SETTING THE RECORDS STRAIGHT: THE CAN CHAIRMANSHIP CONTROVERSY.

 

The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) chairmanship has been a subject of intense controversy, with various blocs and stakeholders holding different opinions. It is essential to set the records straight, provide clarity on the matter, and address the misconceptions that have been perpetuated.

Firstly, it is crucial to note that the turn for CAN chairmanship is not exclusive to the Catholic Bloc. The OAIC Bloc also has a stake in the chairmanship, but they have chosen not to make noise about it, prioritizing the progress of the Church instead. This demonstrates the OAIC Bloc's commitment to the well-being of the Church, even if it means putting their own interests on the backburner.

Additionally, the PFN Bloc did not complete their tenure when Ben Ubeh passed away, and Governor Darius appointed Isaiah Jirapye as his preferred candidate. This sets a precedent for the governor's involvement in the selection process, highlighting the importance of the governor's role in ensuring the smooth operation of the Church.

The Catholic Bloc was given the opportunity to present a candidate for screening, but they declined to send anyone, despite being granted priority. Furthermore, they walked out before the screening even began, which raises concerns about their dedication to the process. This behavior is not only unacceptable but also brings into question their integrity and commitment to the entire process.

It is ironic that some individuals are criticizing the governor for preferring a candidate he can work with, considering that CAN in Taraba relies heavily on government support. This is not unique to Taraba, as Muslim governors in other states have also influenced the selection of CAN chairmen. In fact, it is common practice for governors to have a say in the selection of CAN leaders, as it ensures that the Church and state can work together harmoniously.

The governor has explained his reasons for taking this step to the Bloc leaders and stakeholders, and they have all agreed. With four out of five Blocs, including OAIC, in agreement, it is puzzling that a single Bloc is holding up the process. This raises questions about the motivations behind the Catholic Bloc's actions and whether they are truly committed to the well-being of the Church.

Furthermore, an agreement has been reached to document the understanding that the Catholic Bloc will take the chairmanship after the current tenure. This raises questions about the timing and motivation behind the National's letter to stop the election. Was this letter a genuine attempt to address concerns, or was it a thinly veiled attempt to undermine the authority of the governor and the agreed-upon process?

We urge all parties involved to approach this matter with caution, avoiding sentiment, tribalism, and denominationalism. The Body of Christ should be allowed to move forward, and the CAN chairmanship should not be held hostage by individual interests. It is time for us to put aside our differences and work towards the common goal of promoting the Gospel and serving the Church.

In conclusion, we call for a thoughtful and reflective approach to resolving this controversy, rather than rash reactions or thoughtless accusations. The progress of the Church should be our top priority, and we should strive to maintain the unity and integrity of the Body of Christ.