By EditorZambia
There are moments in the political life of a nation when statements made by influential figures demand not just attention but firm scrutiny.
The recent warning issued by Archbishop Alick Banda to President Hakainde Hichilema, suggesting that the Head of State is “playing with fire” belongs squarely in that category. 
It is a reckless, unnecessarily confrontational statement that risks inflaming national emotions and misrepresenting the Catholic Church’s actual principles of neutrality, moral guidance, and national unity.
Zambia is a constitutional democracy, not a theocracy, and no cleric, no matter how senior, should casually employ language that implies confrontation, threat, or destabilisation.
Archbishop Banda’s words were not pastoral; they were political. They were not advisory; they were accusatory. They did not build society; they undermined it.
And because he speaks from a pulpit that millions respect, his statements must be held to a higher standard.
The first and most immediate question is the one many Zambians are now asking: Was the Archbishop speaking for the Catholic Church, or was he speaking for himself? Because the tone, frequency, and pattern of his comments over the past three years strongly suggest personal sentiment rather than official Church doctrine.
Zambia’s Catholic Church has long been known for its stabilising influence, from the days of Archbishop Adrian Mung’andu and Medardo Mazombwe to the pivotal role the Church played in early democratisation. It is difficult to imagine that institution is authorising language that can easily be interpreted as a politicised provocation.
This is why clarity is not just desirable but necessary. The Catholic Church leadership, including the Cardinal, owes the nation a definitive statement.
Silence in the face of escalating rhetoric only allows confusion to grow.
The Archbishop’s pattern of commentary makes the situation even more concerning. His persistent criticism of President Hichilema’s government has often appeared less like principled concern and more like a personal crusade.
Everyone, including religious leaders, has a right to an opinion. But when those opinions are delivered repeatedly with a political edge, from a position of institutional authority, they inevitably create the perception that the Church itself has taken sides.
The perception is strengthened further by Archbishop Banda’s closeness to the previous ruling Patriotic Front (PF) and its former leader Edgar Chagwa Lungu, whom he shared the same tribal background with.
Thus, his public positions and actions have often aligned with the former ruling party’s political agenda. His decision to travel to South Africa to participate in the funeral arrangements for the late former President, a private, partisan event rather than a national one, raised eyebrows precisely because it blurred the boundaries of religious neutrality.
No one begrudges him for the pastoral act of comforting a grieving family or participating in a funeral. But optics matter. When that same cleric repeatedly issues warnings, criticisms, and near-political commentary directed at the succeeding administration, the public naturally begins to question whether he speaks as a religious leader or an interested political actor. Archbishop Banda must be seen to be apolitical
What makes the Archbishop’s latest statement particularly regrettable is the tone. Warning a sitting President that he is “playing with fire” is not a contribution to national dialogue.
It is not leadership. It is not moral guidance. It is loaded language, suggestive language, and language intended to provoke.
A nation as diverse and politically sensitive as Zambia can not afford such rhetoric from the pulpit.
If Archbishop Banda believes there are genuine issues that require the President’s attention, and every government deserves to be challenged when necessary, he should express those issues with clarity, evidence, and fairness.
Zambia benefits from criticism. Democracy strengthens through debate. Accountability flourishes through constructive engagement. But sensational warnings and sharp political jabs do nothing to improve governance; they only inflame emotions and divide the public.
It is also important to acknowledge the wider implications of comments that appear personal rather than institutional. When criticism seems rooted in animosity rather than moral leadership, it loses credibility.
When a cleric’s public statements are interpreted as aligned with specific political groupings or regions, they erode trust.
And when the Church’s voice seems to echo opposition messaging, it becomes impossible for citizens to separate the sacred from the partisan.
This is why the Cardinal must intervene. Zambia needs clear reassurance that the Catholic Church remains neutral, pastoral, and focused on national unity rather than partisan confrontation.
Hard questions must be answered:
Does Archbishop Banda speak for the Church, or does he speak for himself?
Are his statements consistent with the Catholic Church’s position on political engagement?
Does the Church endorse the language he used toward the President?
If not, what steps will be taken to correct the public record?
The longer these questions remain unanswered, the more Zambia risks interpreting the Archbishop’s comments as representative of the entire Church, which would be unfair to Catholics who value their faith, not political agendas like those of Archbishop Banda.
The most disturbing aspect of this matter is not just the Archbishop’s comments but the tone of hostility that has characterised his approach to President Hichilema’s administration.
There is a level of intensity and persistence in his criticism that has raised concerns among observers who fear that his commentary has moved beyond pastoral oversight into personal resentment.
Whether intentional or not, the effect is the same: a respected religious leader appears deeply antagonistic toward the Head of State in ways that go beyond policy differences. That is unhealthy for national cohesion, unhealthy for the Church, and unhealthy for Zambia’s political culture.
Zambia needs religious leaders who build bridges, not burn them. Leaders who guide with wisdom, not warnings. Leaders who elevate dialogue and not escalate tensions.
Archbishop Banda’s latest statement did the opposite. It is time for accountability. It is time for clarity. And yes, it is time for the Catholic Church to reaffirm its role as a unifying moral force, not a participant in political confrontation.
