The Political Campaign against Dr. Bawumia by Some Ghanaian Christian Pastors – A Theological, Biblical, and Democratic Critique

In the current political climate of Ghana, some Christian pastors are using their pulpits to mount a political campaign against Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, the country's Muslim Vice President and current NPP presidential candidate. These pastors argue that Christians should not support a Muslim leader, drawing upon Deuteronomy 17:15 to assert that a "brother" must be chosen as king over Israel, not a foreigner.

However, this behavior contradicts Ghana's democratic ethos and the biblical and theological principles of fairness, justice, and inclusivity. This article will critically examine these actions by some pastors from a democratic, theological, and biblical perspective, making the case for rejecting such religious bias in political decisions.

At the heart of Ghana's political system is its commitment to democratic values, including freedom of religion and political participation for all citizens, regardless of their faith. The 1992 Constitution of Ghana guarantees the right of every citizen to participate in the nation's political life, including the right to run for office and the right to vote without discrimination based on religion. Religious pluralism is a core principle of democracy, ensuring that people of different faiths can coexist peacefully, share common public spaces, and engage in civic duties equally.

Some Christian pastors are undermining this democratic principle by opposing Dr. Bawumia because he is a Muslim. In the past, the Muslim community in Ghana has voted in large numbers for Christian candidates, such as John Agyekum Kufuor, John Dramani Mahama, and Atta Mills, without raising objections based on religion. This demonstrates a commitment to evaluating candidates based on their competence and vision rather than their religious background. The actions of these pastors now threaten to disturb this historical religious harmony, fostering division and discrimination where none should exist.

Democracy thrives on fairness and equal opportunity, and religious leaders should be at the forefront of promoting these values, not undermining them. A healthy democracy evaluates political candidates on their policies, leadership skills, and ethical conduct, not their personal religious beliefs. Dr. Bawumia's qualifications as an economist and his track record as Vice President should be the basis for evaluating his candidacy, not his Islamic faith.

From a theological standpoint, the actions of these pastors are inconsistent with the Christian Gospel's message of love, justice, and inclusion. Jesus Christ's ministry was marked by a radical inclusivity that transcended religious and ethnic boundaries. He preached to the Samaritan woman, praised the faith of the Roman centurion, and ministered to the outcasts of society (John 4:1-26, Matthew 8:5-13). Jesus did not exclude people based on their religion but instead embraced those who were often marginalized by the religious elite of His time.

In their campaign against Dr. Bawumia, these pastors are behaving more like the Pharisees, who sought to maintain religious purity by rejecting those who did not belong to their community. This contradicts the core of Christian ethics, which calls for love of neighbor and justice for all people. As Paul wrote in Galatians 3:28, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." The Kingdom of God transcends national, ethnic, and religious boundaries. By reducing political participation to a matter of religious identity, these pastors are distorting the inclusivity that Christianity champions.

Furthermore, the Great Commission (Matthew 28:19) commands Christians to engage with all nations, implying that Christians should live alongside people of other faiths, not build walls of separation. This engagement must include respect for different religious traditions in the public sphere, including politics. By vilifying Dr. Bawumia based on his faith, these pastors are betraying the spirit of inclusivity that the Christian faith embodies.

A more appropriate biblical guide for evaluating political leadership is found in Exodus 18:21, where Jethro advises Moses to choose "competent men who fear God, men of truth, hating dishonest gain." The passage emphasizes the moral and ethical qualities that a leader must possess: competence, integrity, and a sense of justice. It does not stipulate that leaders must adhere to a particular religion but should have the moral character to lead justly. Dr. Bawumia's qualifications, experience in governance, and commitment to public service make him a candidate worth evaluating based on these qualities rather than disqualifying him solely based on his religion.

Some pastors have cited Deuteronomy 17:15 as a justification for rejecting Dr. Bawumia, arguing that the passage mandates the election of a leader from "among your brethren." This, however, is a misapplication of Scripture. The command in Deuteronomy was given to ancient Israel, a theocratic nation where political and religious identity were deeply intertwined under the Old Covenant. This context is far removed from Ghana's modern secular state, where citizenship and leadership are not defined by religious affiliation but by national identity and constitutional law.

Ghana is not a theocratic state like ancient Israel but a secular democracy where political office is open to all citizens, regardless of their faith. Applying Old Testament laws concerning Israel's kingship to a modern democratic context is inappropriate and ignores the significant differences between ancient theocracy and contemporary governance. The attempt to use Deuteronomy 17:15 to exclude a Muslim leader in Ghana today fails to acknowledge the new covenant in Christ, which expands the idea of brotherhood to include all people, regardless of religion (Ephesians 2:14-18).

A more relevant biblical example is found in Isaiah 45, where God calls Cyrus, a Persian king who did not worship Yahweh, His "anointed" (Isaiah 45:1). God used Cyrus to deliver the Israelites from Babylonian captivity and to fulfill His purposes, even though Cyrus was not an Israelite. This demonstrates that God can use leaders of different faiths to achieve His will. It is a powerful reminder that religious identity does not limit one's ability to govern justly and fulfill God's purposes. Just as God used Cyrus, a non-believer, for the good of His people, He can also use a leader like Dr. Bawumia, regardless of his religious affiliation.

Another important consideration is that Christianity and Islam share a monotheistic tradition and trace their spiritual lineage to Abraham. Abraham is revered as a model of faith and obedience to God in the Bible and the Quran. The moral and ethical codes in the Bible and the Quran, such as justice, care for the poor, and the importance of integrity, are remarkably similar. Christianity and Islam emphasize serving the community, fostering peace, and upholding righteousness in leadership.

By rejecting a Muslim candidate based on religion, these pastors overlook the common values shared by both faiths. While doctrinal differences exist between Christianity and Islam, these religions' ethical and moral foundations provide a basis for mutual respect and collaboration, especially in the political arena. The Abrahamic connection serves as a reminder that both faiths call for righteous leadership grounded in justice, honesty, and service to others.

The actions of some Ghanaian Christian pastors who oppose Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia's candidacy based on his Muslim faith represent a troubling departure from the principles of democratic pluralism, theological integrity, and biblical wisdom. By reducing political leadership to a matter of religious identity, they are fostering division and undermining the inclusivity that both democracy and Christianity champion.