2023: Akwa Ibom guber and prophetic grandstanding
By Emmanuel Ndon
During the first century AD arose a form of government known as theocracy. By definition, theocracy is government by divine guidance or by officials who are believed to be divinely guided. Theocratic rule was typical of early civilizations whose legal system was based on religious law. It was aborted by most western countries .
Among the dominant forms of government, theocracy has never been a part of Akwa Ibom State nay Nigeria’s system of government. Surprisingly, events unfolding in Akwa Ibom State has painted a picture which indicates that the state may gradually be sliding into theocracy.
A few days ago, a Christian (political) group , Akwa Ibom Christian Assembly (ACA) had issued a press statement in response to a newspaper report alleging that her prayer summit billed for Tuesday, December 7 , was a target for infiltration by agents of the state government. The group, led by Dr. Cletus Bassey of Destiny International, Akwa Ibom State, however denounced the the newspaper report claiming that it did not authorize it.
As it turned out, the event went on smoothly devoid of any tension the said story had generated.
What can be gleaned from this is the capitulation to theocratic monarchy which has crept into our body polity. The state appears to have knuckle under the trappings of a small group of religious figures who claim political authority in the name of God. As is often the case with theocratic monarchy, “these individuals then interpret the verses of the holy book for political purposes, claiming that they are obeying and enforcing the will of the deity”.
Within the past couple of months, we have witnessed the up springing of some additional Christian-political groups with funny nomenclatures, all in a seemingly bitter struggle to determine the locus of power. They are always advancing to be in the center of authority – so they are always in the news to attract attention. In one breadth they want to decide who the next Governor of Akwa Ibom State should be, and in another, they say ‘God has anointed this or that person”.
God is not an author of confusion. We should not condescend to this level of hypocrisy.
The relationship of Christian institutions with government should revolve between social and spiritual welfare. Where Christian bodies or figures interface, issues of good governance, poverty alleviation and the need to curb corruption should take preeminence. Unfortunately for us, whenever such relationships occur, the aim is to expand the political influence and financial fortunes of the ‘man of God’.
Those who flaunt the mantle of God must recognize that most strong economies of the world today are found in non-Christian countries. For instance, countries like China, Japan, South Korea and those of Indonesia do not progress because of inclination to christianity.
They recognize the power of knowledge economy ( ideas ) imbibe science and technology, industrial presence, self reliance and zero tolerance for corruption. These have catapulted them into First World economies with strong per capita income good and functional infrastructure in healthcare, education and other social sectors.
Our Christian clerics and groups must halt the temptation of misleading the state for their personal gains. Most of their activities, if anything, amounts to heating up the polity. The worst is that they have deviated from the primary assignment of leading men to God which, even in the theocracy they are angling towards, is the primary responsibility.
In certain eras of church history, the desire to establish the kingdom of God stimulated political and social strivings. The political power of the Christian proclamation of the coming sovereignty of God resided in its promise of both the establishment of a kingdom of peace and the execution of judgment.
The church, like the state, has been exposed to the temptation of power, which resulted in the transformation of the church into an ecclesiastical state.
Learning from history, the state should draw a line of romance between her and the church so that what ever is left of its efforts does not become counterproductive.
“The struggle between the church, understanding itself as state, and the state, understanding itself as representative of the church, not only dominated the Middle Ages but also continued into the Reformation period. The wars of religion in the era of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation discredited in the eyes of many, the theological and metaphysical rationales for a Christian state.
“The Anabaptists in the 16th century and some Puritans in the 17th century contributed to this skepticism by advocating religious liberty and rejecting the involvement of the state in religious matters. The Enlightenment idea of grounding the relationship between church and state on natural law, as advanced by Friedrich Schleiermacher among others, led to the advocacy of the legal separation of church and state”.
While this writer is not against the role of the church in ‘praying for the government and those in authority’, it will serve us a great interest if Christian or Church leaders who desire political power to opt out individually, or if as a church, do so as a body.
There are Christian political parties in different parts of the world who seek to make a difference when they are dissatisfied with certain systems. We are appalled at the wanton prophecies and counter prophecy about people who have been ordained to become governors in 2023. And even so disgusting to find clergies – some church founders – from outside the state finding a favourable ground to proclaim their prophecies . Those in this trade should recede to their enclaves and do the prayers instead, while allowing the people to choose who they want.
Everyone should define where they stand rather than cause confusion and misleading the vulnerable pubic.
Enough is enough.
