EDITORIAL: The Pulpit, The Presidency, & Politics of Suspicion

🇿🇲 EDITORIAL: The Pulpit, The Presidency, & Politics of Suspicion

We must be careful not to set fire to its own institutions in the heat of election season.

President Hakainde Hichilema attended Mass at St Joseph Cupertino Church in Chifubu, Ndola. He worshipped. He thanked the Catholic Church for its historic role in education, health, and community service. He invoked national blessing. There was no campaign slogan from the altar. No party regalia inside the sanctuary. No manifesto read between the readings.

Yet, within hours, a political storm was manufactured.

Dr. Sishuwa Sishuwa publicly questioned why Ndola Archdiocese Archbishop Benjamin Phiri allowed “a politician to use the pulpit for partisan interests,” referencing a recent Zambia Conference of Catholic Bishops pastoral letter discouraging partisan use of church platforms. He went further, tagging the Vatican and suggesting the Archbishop may be “compromised.”

The implication is serious. It suggests institutional capture.

But here is the deeper question: when does a sitting Head of State cease to be merely “a politician” and remain, constitutionally, President for all?

President Hichilema is not simply the UPND presidential candidate. He is the incumbent President of the Republic of Zambia. He is entitled, like any citizen, to worship. He is also received, by protocol, as Head of State. Churches have historically acknowledged Presidents in attendance without that recognition constituting endorsement.

To collapse the presidency into partisan identity is dangerous. If every public appearance by a sitting President is interpreted as a campaign act, then the office itself becomes illegitimate. That logic burns institutions.

The Catholic Church in Zambia has long prided itself on moral authority and political independence. It has criticised governments before. It has defended democratic norms. It has issued pastoral letters that have shaped national debate. That credibility is not so fragile that a presidential presence at Mass destroys it.

Moreover, precedent matters. Successive presidents have attended church services across denominations. They have been introduced. They have greeted congregants. No administration exists in a vacuum.

What would be more destabilising? A church that acknowledges the Head of State at worship, or a country where the President is treated as a partisan intruder in every civic space?

Dr. Sishuwa’s concern rests on consistency. If opposition leaders sought similar recognition, would they receive it? This is a fair institutional question. It deserves measured engagement, not public escalation to Rome.

But framing the incident as defiance of the bishops’ collective stance may overstate what occurred. Recognition of a President is not equivalent to ceding the pulpit for campaigning. Context matters.

Election season magnifies suspicion. Every handshake becomes theatre. Every hymn risks interpretation. But Zambia must resist importing hyper-partisan culture into sacred and constitutional spaces.

The Presidency is bigger than party colours. The Catholic Church is bigger than electoral cycles. If both are reduced to factional instruments, the casualty will not be political advantage. It will be national cohesion.

Zambia stands at a sensitive moment ahead of 13 August 2026. Institutions must remain intact. Churches must remain neutral. Presidents must remain presidents.

Faith should not be weaponised. Nor should the Presidency be trivialised.

The country deserves cooler heads.

© The People’s Brief | Editor-in-Chief