CROSS VS CROWN

By OKECH KENDO

The Church has declared war against the State over the Proposed Constitution. The battleground is the souls of the citizens.

The Crown is asking citizens to exercise civic responsibility. But the Cross is pleading with the faithful to temper the responsibility with moral piety.

The most populous faith, the Catholic Church, which has always supported the establishment, is defiant. The Anglican Church of Kenya, through the House of Bishops, joined earthly belligerence for ways of the world last week.

But the Seventh Day Adventist Church has discounted the duel, and objected to a public rally on a political ground, Uhuru Park, on their day of worship — Saturday.

While enlisting for the earthly clash with the Crown, ACK Archbishop Eliud Wabukala, who had initially declared ‘Yes’ had no compelling reason to defy other than to pay the Crown in its own currency. "It is because of the Government’s arrogance that I support the resolution by the House of Bishops."

So it is no longer the meekness of turning the other cheek. The Government has refused to dialogue so we must fight them.

It could also be possible other lesser bishops joined the dissident fray for the same reason, reducing the tango to a battle of egos.

Now that the two elephants are fighting it is the flock, caught between opportunistic politicians and moral pretenders, who suffer. The ultimate victors are likely to be wananchi who shall decide the fate of the Proposed Constitution. But there must be a level playing field for the unprecedented clash of the Cross and the Crown.

Now is the time to pick appropriate venues for the duel. There has to be basic ground rules to ensure fair play in the campaign for or against the draft. Cabinet ministers are not expected to exploit their positions to win undue advantage. Neither shall the clergy be allowed to exploit the pulpit to campaign against the draft. The hallowed pulpit should not be a den for propaganda to frustrate constitutional reforms, through spiritual blackmail.

Equally flabbergasted

The public shall take offence if President Kibaki calls rallies in lawns of State House to campaign for the Proposed Constitution.

Wananchi shall also be equally flabbergasted if the Prime Minister converts his office at the Treasury Building to rally support for the Proposed Constitution. These two should not even be seen to be using State resources to rally support for the referendum campaign.

The might of the State should not intimidate those who think the draft constitution is not a good vehicle for good governance and moral rectitude.

It would, therefore, be in order to give all parties to the duel a fair chance to market their case, even though the popular view appears to be the ‘Yes’ drum.

The minority should have their say, no matter how skewed, even though the majority would ultimately have their way.

The great test, however, is on the men of the cloth. They are charting new ground and their credibility depends on how they fight the ‘good’ fight for moral righteousness.

Already, a section of the Church faces a credibility crisis. It has to prove it is not relying on foreign funding to frustrate the Proposed Constitution, or that they shall not use sadaka to fight an ego war with politicians just to prove who is more influential.

It will also be interesting to see whether the rebellious clergy shall use the pulpit to divide their flock on ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ lines.

Although the Catholic top clergy reject the draft law, they should understand they are preaching to a divided congregation, some acutely aware of their civic responsibility.

There would be possible walkouts if radical clergy exploit the pulpit to misinterpret the Proposed Constitution. Doing so would be to misinform and abet lies on sacred grounds. But also taking the ‘No’ campaign rallies to say, Uhuru Park, known more for political power meetings, would be to admit there are congregants who would not countenance propaganda on the pulpit.

Like claiming abortion is permitted when it is not, and rejecting Kadhis’ court in the Proposed Constitution while tolerating them in the current Constitution.

Majority dictatorship

In this clash of egos, it is Muslims that have carried themselves with a great deal of decorum. Muslims have remained composed in the face of provocation by some extremist Church leaders. Muslims preachers have remained humble even as some Christian clergy rant with the haughtiness of the majority.

Muslims have not even demanded that Friday, their day of worship, be made a public holiday just like Saturday and Sunday, for Christians.

Muslims have allowed the Church to be treated with kid gloves, with many sacred days for their faith. Yet it is some Christian clergy claiming the Proposed Constitution favours Muslims.

By carrying this one-sided dialogue, some Christians have proved they support the dictatorship of the majority. Yet, as everyone knows, democracy should protect the rights of the minority, even as its take care of the interests of the majority.

The writer is The Standard’s Managing Editor, Quality and Production.

kendo@standardmedia.co.ke