Misplaced Blame on Christian Clergy
Suleman did not mince words. He characterized those who immediately ask, “Why aren’t pastors speaking out?” as “sick,” calling the assumption that Christian pastors should automatically respond to acts of terror flawed. As he put it, it is illogical to expect Christian clerics to comment first when attacks occur, especially when the attackers do not identify with Christianity.
> “Have you ever heard someone before he pulls a trigger say ‘praise the Lord’ … and then he shoots somebody?” Suleman rhetorically asked, challenging the narrative that links Christian faith to the violence.
He argued that the appropriate response should come from within the religious circle to which the perpetrators belong:
> “The first people you should call are those in that religion. It’s their religious leaders you should call, not pastors.”
Suleman’s audience responded in unison when he asked what is often shouted during certain extremist attacks: “Allahu Akbar.” He used their response to underline his point: such declarations do not stem from a Christian heritage, so why cast blame on Christian leaders?
Moral Duty, Not Religious Affiliation
Although Suleman rejects the idea that pastors should be the first responders to terror-related commentary, he made clear that Christian leaders do have a moral duty to speak — not because terror is “Christian,” but because humanity demands it.
> “Should pastors speak? Yes, for the sake of humanity.”
He recalled his own past interventions, saying he has often gone into crisis-affected areas and offered aid, consistent with his broader advocacy for peace and protection of innocent lives.
A Decade of Advocacy for Christian Victims
Suleman’s criticisms come at a time when he is reaffirming his long-standing commitment to combat what he describes as Christian genocide in Nigeria. According to a recent profile, he has been vocal about violence against Christian communities since as far back as 2014.
He argues that his calls for justice aren’t driven by politics but by a deep moral conviction: Christians, like all Nigerians, deserve protection and accountability, regardless of faith.
Frustration with National Leadership
Beyond addressing religious responsibility, Suleman also leveled criticism at Nigeria’s political leadership. In a separate but related statement, he condemned the federal government over mass violent attacks in Benue State, warning that the security apparatus appears overwhelmed.
He didn’t shy away from calling for the constitutional right to self-defense, suggesting that citizens have a duty to protect themselves when the state fails to guarantee their safety.
The Bigger Picture: Leadership, Not Faith, Is the Issue
Suleman’s critique is rooted in a broader thesis: the problem facing Nigeria today is not Christianity, nor is it the church — but bad leadership and lawlessness. He argues that religious identity alone is a poor basis for accountability when the violence in question is perpetrated by individuals or groups outside of that faith.
Why This Message Is Resonating — and Striking a Nerve
1. Deflecting the Blame: By reframing who should be held accountable, Suleman is refusing the narrative that religious leaders from one faith are responsible for the actions of extremists from another.
2. Moral Leadership: He is positioning pastors not just as spiritual guides but as moral agents who speak up for humanity, not partisanship.
3. Political Wake-Up Call: His actions and words are amplifying pressure on political leaders to address insecurity, while also empowering citizens to demand real protection.
4. Consistent Advocacy: Given his decade-long outspokenness, Suleman is seen by many as a credible and consistent voice — not someone reacting to the latest headline but someone deeply invested in justice.
Final Thoughts
Apostle Suleman’s bold remarks are more than a defense of Christian clerics — they are a challenge to the public narrative. In a climate where religious violence is rampant, his message invites a more nuanced conversation: one that separates faith from extremism, and demands accountability where it truly belongs — in the hands of those who wield violence, and the leaders of the ideologies they claim to represent.
By refusing to play the role that critics have assigned, Suleman reasserts that pastoral influence should not be conflated with political scapegoating. For his congregation, and for many Nigerians, that distinction could not be more critical.
0 Comments