We all are witnessing the unfolding unsavoury events at Ahiara Diocese. Since they are the principal party to the conflict, people from that diocese have neglected to view the matter objectively. But even in their subjectivity, people like me could see some sense amid the dissonance of their utterances and pens. Indeed, a number of my journalist-friends from that area are in support of their priests, who, in foolish pride, have rejected their bishop.
What do we say of people of Ahiara Diocese –one of the pillars of Catholicism in Igboland? It is hard to imagine that this resilient people, whose province produced one of the greatest priests in Nigeria, Msgnr. Theophilus Okere, should drag us into the current quagmire. The last time I saw Fr. Okere was at the requiem mass for Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu-Ojukwu. It was a delight, watching him sing the “Dies Irae,” with the cadence pouring mollifying harmony into the soul.
The selection of bishops or ecclesiastical offices and benefices is not a doctrinal matter; so, when the pope does so, it is not a matter of speaking or acting “Ex Cathedral.” Such appointments take place within the church, which is managed by sons of Adam that are vulnerable to making mistakes.
I am among those that saw reason in the protest by our brothers from Ahiara Diocese. If, indeed, someone is ‘unduly’ influencing appointments this side of Catholicism and elevating those close to him, it is not proper and must be rejected, for it is an ecclesiastical co-relate to tribalism and nepotism. May they not remind us the era when the clergy married and how some popes overly elevated even their children to high posts. These are stages the church underwent to attain its height today.
My worry is the persistence of the protest. Knowing that the church has taken notice of their protest and the circumstances that precipitated it, it is wrong for them to remain becalmed in the dissent. I have known their Bishop, Most Rev. Dr. Peter Okpaleke, for many years. He was my teacher, and I am convinced he is infinitely qualified for the Bishopric. I have followed his travails, or rather the travails of the church at Ahiara and I’m compelled to call Okpaleke the Athanasius of the modern era. St. Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, led the great debate against Arius. Five times he was sacked from his See, often at great peril to his life. Even when Pope Liberius was tempted to give in to the Arian doctrine, Athanasius stood firm – felling all heresies and answering all objections, as St. Augustine did with the Manicheans. Again, after Pope Julius 1 restored him to his See, a Council of Eastern Bishops at Antioch – who could be distant brothers of Ahiara Presbytery – denied the pope’s jurisdiction, and even went on to name Gregory, an Arian, the Bishop of Alexandria.
The church is not that of Pope Francis, but belongs to all of us; and we feel injured when it is attacked in such a manner as Ahiara people are doing. Their protest was understandable, but taking it this far is an atavistic throw-back to the old, vicious and superseded ways. What baffles me is that the leaders of this mutiny are the priests themselves. Priests take the vows of obedience, chastity and poverty. To go on this path of perdition is to suggest that they, ab initio, are even unbelievers, masquerading as Catholic priests. If they believe in God, they will not toe the path they have – jettisoning all advice and moving on as if under blinkered vision.
One wonders if these priests were taught church history in the seminaries. Any person schooled in the subject-matter, especially the Reformation, will not engage in what these priests are doing. The church has undergone its fair share of crises to attain stability, such that it is only the devil or its agents that will try to push it back to Babylon.
Going back to Babylon has to do with the era the papal seat was taken away from Rome. Throughout the 14th century, the church suffered political humiliations and moral decay. Philip IV had secured the election of a Frenchman to the Papacy, and persuaded him to move the Holy See to Avignon (in France) on the Rhone. For 68 years, the popes were clearly the prisoners and pawns of France so much so that other nations accorded her rapidly diminishing reverence.
At that time, the Papacy was using all means possible to raise revenue. On the death of a cardinal or archbishop, for instance, his personal wealth reverted to the Papacy. Even the pallium – a band of white wool that served as the confirmation and insignia of his authority – was sold at a premium. Also, in the interim between the death of an ecclesiastic and the installation of his successor, the popes received the net revenues of the benefice, hence, were accused of prolonging this interval. However, a school of thought believed such actions were justified and the taxation means of financing the central administration of the church – be it at Avignon or Rome.
I have once told the story of an ancient ruler that built urinals all over his realm. When his son protested the base manner of going after revenue, the scandalised father brought some coins realised from that and placed them to his nose and asked him: “Do they smell?” The situation deteriorated to the extent that even Edward 111 had to remind Pope Clement VI, “the successor of the apostles was commissioned to lead the Lord’s sheep to pasture, not to fleece it.”
It was Gregory XI that returned the Papacy to Rome in 1377. Papal schism was one of the saddest chapters in the development of the church, and the crisis at Ahiara reminds us of the church’s dark years. At a point in time, there were three popes, which confusion was resolved by the Council of Constance – ushering in the tenure of Pope Martin V. The way our Ahiara brothers are going, it would be hardly surprising if they descend to the level of ordaining their own bishop.
As if the Papal schism was not enough damage, even many years before Luther and Henry VIII, the wind of nationalism was aflame in many nations. In 1438, France, under Charles VII, convened an assembly of French prelates, nobles, and lawyers and decided that ecclesiastical offices were thenceforth to be filled through election by the local clergy. A year later, a similar diet at Mainz adopted resolutions, aiming at a national church in Germany. Bohemia (Czech) as it then was, had already separated from the Papacy. The whole edifice of the Catholic Church seemed about to collapse. Today, it is as if the clergy of Ahiara Diocese have received the same instructions. May we not witness the collapse of the church in Ahiara!
Our renegade Ahiara priests boast they had also written to the pope though they are not sure whether it got to the Holy Father. Led by John Cardinal Onaiyekan, the priests and some other stakeholders from Ahiara Diocese went to Rome and met with the pope, but the renegade priests, even when professing obedience to the pope, insist he was not properly briefed on the matter.
The modalities for appointments into ecclesiastical offices are outlined in the canon law of the church. The priests of Ahiara are aware of this and know that the prescriptions of the canon law have been followed. What really is their problem and what do they want to achieve?
Beyond ecclesiastical issues involved, are they not worried that what they are doing seem to be an imprimatur to the belief in many quarters of the class character ascribed to the people from that axis? Why are the people from Ahiara Diocese inflicting so much destruction on themselves?
To Catholics, let the events in Ahiara not discourage anyone a bit. We take consolation that Christ pledged to be with his church till the end of time and, as such, let us not allow our hearts to be troubled. The gale at Ahiara will surely pass by.
• Obienyem wrote in from Lagos.