₦airaland Forum

JASONjnr:
You can't comfortably lie to yourself that Obi isn't their preferred candidate. After all, he divided Anambra people along other Christian faithfuls....He made Catholics more powerful and gave them appointments in his government.

The same bishops who distanced themselves from other bishops that supported Tinubu in the last general elections...Now want to have a say and be heard.

Catholic heads are politicians and they played early politics that created democracy. But then, Tinubu is more advan6tgan what they're offering today.

Mechonu jare ! Na everybody wey criticize Tinubu dry work for Prter obi, you will think Nigeria is divided into APC nd Peter Obi .. how ridiculous can tinubu boiz be

You can see you are sick upstairs, is church meant to be political, you want church to be singing Bola on your mandate .. did they sing it for obasanjo, yaradua, or jonathan .. Tinubu get two head abi

Under Jonathan Bishops criticise Jonathaj a xtain, dem don give you evidence yet you chose to be unreasonable cos you cant face the Truth.. na wa o

the catholic church suspended Rev. mbaka becos ofalleged partisanship under buhari govt, thats how far the church have gone to distance itself from politics

You see, Tinubu can force his 2nd term on us, Buh he will never smell our respect and love, shebi he sabi use powet gone on ..but he wil go down history as worst president ever

Macphenson:
If Tinubu is bereft of ideas of how to run a country he should quietly resign and stop causing disaster and chaos all over the Nation.

Then you have to leave with his solutions since we have given him the job to do. Once you are not better than his ideas and solutions, then he is still far better than anyone complaining without alternative.

The Catholic Church is a mouthpiece for an international shadow government, a wise politician would pay attention to whatever they say.

Tinubu, I believe understand the language and surely upset by the visit.

MEGAWATCH:
You are expecting a miracle from the man who never attended a primary and secondary schools with a university degree abi?


🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

PETER GREGORY OBI WILL NEVER BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA.

Macphenson:
If Tinubu is bereft of ideas of how to run a country he should quietly resign and stop causing disaster and chaos all over the Nation.

PETER GREGORY OBI WILL NEVER BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA.

chidiokay:
Mechonu jare ! Na everybody wey criticize Tinubu dry work for Prter obi, you will think Nigeria is divided into APC nd Peter Obi .. how ridiculous can tinubu boiz be

You can see you are sick upstairs, is church meant to be political, you want church to be singing Bola on your mandate .. did they sing it for obasanjo, yaradua, or jonathan .. Tinubu get two head abi

Under Jonathan Bishops criticise Jonathaj a xtain, dem don give you evidence yet you chose to be unreasonable cos you cant face the Truth.. na wa o

the catholic church suspended Rev. mbaka becos ofalleged partisanship under buhari govt, thats how far the church have gone to distance itself from politics

You see, Tinubu can force his 2nd term on us, Buh he will never smell our respect and love, shebi he sabi use powet gone on ..but he wil go down history as worst president ever

PETER GREGORY OBI WILL NEVER BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA.

Guy ..just say TINUBU disappointed you and dont shift the talk.

Atiku as VP did more for NIGERIA than TINUBU.

Peter Obi as GOVERNOR did more for Anambra State than TINUBU.

Where is the educational qualification of the man you voted for.?

Abeg go sleep

epainos:
The Catholic church will brand itself wrongly soon. It takes someone like Tinubu to stain them.

I listened to the whole issues, and the view of the church was taken too far. They got some things right, and Tinubu gave them the right answers to some of their concerns.

For example, I agree with him that they shouldn't even talk about returning their schools with him. They ought to know that its their governors' necks they should press. And the man told them that he returned all schools to missionaries in his first term in office as far back as 2000. This is absolutely the truth. So, if the so called bishops refused to do their due diligence and approach him with such request, something is wrong with them.

Then, the issue of poverty in Nigeria before he was born. Ha! Tinubu actually, messed uo there. I understand it wasn't the way he meant it because no president will deliberately want poverty on his people. But deeply, he said the truth. And such truth is not meant to be voiced out. Never!!!

For me, the bottom line is that, he should just finish the major constructions he is doing before leaving office. I dont see what Obi or Atiku would do better. This is the truth. May God provide the right person who will make Nigeria great again. These guys have nothing to offer us.

toffyz:
PETER GREGORY OBI WILL NEVER BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA.

Come and enjoy peace in your region let's see na!


They have not even started cutting your heads in the bushes.



🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

MEGAWATCH:
Come and enjoy peace in your region let's see na!

They have not even started cutting your heads in the bushes.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

PETER GREGORY OBI WILL NEVER EVER EVER BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA.

MusaChukwudi:
PETER GREGORY OBI WILL NEVER EVER EVER BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA.

Yes, on top of your cutting of HEADS in the bushes of South west by bandits


🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Image123:
Everyone knew GEJ was a catastrophe, this is nothing. You didn't need to be partisan to do that, you only needed to be sane.

A catastrophe that made life better by far for everyone than APC presidents have done

JASONjnr:
You can't comfortably lie to yourself that Obi isn't their preferred candidate. After all, he divided Anambra people along other Christian faithfuls....He made Catholics more powerful and gave them appointments in his government.

The same bishops who distanced themselves from other bishops that supported Tinubu in the last general elections...Now want to have a say and be heard.

Catholic heads are politicians and they played early politics that created democracy. But then, Tinubu is more advan6tgan what they're offering today.

sometimes I wonder why you lots do this
Are you happy with how Nigerians are suffering under the current administration?
Doctors will soon go on strike
It's absurd

HacheNoire:
Nigerians?

More than 75% of Nigerians are on His Excellency, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) side.

What you taking about?

Are you trying to pretend like you don’t know victory is guaranteed for the demigod?

Anyways, be patient. Reality hits deep!

Come out and say this in the market place or large crowd.Stop hiding under keyboard.

mrvitalis:
Dismissing the Catholic bishops’ criticism of Tinubu as “partisan” or “because they have a candidate” is foolish. It ignores a long, consistent record of institutional critique that transcends administrations, parties, and personalities. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) has spoken hard truths to power under military rulers, under Goodluck Jonathan’s PDP, under Muhammadu Buhari’s APC, and now under Bola Tinubu. Treating their latest interventions as a sudden partisan plot reveals more about the accuser’s discomfort with accountability than about the bishops’ motives.

A consistent pattern, not selective outrage

The CBCN has never been a cheerleader for any government. Under Jonathan, the bishops publicly blasted massive corruption, rights abuses, and the failure of federal and state leaders to uphold probity in public resources. Under Buhari, their language grew even sharper. They described Nigeria as “killing fields and mass graveyard,” demanded that the president “save Nigeria from avoidable doom or step aside” if he could not secure the country, and rejected propaganda campaigns that painted religious critics as enemies of the state. They warned of poverty, hunger, insecurity, and the erosion of trust—issues that cut across ethnic and regional lines.

That same institutional voice has now raised concerns with Tinubu: a bleeding economy that fails the poor, persistent insecurity, the narrowing of political space, fears of one-party dominance ahead of 2027, and the need for genuinely free and fair elections. Archbishop Matthew Man-Oso Ndagoso and Cardinal John Onaiyekan have been explicit that the bishops acted after broad internal consultation, that they have no ambition to seize anyone’s office, and that they speak as religious leaders duty-bound to address the lived realities of Nigerians—Catholic and non-Catholic alike. Onaiyekan stressed they are not politicians and are not acting for any party.


If the bishops were partisan operators waiting for a preferred candidate, their record would look very different. They would have been silent under one government and vocal under another. Instead, they have criticized successive leaders of different parties when governance failed ordinary people. Consistency of this kind is the opposite of partisanship.


The “they have a candidate” claim collapses under scrutiny
No credible evidence has surfaced that the CBCN is grooming or backing a specific presidential aspirant for 2027. The bishops’ public interventions focus on systemic issues ,electoral integrity, security, poverty, democratic institutions not on endorsing individuals. Cardinal Onaiyekan has stated plainly that the bishops are united on what matters for Nigeria’s survival even while holding diverse personal political feelings. Suggesting they are merely proxies for some hidden candidate requires inventing motives that the bishops themselves reject and that their history does not support.
This accusation is a classic deflection. When institutions or citizens raise uncomfortable facts, the easiest response is to question their purity of intent rather than engage the substance. It is the same tactic used against earlier episcopal statements under previous presidents. The result is always the same: the underlying problem’s insecurity that still claims lives, an economy that leaves millions struggling, and worries about the health of multiparty democracy—remain unaddressed while attention shifts to the messengers.

Why the charge is foolish on its face
First, it treats religious moral critique as illegitimate by definition. Catholic social teaching has long insisted that the Church has a right and duty to speak on matters of justice, the common good, and the protection of human dignity. Nigerian bishops have exercised that duty across decades. Demanding silence only when the criticism lands on the current administration is selective and self-serving.
Second, it assumes that any criticism of the government must be motivated by opposition politics. This is a low view of both the Church and of public discourse. Bishops live among the people they serve. They hear the stories of kidnapping, hunger, unemployment, and fear. When they convey those realities to the president—and when the president disagrees, as Tinubu did on the state of the economy and the claim that the nation is “bleeding”—that is democratic dialogue, not conspiracy. dailypost.ng
Third, the charge is strategically shortsighted. A healthy democracy needs institutions willing to speak uncomfortable truths to every government. If the bishops are dismissed as partisan today, the next administration will face the same dismissal tomorrow. The long-term cost is a public square in which only praise is acceptable and criticism is automatically tainted.
Nigeria’s challenges—security, economic hardship for the poor, and the integrity of future elections—are real. They predate Tinubu and will outlast him if left unaddressed. The Catholic bishops have criticized previous governments for the same categories of failure. Calling their recent engagement partisan or candidate-driven is not analysis; it is an evasion. It is foolish because it substitutes motive-hunting for the harder work of examining whether the concerns themselves have merit. A serious country listens to consistent institutional voices rather than inventing secret agendas to silence them.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Stop Hiding obidient Onaiyekan Behind the Entire Catholic Church. by CharlesCNG.

This lengthy defence is an impressive example of[b] shadow boxing.[/b]

Shadow boxing, in this context, is the tactic of refusing to engage the actual argument before you and instead inventing a different, easier argument to defeat.
In this case, the criticism concerns Cardinal Onaiyekan's personal conduct and his well-documented history of reckless political partisanship, yet your response defends the entire Catholic Bishops' Conference—a point that was never under attack.


Nobody argued that the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria must remain silent. Nobody denied that the bishops criticised Jonathan, Buhari and earlier governments. Nobody said religious leaders have no right to speak about poverty, insecurity or electoral integrity.

The issue is narrower and more specific:

Did Cardinal John Onaiyekan fairly represent the private meeting with President Tinubu when he later appeared on television?

Instead of answering that question, you are hiding one individual's irresponsible and unbecoming behaviour behind the entire history and moral authority of the Catholic Church.

That is argument laundering.

The questions remain:

* Did Onaiyekan clearly state that he was giving his **personal interpretation**, rather than an authorised collective account of the bishops’ meeting?
* Did he fairly report Tinubu’s full response, including the President’s assurance that INEC would remain neutral and every party would receive equal treatment?
* Did he distinguish what was actually said from his own hostile interpretation of phrases such as “all is fair in politics”?
* Given his previous public sympathy for Peter Obi’s political position, was he sufficiently careful to avoid appearing partisan?

Saying that the CBCN criticised previous governments does not answer any of these questions.

A football association may have a long history of neutrality; that does not automatically prove that one particular referee handled one particular match fairly.

Likewise, the Church’s prophetic mission does not make every television interpretation by every cleric complete, impartial or beyond scrutiny.

No one is demanding silence. The demand is for accuracy, discretion and institutional responsibility.

Cardinal Onaiyekan was free to criticise the government. he is a well known obidient and most of us do not take him serious,
But once he publicly interpreted a private meeting through a recognisably partisan lens, he became accountable for the fairness of that interpretation.

So stop answering an accusation nobody made.

The matter is not whether the bishops may speak truth to power.

The matter is whether Onaiyekan’s retelling was the whole truth, his personal truth, or a politically useful version of the truth.

Until that is addressed, invoking the CBCN’s historical record is merely using the entire Church as a human shield for one man’s irresponsible and unbecoming of a bishop and disgraceful conduct.

mrvitalis:
Dismissing the Catholic bishops’ criticism of Tinubu as “partisan” or “because they have a candidate” is foolish. It ignores a long, consistent record of institutional critique that transcends administrations, parties, and personalities. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) has spoken hard truths to power under military rulers, under Goodluck Jonathan’s PDP, under Muhammadu Buhari’s APC, and now under Bola Tinubu. Treating their latest interventions as a sudden partisan plot reveals more about the accuser’s discomfort with accountability than about the bishops’ motives.

A consistent pattern, not selective outrage

The CBCN has never been a cheerleader for any government. Under Jonathan, the bishops publicly blasted massive corruption, rights abuses, and the failure of federal and state leaders to uphold probity in public resources. Under Buhari, their language grew even sharper. They described Nigeria as “killing fields and mass graveyard,” demanded that the president “save Nigeria from avoidable doom or step aside” if he could not secure the country, and rejected propaganda campaigns that painted religious critics as enemies of the state. They warned of poverty, hunger, insecurity, and the erosion of trust—issues that cut across ethnic and regional lines.

That same institutional voice has now raised concerns with Tinubu: a bleeding economy that fails the poor, persistent insecurity, the narrowing of political space, fears of one-party dominance ahead of 2027, and the need for genuinely free and fair elections. Archbishop Matthew Man-Oso Ndagoso and Cardinal John Onaiyekan have been explicit that the bishops acted after broad internal consultation, that they have no ambition to seize anyone’s office, and that they speak as religious leaders duty-bound to address the lived realities of Nigerians—Catholic and non-Catholic alike. Onaiyekan stressed they are not politicians and are not acting for any party.


If the bishops were partisan operators waiting for a preferred candidate, their record would look very different. They would have been silent under one government and vocal under another. Instead, they have criticized successive leaders of different parties when governance failed ordinary people. Consistency of this kind is the opposite of partisanship.


The “they have a candidate” claim collapses under scrutiny
No credible evidence has surfaced that the CBCN is grooming or backing a specific presidential aspirant for 2027. The bishops’ public interventions focus on systemic issues ,electoral integrity, security, poverty, democratic institutions not on endorsing individuals. Cardinal Onaiyekan has stated plainly that the bishops are united on what matters for Nigeria’s survival even while holding diverse personal political feelings. Suggesting they are merely proxies for some hidden candidate requires inventing motives that the bishops themselves reject and that their history does not support.
This accusation is a classic deflection. When institutions or citizens raise uncomfortable facts, the easiest response is to question their purity of intent rather than engage the substance. It is the same tactic used against earlier episcopal statements under previous presidents. The result is always the same: the underlying problem’s insecurity that still claims lives, an economy that leaves millions struggling, and worries about the health of multiparty democracy—remain unaddressed while attention shifts to the messengers.

Why the charge is foolish on its face
First, it treats religious moral critique as illegitimate by definition. Catholic social teaching has long insisted that the Church has a right and duty to speak on matters of justice, the common good, and the protection of human dignity. Nigerian bishops have exercised that duty across decades. Demanding silence only when the criticism lands on the current administration is selective and self-serving.
Second, it assumes that any criticism of the government must be motivated by opposition politics. This is a low view of both the Church and of public discourse. Bishops live among the people they serve. They hear the stories of kidnapping, hunger, unemployment, and fear. When they convey those realities to the president—and when the president disagrees, as Tinubu did on the state of the economy and the claim that the nation is “bleeding”—that is democratic dialogue, not conspiracy. dailypost.ng
Third, the charge is strategically shortsighted. A healthy democracy needs institutions willing to speak uncomfortable truths to every government. If the bishops are dismissed as partisan today, the next administration will face the same dismissal tomorrow. The long-term cost is a public square in which only praise is acceptable and criticism is automatically tainted.
Nigeria’s challenges—security, economic hardship for the poor, and the integrity of future elections—are real. They predate Tinubu and will outlast him if left unaddressed. The Catholic bishops have criticized previous governments for the same categories of failure. Calling their recent engagement partisan or candidate-driven is not analysis; it is an evasion. It is foolish because it substitutes motive-hunting for the harder work of examining whether the concerns themselves have merit. A serious country listens to consistent institutional voices rather than inventing secret agendas to silence them.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

This is very correct

Image123:
Everyone knew GEJ was a catastrophe, this is nothing. You didn't need to be partisan to do that, you only needed to be sane.

Are you still sane?

Before and After!!!

You can clearly see the hypocrisy that comes with being a Tinubu supporter. They think the Catholic church is partisan when it has consistently spoken truths to all governments in power.

Soon, the church will canonize a few priests killed during by the communist governments in South America some decades back.

The church has always expressed itself in the light of the interest of the country.

Just forget these APC rats and their demonic idol they worship.

JASONjnr:
You can't comfortably lie to yourself that Obi isn't their preferred candidate. After all, he divided Anambra people along other Christian faithfuls....He made Catholics more powerful and gave them appointments in his government.

The same bishops who distanced themselves from other bishops that supported Tinubu in the last general elections...Now want to have a say and be heard.

Catholic heads are politicians and they played early politics that created democracy. But then, Tinubu is more advan6tgan what they're offering today.

Aren't you too big for this nonsense you wrote?

Catholic bishops did not attack Tinubu.
They only had a tete_a-tete with the fraud

Tinubu is used to bootlickers and fake pastors like the adeboye dude; so its rare for him to find people who tell him the truth.

mrvitalis:
Dismissing the Catholic bishops’ criticism of Tinubu as “partisan” or “because they have a candidate” is foolish. It ignores a long, consistent record of institutional critique that transcends administrations, parties, and personalities. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) has spoken hard truths to power under military rulers, under Goodluck Jonathan’s PDP, under Muhammadu Buhari’s APC, and now under Bola Tinubu. Treating their latest interventions as a sudden partisan plot reveals more about the accuser’s discomfort with accountability than about the bishops’ motives.

A consistent pattern, not selective outrage

The CBCN has never been a cheerleader for any government. Under Jonathan, the bishops publicly blasted massive corruption, rights abuses, and the failure of federal and state leaders to uphold probity in public resources. Under Buhari, their language grew even sharper. They described Nigeria as “killing fields and mass graveyard,” demanded that the president “save Nigeria from avoidable doom or step aside” if he could not secure the country, and rejected propaganda campaigns that painted religious critics as enemies of the state. They warned of poverty, hunger, insecurity, and the erosion of trust—issues that cut across ethnic and regional lines.

That same institutional voice has now raised concerns with Tinubu: a bleeding economy that fails the poor, persistent insecurity, the narrowing of political space, fears of one-party dominance ahead of 2027, and the need for genuinely free and fair elections. Archbishop Matthew Man-Oso Ndagoso and Cardinal John Onaiyekan have been explicit that the bishops acted after broad internal consultation, that they have no ambition to seize anyone’s office, and that they speak as religious leaders duty-bound to address the lived realities of Nigerians—Catholic and non-Catholic alike. Onaiyekan stressed they are not politicians and are not acting for any party.


If the bishops were partisan operators waiting for a preferred candidate, their record would look very different. They would have been silent under one government and vocal under another. Instead, they have criticized successive leaders of different parties when governance failed ordinary people. Consistency of this kind is the opposite of partisanship.


The “they have a candidate” claim collapses under scrutiny
No credible evidence has surfaced that the CBCN is grooming or backing a specific presidential aspirant for 2027. The bishops’ public interventions focus on systemic issues ,electoral integrity, security, poverty, democratic institutions not on endorsing individuals. Cardinal Onaiyekan has stated plainly that the bishops are united on what matters for Nigeria’s survival even while holding diverse personal political feelings. Suggesting they are merely proxies for some hidden candidate requires inventing motives that the bishops themselves reject and that their history does not support.
This accusation is a classic deflection. When institutions or citizens raise uncomfortable facts, the easiest response is to question their purity of intent rather than engage the substance. It is the same tactic used against earlier episcopal statements under previous presidents. The result is always the same: the underlying problem’s insecurity that still claims lives, an economy that leaves millions struggling, and worries about the health of multiparty democracy—remain unaddressed while attention shifts to the messengers.

Why the charge is foolish on its face
First, it treats religious moral critique as illegitimate by definition. Catholic social teaching has long insisted that the Church has a right and duty to speak on matters of justice, the common good, and the protection of human dignity. Nigerian bishops have exercised that duty across decades. Demanding silence only when the criticism lands on the current administration is selective and self-serving.
Second, it assumes that any criticism of the government must be motivated by opposition politics. This is a low view of both the Church and of public discourse. Bishops live among the people they serve. They hear the stories of kidnapping, hunger, unemployment, and fear. When they convey those realities to the president—and when the president disagrees, as Tinubu did on the state of the economy and the claim that the nation is “bleeding”—that is democratic dialogue, not conspiracy. dailypost.ng
Third, the charge is strategically shortsighted. A healthy democracy needs institutions willing to speak uncomfortable truths to every government. If the bishops are dismissed as partisan today, the next administration will face the same dismissal tomorrow. The long-term cost is a public square in which only praise is acceptable and criticism is automatically tainted.
Nigeria’s challenges—security, economic hardship for the poor, and the integrity of future elections—are real. They predate Tinubu and will outlast him if left unaddressed. The Catholic bishops have criticized previous governments for the same categories of failure. Calling their recent engagement partisan or candidate-driven is not analysis; it is an evasion. It is foolish because it substitutes motive-hunting for the harder work of examining whether the concerns themselves have merit. A serious country listens to consistent institutional voices rather than inventing secret agendas to silence them.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

All these doesn't stand on sound logic. The other presidents that you mentioned, did they have audience with the presidents and their leader afterwards used a TV interview to reveal what they discussed and lambast the presidents? The answer is no.

They were at liberty to have attended any tv interview and say anything that they wanted to say against the president and his government just like any other in Nigeria. Onayaikan was ethically wrong to have granted that interview almost immediately after the president granted them audience. He would have been right to grant it if they had sort audience and the president didn't grant it. Too much politics takes away sound etiquette.

Macphenson:
Tinubu have consistently shown his disdain and disrespect for the Christian community.

First he hired fake bishops during his campaign. Next he floated a Muslim/ Muslim ticket, now he is insulting the Catholic bishops who have been speaking truth to power

The Catholic priests showed a lot of disrespect to the president and they did that to him just because he is a southern Muslim.

That level of disrespect can never ever be shown to Buhari, Atiku, Yar'adua or Abacha

tit:
Catholic bishops did not attack Tinubu.
They only had a tete_a-tete with the fraud

Their approach was pure attack and completely disrespectful

stuffs2002:
The Catholic priests showed a lot of disrespect to the president and they did that to him just because he is a southern Muslim.

That level of disrespect can never ever be shown to Buhari, Atiku, Yar'adua or Abacha

Pathetic liar. Go and check the history of the Catholic bishops and the Presidents. It reach Tinubu turn he started insulting the Bishops. He just made a terrible mistake of his political career.

chidiokay:
Mechonu jare ! Na everybody wey criticize Tinubu dry work for Prter obi, you will think Nigeria is divided into APC nd Peter Obi .. how ridiculous can tinubu boiz be

You can see you are sick upstairs, is church meant to be political, you want church to be singing Bola on your mandate .. did they sing it for obasanjo, yaradua, or jonathan .. Tinubu get two head abi

Under Jonathan Bishops criticise Jonathaj a xtain, dem don give you evidence yet you chose to be unreasonable cos you cant face the Truth.. na wa o

the catholic church suspended Rev. mbaka becos ofalleged partisanship under buhari govt, thats how far the church have gone to distance itself from politics

You see, Tinubu can force his 2nd term on us, Buh he will never smell our respect and love, shebi he sabi use powet gone on ..but he wil go down history as worst president ever

You are arguing against a position nobody took.

The discussion was not about the Catholic Church as an institution. It was about the public comments of Cardinal John Onaiyekan as an individual church leader.

Those are two different things.

Nobody said the Catholic Church should "sing Bola on your mandate." In a democracy, religious leaders are free to comment on public affairs, and politicians and citizens are equally free to respond to those comments.

That is not politicising the Church. That is exercising free speech.

You mentioned Jonathan and Rev. Mbaka. Thank you. They actually prove the point: individual clerics have made political comments under different administrations, and those comments have attracted public criticism or support.

Critiquing those comments is not an attack on Christianity or the Church.

As for "every critic works for Peter Obi," that is another strawman. Nobody said that. But when a criticism closely mirrors the talking points of a political campaign, people are entitled to examine and challenge it.

Finally, saying Tinubu will "force" himself into a second term is not an argument—it is a prediction without evidence. If the opposition believes it has a better alternative, let it present its programme, build its coalition and win the election at the ballot box.

In a democracy, respect is earned, votes are counted, and arguments are answered with better arguments—not with exaggeration or by pretending that criticism of one individual's public comments is an attack on an entire Church.

The discussion concerns Cardinal John Onaiyekan's publicly expressed political views, not the Catholic Church as an institution.
He has, on several occasions, made public comments on elections and governance that have attracted political debate.
Those comments are therefore open to public scrutiny and disagreement, just like those of any other influential public figure.

Chibuezem:
sometimes I wonder why you lots do this
Are you happy with how Nigerians are suffering under the current administration?
Doctors will soon go on strike
It's absurd

My brother, you are asking the wrong question.

The question is not whether Nigerians are facing hardship.

They are.

The real question is what caused the hardship, what is being done about it, and what is the credible alternative?

President Tinubu did not create every structural problem Nigeria faces. He inherited an economy weighed down by fuel subsidy costs, foreign exchange distortions, rising debt pressures and years of postponed reforms.

The reforms have undoubtedly been painful. No honest supporter should deny that.

But we can also point to progress: subsidy removal has reduced a major fiscal burden, exchange-rate reform has ended multiple official rates, states now receive significantly higher FAAC allocations, major infrastructure projects are underway, the student loan programme has commenced, and there has been a sustained effort to expand CNG and improve oil production.

Is everything perfect?

Certainly not.

But democracy is about comparison, not wishful thinking.

So tell me: what would your preferred candidate do differently?

Would he restore fuel subsidy?

Would he reverse exchange-rate reform?

How would he stabilise the naira?

How would he finance infrastructure?

How would he increase government revenue without difficult reforms?

Those are the questions that matter.

As for doctors, every government should work to resolve legitimate labour concerns quickly. The same applies to every public-sector dispute.

Thankfully, compared with previous administrations, Nigeria has generally witnessed fewer prolonged nationwide industrial actions in higher education, and there has been no prolonged nationwide ASUU strike like the ones that repeatedly disrupted academic calendars for months under earlier governments.

You are entitled to conclude that Tinubu deserves another term or that he does not.

That is democracy.

Make your choice.

I will make mine.

Then let the Nigerian people decide in 2027.

HacheNoire:
I am very glad that y’all are learning politics and gradually accepting that every living thing has a price tag on his head- might be high, but he still does sure have.

His Excellency, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) is schooling y’all and delighted that you all are attentive.

The difference between a human like Jonathan and a demigod like His Excellency, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) is what you see playing out!

If you have problems with your religious or traditional leaders or worshippers, go after them. His Excellency, President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) is dynamic to fronts, pure and transparent.

After typing this rubbish

you find out that Bandits have emptied towns in kwara state, displace residents..

Tinubu is the commander in chief
SMH

JASONjnr:
You can't comfortably lie to yourself that Obi isn't their preferred candidate. After all, he divided Anambra people along other Christian faithfuls....He made Catholics more powerful and gave them appointments in his government.

The same bishops who distanced themselves from other bishops that supported Tinubu in the last general elections...Now want to have a say and be heard.

Catholic heads are politicians and they played early politics that created democracy. But then, Tinubu is more advan6tgan what they're offering today.

Be mindful of how you talk about the Catholic Church, it's not just a church, it's an institution, a movement bigger than any .... Well respected by the highest level of government in the world, if the Catholic Church is against your government, they can bring you down to your knees...so be careful, don't make tulumbu assume , Vatican is South East.

CharlesCNG:
My brother, you are asking the wrong question.

The question is not whether Nigerians are facing hardship.

They are.

The real question is what caused the hardship, what is being done about it, and what is the credible alternative?

President Tinubu did not create every structural problem Nigeria faces. He inherited an economy weighed down by fuel subsidy costs, foreign exchange distortions, rising debt pressures and years of postponed reforms.

The reforms have undoubtedly been painful. No honest supporter should deny that.

But we can also point to progress: subsidy removal has reduced a major fiscal burden, exchange-rate reform has ended multiple official rates, states now receive significantly higher FAAC allocations, major infrastructure projects are underway, the student loan programme has commenced, and there has been a sustained effort to expand CNG and improve oil production.

Is everything perfect?

Certainly not.

But democracy is about comparison, not wishful thinking.

So tell me: what would your preferred candidate do differently?

Would he restore fuel subsidy?

Would he reverse exchange-rate reform?

How would he stabilise the naira?

How would he finance infrastructure?

How would he increase government revenue without difficult reforms?

Those are the questions that matter.

As for doctors, every government should work to resolve legitimate labour concerns quickly. The same applies to every public-sector dispute.

Thankfully, compared with previous administrations, Nigeria has generally witnessed fewer prolonged nationwide industrial actions in higher education, and there has been no prolonged nationwide ASUU strike like the ones that repeatedly disrupted academic calendars for months under earlier governments.

You are entitled to conclude that Tinubu deserves another term or that he does not.

That is democracy.

Make your choice.

I will make mine.

Then let the Nigerian people decide in 2027.

Things are getting worse under this administration

Everything, every sector is going down since This administration took over

Look at the economy and security for example..
families hardly feed
Towns emptied residents displaced
what we only hear in Borno under previous administrations is now everywhere.

They'll tell you it will get worse before it gets better... bloody lies

Governors , senators, appointees all receive improved salaries courtesy of subsidy removal, how does that trickle down to the common man in the streets

This government has borrowed more without paying subsidy than previous administration that paid. this is absurd

Tinubu never had a clue about governance before contesting and still has no idea what he's doing in office

JASONjnr:
You can't comfortably lie to yourself that Obi isn't their preferred candidate. After all, he divided Anambra people along other Christian faithfuls....He made Catholics more powerful and gave them appointments in his government.

The same bishops who distanced themselves from other bishops that supported Tinubu in the last general elections...Now want to have a say and be heard.

Catholic heads are politicians and they played early politics that created democracy. But then, Tinubu is more advan6tgan what they're offering today.

There is no way you can defend this monumental failure of a president without sounding stupid.
. Saying the truth is a rare commodity among you. You have a president who is not in tune with reality. Rather than express appreciation to the bishops for jolting hin back to the reality, you are here ravingly looking for conspiracy theories.