The Cathedral Question

The desire to build a house for God is, in itself, noble and praiseworthy. Throughout Scripture, building for God has always been an act clothed in reverence and purity of intention.

Yet the current debate invites us to reflect deeply on whether the approach to such a sacred task has matched the purity of its intention.

From the beginning, the altar of God has been a sanctified space—distinguishing between an Abel offering and a Cain offering.

God delights not in the magnitude of what is given, but in the spirit and integrity behind it.

The question, therefore, is not merely what we build, but how we build it.

The Question of Foundations:

Would God not be pleased with a clean, transparent, and selfless approach to building His house?

A good idea, no matter how divine it appears, must rest on a spiritual foundation of truth, humility, and sacrifice.

Jesus Himself began the expansion of the Kingdom using seasoned professionals—men whose competence was matched by their willingness to sacrifice.

These professionals, though highly skilled, left the comforts and benefits of their trades because they believed in the mission.

They followed Christ even unto death.

In the same vein, Nehemiah’s rebuilding of Jerusalem’s broken walls was not funded by heavy levies or state budgets.

He appealed, and the people—moved by conviction—responded.

Volunteers, families, priests, artisans and ordinary citizens worked on gratis. They saw a divine purpose and aligned their labour with their faith.

So We Ask:

What About the Ghanaian Cathedral?

Couldn’t the highly renowned professionals involved—already blessed in their professions—have offered their skills as a sacrificial gift unto God?

Did they have to charge fees for a project intended to symbolise national faith, unity, and devotion?

One might argue:

“Perhaps they are not Christians.”

Yet even then, why were they engaged when tens of thousands of seasoned Christian architects, engineers, quantity surveyors, artisans, and project managers fill our churches every Sunday?

Professionals who would joyfully offer their expertise for the glory of God?

Examples abound:

• Architect Lawrence Ndaago Ayagiba designed the Roman Catholic Church - Corpus Christi, Sakumono and the Good Sherperd Parish Hall building at Tema West, and supervised the construction at no cost.

He did same for the Methodist Church building at Sakumono, interestingly constructed with internal contributions from members, for more than 10 years - These were not commercialised.

• And again, Nehemiah rebuilt with volunteers, not consultants billing millions. Would it not have been spiritually—and financially—sound to engage a "Consortium of Christian professionals" to execute the National Cathedral at no cost?

Could volunteer-driven fundraising, paired with expert contributions from the body of Christ, not have prevented the public uproar now accompanying the $400 million expenditure?

A Cost-Raising Serious Question:

It is mind-boggling that almost one-fifth of the IMF’s $2 billion support appears to be consumed by a single religious construction project.

If nearly $100 million is spent on 10% of the project, with $400 million earmarked for completion, then it could finally run into billions—funds that could transform the lives of congregants struggling with unemployment, healthcare costs, and basic livelihood challenges.

What the Church Could Have Done:

Surely-

- The Catholic Bishops' Conference, - The Christian Council, and - The Pentecostal and Charismatic Council—with their vast networks of educated, Spirit-filled professionals—could mobilise a national pool of architects, engineers, artisans and financiers who would volunteer to see the dream realised without draining public coffers.

That would embody the early church’s spirit of shared sacrifice.

That would reflect Nehemiah’s model.

That would silence accusations and restore dignity to the Church.

A Call for Forensic Truth:

It is therefore imperative that the government continues its forensic review of state expenditures related to the Cathedral—not out of malice, but in pursuit of truth.

For truth is cleansing.

Truth restores.

And truth protects the credibility of both Church and State.

A Sobering Conclusion:

It is painful—indeed saddening—that a project intended to honour God has become shrouded in controversy.

Not because the idea was wrong, but because the process may not have reflected the selflessness that defines true Christian service.

Perhaps the real question is this:

Has the modern Church unknowingly drifted from the spirit of sacrificial service that once defined its strength?

The Cathedral debate is more than a national issue—it is a spiritual mirror.

Ye Son of Man!

This Is The WORD Of GOD!

Let good ears - effectively listen with the fear of GOD!!

AMEN!!!