ATTACKS ON CBCN (JOHN ONAIYEKAN & HASSAN KUKAH)

For some weeks now, statements have been spreading virally on the internet in reaction to the perceived activities or comments of Hassan Kukah and John Onaiyekan, not really because comments made about them may be true in themselves, but because the internet is a place where even the whistling of a bird is acceptable. As an individual one may have his/her reservations against these two prominent figures, but we must try to approach issues with some reasonable sense of objectivity. If every article or comment made on the internet is publishable, then many Nigerians do not need much to become professors. These reactions are not unconnected with the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and their points of departure on issues of national importance. As a result, Christians of different denomination/factions and people of different faith perceive their opinion not to be in consonance with CAN and in defense of Ayo Oritsejafor, Nigerians make unwarranted comparisons among this trio. It is in reaction to the comparison made by some incoherent minds that I summarily make certain observations.

Ayo Oritsejafor is certainly the president of the Christian Association of Nigeria and we give him credit for that. However, on issues of national importance, we should not be beclouded by the office of the CAN president at the expense of one’s suitability for particular situations. John Onaiyekan and Hassan Kukah are first of all human beings, Nigerians and then clergy. However, because of our conscious amnesia, we throw to the waste bin that which qualifies them not as bishops, but as scholars and by extension resource fellows. All we need to do is to strive to sieve the ideas of these figures within scholarly and ecclesiastical lines and know when they speak as clergy and when they render their views as scholars. When I listen to some Nigerians make careless statements on internet such as; “Kukah or Onaiyekan is a politician”, “their view does not represent the mind of CAN”, the question is; should Drs. Onaiyekan and Kukah be taken for granted simply because they are bishops Onaiyekan and Kukah respectively?  Oritsejafor on one hand attended the New Covenant Bible Institute Benin City, Nigerian Baptist Seminary Ogbomosho, Oyo state and Morris Cerrulo’s School of Ministry, San Diego. All these certainly qualifies him as a pastor that he is, but absolutely not as a scholar and by extension not a resource fellow on issues of national importance.

Known across various continents for their contributions to scholarship, Christian unity and peace, Onaiyekan, who was nominated to be a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize alongside Barack Obama and Kukah, a Harvard alumnus whose intellectual prowess is unequalled among his critics (both of whom had a stint on international diplomacy at various intervals) do not stand out as clergy alone but people of outstanding intellectual reputation. People should be discouraged, if not tired, of talking when those whose attention they want to attract, are very busy making meaningful impact in our world, therefore having no time in their schedule have to respond to mediocre. My advice to ‘you’ who seeks relevance is to have a touch of what they have acquired so that your voice like theirs, will become relevant.      

DOYIN OKUPE AND HIS ANTICS

The very first time I listened to Nkoyo Toyo on the floor of the National Assembly, the first impression I got registered in my memory because I was marveled by the level of her accuracy, logical consistency and intellectual exposure. I had to sail into her profile and I have come to revere her as one of those very few honorable members of the House of Representatives marked with clarity and distinction. As a philosopher, I always probe into a person’s profile to learn or unlearn some qualities based on either positive or negative impressions.

The first time I heard Doyin Okupe was on an interview on Aljazeera TV. Having been accused by a Sahara reporter of “doing deals with the military leaders and selling away Nigeria…” Okupe anxiously asked the reporter to “shut up”. Also, his seemingly unprofessional response to the anchors of Sunrise Daily is quite resounding. His approach to issues immediately captured the attention of many around the world and the rest of the story is on Google. But I want to draw our attention to some issues of importance:

1)      Okupe denied the allegation that he had been arraigned before the EFCC for some corrupt dealings shrouded in secrecy.

2)      He assured Nigerians never to be in despair since the Nigerian government had every situation under control.

3)      He referred to the reporter from Sahara as a liar and one that has no reputation

4)      On 3^rd November, 2013, he gave a wrong figure of the number of ATC that were fired in 1981 to be 1435 persons as against 11345 persons.

5)      That the government has granted the demands of ASUU more than ASUU desired.

6)      Above all, do not forget that President Obasanjo was reported to have physically beaten up Doyin Okupe on account of his dishonesty.

7)      Doyin Okupe said that government has opened an account with the CBN and ‘set aside’ the sum of 200million naira as ASUU requested. (Recall that he used the words ‘set aside’ and ‘paid’ interchangeably.)

If you have gone through the tertiary system of education or still an undergraduate student, then you probably should have done some GST in philosophy and logic. If numbers 1 to 6 is false, then number 7 is probably false too. So why should Okupe cajole Nigerians into believing that every demand has been met. With all these misgivings, it beats the imagination of every average mind who is impatient with incoherency why Okupe should persistently be a mouth-piece in government at this point of our political history. Having understood the antics of government and the antecedents of some government representatives, would you not expect members of ASUU to reason as intellectuals?

In 1981, when the American president fired some ATC, recall that he offered them an 11% increase in their wages having seen the demanding nature of their job. The ATC in turn rejected the offer because they wanted 100% increase. There was no prior written agreement between the government and the ATC, even though he evaded telling us the security implications it had for the American government. In the case of ASUU, there is a written agreement between the government and ASUU and a memorandum of understanding. The weak precedent or foundation upon which Okupe based his argument is feverish to a sound mind. While there is certainty that the government and ASUU are drawing closer to a middle course, the government in turn should strive to be a friend of democracy.

    

THAT ALL CATHOLICS WILL GO TO HELL? OKOTIE WAS RIGHT

I have received too many reactions from various quarters in anger against the very controversial but somewhat true statements of pastor Okotie. Please before you condemn the words of Chris Okotie; it is worthwhile that you understand the context from which he speaks. Be slow to anger lest you become as guilty as he is. Recall that in 2002, God ‘personally’ told Pastor Okotie that he should be the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2003. In that same year (2003), he did not only lose the election to Olusegun Obasanjo, but was number eight (8) in the electoral results ranking.

If it was the same God that gave Obasanjo landslide victory over Okotie, then that God is a liar. But anyone who is conversant with previous write-ups knows that we have already established that God cannot lie since to lie is evil and evil is the absence of good and goodness is the very nature of our God. It becomes pertinent to know that he is yet to recover from the disappointment of a god who promised him presidency and failed. As for me, I will not want to find myself in the presence of a god who cannot guarantee common electoral success; for that is the nature of the god that Okotie serves. Invariably, when Okotie says all Catholics will go to hell, I think he could probably be correct since what we consider as heaven may be hell to him. Or would you rather follow and find yourself in the presence of a god who promises and fail?