The Tribune

by SIMON

A FRIEND recalls a story his father used to tell about the latitude and longitude of the spectacular moral hypocrisy of quite a number of self-appointed religious leaders and pastors in The Bahamas.

The story was told to his father by a late numbers kingpin, a generous man, who served for a time as Treasurer of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP).

Asked why he did not attend church regularly, he laughed, recounting the number of pastors who railed against gambling from the pulpit but who regularly asked him for church contributions and personal money for mortgages, school fees, and other expenses.

During the pernicious drug era of the 1970s and 80s, when drug money rained on The Bahamas, one church leader famously implored: “Bring the money here the devil had it too long!” Another insisted: “Principle don’t put bread on the table!”

While campaigning in one of the Exuma Cays, an FNM politician addressing a church meeting was warned not to go hard on drug trafficking, because drug money helped build the church.

Hypocrisy is human. Still, there is a difference between garden variety hypocrisy and an orchid or Garden of Eden-sized hypocrisy gripping quite a number of self-anointed bishops, apostles, and prophets.

Religion has been a big business and moneymaker for a procession of charlatans throughout human history. Many have preyed on the fears, hopes, anxieties about death, and weaknesses of their flocks.

In Christianity, these entrepreneurs of religion and prosperity contradict the message of Jesus Christ about simplicity, poverty, and rejecting status for its own sake.

Today, many of those in churches that once eschewed certain clerical garb and titles, now parade around in red and purple as self-anointed bishops, full of pomp and odd circumstance, with little substance on theological and ethical matters.

They stand in contrast to other religious leaders living more humble lives, dedicated to their congregants, modelling their ministries after Jesus.

The scarlet red zucchetto worn by a Roman Catholic cardinal symbolizes “their willingness to shed blood in defence of the Catholic faith.”

“The purple—specifically amaranth or magenta—zucchetto worn by a Catholic bishop represents his authority and ecclesiastical rank, signalling his role as a successor to the Apostles.”

When these colours are worn by those with little to no apostolic tradition, the colours seems more status-seeking and self-aggrandizement than they do about following Christ.

What exactly is a College of Bishops in a Bahamian context? The idea is odd and looks ridiculous to many. In Roman Catholicism, the College of Cardinals and conferences of bishop are not self-appointed social cliques for status-seekers.

“Conference of Bishops (or Episcopal Conference) is a permanent institution comprising all Catholic bishops within a specific country or territory. It serves as an assembly where bishops jointly exercise pastoral offices, promote greater good for the Church, and address regional issues in unity, acting according to Canon Law.”

The recent announcement by the FNM that it will institute a public lottery if elected, has exposed the hypocrisy of a new generation of religious leaders in hock to a particular political party.

There are religious leaders fully opposed to gambling who have not received money from gaming bosses. Alas, there are the spectacular hypocrites, who pronounce in pulpits and in the press their opposition to lotteries, while receiving numerous and significant donations from web shop owners.

Their loud and boisterous voice and jeremiads ring hollow, drip with insincerity, and display cant and underlying agendas. Many Bahamians — including those who work in casinos and give offerings to these pastors — know the double-game, pun intended, these pastors are spinning cum playing.

It would be good to know the number of pastors, who continue to accept gifts, offerings, and largesse from gambling bosses, who now oppose a national lottery.

The double-barrel hypocrisy of many of these pastors includes not only taking gambling money. It also includes soto voce or scant criticism of former Prime

Minister Perry Christie when he “overturned” the will of the people in the gambling vote.

Many of these partisans will loudly criticize the FNM while keeping in good with the PLP so they remain in the party’s good books and on the receiving line of a treasure trove of goodies, appointments, donations, national honours, and access.

In a national lottery the proceeds are returned to the Bahamian people for various social and development initiatives.

However, instead of a national or public lottery benefiting significantly more Bahamians, the former government regularized a privately-owned lottery system in which the majority of the profits accrued to already wealthy individuals, with the government receiving some funds from taxing the private lottery.

Most advanced and progressive countries opt for national lotteries as a matter of economic and social justice.

A public or national lottery is typically designed to expand opportunity and equality for citizens. They ensure a greater common good than do private lotteries which overwhelmingly concern the narrow interests of a few, with little by way of return to the mass of citizens.

Throughout the US, the UK and many other countries lottery profits are used overwhelmingly to fund public goods such as education rather than to primarily enrich already bulging private coffers.

Those who oppose a national lottery but who have been mostly quiet about the private lotteries should recall than in the gaming vote more Bahamians supported the former.

A recent letter to the editor in The Nassau Guardian summarized the views of many who support a public lottery:

“The Bahamian people will recall that during the national referendum on gaming, a majority voted against it. Yet the then-PLP administration proceeded to legalize web shop gaming regardless, dismissing the vote as merely ‘an opinion poll.’”

“The result? A system that has largely benefited a few operators, while many Bahamians continue to bear the social and economic consequences.

“To criticize a structured, regulated national lottery—designed to generate revenue for the public good—is contradictory at best.”

The letter continued: “A properly governed national lottery is not a gamble on the public; it is a policy tool used worldwide to fund education, healthcare, youth development, [social intervention] and national priorities. The difference lies in transparency, regulation, and purpose.

“The real question is not whether gaming exists—it already does. The question is, will it continue to enrich a few, or will it be structured to benefit the many?”