remind those in power that public office is a trust, not an entitlement.

If Nigerians applauded the bishops when they challenged previous administrations but condemn them today simply because the government has changed, then perhaps the issue is no longer the bishops.

Perhaps the issue is consistency.

Democracy requires more than periodic elections. It requires courageous institutions willing to speak truth to power, even when that truth is unpopular.

That has been the role of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria for decades.

Presidents come and go.

Military rulers rise and fall.

Political parties win and lose elections.

But the Church’s moral responsibility to comfort the afflicted, challenge injustice and remind those in authority that leadership is ultimately a sacred trust remains unchanged.

That responsibility is older than Tinubu.

Older than Buhari.

Older than Jonathan.

And, if history is any guide, it will remain long after today’s political arguments have faded into memory.

@PigTormentor @Seunmsg @Flokii @Lithiumite

Its for the bishops to tender their views and its their right to be heard and the president availed them that privilege in their highly esteemed capacities, its also the prerogative of the president to respond to their posits which he also did with utmost courtesy by doing that in person,it then behoves on the Cardinal to reciprocate the gesture and uphold cerebral tenets of such privileged access to simply know that their job is done and its left for govt to dobits job of governing not to attempt to take over the narrative or direction of that govt.

As the Cardinal took it unto himself to interpret the presidents response in their own prism and made emphatic statements on the comments of the president to establish a finite position of the church........it then behoves on the president to issue rebuttals as appropriate and make its own stand.

Ofunaofu:
The Catholic Bishops have been speaking truth to power for years, it didn't start under Tinubu. The difference is that the Tinubu regime hates hearing the truth. It sees accountability and transparency as threats, not democratic virtues.

That is one of the things I love about the CBCN. They don’t care who occupies the office, they speak the truth when necessary.

ibabz:
That is one of the things I love about the CBCN. They don’t care who occupies the office, they speak the truth when necessary.

Absolutely 💯

Lithiumite:
Its for the bishops to tender their views and its their right to be heard and the president availed them that privilege in their highly esteemed capacities, its also the prerogative of the president to respond to their posits which he also did with utmost courtesy by doing that in person,it then behoves on the Cardinal to reciprocate the gesture and uphold cerebral tenets of such privileged access to simply know that their job is done and its left for govt to dobits job of governing not to attempt to take over the narrative or direction of that govt.

As the Cardinal took it unto himself to interpret the presidents response in their own prism and made emphatic statements on the comments of the president to establish a finite position of the church........it then behoves on the president to issue rebuttals as appropriate and make its own stand.

The bishops met with the President and presented their concerns, just as they have done with previous administrations over the years. That is part of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria’s longstanding tradition of engaging those in authority and speaking on issues affecting the nation.

From the accounts that have emerged, the President defended his administration and its policies. However, it is evident that he did not persuade the bishops to change the assessment they had reached after their own deliberations. If he had, there would have been little reason for Cardinal John Onaiyekan to later explain publicly that the bishops stood by the concerns they presented.

It is worth remembering what it takes to become a bishop in the Catholic Church. Bishops are not appointed casually. They are men who have undergone years of rigorous intellectual, theological and pastoral formation. They are widely read, experienced and entrusted with the responsibility of guiding millions of faithful while engaging complex social, moral and national issues.

When these bishops gather as the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria to review the state of the nation, they do not simply express personal opinions. They deliberate collectively, drawing from reports across the country, their pastoral experience and careful reflection before issuing a communiqué.

Naturally, if anyone hopes to persuade such a body to reconsider its conclusions, it requires more than assurances or optimistic rhetoric. It requires convincing evidence, credible data and demonstrable results that address the concerns they have raised.

Cardinal Onaiyekan’s subsequent remarks should therefore be understood in that context. He was not introducing a new position; he was explaining the position already adopted by the bishops after their meeting with the President. Nor was it the first time he had spoken candidly on national issues, regardless of which political party was in power.

What transformed an ordinary exchange between the Church and the government into a national controversy was not the meeting itself, but the reactions that followed. Rather than engage the substance of the bishops’ concerns, some political commentators and government supporters, including presidential spokesman Daniel Bwala who turned their attention to questioning the bishops and Cardinal Onaiyekan personally. That shift from debating the message to attacking the messenger is what escalated the conversation and diverted attention from the important national issues the bishops had raised.

Just so you know: Yes, I’m a Catholic, a proud one at that.

We are not fanatics, nor are we irrational. We are taught to be objective, to seek the truth wherever it may be found, and to examine issues through the lenses of faith, reason, and evidence.

The Catholic intellectual tradition encourages critical thinking, informed judgment, and the courage to speak the truth with charity. We are not expected to defend every government or oppose every government. Rather, we are called to stand firmly on the side of truth, justice, human dignity, and the common good.

In fact, this is reflected in our Prayer for Nigeria. We constantly pray that God will grant our leaders wisdom, integrity, justice, and the fear of God, so they may govern with compassion and place the welfare of the people above personal or political interests. Our prayers are not for political parties or personalities; they are for righteous leadership and a nation where peace, justice, and equity prevail.

So when the Catholic Church, through the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN), speaks on the state of the nation, it is not acting out of political bias or religious fanaticism. It is fulfilling its moral and pastoral responsibility to proclaim the truth, defend the dignity of every human person, and remind those in authority of their duty to serve the common good.

That is the Catholic faith I belong to, and I am proud of it.

Onaiyekan has the right to speak whatever he sees as truth no matter how ridiculous it may be. Mr. President also has the right to respond with his own truth. For responsible and honest people, it ends in that room. But not Onaiyekan. That irresponsible man went on National Television that same day to divulge their discussion and make very disparaging remarks about the president and even the electoral process.

Pray tell, what does Onaiyekan knows about the economy? Apart from fleecing his church members through the sales of false hope, what else does he know?


The president should learn from this and stop opening his doors to all these irresponsible opposition elements. Onaiyekan’s anti-Tinubu rhetorics are very well documented. So, why grant such a character a listening ear?

seunmsg:
Onaiyekan has the right to speak whatever he sees as truth no matter how ridiculous it may be. Mr. President also has the right to respond with his own truth. For responsible and honest people, it ends in that room. But not Onaiyekan. That irresponsible man went on National Television that same day to divulge their discussion and make very disparaging remarks about the president and even the electoral process.

Pray tell, what does Onaiyekan knows about the economy? Apart from fleecing his church members through the sales of false hope, what else does he know?


The president should learn from this and stop opening his doors to all these irresponsible opposition elements. Onaiyekan’s anti-Tinubu rhetorics are very well documented. So, why grant such a character a listening ear?

You go cry tire. The president is taken aback that someone will openly choose to oppose him because he's so used to seeing people singing the mandate song at every corner he turns in the villa.

"Catholics are not Christians" - Presidency

AMINDA:
You go cry tire. The president is taken aback that someone will openly choose to oppose him because he's so used to seeing people singing the mandate song at every corner he turns in the villa.

"Catholics are not Christians" - Presidency

The only thing they are good at is division. They have successfully divided the country, now the christiandom. For the record, I’m proud to be a catholic.

ibabz:
You are absolutely correct. I’ve come to realize that the issue may not be Tinubu alone, but also the people around him. If those closest to a leader are unwilling to speak honestly, or if they believe he is not receptive to uncomfortable truths, then meaningful feedback becomes impossible.

The recent visit of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) reinforced that concern for me. It appeared to highlight a leadership environment where criticism is too easily dismissed rather than carefully considered.

Unfortunately, many of those surrounding the President seem more interested in defending every government action than in offering sincere advice. Whether out of loyalty, fear of losing their positions, or the desire to preserve their privileges, they often choose praise over honesty.

Equally concerning are citizens who defend every policy solely on the basis of tribe or religion, regardless of its impact. When political support becomes unconditional, accountability suffers, and it is ordinary Nigerians who ultimately bear the consequences.

Everyone is entitled to support a political leader, but that support should never come at the expense of truth, constructive criticism, or the national interest.

That was the exact problem many of us who have studied him for long had before he became the president

He long have that personality of I am the best no matter what and a leader should always listen, you don't criticize, you only need to work on the issues raised

Man just dey fall hand with his handling of the presidency

ibabz:
The bishops met with the President and presented their concerns, just as they have done with previous administrations over the years. That is part of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria’s longstanding tradition of engaging those in authority and speaking on issues affecting the nation.

From the accounts that have emerged, the President defended his administration and its policies. However, it is evident that he did not persuade the bishops to change the assessment they had reached after their own deliberations. If he had, there would have been little reason for Cardinal John Onaiyekan to later explain publicly that the bishops stood by the concerns they presented.

It is worth remembering what it takes to become a bishop in the Catholic Church. Bishops are not appointed casually. They are men who have undergone years of rigorous intellectual, theological and pastoral formation. They are widely read, experienced and entrusted with the responsibility of guiding millions of faithful while engaging complex social, moral and national issues.

When these bishops gather as the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria to review the state of the nation, they do not simply express personal opinions. They deliberate collectively, drawing from reports across the country, their pastoral experience and careful reflection before issuing a communiqué.

Naturally, if anyone hopes to persuade such a body to reconsider its conclusions, it requires more than assurances or optimistic rhetoric. It requires convincing evidence, credible data and demonstrable results that address the concerns they have raised.

Cardinal Onaiyekan’s subsequent remarks should therefore be understood in that context. He was not introducing a new position; he was explaining the position already adopted by the bishops after their meeting with the President. Nor was it the first time he had spoken candidly on national issues, regardless of which political party was in power.

What transformed an ordinary exchange between the Church and the government into a national controversy was not the meeting itself, but the reactions that followed. Rather than engage the substance of the bishops’ concerns, some political commentators and government supporters, including presidential spokesman Daniel Bwala who turned their attention to questioning the bishops and Cardinal Onaiyekan personally. That shift from debating the message to attacking the messenger is what escalated the conversation and diverted attention from the important national issues the bishops had raised.

He should not defend it, as a leader when a concern is raised, you don't defend it, you work on the concerns raised, that's what a leader does always

seunmsg:
Onaiyekan has the right to speak whatever he sees as truth no matter how ridiculous it may be. Mr. President also has the right to respond with his own truth. For responsible and honest people, it ends in that room. But not Onaiyekan. That irresponsible man went on National Television that same day to divulge their discussion and make very disparaging remarks about the president and even the electoral process.

Pray tell, what does Onaiyekan knows about the economy? Apart from fleecing his church members through the sales of false hope, what else does he know?


The president should learn from this and stop opening his doors to all these irresponsible opposition elements. Onaiyekan’s anti-Tinubu rhetorics are very well documented. So, why grant such a character a listening ear?

Secrecy! Shey won fi se yin ni?

The only issue you could find with Cardinal Onaiyekan was that he spoke publicly about the meeting? Seriously?

This wasn’t a private family matter or a personal conversation about himself. It was a discussion concerning the state of the nation, governance, and the welfare of millions of Nigerians. Why should such matters be kept secret from the very citizens whose lives are affected by government policies?

So, because he chose transparency over secrecy, that makes him “irresponsible”? Is that really your standard?

The Catholic Church has never been known for keeping silent in the face of injustice or poor governance. Speaking truth to those in authority is part of its moral responsibility. That has been the tradition of the Church, and it will continue to be. I cannot speak for other denominations, but Catholics are taught that when the common good is at stake, silence is not a virtue.

I’m honestly disappointed by this line of reasoning. At times, I genuinely wonder how some people think. Instead of engaging with the substance of what was said about the nation’s challenges, the focus becomes attacking the messenger simply because he refused to keep the public in the dark.

ibabz:
Secrecy! Shey won fi se yin ni?

The only issue you could find with Cardinal Onaiyekan was that he spoke publicly about the meeting? Seriously?

This wasn’t a private family matter or a personal conversation about himself. It was a discussion concerning the state of the nation, governance, and the welfare of millions of Nigerians. Why should such matters be kept secret from the very citizens whose lives are affected by government policies?

So, because he chose transparency over secrecy, that makes him “irresponsible”? Is that really your standard?

The Catholic Church has never been known for keeping silent in the face of injustice or poor governance. Speaking truth to those in authority is part of its moral responsibility. That has been the tradition of the Church, and it will continue to be. I cannot speak for other denominations, but Catholics are taught that when the common good is at stake, silence is not a virtue.

I’m honestly disappointed by this line of reasoning. At times, I genuinely wonder how some people think. Instead of engaging with the substance of what was said about the nation’s challenges, the focus becomes attacking the messenger simply because he refused to keep the public in the dark.

When you have access to Mr president, you don't go on television to bark and spew lies. That's what makes him an elder statesman. How old are you? Some of you kids really needs to learn basic manners and diplomacy.

AMINDA:
You go cry tire. The president is taken aback that someone will openly choose to oppose him because he's so used to seeing people singing the mandate song at every corner he turns in the villa.

"Catholics are not Christians" - Presidency

Under this administration, Nigeria has witnessed unprecedented levels of tribal division and ethnic hostility. As if that were not enough, the same administration now appears to be steering the country toward another dangerous fault line, a religious one.

But this time, it is not a conflict between Christians and Muslims. Instead, it is an attempt to pit Christians against Christians, or, more accurately, Christians against Catholics.

According to Daniel Bwala’s reasoning, Catholics are somehow not Christians. Such a claim is not only historically and theologically false, but also deeply divisive and irresponsible.

What a shame that, at a time when Nigeria desperately needs unity, some public figures are promoting narratives that only deepen our divisions.

seunmsg:
When you have access to Mr president, you don't go on television to bark and spew lies. That's what makes him an elder statesman. How old are you? Some of you kids really needs to learn basic manners and diplomacy.

The Bishop spoke the mind of most Nigerians

HIGHESTPOPORI:
The Bishop spoke the mind of most Nigerians

I decided to ignore him because engaging with him doesn’t worth my time.

seunmsg:
Onaiyekan has the right to speak whatever he sees as truth no matter how ridiculous it may be. Mr. President also has the right to respond with his own truth. For responsible and honest people, it ends in that room. But not Onaiyekan. That irresponsible man went on National Television that same day to divulge their discussion and make very disparaging remarks about the president and even the electoral process.

Pray tell, what does Onaiyekan knows about the economy? Apart from fleecing his church members through the sales of false hope, what else does he know?


The president should learn from this and stop opening his doors to all these irresponsible opposition elements. Onaiyekan’s anti-Tinubu rhetorics are very well documented. So, why grant such a character a listening ear?

You’re right

ibabz:
The only thing they are good at is division. They have successfully divided the country, now the christiandom. For the record, I’m proud to be a catholic.

Those Bishops are catholiticians :
1. Their demand for free and fair elections is similar to indirectly advising the President not to rig, hence his response that all is fair in politics.
2. Why still openly raising concern about insecurity, when the tide is now against criminal elements, especially when their lord and personal saviour, Donald Trump has given Tinubu a clean bill of health.
3. The economic reforms have attracted accolades from World Bank, IMF, rating agencies, Okonjo-Iweala, Adewunmi Adeshina,etc, and recently Lamido Sanusi. That a patient is still on hospital bed, does not mean he is not recovering and making progress. It’s just a matter of time.

Tinubu wan whine Catholic church wey dey 2,000 years older than Iragbiji his hometown .

The Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria was very vocal and outspoken against General Abacha and Babangida when they were military heads of state. Yet Abacha and Babangida never had their sides rush to the press to attack them. They CBCN gave Obasanjo the benefit of the doubt as the first civilian government head the country had in over 20 years and as such needed to learn the ropes but the moment he began nursing a third term project, they spoke out. Obasanjo later had to reassure them that he had nothing like that planned. The CBCN was a very vocal critic of Buhari and Jonathan. The conference rejected millions of dollars Jonathan wanted to use to bribe them. This was money PFN and CAN collected already. Nigerian Catholic Bishops rejected that money. They earned my respect from that day. I am not even Catholic.

So that Yekini Amoda and his aides can feel attacked when such an organisation calls out glaring short falls and short comings, shows that evil is what drives this administration.

This is the man who is running your economy for you and we are expecting a miracle.


🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣