TEXT OF A PRESS CONFERENCE BY CHRISTIAN SOCIAL MOVEMENT OF NIGERIA IN COLLABORATION WITH A COALITION OF NIGERIAN CHRISTIAN AND CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS ON CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE IN NIGERIA AND THE IMPERATIVE FOR INTERVENTION BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 TEXT OF A PRESS CONFERENCE BY CHRISTIAN SOCIAL MOVEMENT OF NIGERIA IN COLLABORATION WITH A COALITION OF NIGERIAN CHRISTIAN AND CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS ON CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE IN NIGERIA

TEXT OF A PRESS CONFERENCE BY CHRISTIAN SOCIAL MOVEMENT OF NIGERIA IN COLLABORATION WITH A COALITION OF NIGERIAN CHRISTIAN AND CIVIL SOCIETY GROUPS ON CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE IN NIGERIA AND THE IMPERATIVE FOR INTERVENTION BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Thursday 20th November 2025

Gentlemen of the Media and Members of the Public,

This press conference is held under the auspices of Christian Social Movement of Nigeria (CSMN) as the representative organ in the socio-political affairs of the body of Christ for all Christians in Nigeria except, of course, those who are collaborating to cover-up the obvious case of Christian Genocide in Nigeria. 

The National coalition of Nigerian Christian and Civil Society Groups consists of Nigerian Christian organizations across denominations and Civil Society Groups that collaborate with Christian Social Movement of Nigeria; such as, amongst numerous others, Middle Belt Voice, National Christian Elders Forum, International Coalition Against Christian Genocide in Nigeria, Apostolic Round Table, Stefanos Foundation, Lay Faithful Trust Foundation, Education-Must-Continue, the Initiative for a Better and Brighter Nigeria, Plateau State Indigenous Independent Ministers’ Association, God’s Sovereign Army of Intercessors, the National Prayer Altar, the Missionary House, Voice of Truth Agents, Arewa Christian Indigenous Pastors Association, Wailing Women Worldwide, Nigerian Christian Graduate Fellowship, and Nigeria National Christian Coalition including well-wishing peace lovers of Nigeria.

We affirm without the least equivocation that there is Genocide against Christians in Nigeria perpetrated by Islamic groups and, that even as we speak today the same Genocide is on-going. We don’t intend to belabor ourselves disputing whether the mass slaughtering of Christians in Nigeria today by Muslims could be defined as Genocide or not, as some people appear to claim.

This is because what constitutes the crime of Genocide in International Criminal Law is well spelt out in Article II of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, ratified by UN General Assembly resolution 260 A (III) of 9th December 1948. Similarly, Part 2, Article 6 of the 17th July 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court clearly stipulates what constitute Genocide. 

It is therefore laughable that some people would think that the mere denial of what constitutes Genocide translates to its non-occurrence with Christians in Nigeria. Genocide is a crime recognized by International law as afore cited and, thus, its occurrence can only be established by statutory international investigators empowered by the aforesaid exacting laws; and not by rented official mercenaries and crowds of unscrupulous agent provocateurs.

We therefore hereby request the United Nations Security Council in conjunction with the International Criminal Court (ICC) to immediately send a team of investigators to ascertain the veracity of Christian Genocide in Nigeria. The argument that some Muslims are victims, does not vitiate the occurrence of Christian Genocide in Nigeria; and hence, is an obnoxious misinterpretation and misrepresentation of what constitutes Genocide? 

The fundamental issue here is; the acclaimed Muslim victims were not killed by Christians by any guise but by the Islamist perpetrators of the heinous crime! Curiously, it begs the question as to why Nigerian Muslims feel that the killing of their members by their fellow Muslim does not constitute acts of terrorism and Genocide. Nigerian Christians having established the crime of Genocide against them by groups whose affinities with Islam are not hidden have the right to invoke the relevant provisions of international statutes to report such. It's an aberration to expect anyone subjective to Islamic ideology to deny ISWAP or ISIS and their operations. The onus of proving Genocide lies on the survivors’ victims and not on the perpetrators. So it makes no meaning to us if all the Muslims conspire to deny the occurrence of Christian Genocide in Nigeria. What matters to us is the incontrovertible evidence in our hands that is already reckoned with in the global arena.

Secondly, we fully support the intervention of the government of the United States of America in Nigeria by whatever means aimed at putting a final end to intractable criminal impunity against Nigerian Christians called Genocide and persecutions of all kinds. In fact, we believe that any Nigerian Christian who does not commend the government of the United States of America under President Donald J. Trump for its prescience is either a disciple of Judas Iscariot or a Muslim in Christian clothing. It is our conscious belief that the sovereignty of any nation ends where the leaders fail to uphold their fundamental responsibility to protect the lives and property of any section of their citizenry.

We therefore affirm that the government of the United States of America is legally protected and guided under international humanitarian law to intervene in Nigeria to stop the on-going Genocide against Christians. For those members of the press who might not be aware, the right of America to intervene in Nigeria militarily is anchored on the relevant clauses in international law.

First, Article I of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide clearly stipulates that “The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.” So the United States is under the UN obligation to intervene in Nigeria to stop Genocide.

Second, “The Responsibility to Protect” as espoused by the 2001 International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, clearly legitimizes American Humanitarian military intervention in Nigeria after due consideration without informing the Federal Government. 

Section 1 (A and B) of the core principles of the responsibility to protect on the principles for military intervention explicitly states: “Military intervention for human protection purposes is an exceptional and extraordinary measure. To be warranted, there must be serious and irreparable harm occurring to human beings, or imminently likely to occur, of the following kind: A. large scale loss of life, actual or apprehended, with genocidal intent or not, which is the product either of deliberate state action, or state neglect or inability to act, or a failed state situation; or B. large scale ‘ethnic cleansing’, actual or apprehended, whether carried out by killing, forced expulsion, acts of terror or rape.”

Section 3 (F) on the right authority to initiate military intervention states: “The Security Council should take into account in all its deliberations that, if it fails to discharge its responsibility to protect in conscience-shocking situations crying out for action, concerned states may not rule out other means to meet the gravity and urgency of that situation – and that the stature and credibility of the United Nations may suffer thereby.”

This principle of the responsibility to protect was adopted by the United Nations in 2005 World Summit of all Heads of State and Government, particularly in paragraphs 138 and 139. It therefore follows that the inability of the Federal Government of Nigeria to put an end to Genocide against Christians clearly gives the United States the legal responsibility to intervene in order to uphold and strengthen the sovereignty of the Nigerian statehood in the comity of nations.

We hereby acknowledge and thank every voice at home and in the global arena that amplifies the cry of Christians in Nigeria for justice and to end genocide including all forms of persecution against Nigerian Christians and elsewhere in the world; Nicki Minaj spoke eloquently in raising the plight of Christians in Nigeria at the UN, so also Bill Maher on his media platform, CNN reporter, Romanian football fans, parliamentary Members in Portugal, Canada, UK and the US.    

On the matter of those who are attempting to disrupt the true narrative of Christian Genocide in Nigeria through fabrication of incorrigible falsehoods, let us begin by asking the newly elected Chairperson of the African Union Commission, the Muslim Djibouti-born Mahmoud Ali Youssouf, when he was elected to the position and, if it is within his authority under African Union Constitutive Act to declare what is Genocide and what is not Genocide? 

Mr. Mahmoud Ali Youssouf was elected into office on February 16, 2025 and officially assumed incumbency in March; he cannot tell the world that between March 2025 and the time President Donald Trump re-designated Nigeria as a country of particular concern that he conducted investigations, or visited Nigeria to ascertain the veracity of Christian Genocide.

Does the mere fact that Muslims were the first victims of Boko Haram as he erroneously claimed, invalidate the fact of Christian Genocide? Mahmoud Ali Youssouf should be reminded that Boko Haram is only a fraction of his co-Muslim terrorists committing Christian Genocide in Nigeria. If he was not properly informed, there are other Islamic terrorists operating in Nigeria such as armed Muslim Fulani herdsmen, armed Muslim bandits, ISWAP including similar Islamic terrorist groups jointly committing Genocide against Christians in Nigeria. It is regrettable that those who rented Mahmoud Ali Youssouf to peddle falsehood on Christian Genocide in Nigeria did not educate him properly. 

We wish however to remind Mahmoud Ali Youssouf that it is not his responsibility under the African Union Constitutive Act to determine the veracity of Genocide in Nigeria. That responsibility devolves on the African Union Peace and Security Council which he is not a member. Furthermore, being a Muslim, we do not expect anything better than his open denial of Christian Genocide perpetrated against Christians in Nigeria by his co-Muslims.

We listened with subdued sympathy as the apex Nigerian Muslim group, the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs (NSCIA) effusively denied Christian Genocide in Nigeria, a jihad project that their past statements and actions have consistently affirmed. As we pointed out earlier, the only solution to these barrages of warped denials is the constitution of international genocide crime investigators. And indeed, Nigerian Christians are not demanding anything less.

We are neither surprised nor perturbed when NSCIA chooses to deny the occurrence of genocide against Christians in Nigeria, because it is not uncommon for an offender to deny his crimes. But what surprised us and many Nigerian Christians is that NSCIA maligned CAN, a body with whom they share the government arranged interfaith council, by accusing it of using agents to report genocide against Christians in Nigeria. Despite this, the National leadership of CAN is yet to respond to NSCIA for the denial of Christian Genocide in Nigeria. It is expected that their interfaith fellowship should provoke a reaction from CAN on behalf of Christendom. 

Surprisingly, the same CAN was also accused by the Founder and Executive Director of Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), Professor Ishaq Akintola of betraying President Bola Tinubu, following the re-designation of Nigeria as a country of particular concern by the government of the United States of America on 31st October 2025. The question is, how did CAN betray the Tinubu led government, and what are the terms of engagement between MURIC and President Tinubu that involved CAN? The answers will not only come from CAN in its duty of defending the faith at this unholy time. We hereby call upon MURIC and President Tinubu to publicly provide full disclosure of the reason for which CAN is accused of betrayal.

In the face of Goliath harassment of Israel, the timidity of Saul notwithstanding, the divine strategic plan of God for victory will stand. As all Israel accepted the leadership of David, the body of Christ in Nigeria must come together for the perfection of the deliverance been wrought by God through his anointed- President Trump.

We however wish to state that the statement made by NSCIA to wit: “62 per cent of presidential appointees are Christians in a country where Muslims are preponderant” is not only a putrid lie from the pit of hell but a naked insult to the sensibility of Nigerian Christians who are better educated than Muslims in this country. 

In the first place, Muslims are not more in population than Christians in this country, outside their criminal penchant to rig election and census outcomes. Demographically, Christians are more in population than Muslims with over sixty percent advantage. We can only acknowledge the political naivety and self-conceited mentality of Nigerian Christian leaders and politicians. The fact remains that Christians have majority in more States than Muslims in Nigeria today.

Furthermore, we do not understand what NSCIA meant by “62 percent of Presidential appointments being Christians.” Today, the President is a Muslim, the Vice President is a Muslim, the Deputy Senate President is a Muslim, the Speaker of Federal House of Representatives is a Muslim, the National Security Adviser is a Muslim, the Minister of Defense is a Muslim, the Minister of State for Defense is a Muslim, the Chief of Army Staff is a Muslim, the Chief of Naval Staff is a Muslim, and the Chief of Staff to the President is a Muslim.

Indeed, out of 24 most high-ranking defense and security officials of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, including the President and Vice President who are both Muslims, only five (5) are Christians and the rest nineteen (19) are Muslims. Furthermore, out of 48 Ministers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 33 are Muslims and 15 are Christians. In fact, even among the President’s Yoruba ethnic group, more than 90 percent of Presidential appointees are Muslim Yoruba with only a minute percentage being Christians.

We wish to conclude by drawing the attention of the press and the general public to the following as our position in the current state of our nation with respect to Christian Genocide:

First, we humbly express our most sincere appreciation to the enviable President of the United States of America, Donald J. Trump, for his kind and timely intervention in Nigeria to help put a stop to the on-going Genocide against Christians. We totally affirm our unreserved support to whatever means or policy he deems necessary in achieving his divinely inspired objective in Nigeria. 

Second, amid repeated denials of Christian Genocide in Nigeria, it is our position that the most effective way of proving the veracity of Christian genocide in Nigeria is by the intervention of the appropriate organs of the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC) tasked with proving the truth about Genocide and Crimes against Humanity; this will expose the brazen and grotesque assertion of Sheikh Ahmad Gumi that ‘Christians buried empty coffins’.

Third, we affirm that the present Government of Federal Republic of Nigeria with its crop of questionable officials, some of whom are accused of sponsoring terrorists, lacks both the moral credentials and the political will to confront both the terrorists and perpetrators of Christian Genocide. This is where the question of the sanctity of Nigeria’s sovereignty becomes even more questionable.

Thank you.

Signed:

Pastor Bosun Emmanuel; Christian Social Movement of Nigeria

Dr. Nwankwo T. Nwaezeigwe; International Coalition Against Christian Genocide in Nigeria 

Dr S. D. Gani; National Christian Elders Forum

Elder Sunday Oibe; Lay Faith Trust Foundation

Da Jonathan Akuns; Middle Belt Voice 

Dr. Bolaji O. Akinyemi; Apostolic Round Table

Prof. Kontein Trinya; The National Prayer Altar

Rev. James Pam; Plateau State Indigenous Independent Ministers' Association (PIIMA)

Engr. Mark Lipdo; Stefanos Foundation

Prophet Isa El Buba; Initiative for a Better and Brighter Nigeria

Dr. Paul Gadzama; Education Must Continue

Dr Rotimi Olokodana; The Missions House

Pastor Kingsley Ayinde; God’s Sovereign Army of Intercessors 

Amb (Dr) Immanuel B. David; Voice of Truth Agents

Rev. Dr Luke Shehu, Arewa Christian Indigenous Pastors Association 

Dr Mrs. Laide Okafor; Wailing Women Worldwide

Prof. Ashong Ashong; Nigerian Christian Graduate Fellowship 

Apostle Titilope Oluwadare, Nigeria National Christian Coalition

A REVIEW OF THE ALMAJIRI EDUCATION BILL

THERE IS A BILL on the floor of the House of Representatives that seeks to establish yet another bureaucratic agency to administer education in Nigeria. The full title of the Bill is, Bill for an Act to Establish the National Commission for Almajiri Education and out of School Children to Provide for a Multimodal System of Education to tackle the Menace of Illiteracy, Develop Skill Acquisition and Entrepreneurship Programmes, Prevent Youth Poverty, Delinquency and Destitution in Nigeria; and for Related Matters. The Bill successfully passed through 2nd Reading on 22 November 2022. 

Dr. Shehu Balarabe Kakale (PDP), who represents the Dange/Shuni/Bodinga/Tureta Federal Constituency in Sokoto State, is the author of the Bill. He was supported by 18 other Members of the House of Representatives.

Just before the scheduled Public Hearing on the Bill on 28 March 2023, a group came out to publicly express its support for the passage of the Bill into law while another group demonstrated against its passage. The first group is the National Youth Council of Nigeria (NYCN), which urged the leadership of the National Assembly to hasten the passage of the Bill on March 26, 2023 in Sokoto.  The groups also advised the 36 Nigerian States to all consider domesticating the Bill so as to improve the lot of Almajiris in the country,

The second group is the Civil Society Coalition for Transparency and Good Governance (CSCTGG). This group asserted that it will amount to a duplication of functions and a waste of scarce resources to establish another education commission in the country. It argued that existing agencies like the Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) and the National Commission for Mass Literacy, Adult and Non-Formal Education are adequately empowered to carry out the functions listed in the proposed Bill for the new Commission. The group also seized the opportunity to remind our federal legislators that there are 157 underutilized Almajiri Schools spread across the 19 Northern States that were built by President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration to cater, specifically, to the unique needs of Almajiris.  The group, therefore, urged our federal lawmakers to reject the Bill. I would like to add here that there is also in existence a National Board for Arabic and Islamic Studies (NBAIS), which claims to have over 5,000 staff that only organize examinations but gulps over N8 Billion of federal funds annually according to their approved 2022 Budget.        

Dr. Mohammed Ali, the Executive Director of the Centre for Human Resource Development and Empowerment Initiative (HRDEI) recently declared that the North does not need an Almajiri Education Commission. He said rather, the Almajiri System should be banned in Nigeria. His reasons are that the system is outmoded, has lost its original glory and the Almajiris are no open to exploitation. He added that its begging component contravenes the teachings of Islam.

Sokoto, the headquarters of the Caliphate, is unarguably the source of the agitation for an Almajiri Education Commission. Hon. Balarabe Kakale, the author of the Bill, is from Sokoto State. Also, in January 2023, the Sokoto State Governor, signed a similar Bill into law, that is, the Sokoto State Islamic Education Commission Bill. The Governor also inaugurated the Board of the Almajiri Nizzamiyah Education Model (also known as ALNIZAMO) on the occasion. ALNIZAMO is a hybrid of the Indonesian Pondok, Turkish Nizzamiyah and the Northern Nigerian systems of education. The question is, must what is good for Sokoto State be good for the whole country?

The Almajiri Education Bill is reminiscent of the Grazing Reserve Bill that was introduced to the 6^th and 7^th Senates by Senator Zainab Kure. The Bill suffered defeat on both occasions. The Almajiri Education Bill harbours subliminal messages in it just like the Grazing Reserve Bill.

Other Nigerians view the new Bill as another attempt to elevate the status of one religion above the others in the country. The legislators who voted in favour of the Bill during its First and Second Readings are hereby advised to have a rethink and to consult widely. The purpose of this review is to throw more light on the Bill and to create greater awareness of its import.

Senator Kure’s Grazing Reserve Bill in 2016 clearly had ulterior motives. The Bill’s proposed Grazing Commission was going to have enormous powers to acquire land in every State of the Federation for a particular tribe, a particular trade and in support of a particular lifestyle at federal expense, with no benefit to other Nigerians. Federal lawmakers read the Bill accurately and rejected it. In confirmation of the suspicions of Nigerians, shortly after the Bill was defeated, others that sought to achieve similar objectives were introduced in rapid succession. These were the RUGA Bill, the Cattle Colony Bill, the Water Bill and the current controversial National Livestock Transformation Plan (NLTP).    

The Federal Government currently has about 650 Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) that have made our Government very large and governance very expensive. Reduction of the number of these MDAs is what Nigeria needs, as recommended 10 years ago by the Oronsaye Committee, is a reduction of these and not the creation of new ones. Moreover, the Federal Government is over-borrowed and currently applying 92% of its revenues on debt servicing according to the latrest IMF report.   

What is the Almajiri System is all about? Amb. Bukar Al-Amin, the head of Nigeria’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) presented a well-written paper on the subject at the Women-In-Da’awah’s 14th Annual National Conference in Kaduna on June 22, 2019. He said Almajiri is a word derived from the Arabic Almuhajir’, which translates to ‘migrant’. The Almajiri is someone who has left his home to pursue Quranic knowledge elsewhere. This is a centuries-old practice that inculcated Islamic principles, values, jurisprudence and Quranic memorization abilities in its students in learning centres called Tsangaya. The migrant students were funded by the state treasury while they gave back to society by way of providing of menial services such as laundry, cobbling, gardening, and weaving. Some of the labour used in farming and building the famous Kano Groundnut pyramids, in the Kano leatherworks, in cap making in Zaria and in the tin mines of Jos, was supplied by Almajiris. The system also produced early teachers of Sharia  jurisprudence and judges of Sharia Courts. It provided personnel who could read and write using ajamy to the British colonialists in Northern Nigeria. The British later stopped recognizing them as educated persons after Western education caught on. The Almajiri system has thus suffered losses and fallen into disrepute. UNICEF estimates that Nigeria currently has about 19.2 million out of school. About two-thirds of this figure is found in the 19 Northern States alone and about 6.2 million of these are attributable to the outmoded Almajiri system.

Today’s Almajiris are riff-raffs who are found roaming the streets in gangs with bowls in their hands begging for free food. Many of them are not even enrolled in any Tsangaya. Bukar Al-Amin concluded that today’s Almajiris are a societal burden that are giving Islam a bad name and recommended the syestem’s outright ban.  

Much as some of the listed benefits of the Almajiri Education Commission are desirable, the Federal Government should not be dragged into it because of its religious bias and concomitant financial burden. The component of the Bill that deals with out-of-school children will best be handled separately. The Federal Government has several schemes, skills acquisition and economic empowerment programs that can adequately meet their needs. 

It is, therefore, recommended that States that have an Almajiri problem should handle it at State level. Four years ago, Northern Nigerian Governors agreed to ban the Almajiri system. They, therefore, relocated Amajiris in their States back to their States of origin. Governor Ganduje of Kano State recently announced that many of today’s Almajiris are not even Nigerians but abandoned and run-away children from our neighbouring countries. The 12 Northern States that have adopted the Sharia legal system should incorporate Almajiri care in their programs.   

If President Jonathan’s excellent decision to build 157 special Almajiri schools to teach both Islamic and Western education did not address the Almajiri problem, an Almajiri Education Commission will not either. The FG’s paltry 6% budget allocation to Education, which is far below the UN’s recommended 15% threshold, should not be diverted to yet another pointless bureaucratic agency. Given all theses reasons, our federal lawmakers are hereby urged to rethink their earlier decision and not pass the Bill into law.       

By Rev. James G. Pam, jamespam2004@gmail.com, April 24, 2023

MYSTERY OF THE TITHE

THE MYSTERY OF THE TITHE                     

June 2004

A mystery, in New Testament terminology, refers to a truth long hidden but now revealed by God to man. Therefore, to Bible scholars, a mystery is not something shrouded in secrecy but a revealed truth from the scriptures. For example, the mystery of marriage is that it symbolizes Christ, the Head (husband), and His body, the church (wife). This is the great mystery referred to in Ephesians 5:32. The Believers’ Study Bible defines mystery as “revealed truth which man cannot discern by human wisdom.”

The meaning of  a mystery in biblical sense is best illustrated by Jesus’ discussion with His disciples regarding His true identity found in Matthew 16:13-18: “When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

What Peter said was not revealed to him by a man, neither was it understood through study. God gave it. God reveals a mystery to us and it is our duty to check His word to make sure that we have truly received a revelation from Him. If the word of God cannot confirm what we perceive as a divine revelation, then we must discard it and label it as unbiblical. A mystery is, therefore, a divinely revealed truth.

We can easily see the importance of divine revelation in Jesus’ additional comment in the passage quote  above. Jesus said that it is upon the rock of revelation knowledge that He will build His church and even the strongest demons from hell cannot stop it.

Many have questioned if tithing is also for the New Testament church.  Payment of tithes to God is definitely an ordinance for us today as much as it was for the Old Testament believers. In Matthew 23:23b Jesus said, “Yes. You should tithe …”  Hebrews 5:5-6 says that Jesus’ Priesthood is in the order of that of Melchizedek forever. As explained below, Abraham paid a tithe of the spoils of war to Melchizedek. Therefore, Jesus our Most High Priest, is entitled to tithes from us forever.

Deuteronomy 14:22 & 28 say we should tithe all our “increase.” Increase here means fresh income, whether worked for and received as wages or received as gifts or received as profits on investments. Loans taken are not to be tithed because they do not qualify as increase or income.

Deuteronomy 26:13 says that the tithe is an “hallowed thing.” In the Lord’s Prayer we say, “Our Father, who is in heaven, hallowed be your name.” Leviticus 27:30 says the tithe is he Lord’s and it is holy.” Verse 32 says, “The tenth shall be holy unto the Lord.” Therefore, it is not ours but hallowed or holy and so belonging to God. That is why the tithe is “paid” to Him and not “given”. No wonder, Malachi 3:8 & 9 say those who don’t pay tithes are directly stealing from the Lord.

The tithe is a tenth of one’s income or increase. Hebrews 7:2 makes us to understand that it was tenth of the spoils that Abraham gave to Melchizedek. Nehemiah 10:37,38 also state that the tithe is ten percent of all increases of both livestock and crops. In Jesus’ day the Pharisees, a strict Jewish sect, used to observe the tithe ordnance by paying ten percent of all their incomes to God. (Luke 18:12)

Why is the tithe ten percent and not any other number? It’s not five, not nine, not twelve percent. But why? To unveil the mystery behind the number “ten” we need to study the Scriptures from the time tithing was introduced.

The first mention of the word “tithe” in scripture is in Genesis 14:20: “And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand. And he gave him tithes of all.” (KJV). Other translations of the Bible say Abraham gave Melchizedek a tenth of everything he recovered.  This is part of the encounter between Melchizedek and Abram before God changed his name to Abraham. Abram had just returned from defeating five kings and recovering his nephew, Lot, and had taken a lot of loot or spoils of war.

Why did Melchizedec, a Priest of the Most High God, approach Abram with bread and wine, the emblems of the Holy Communion? (1) He did because he was a Priest and only Priests were permitted to minister to God in the temple. (2) He did because there was a religious practice then of celebrating atonement with bread and wine what we call the Holy Communion today. But Jesus had not yet come to earth in Melchisedek’s day, let alone die and resurrect. So what information did he have on the atoning death of Jesus Christ?

In Revelations 13:8 we learn that Jesus was slain from the foundation of the earth. That is, the plan for Christ to come to earth and die for the salvation of mankind was hatched by God as the earth was being created because God is omniscient (all-knowing). God knew that man would fall and redemption would become a necessity. John, the writer of the book of Revelations, was given a vision of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the purpose of redeeming man. “And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.” (Revelations 5:6).

The Bible doesn’t say how, but Melchizedek was aware of this plan of God. Believers must have been given the ordinance of celebrating Jesus’ death and resurrection in anticipation (or in advance) of the event. Today, we celebrate it in retrospect as an event that took place in the past. Therefore, the salvation of mankind has always been through faith in the death and resurrection of our Lord, either looking forward to the event or looking back at it. How wonderful! Who could have made all these elaborate arrangements except God?

Jesus confirmed the fact that His death and resurrection were known and anticipated in faith by Old Testament saints thousands of years before the event. He told the Jews that Abraham who lived two thousand years before His birth saw His day and rejoiced about it. “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.” (John 8:56) Melchizedek and Abraham both knew that God had promised to send His Son to come to the earth one day and die for the sins of man. They believed this but just didn’t know when it would happen. 

“Melchizedek,” meaning “my king is righteousness,” is described as the “King of Salem,” that is, the “King of Peace.” The appearance of Melchizedek, a worshiper and a priest of “The God Most High”  is unexplained. His parentage or lineage or beginning or end are not mentioned. His priesthood is not connected with Aaron’s either since Aaron was not even born yet.

Abram apparently knew more about Melchizedek than is recorded in Scripture. Abram “gave him a tithe” of all. Therefore, tithing was practiced 500 years before the Mosaic Law which included tithing. Abram commenced it in the Dispensation of Promise, Moses commanded it Deuteronomy 12:6 during  the Dispensation of Law, and Christ Himself commended it in Luke 11:42 during the Dispensation of Grace which we are in today. Tithing is therefore still a biblical obligation on all Christians today.

God introduced Melchizedek as a type of our lord Jesus Christ. That is why it is written that Jesus’ Priesthood is like that of Melchizedek. Melchizedek typifies Jesus in seven ways: (1) As King of Peace; (2) As king of Righteousness; (3) In his genealogy; (4) As both King and Priest; (5) As being greater than Abraham; [For it is the greater that normally blesses the lesser.] (6) As having an endless Priesthood; (7) In sacrifice.

According to Genesis 14:20 and Hebrews 10:2, what Abram gave Melchizedek was a tenth part of all that he recovered. The tithe is therefore one tenth. We are not told any where in scripture why the tithe should be ten percent. We therefore have to try and understand what was going on in Abraham’s mind on that day in order to get the significance of the tenth part. What Abraham then knew is the mind and law of God. That is why we are interested in knowing same. So that we too can know Gods mind and law.

“Abram” means “the father of heights”, which portrays Abram as a tall man. Mechizededek, however, welcomed Abram with a salute that was meant to convey a message to him. He said, “Blessed be Abram of the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth: And blessed be the most high God, which hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand.” Abram was made to understand that his victory over his enemies was made possible by the MOST HIGH GOD who is higher than he, Abram, the “father of heights.”

The word translated “possessor” here is the Hebrew word “qanah” whose better translation is “creator” as it occurs in some Bible versions. Melchizedek therefore wanted Abram to acknowledge God as his Creator and Owner. Abram realized this and immediately gave the Priest a tenth part of everything he had recovered.

Why did Abram give a tenth part? It was because Melchizedek reminded him that God is his Creator. To acknowledge God as Creator, Abram knew that a tenth part given to God would do it. But what is the relationship of the tenth part to creation? The relationship is that in God’s acts of creation, man was the tenth. Man was not just the tenth to be created but the best of the ten. When God created other things He looked at them and said, “Good.” But after creating man on the sixth day, He said, “Very good.” (Genesis 1:31). Therefore, was the best creature in all of God’s creation. Man is the only creature made in God’s image and likeness.

Let us prove that man was the tenth creature to be created from the Bible. In Genesis chapter one God said, “Let us …’ or “Let there be …” ten times.

First                 -           Let there be light … (v.3)                             -           1^st day 

Second            -           Let there be a firmament .. (v.6)                    -           2^nd day 

Third               -           Let the waters under the heaven be … (v.9)  -           3^rd day

Fourth             -           Let the dry land appear … (v.9)                     -           3^rd day

Fifth                -           Let the earth bring forth grass … (v.11)         -           3^rd day 

Sixth                -           Let there be lights in the firmament … (v.14)-           4^th day

Seventh            -          Let them be for signs, and for seasons ... (v.14)         4th day

Eigth               -           Let the waters bring forth abundantly… (v.20)  -       5^th day

Ninth             -             Let the earth bring forth the living creature (v.24)       6^th day

Tenth               -           Let us make man in our image … (v.26)         -           6^th day

Being the tenth creature to be created and owned by God, Abram knew that he was a tenth of God’s creative acts and so a tenth part is the correct percentage of our substance that we should give back to God. In fact, the tenth part does not belong to us but to God. Paying the tithe to God by man is like saying, “God, Your all your creatures are still loyal to you.”

Because God’s power over creation was tested ten times, the number “ten” in scriptures tends to represents testing or trial. Remember the Ten Commandments, The Ten Virgins and The Ten Lepers Jesus healed, Sarai gave Hagar to Abram after they had been in Canaan for ten years, Daniel asked for ten days to prove that the diet he chose was better that the King’s rich food, the Beast in Daniel and Revelation has ten horns signifying the Antichrist’s authority, Isaiah made the shadow on Ahaz’s dial to go back ten degrees, etc?

Malachi 3:10 instructs that the tithe be brought to the store house of the Lord. The store house is the treasury of the House of God or what we call the local church today. Your local church, that is, the church you attend and receive spiritual nourishment, is the only recommended receptacle for your tithes. You cannot choose to take your tithes to any other place or person. Your other offerings, which are over and above your tithes, may be sent elsewhere, but never tithes.

The benefits of tithing according to the Bible include: (1) God’s blessings beyond what we can contain (Malachi 3:10). (2) God Himself will rebuke Satan, the devourer, on our behalf. (Malachi 3:11) (3) “That there may be meat in mine house.” Providing material and financial support for the work of God. (4) “Prove me now.” Confirm or test God’s promise regarding tithing. (5) A means of getting God to open heaven’s window for our blessing to flow to you. (6) We honour God when we give Him our substance. (Prov. 3:9). (7) Avoid the sin of robbing God and the curse which it carries.

Now that we have established the origin of tithing and God’s instructions regarding it, we do not have an excuse anymore not to observe this ordinance. Now that you know, if you do not practice it, you will be guilty of the sin of deliberate disobedience. James 4:17 says, “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” I urge you to be faithful in your tithes as Christians.

NIGERIA: NEW MARRIAGE REGULATIONS TAMPERING WITH CHRISTIAN FAMILY UNIT?

31 October 2019

A.    Definition Of Marriage:

The definition of marriage varies from religion to religion, from culture to culture and from one historical era to another. While the New Penguin Dictionary defines marriage as “the institution whereby a man and woman are joined in a special kind of social and legal dependence”, the Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology defines it as “an intimate and complementing union between a man and a woman in which the two become one physically, in the whole of life.” The New Bible Dictionary defines it as “the state in which men and women can live together in sexual relationship with the approval of their social group.” The Wikipedia online encyclopedia defines it more elaborately as “a culturally recognized union between people, called spouses, that establishes rights and obligations between them, as well as between them and their children, and between them and their in-laws.” 

From these definitions the following five basic and essential ingredients of marriage emerge:

i.        A man and a woman cohabiting,

ii.      Sexual relationship,

iii.    Procreating,

iv.    Having certain rights towards each other and their relatives

v.      Doing all the above in a manner acceptable to their social group.

More outlandish definitions of marriage over the centuries have included:

1.      A mystical relationship preordained by cosmic forces?

2.      A blessed physical and spiritual union that mirrors for us a human experience akin to God’s indissoluble steadfast love as it has found expression in the life of Christ?

3.      A legal relationship that protects property and inheritance?

4.      A social relationship that forms a basic fundamental unit of almost all human society.

5.      A less-than-optimal but necessary religious concession to the realities of the uncontrolled instincts and passions of earthly human creatures. An institutional social convention that restricts and restrains the boundaries of human relationship through social proscriptions and legal constraints on individuals’ sexual expression and personal identity.

6.      A self-chosen, psychologically driven relationship that offers stability and intimacy for human growth and development.

B.     State And Marriage:

Marriage can be recognized by a state, an organization, a religious authority, a tribal group, a local community, or peers. It is often viewed as a contract. When a marriage is performed and carried out by a government institution in accordance with the marriage laws of the jurisdiction, without religious content, it is a civil marriage. Civil marriage recognizes and creates the rights and obligations intrinsic to matrimony in the eyes of the state.

When a marriage is performed with religious content under the auspices of a religious institution, it is a religious marriage. A religious marriage recognizes and creates the rights and obligations intrinsic to matrimony in the eyes of the religion. A religious marriage is known variously as sacramental marriage in Catholism, nikah in Islam, nissuin in Judaism, and various other names in other faiths, each with its own constraints as to what it constitutes and who can enter into a valid religious marriage. 

Some countries do not recognize a locally performed religious marriage on its own, and require a separate civil marriage for official purposes. Conversely, a civil marriage does not exist in some countries that are governed by a religious legal system, such as Saudi Arabia, where marriages contracted abroad might not be recognized if they were contracted contrary to Saudi interpretations of Islamic religious law. In countries governed by a mixed secular-religious legal system, such as Lebanon and Israel, a locally performed civil marriage does not exist within the country, which prevents interfaith and various other marriages that contradict religious laws from being entered into in the country.

C.    International Convention:

Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that, "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses."

 

D.    God Established The Marriage Institution According To The Bible.

God’s actions and pronouncements in Genesis 2:18-24 started the marriage institution with Adam and Eve. He said:

It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him…so the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, ‘This, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man.’ Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

 

E.     The Status Of Marriage In The Bible

The Bible regards marriage as normal to the extent that the Old Testament has no word for ‘bachelor’. Monogamy is also implicit in the story of Adam and Eve since God created only one wife for him. The Bible also shows that polygamy brings trouble, which often results in sin (Abraham, Gen. 21; Gideon, Judges 8:29 – 9:57; David, 2 Samuel 11, 13; Solomon, 1 Kings 11:1-8). In normal marriages, the wife came to the husband’s home.

 

F.     Betrothal And Wedding Are The Two Marriage Customs In The Bible.

 

1.      Betrothal. It is almost as binding as marriage itself. Betrothed women and men were referred to as ‘wife’ and ‘husband’ in several instances (Gen. 29:21; Deut. 22:23, 24; Matt. 1:18, 20; Joel 1”8; Matt. 1:19). The Bible does not legislate for broken betrothals.

2.      Usually the parents of a young man chose his wife and arranged for the marriage. But sometimes the young man did the choosing. Sometimes the girl’s consent was sought.

3.      There was an exchange of gifts associated with betrothal. There was a marriage gift or compensation and a dowry.

4.      Wedding ceremonies were an important feature. There were special garments for both the bride and groom. There were bride’s maids and grooms friends. There was a procession with music and dancing.  The marriage feast usually held at the house of the groom and often at night. Guests wore festive clothes. The man covered the bride with his skirt. Parents and friends blessed the couple and wished them well. The father of the bride drew up a written marriage covenant of faithfulness as implied in Prov. 2:17; Ez. 16:8; Mal. 2:14). A blood-stained cloth or chemise was exhibited as a proof of virginity (Deut. 22:13-21). The wedding festivities continued for a week or two.

5.      The Levirate law. When a married man died without a child, his brother was expected to take his wife and have children for him. (The Berom people of Plateau State had this custom before Christianity came to them). Where a brother objected, the ‘next of kin’ rule came into effect as in the case of Ruth and Boaz. But while a man is still alive, his brother is not allowed to marry his wife.

6.      Divorce. In Matt. 19:8, Jesus said that Moses “suffered” (allowed) divorce because of the hardness of the people’s heart. This means that Moses did not command a divorce, but regulated an existing practice, and the form of the law is Deut. 24:1-4. A certificate of divorcement was given to the wife and she could remarry, but not without it. Grounds for divorce were not specific but general, like “some uncleanliness” or “anything unpleasant”. Mal. 2:16 is a mistranslation. The word translated as “divorce” is elsewhere translated as “put away”. The Hebrew word is Shalak, which the KJV properly translates, but not the NIV. (The same word appears in Jer. 3:1, 8. “Putting away” means sending a wife away without giving her a certificate of divorce (Deut. 24:1, 3; Is. 50:1). Jesus also emphasized that “putting away” meant the marriage contract was still subsisting and so the wife and husband should not remarry or they would be committing adultery. Jesus said the only grounds for “putting away” is a wife’s infidelity (Matt. 5:32, 19:3-12; Mk. 10:2-12; Lk. 16:18).   

 

G.    Three Positions On Biblical Marriage

There are three commonly held beliefs about what constitutes a marriage in the eyes of God:

1.      The couple is married in the eyes of God when the physical union is consummated through sexual intercourse.

2.      The couple is married in the eyes of God when the couple is legally married.

3.      The couple is married in the eyes of God after they have participated in a formal religious wedding ceremony.

 

H.    Brief History Of Christian Marriage:

The history of Christian marriage is as complex and diverse as the history of Christianity, with the meaning of that word “marriage” having changed and morphed as generations of faithful Christians have sought to define for themselves the nature of a holy life lived out in the midst of daily life. Marriage has meant numerous things in various geographic settings over the course of history, and even now, when Christians use the word “marriage,” it does not mean the same thing to all of them.

To understand what our moment in history has to say about the nature of Christian marriage, we shall benefit from an examination of the many things marriage has meant over the millennia.

 

1.      Jewish & Roman Marriage (From Adam To Jesus Christ)

We learn from this era that marriages can function in society as a means of ordering that society and    protecting the authority and property of those in power. Also, that western culture has a long history of denying marriage privileges to the poor, the destitute and the incarcerated.

2.      Christian Marriage in the Early Church (From 1^st to 3^rd Century – up to the Nicene Council 325 AD)

The early Church, through its several iterations, held various views of the nature of marriage. The reasons for marrying are threefold: fidelity, procreation, and the fulfilling of a sacred obligation. We see in this period of history a widening of understandings of what it means to be human in a way that does not simply equate the human condition with procreative capacities. Celibacy becomes a virtue. We see an already present tension between the concepts of marriage as a legal and societal act and Christian marriage as a blessed state of life given by God and blessed by the Church.

3.      Marriage in the Medieval Church (Middle Ages, 5^th to 15th Century)

Betrothal was seen as essential to a proper marriage and formed a basic contract of commitment between two households. Marriage blessings were usually domestic in nature and often took place at feasts and at the marriage beds. The Church required monogamy in marriage. What marriage was, how it happened, and who was eligible to be married were matters of debate in this era of the Church. A marriage might involve a simple blessing by the priest at the doors of the church, a full nuptial mass within the church, or a blessing of the marriage bed. By the late medieval period, we see a deepening divide between all things sacred and profane, as well as a fully developed societal and legal authority invested in the officers of the Church. The continuing importance of the betrothal, with its emphasis upon consent and commitment, led to the necessity to make this consent an action done as a part of the marriage rite in the presence of the priest. This led to a diminishment of the role and efficacy of the whole communal betrothal process.

The Church required monogamy in marriage. As the scholastic church of the late medieval period was narrowing its understanding of how Christians were to understand sacrament, marriage (along with its counterpart, ordination) came to be seen as one of the seven sacraments of the Church. Both the man and the woman were now seen as entering into a sacramental act, and now both the man and woman were expected to voice their consent. Vows were exchanged in most circumstances, but not all. The woman was required to swear her obedience to her husband.

4.      The Reformation Period and Marriage (16^th Century)

The primary changes to the understanding of marriage that arose from the Reformation were theological rather than practical. The rejection of the primacy of the celibate life was a core tenet of Reformation thinking, and with that rejection came a new emphasis upon marriage. Marriage was seen as the natural and original means of ordering human life. Established by God in creation, marriage was expected of all Christian people. In an adaptation of Augustine’s teachings on marriage, Luther identified the three goals of marriage as procreation, a remedy for concupiscence, and companionship. Protestant reformers saw the family as the central building block of the Christian life. They saw the act of marrying as a solemn act and a solemn obligation. They used marriage ceremonies as occasions to teach the entire community the Church’s expectations regarding life lived in marriage.  In contrast to some earlier periods of history, marital fidelity was an expressed expectation of both members of the marriage and not just of the woman. Familial and communal feasts and celebrations that had historically accompanied and been a part of marriage were severely criticized in some reform communities. If the medieval period had strongly urged that marriages take place in churches and be presided over by priests, most reformers absolutely required church marriages with pastors and witnesses present.  

In 1653, during the Puritan period of the English Commonwealth, the nature of marriage was once again reshaped by theological constraints. In this radical, Puritan setting, marriage became a simple vow between a man and a woman using a prescribed Puritan form from the Westminster Directory. The vow was made before a justice of the peace, and there were no prayers and no ordained minister involved, making it absolutely clear that marriage was not to be understood as a sacramental act, thereby allowing considerably more latitude in arguing for the potential dissolubility of a marriage. Puritans saw marriage as an event with significant spiritual and religious implications.

This period of history tells us that Christian marriage, even when understood as both a legal and a religious act, has not held the same meaning for all Christians across the Church, nor has there been any form of consensus regarding the dissolubility of marriage. The divide between Catholic and Protestant understandings of marriage continued in the Reformation era to shape the Christian churches.

5.      Marriage in the New World

American understandings of marriage were diverse from the founding of the United States. Puritan values regarding marriage as a central building block of society were continued among white Protestant Americans; and the sacramental, unbreakable bonds of marriage continued to be upheld by Roman Catholic Christians of the New World.

A core stricture that entered into Roman Catholic Spanish marriage practices and then quickly became a part of Latin-American marriage practices was the principle of “equality” — not equality as a source of mutual companionship between the genders, but social, racial, and economic equality between the two parties marrying. While those who were black or of mixed race were initially exempted from this law.

 In addition, this act was unprecedented in Catholic practice in requiring parental permission for any marriage to take place, taking the power of choice away from the groom as well as the bride. Once the marriage had been attained, the understanding within society and within the Church was that the patriarchal role of head of household required obedience of the woman in her relationship with her husband.

Seventeenth-century confessional manuals that were used by priests of the New World define marriage as contractual in nature, with expectations that husbands would support their wives, and wives would be obedient to their husbands unless the husband’s demands were deemed unreasonable, irrational, and unjust by civil authorities. Beginning in the 17th century, we also see pastoral language of equality and reciprocity that imagines marriage in the ideal as a mystical union.

Native Americans, Black slaves, Asian Americans, Filopino and Japanese migrants were denied marriage rights and not allowed to marry across the races.  This portion of history helps illuminate for the Church the numerous ways in which marriage law was used to oppress.

6.      The Victorian Concept of Marriage

In the 17th century, the 1662 Anglican Book of Common Prayer asserted that the purposes of marriage were procreation, a remedy against sin and fornication, and mutual society (help and comfort), indicating little change in understanding since the Reformation period. But with the Victorian era (1837-1901), new patterns of practice regarding marriage began to appear in British and American society.

In the Victorian era, the home-workplace split led to a reconfiguration of familial identity that made the husband in the household the sole breadwinner and defined the many and necessary tasks of the wife as homemaking.

The marriage of Queen Victoria to Prince Albert in 1840 provided Anglicans across the globe with a new romantic model for the ideal marriage ceremony. An elaborate ritual, a long white dress, a horse-drawn carriage, and sacred vows said before a priest came to be seen as the desirable way in which to marry.

7.      Twentieth-Century Episcopal Marriage

U.S. marriages were to take place only within the confines of state law. An exhortation regarding the nature of marriage was still read. Vows were still exchanged. Rings could be given, and blessing prayers were still said by a priest. By the mid-20th century, all Christian persons were fit candidates for Christian marriage so long as there were no legal impediments that would prevent the marriage.

The second half of the 20th century brought the fruits of the Liturgical Renewal Movement to all the rites of the Church, including the “Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage” — language that would not have been used for such a rite since the Reformation. The new introduction to marriage in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer lists as the first intention of marriage the couple’s mutual joy. This is followed by reference to the help and comfort given one another in prosperity and adversity (language, we have seen, that has been a part of the Church’s understanding of marriage for hundreds of years). Last in the priority is the procreation of children.

Twentieth-century liturgical reformers added a clear blessing of the rings given in marriage, a pronouncement by the priest at the couple is husband and wife, and a specific prayer that is identified as the nuptial blessing and only to be performed by a priest or a bishop.

 

8.      Twenty-first Century Christian marriage

 Another radical change in the nature of our understanding of marriage has come in the last several decades as gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people have taken on greater visibility  in our society and have worked to gain a voice, a presence, and legal rights within both the broader culture and the Church.

 

I.       Summary Of The New Regulations Issued By The Ministry Of Interior (MOI)

The new regulations have been issued by the MOI’s Citizenship & Business Department. The Department has, among other things, the responsibility of upholding the Marriage Act, CAP M6, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (2004) and the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Regarding this, its duties include:

1.       Granting of secured marriage certificates

2.       Place of worship licensing (so that places of worship can be legally certified to conduct statutory marriages in Nigeria)

3.       Conducting of Statutory Marriages at Federal Marriage Registries nationwide.

 

J.      The Portal Provides The Following Information:

That in accordance with the 1990 Marriage Act, CAP 218, Laws of the Federation, the Ministry of Interior is charged with carrying out statutory marriages in Nigeria and that there are two types of marriages which are recognized under the law. These are:

1.      Ordinary Marriage: This is a marriage between a Nigerian and a Nigerian.

2.      Special Marriage: This is a marriage between a Nigerian and non-Nigerian or between a non-Nigerian and a non-Nigerian in Nigeria.

 

K.    Services Available Through The Internet Portal Include:

1.      Marriage Applications: In order for one’s marriage to be legally binding, or to be recognized under the law, it has to be certified by the Ministry of Interior.

2.      Marriage Certificate Re-issue: This is a service that is provided to couples who have already been married but did not have a Marriage Certificate issued by the Ministry of Interior. Such couples should only apply for issuance of a new certified Marriage Certificate.

3.      Change of Marriage Venue: For couples who wish to perform their marriages outside the Federal Marriage Registry. They would apply and pay the required amount so that their marriage can be conducted at their desired location outside the Registry.

4.      Certified True Copy of Documents: To provide a Certified True Copy (CTC) of the original Marriage Certificate to couples who no longer have a copy of their original Marriage Certificate, either due to loss or theft, or by request of 3^rd parties, like Embassies. A fee is charged for this service.

5.      Attestation of Marital Status: To declare and verify one’s status as either single, married, widowed, divorced, etc.

6.      Verification of Documents: Third party agencies seeking to verify the authenticity of documents submitted to them by individuals by spinsters, bachelors, or married people. (For example, a Nigerian bachelor wishing to marry in another country. Fees would be charged for this service.

7.      Licensing of Place of Worship: The Ministry also has the duty of licensing places of worship in order to enable them to legally conduct marriages in Nigeria. A License that is valid for two years is issued after the application has been approved, and all necessary payments have been made. The first certificate is valid for two years and is renewable.

8.      Renewal of Place of Worship License: After the period of two years, a place of worship is mandated to renew their license every year.

9.      Marriage Public Notice: Intending couples are required to announce their plans on the portal with passport pictures and stating date and place of intended marriage for at least 3 weeks. Members of the public are invited to file in any objection to the intended marriage if they have valid reasons before the due date at the venue intended.

10.  Marriage End-user Manual: Contains guidelines to intending couples on how to fill in the online forms, upload documents and make payments online. (39 pgs)

11.  Place of Worship End-user Manual: Contains guidelines to worship place operators on how to fill in the online forms, upload documents and make payments online. (24 pgs)

 

L.     Fees payable:

1.      Special marriages                    -           -           N35,000

2.      Ordinary marriages                 -           -           N21,000

3.      Attestation of marital status   -           -           N20,000

4.      Change of marriage venue      -           -           N30,000

5.      Verification of documents      -           -           N15,000

6.      Certified True Copies (CTC)  -           -           N15,000

7.      Certificate re-issue Standard  -                         N/A

8.      Place of worship license          -           -           N30,000 (2 years)

9.      Renewal of place of worship license  -           N30,000 (1 year)

10.  Marriage Certificate at N100 each

in booklets of 25 certificates and

minimum order of 2 booklets  -           -          N5,000

 

M.   Requirements For Place Of Worship Licensing:

1.          Identity Card Of  Place of Worship Representative

2.          Certificate Of Occupancy

3.          Certificate Of Incorporation

4.          First Five Pages And The Last Page of Place of Worship Constitution

5.          Ordination Certificate of Minister

6.          Photographs of the Interior and Exterior Views of the Place of Worship (Two Copies Each)

7.          Minister’s Identification

8.          Passport Photographs of Minister

9.          Power of Attorney

  

N.    Date Of Take-Off:

The date of takeoff of all these arrangements was not specified by the Ministry. But Nigerian newspapers started commenting of the new provisions in July 2019.

 

O.    Legal Provisions:

The actions of the Ministry of interior are supported by the following Nigerian laws:

1.      1999 Constitution (As Amended), Schedule II, Part I FEDERAL EXCLUSIVE LIST),

(a)    Item 61. The formation, annulment and dissolution of marriages other than marriages under Islamic law and Customary law including matrimonial causes relating thereto.

(b)    Item 68. Any matter incidental or supplementary to any matter mentioned elsewhere in this list.

2.      The Marriage Act 2004 clearly gives the Ministry of Interior the powers to regulate places of worship for marriage purposes and statutory marriage. 

3.      The Marriage Act 2004 specifies a five-year imprisonment for anyone who knowingly conducts a marriage outside a licensed worship place and two years imprisonment for one who conducts a marriage without being authorized by the ministry of interior.

4.      Note that there is mention of ‘Marriages’ in Part II: Concurrent Legislative List in the 1999 Constitution.

5.      The Fourth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution specifies the functions of Local Governments. 1(i) mentions “registration of all births, deaths and marriages.”

6.      But Sokoto State has a Marriage Expenses (Regulations) Law 1981 and Bornu State has the Local Government (Modification of Borno native Law and Custom Relating to Marriage Order) 1971. It would seem that the Constitution does not prohibit this. Why should Christians and Churches not choose to practice traditional marriage?  

7.      There is no principle of customary law which requires the recording of customary law marriages. But Item 7 (1) of the Fourth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution provides that the functions of Local governments shall include, “Registration of all births, deaths and marriages.” Does this provision include the certification of deaths, births and issuance of customary marriage certificates or not?

8.      A statutory marriage is defined as the voluntary union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. Therefore, ‘statutory marriages’, which are also called ‘marriages under the Act’’ are monogamous marriages. So-called ‘Church marriages’ have therefore been classified as statutory marriages for the mere fact that they are monogamous. Christians and churches have become innocent victims of the law by default. Traditional and Islamic marriages do not qualify as statutory marriages for the mere fact that they have the potential of becoming polygamous. Why should churches and Christians not consider means of freeing themselves from the shackles of the law?

9.      By virtue of the fact that ‘marriages’ are on the Exclusive Legislative list of the Federal government, State Governments cannot legislate on them but they can legislate on traditional and Islamic marriages as Sokoto and Borno States have done.            

10.  Legal Questions:

1.      Are there contradictions in the 1999 Constitution regarding the issuance of marriage licenses?

2.      How many types of marriages are recognized in Nigeria?

3.      What is the position of the 1999 Constitution regarding Islamic marriages?

4.      Which laws govern Islamic marriages?

5.      Which laws govern Traditional marriages?

6.      Are Islamic marriages also affected by the Ministry of Interior’s new regulations or not?

7.      Can Local Governments make by-laws regarding marriages since the 1999 Constitution includes this item in their functions?

8.      Can Christians and Churches not choose to practice traditional marriage instead of statutory marriage? Can the law force them to practice statutory marriage just because Christian doctrine teaches monogamy?

9.      Since States can constitutionally legislate on traditional and religious marriages, why should Christians not write laws governing ‘Christian Marriage’ but reclassify it ‘Traditional Marriage’ and make States to pass it into law?  

10.  Can Christians not write a bunch of standard biblical doctrines and principles that prescribe a Christian life style (including biblical marriage requirements) and demand States to pass them into ‘Ecclesiastical Law? Will this not be an easier way to free Christians from all the new regulations released by the Ministry of Interior? Why should Christians willingly subject themselves to the dictates of a discriminating and insensitive Federal government?

 

P.     Compliance Thus Far:

The PUNCH newspaper of July 24, 2019 reported that the Ministry of Interior organized a one-day stakeholders’ conference on the conduct of marriages in accordance with the Marriage Act Cap M6, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, as amended. The Permanent Secretary in the Ministry, Mrs. Georgina Ehuriah, disclosed in Abuja during the conference that in accordance with the Marriage Act Cap M6, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, as amended, only about 4,689 places of worship of worship in Nigeria had been licensed and out of this number, only 314 have renewed their licenses to conduct statutory marriages this year. She said that all marriages being conducted in unlicensed places of worship cannot serve legal purposes and are contrary to Section 6(1) of the Marriage Act.

 

Q.    Objections So Far:

We could find only two recorded objections to the new Ministry of Interior regulations in the public domain. Christians need to vehemently oppose the new regulations because they are discriminatory and infringe on their fundamental human rights and the legal rights of Churches registered with the CAC as ‘not-for-profit’ Trustees with powers to conduct marriages without recourse to any other government agency. 

1.      The ‘Body of Marriage Registrars’ of Local Governments in Nigerian issued a communiqué at the end of their National Conference held at the Radio House in Abuja in August 2019 which was read to the press by their National President, Deji Sokeye. The PUNCH newspaper of September 3, 2019, quoted the communiqué as lambasting the ministry of Interior for encroaching into the exclusive constitutional jurisdiction of LGs and demanding that the Minister of Interior, Rauf Aregbesola, direct his Permanent Secretary and staff to close down the “illegal Marriage Registries they have opened in several States being run by a private firm named Anchor Dataware Solutions Ltd. The communiqué also disclosed that the Ministry contracted this private firm, with whom they have a revenue sharing agreement, illegally. The fees firm is collecting on behalf of the Federal Government may actually be going first to the private firm’s account instead of going directly into a Federal Government consolidated revenue account as prescribed by the Treasury Single Account mandate. The Body of LG Registrars advised foreign Embassies in Nigeria to disregard the letter written to them by the Ministry of Interior instructing them to not recognize documents issued by other government agencies.

2.      On 31 July 2019 the PUNCH newspaper again reported an interview that the Legal Adviser of CAN, Barr. Samuel Kwamkur, granted them on the new Ministry of Interior regulations.    

 

R.    Some Implications Of The New Licensing Regulations

1.      The new regulations single out statutory monogamous marriages and there by implication, only Christians for punitive and obnoxious marriage processes amounts to religious discrimination.

2.      The N30,000 per annum license fee is far too high, punitive and an attempt to tax churches heavily whereas they are mere registered Trustees that are not profit generating organizations. Its funds are freewill donations for the building religions infrastructure and propagation of the Christian gospel.

3.      Many church branches in rural areas cannot afford the N30,000 annual license fees. 

4.      Majority of intending couples cannot afford the exorbitant N21,000 marriage fees. Such astronomically high fees for marriage, which is a basic human right, will discourage Christian youth from getting married, thus depleting the population of Christians in the country and encourage their youth to engage in promiscuity.

5.      Why should ALL other Nigerians not pay the same fees when getting married? Just because some prefer to get married under Customary or Islamic laws should not free them from paying the same fees. There should be uniformity for all Nigerians irrespective of religion. Amend the Constitution in order to achieve this if necessary.

6.      The use of a private consulting firm by the ministry of interior as reported by Local Government Registrars to collect government revenue and share some of it while it goes through their account violates the Single Treasury Account (STA) principle.