Nigeria has seen this script before. In 2022, the APC was accused of surrounding its Muslim-Muslim ticket with unfamiliar Christian clerics. Four years later, a different bloc of charismatic bishops has emerged with a much bigger political message: Tinubu has their support for 2027 — and even beyond. So who exactly are these bishops, where did they come from, and what happens next?
There is something strangely familiar about the latest political theatre surrounding President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
A group of Christian bishops has gathered in Abuja.
Government officials are present.
The bishops praise the president.
They defend the administration's religious credentials.
And then comes the political endorsement.
On September 9, 2026, the Charismatic Bishops Conference of Nigeria — CBCN — formally endorsed Tinubu for a second term in the 2027 presidential election.
Its President-General, Archbishop Leonard Bature Kawas, did not merely say the bishops preferred Tinubu.
He said they would stand with him today, tomorrow and beyond 2027.
The bishops argued that Tinubu had demonstrated religious balance despite running a Muslim-Muslim ticket, pointing to appointments including George Akume as Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Nyesom Wike as FCT minister and Nentawe Yilwatda as APC national chairman. They also praised the president for supporting Christian governors and for his handling of insecurity.
And suddenly, the ghosts of 2022 have returned.
Not necessarily the same bishops.
Not necessarily the same organisation.
But the same political problem.
How does a Muslim-Muslim ruling party convince Christian voters that it represents them?
In 2022, the APC's answer became one of the strangest spectacles of the 2023 campaign.
In 2026, it appears to have found a more organised answer.
First came the “fake bishops”
When Tinubu unveiled Kashim Shettima as his running mate in July 2022, images of men dressed as Christian clerics attending the event went viral.
Critics called them “fake bishops.”
The controversy became so intense that the Tinubu campaign had to issue a public defence.
Bayo Onanuga, then Director of Media and Communication of the Tinubu campaign, insisted that the clerics were genuine Christian leaders, arguing that they were simply not yet prominent names in Nigerian Christendom.
The clerics themselves later produced certificates and documents which they said demonstrated their ordination and ministries.
But the controversy was never really about whether every individual wearing a cassock was literally an impostor.
It was about political representation.
The Christian Association of Nigeria had not sent them.
Other Christian bodies distanced themselves from them.
And their sudden appearance at the unveiling of a Muslim running mate created the impression that the APC was searching for Christian faces willing to legitimise a ticket that mainstream Christian leadership was uncomfortable with.
That was the political controversy.
And it has never completely disappeared.
Now comes the “Charismatic Bishops”
Four years later, Nigeria has a new political spectacle.
This time the organisation has a name:
Charismatic Bishops Conference of Nigeria.
And this time, the endorsement is much more explicit.
The organisation says it has bishops across Nigeria and internationally. Kawas told TheCable that CBCN has members in 52 countries and about 950 “canonical” bishops in Nigeria.
That is a significant claim.
But it raises a question that deserves considerably more attention than the endorsement itself:
Who exactly is the Charismatic Bishops Conference of Nigeria?
Not because every member should be presumed fraudulent.
There is evidence that CBCN has existed for years.
The Federal Government itself has dealt with the organisation publicly.
In June 2024, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation reported a meeting between George Akume and a CBCN delegation led by Leonard Bature Kawas.
In November 2025, the Federal Ministry of Information again reported a meeting between Akume and CBCN representatives and described Kawas as the organisation's president.
So the evidence does not support simply declaring CBCN a fake organisation.
That would be lazy journalism.
The more interesting question is different:
How independent is this religious organisation from the political establishment it is now endorsing?
That question is legitimate.
Because the relationship did not begin yesterday
This is perhaps the most important part of the story.
The relationship between CBCN and the Tinubu administration did not suddenly begin on September 9, 2026.
It was already visible before the 2027 endorsement.
In 2024, the SGF hosted the CBCN delegation and urged the Church to support the Tinubu administration.
Kawas responded by praising the government and describing it as all-encompassing, while assuring the government of the bishops' prayers and support.
Then, in November 2025, the Federal Government again reported that CBCN had expressed support for the Tinubu administration and passed a vote of confidence on the government.
By September 2026, that relationship had evolved into something more politically consequential:
an explicit presidential endorsement.
That chronology matters.
It means Nigerians should not view the September endorsement as an isolated religious event.
It is the latest chapter in a relationship that has been developing publicly for years.
So, are these the “new fake bishops”?
That is where we need to be careful.
Calling CBCN's bishops “fake” as a factual claim would require evidence that they are not genuine bishops or that the organisation is fraudulent.
The available evidence does not establish that.
In fact, reporting shows that CBCN has held synods, maintained a leadership structure and interacted publicly with government officials for years.
But there is another meaning of “fake bishops” that is worth examining.
Not fake in the theological sense.
Fake in the political sense.
A bishop may be completely genuine as a cleric and still become a political instrument.
A church organisation can be legitimate and still become politically captured.
A religious leader can sincerely believe in a president and still provide political cover for that president.
That is the uncomfortable question.
Are these bishops speaking to Tinubu as independent Christian leaders, or are they becoming another component of the APC's 2027 political machinery?
That is a question the bishops themselves should answer.
And then comes the most extraordinary part
The bishops did not stop at defending Tinubu's religious balance.
They praised the APC itself.
Kawas celebrated the emergence of what he described as a born-again Christian and preacher as national chairman of the ruling party.
That is politically significant.
Because the APC now has a ready-made narrative for Christian voters:
Yes, the president is Muslim.
Yes, the vice-president is Muslim.
But look at our Christian appointments.
Look at the SGF.
Look at the FCT minister.
Look at the APC national chairman.
Look at the Christian governors.
And look at the bishops supporting us.
The Muslim-Muslim ticket is therefore being politically rebranded.
The argument is no longer:
“Trust us despite the ticket.”
It is becoming:
“Look at the Christians around us.”
That is a much more sophisticated political strategy.
But who elected the bishops to speak for Nigerian Christians?
This is where Nigerians should pay attention.
CBCN can speak for its members.
Its bishops can endorse whoever they choose.
They have constitutional rights like every other Nigerian.
But no religious organisation should automatically be presented as the voice of Nigerian Christians.
Nigeria has millions of Christians belonging to different denominations and traditions.
The Christian Association of Nigeria exists.
The Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria exists.
Catholic leadership exists.
Anglican leadership exists.
Methodist, Baptist, Evangelical, Pentecostal and independent churches exist.
And millions of Christians belong to none of the organisations making political endorsements.
Therefore, when a group of bishops endorses Tinubu, the honest headline is:
“A group of charismatic bishops endorses Tinubu.”
Not:
“Christian leaders endorse Tinubu.”
The distinction matters.
Because Nigeria has been here before
The 2022 controversy should be remembered precisely because it demonstrated how easily religious authority can become campaign theatre.
The men who appeared at Shettima's unveiling were branded “fake bishops” by critics.
The Tinubu campaign rejected that accusation.
The clerics themselves produced documents to defend their credentials.
But the Christian Association of Nigeria had not sent them, and the episode became a political embarrassment for the APC.
The lesson should have been obvious:
A politician cannot manufacture Christian legitimacy simply by putting men in cassocks behind him.
But four years later, something more sophisticated appears to be happening.
The political system no longer needs unknown bishops to appear suddenly at a campaign event.
It can develop relationships with existing charismatic religious organisations.
It can invite their leaders to government meetings.
It can praise their role.
They can praise the government.
And eventually, they can endorse the president.
The optics are cleaner.
The political effect may be even stronger.
The government itself understands the power of these bishops
There is another revealing element in this latest episode.
Tinubu, through the SGF, addressed the bishops.
The government did not treat them as irrelevant fringe figures.
Instead, the president urged them to use their influence to promote peace, reject vote buying, hate speech and the weaponisation of religion ahead of the 2027 election.
That tells us something.
The government recognises the political and social influence of this religious network.
And that is exactly why Nigerians should scrutinise the relationship.
The more influential a religious organisation becomes in an election, the more important its independence becomes.
And the timing could not be more revealing
Nigeria is now less than a year away from the 2027 presidential election.
Political alliances are hardening.
Religious constituencies are being courted.
The ruling party is attempting to neutralise one of its biggest political vulnerabilities — the Muslim-Muslim ticket.
And here comes a group of charismatic bishops announcing that Tinubu has earned their confidence.
This is not an ordinary church announcement.
It is election politics.
The bishops know it.
The APC knows it.
The presidency knows it.
And Nigerian voters should know it too.
What comes next?
This is perhaps the most important question.
If the first controversy produced the “fake bishops” of 2022, and the current political environment has produced the “charismatic bishops” of 2026, what comes next?
Will we see more Christian coalitions endorsing Tinubu?
Will more pastors publicly campaign for him?
Will the APC begin presenting religious endorsements as evidence of Christian acceptance?
Will opposition parties respond by assembling their own bishops?
Will Nigeria eventually have competing groups of bishops — APC bishops, Labour bishops, PDP bishops and perhaps ADC bishops?
Will every presidential candidate eventually need a religious coalition to certify his Christian or Muslim credentials?
That would be a terrible destination for a democracy.
Because once religious endorsement becomes a political commodity, politicians will inevitably compete for religious gatekeepers rather than voters.
The real danger is not the bishops
The danger is what happens when bishops become political validators.
A bishop should be able to tell a president:
“You are wrong.”
A bishop should be able to condemn a government policy.
A bishop should be able to criticise insecurity.
A bishop should be able to challenge corruption.
A bishop should be able to condemn electoral malpractice.
And most importantly, a bishop should be able to do all of these things after endorsing the president.
Otherwise, the endorsement becomes something else.
It becomes political loyalty.
And once religious loyalty becomes political loyalty, the pulpit stops being independent.
Tinubu's own warning deserves to be taken seriously
There is an extraordinary irony in the latest development.
Tinubu's message to the bishops was that they should not turn their pulpits into instruments of political incitement.
He urged them to oppose vote buying, hate speech and the weaponisation of religion and ethnicity.
That is precisely the standard by which the bishops should now be judged.
Not by whether they support Tinubu.
But by whether they can still challenge Tinubu after supporting him.
Can they criticise him when Nigerians are hungry?
Can they challenge him when insecurity worsens?
Can they demand accountability when government officials fail?
Can they condemn APC electoral malpractice if it happens?
Can they support another candidate in 2027 if they conclude that another candidate is better for Nigeria?
That is the test of independence.
So, are these the APC's new fake bishops?
Perhaps the phrase needs to be used differently.
Not as an accusation that these men are not bishops.
Not without evidence.
But as a question about political function.
Have Nigerian politicians learned from the 2022 fake-bishop controversy and discovered a more sophisticated way of producing religious legitimacy?
That is the question worth investigating.
Because CBCN clearly existed before this latest endorsement. It has appeared in government meetings, held national synods and publicly engaged with political and social issues for years.
So this is not simply a case of an organisation suddenly being invented yesterday.
But its growing proximity to the Tinubu administration — followed by its explicit endorsement of his 2027 campaign — deserves scrutiny.
The question is not:
“Are they real bishops?”
The better question is:
“How independent are these bishops from the political establishment they are now endorsing?”
And perhaps the most uncomfortable question of all is this:
If the APC needed bishops in 2022 to defend a Muslim-Muslim ticket, and now has a conference of charismatic bishops publicly endorsing Tinubu in 2026, what religious coalition will appear next when the 2027 campaign enters full speed?
Nigeria should watch carefully.
Because the next phase of the election may not simply be about politicians looking for voters.
It may be about politicians looking for bishops who can tell the voters whom God supposedly wants them to vote for.
And that is a line Nigeria should be very careful about crossing.
Comments
Post a Comment