Church, state fusion untenable

Jun 03, 2012

IT was full of cleverly selected verses from the Bible regarding the last Easter statements on term limits attributed to two bishops from the Anglican and Catholic faiths

By Henry Mayega

AN opinion recently published in one of the dailies titled; “Church role in politics part of a holistic gospel”, was a captivating piece that merits a response.

It was full of cleverly selected verses from the Bible regarding the last Easter statements on term limits attributed to two bishops from the Anglican and Catholic faiths.

Nobody has suggested that the clergy should have no interest in the political affairs of Uganda because, at 50 years of independence, Ugandans, including the clergy, ought to reflect on governance issues rationally.

What definitely is not desirable and perhaps is questionable is for religious leaders taking sides in the political process.

That is why Archbishop Henry Luke Orombi was far-sighted when he, on last Easter day, counselled against religious leaders who make ‘political statements’ on the pulpit rather than preach the word of God to turn sinners away from evil.

Bishop Zac Niringiye has made political statements on the pulpit. Politics is very divisive and when bishops openly make political statements, congregations are divided. People attend church to attain spiritual renewal. When we want political messages we go to rallies.

I am aware of people who have chosen to avoid church sermons given by ‘political bishops’ and have relocated to other churches, which emphasise preaching the word of God.

The religious leaders, who may want to advise the President, could directly call him. The political ranting on pulpits only helps to stock-pile acrimony among believers. Politics is a mucky engagement, which, if it sucks in religious leaders as active participants, they become targets.

No member of the laity in their sound mind would desire to see men and women dressed in white or purple being attacked.

Nobody has denounced the bishops who commented about term limits on last Easter day instead, people have rather pointed out the undesirability of their direct involvement in the political divides.

The clash between the church and the state is a luxury Uganda cannot afford, especially where religious leaders are cleverly using pulpits to divide us after we have attained peace at a huge cost.

It is of course unfathomable to give Archbishop Janan Luwum’s taking on Idi Amin in the 1970s, as an example, when of course the former lost his life as a result. The two epoch times are miles apart, in terms of logical argument because Uganda is on a strong democratic path. It is this very environment that should be harnessed by all to celebrate the 50 years of independence.

Nobody should take offence, when political leaders are given front seats on the pews. It is a sign of respect accorded them. One should not expect that when the President goes to church he should be given the back seat after all; it is always the handlers there who grant them that opportunity.

Politicians do not grab those pew positions and canonical responsibilities are usually given by Church to eminent personalities. In fact politicians do not usurp the roles of the clergy even after being given canonical titles.

The Luke 4:18-19 verses in the Bible, quoted cannot be fully understood, if you do not read them together with the subsequent verses 33-35. Jesus actually cast evil spirits out of a man implying spiritual renewal.

There is no mention of any political statement by Jesus. Besides, Luke 4:18-19 is instructive in that and I quote; “the spirit of the Lord is upon me because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor …. to heal the heart broken …. and recovering of sight to the blind ….”. The word is still preaching.

Jesus promoted reconciliation and forgiveness. In Luke chapter 5:32, Jesus said: “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance”, clearly pointing out his mandate of bringing back sinners to God’s fold.

The opinion’s reference to William Wilberforce and Winston Churchill as people who used religion to promote good governance does not resonate well with the argument about clergy involvement in politics because none of the two was a clergy and lived not in our times and definitely not in our African or Ugandan context where political affiliation means division.

I do not also agree with the article’s assertion that there is a growing school of thought for increased church involvement in the economy, education etc. Where is that written in the Bible? And where is the empirical evidence to confirm the alleged school of thought.

The 68% who voted for President Yoweri Museveni in the 2011 general elections confirm Romans 13:1 which says; “there is no authority except that which God has established”.

Yes the Church should relate to contemporary issues but should not usurp the role of political leaders.

The issue of reinstating term limits per se will not resolve our political problems like some have argued. Kenya has term limits but corruption is still there. In Tanzania which has term limits, over six ministers were recently relieved of their duties and dropped from cabinet.

The bishops should preach and turn people away from this sin. Uganda changed Presidents eight times before 1986 in a space of 24 years but problems of instability remained. Our country has now achieved peace and stability.

Those agitating for term limits do not know they are handling a double edged sword. Can we have term limits for MPs also? The priority of this Government is to implement the NRM manifesto.

Writer is a Special NRM mobiliser

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});