The trouble with the NCCK protocol: The glory has left, left 'em
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.
Dear ladies and gentlemen - I have purposely refrained from calling you "movement" because you are yet to fully convince me about the direction and ultimate purpose of your unity. However, you must rest in the confidence that mine was one of the millions of votes that endorsed the leadership you have so far - and ably so - provided to the challenge of shepherding our hopes and aspirations. I'm writing to ask you to: 1. Consider keeping your word on the review process, - don't you go the "pumbavu" way. 2. Consider staying the course in de-ethnicizing our body-poliik. 3. Consider, in as much as this shall depend on you, playing ball with our banana brethren for the purposes of processing an all-inclusive constitution. 4. Consider exiting the country's political stage when, in the wisdom of time, you'll have obviously done your patriotic bit for this great country, - don't let the glory get into your head so much as to want to ride on the crest forever. 5. Consider honouring the most High Living God with your public and private lives, - I doubt you could have proceeded any further without his tacit backing. There are millions of prayerful men and women within and without Kenya who unceasingly committed this nation to God against much spiritual opposition. Blessings! Jesse Masai.
1. The state is and shall, for all intents and purposes, remain intact (inefficiencies of our civil service notwithstanding). However, the government - already out of sync with itself and a considerable portion of of the populace - shall be shaken to its core. I'm not talking about a military coup here, I'm talking about the end of a political era and the beginning of another. I'm also talking about the end of some careers and the beginning of others. More on that further below. 2. Mainstream Christianity has lost out on its credibility in the process and it shall have an uphill task regaining it again (and here I'm talking about individuals on both sides of the political divide). For obvious reasons, no believing and practising Christian is going to ever believe some of our so-called "men" and "women" of God on anything again. The Orange-Banana debates have shown us all that the Church is orthodox in its beliefs but very liberal (even hypocritical) in its practices some times. This disparity between knowledge and expected experience has caused an unprecedented cognitive dissonance in the minds and hearts of people (Christians or not) who previously looked up to the Church to provide spiritual and social leadership (refer to http://www.voteorangekenya.com/forum/index.php?topic=22.0 for summary of my thoughts on this). It is my humble submission that there is going to be a new revival in Kenyan Christianity, one that will have men and women hungering for a new visitation of God upon their lives and this country in ways we've never seen before. A new crop of Christian leaders is going to emerge in the process, - one that will not be afraid to take a clear stand for God on topical issues of the day and exhort their congregations to live for God and Him alone no matter the cost. Those are the people whose lives in this country are going to count for eternity. These are no ordinary times (I hope and pray you understand)! 3. Political leadership in this country is definitely going to change, perhaps even earlier than 2007. I take the position that Kenya is destined not just to better the lot of her citizenry but also provide leadership in the region as well as the entire continent. I believe we are called to be a nation that nurtures and blesses her own children as well as those who are hurting besides us (Sudan, Somalia, Ethiopia, etc). I believe Kenya has been called to be a blessing to the nations. However, successive regimes have not been faithful in leading us along these paths (there is every evidence around you to indicate that our best days remain ahead of us). A new political leadership has to emerge out of this referendum process that will change our status from merely being a nation of potential and promise into one that actually lives out that vision. I do not know precisely when we shall have a clean break with the selfishly myopic kind of politics we are being treated to over the proposed constitution, but it is my firm belief that Nov. 21 shall mark the start of our journey towards that new future. There are leaders who - in their foolish pride - have dedicated this country and its people to untold darkness; and there are leaders who - in their faithful humility - have chosen the less travelled road of walking in the light over the issues at hand. Both kinds are going to reap the fruit of their labour in the fullness of time. Conclusion: At hand is not merely any other vote but a contest for the heart and soul of Kenya by not just the individuals we see on both sides of the divide but also the forces of good and evil. Kenyans must decide the kind of century they want to continue walking into. In doing this, they must consider not just their own priorities and concerns but also those of the God who ordained the being of this nation and very definitely reigns over it (some will, sadly, only acknowledge this too late in the day). In my prayers for this country, I rarely pray for the unity so many are clamouring for ("unity at all costs"); I pray for a clear-cut decision on that day that will not only expose the deep fissures that exist within and around us but also provide a working basis for honest national reflection and re-building.
Reading and listening to recent statements by various church leaders on the law review process, ordinary Christians and Kenyans at large may genuinely be at loss on what has become of a people that are often clearly decided on temporal issues of the day as well as eternity. Church leaders in this country have played an indisputably vital role in agitating for a new political and constitutional order, going as far back as the 1980s and 1990s when the likes of Dr. Henry Okullu and Bishop Alexander Muge would give the establishment a prophetic earful. No doubt history will also take a favorable note of the times, money, effort and prayers other Christian leaders subsequently put into the law review process. But I doubt historians – and the Christian God I also believe in – will suffer their on-going “chameleoneosis” on the same any gladly. The reportedly 43-member Kenya Church declared a clear “No” to the Wako draft a few weeks ago only for some of their members (who had been attending meetings leading to the announcement) to later say they weren’t decided yet; they still need more time to study, consult and – supposedly – pray before making up their minds. It is instructive that a majority of these Churches went easy on the review process in the Kanu days and are reportedly still at home with remnants of the previous regime in the current scheme of things. On the other hand, the influential Roman Catholic Church and congregations affiliated to the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) and the Ufungamano Initiative have been reported to have given the Wako draft a shot in the arm by declaring it “better” than the current one and “worthy” for consideration by Kenyans, - but with a rider: Each Christian is to follow his conscience in voting either for or against the proposed constitution. Like the Kenya Church, this latter section of Kenyan Christianity has increasingly been identified with pro-establishment ideals and projects in the Narc days, leading some to question the nature and extent of its biblical authority on some issues of the day. One need not be a prophet or even a believer to realize that both sides of the Christian divide have been sucked up in the Kanu-LDP/NAK power games to the extent that they can no longer speak truth to power. Reactions to the Wako draft by the two streams of Kenyan Christianity betray a desperate desire to remain relevant and loyal to evolving political constituencies and ethnic power-bases in ways and means similar to the politicians they so much want us to believe they are unlike. The unspoken but latent line in what these men and women of the cloth nowadays seem to pass on is that true power lies not on that old and rugged cross but in the corridors of raw political and economic power that, in the worst of times, they preach is no comparison to the 6,000-years old Christian story. To blindly laud one side for saying “No” or the other for staying non-committal while pursuing “civic education” is to miss the one salient point here: These shepherds have, by both choices, abandoned their flock and sought to pursue the paths of least resistance; paths that will not invite them to review their theology and practical commitment to a honest world vision that the review process obviously requires of them. Apart from glossing over the Wako draft and playing up to the gallery on issues they say are dear to them, none of them has offered to – say – characterize the document in light of the Scriptures they believe in. How, for instance, would the presidency, judiciary and legislature as envisaged in the proposed draft specifically jell in with the Christian ideal of public affairs and social justice? No doubt there is a viable body of Christian knowledge and tradition on all these matters, but why aren’t they getting all that flowing? Certainly, God is not silent in our world and neither should they be by either of the paths they have chosen to tread. The saddest commentary here is that they seemingly do not appear to be learning from the disastrous experiences occasioned by such Christian bigotry and selfishness as has been exhibited in recent Church history. In Nazi Germany, the “official” Church cohabited with Hitler as the likes of theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer warned of the accruing apostasy in the face of the Holocaust; many would later wish they had heeded the young man’s call to Christian, intellectual and moral honesty in the face of reflexive nationalism and lopsided patriotism. In 1960s America, White Anglo-Saxon Protestants wondered why Dr. Martin Luther King’s Jesus would be so concerned about the civil rights’ movement so many years after the war of independence. In 1994 Rwanda (reportedly 80.83% Christian), the depth of discipleship there continues to draw increased scrutiny in the face of mounting allegations that Hutu and Tutsi Christian leaders may have knowingly played a role in the genocide. As it is, the Church stands to be a victim of its own short-sightedness and political short-termism (engineered by the ruling class) in a process it previously shepherded but now, and belatedly so, considers flawed and fraught with “concerns” about which they now are seeking “further clarification.” Clearly, it had a historic and strategic responsibility to help distill the process and content from the competing visions around it and the obvious political and religious interests vested therein. Reflecting on this, writer Pamela Evans once remarked: “Church leaders who have a little sense of their own worth before God’s sight can over-value popular acceptance of their own ministry to such an extent that they develop a chameleon-like character, serially reflecting the many colors of opinion within their Church. Trying to serve God faithfully and keep everyone happy simultaneously doesn’t work. Infact, it often leads to paralyzing indecision, accusations of compromise or both. God doesn’t award prizes for window dressing competitions or popularity contests. So why do we behave as though he did?” In his seminal book The Contemporary Christian, theologian John Stott sums it up well when he says: “I fear that contemporary Church leaders are guilty of serious unfaithfulness. A few are brash enough to deny the fundamentals both of the historic Christian faith and of traditional Christian morality, while others seem as blushingly unsure of themselves and of their beliefs as an adolescent teenager.” Need I say more? Editor's note: Further reactions to this piece may be found at http://www.voteorangekenya.com/forum/index.php?topic=22.0