An Open Letter to the Leader of the Opposition

Bishop Atherley,

Like many Barbadians, I am exceedingly proud of the bold step which this nation is taking as we embark on our journey to republicanism. It is with that patriotic spirit that I watched the proceedings of the Houses of Parliament as they elected the first President of our coming Republic. I had hoped, like many, that the day would be one of joyous celebration, for we have waited so long for this moment, as well as solemn reflection, as we contemplate the journey thus far and where we have yet to go. It was a day designed to be bereft of partisan rancour, a day for unbridled patriotism.

Ultimately however, that was not entirely the case. In particular, one gentleman, your Leader of Opposition Business in the Senate, sought to bring the entire dignified proceedings into disrepute, in the process affronting the Parliament, the country and indeed, you, as his Leader. While I would never presume to tell you how to exercise your constitutional duties, it no doubt appears that there is no choice but to either ask the gentleman for his resignation, and if he refuses, to recommend to the Governor General that he be replaced in the Senate. I take no delight in that position, but it is the only way to staunch the bleeding. I rest this contention upon three principal grounds.

Firstly, the gentleman has repeatedly been publicly at variance with you. In our system of government, the parliamentary leader and members of his frontbench must be in lockstep. This is particularly so in the Senate, where those appointed on your recommendation, are entirely dependent upon you for their continued service. While disagreement is par for the course, the matter before us is not a resolution to acquire land. The constitutional ordering of this nation at its highest level is of such paradigmatic importance, that any disagreement on that, means that there is an irredeemable loss of confidence on the part of both parties, for how can you agree on the ‘little things’ if the ‘biggest thing’ is so contentious. A man cannot be led by a person in whom he does not confidence, nor can a man lead another in whom he has no confidence. Little wonder then that in comments to the press, he delivered of himself a fatal remark, that to partake in the process would have made him “look like a fool”. Sir, you participated in the process, in fact you advanced a joint nomination. Sir, you cannot lead a man who thinks you to be a fool.

Further, the reasons advanced for his conduct are disingenuous at best. The gentleman pretends that his issue was with the ballot. The fact is, however, that there never would have been a ballot, unless he objected (note that in Trinidad, there is no constitutional provision to allow objections when there is only one candidate). Did he object in order to have a ballot so that he could again object? Is that the philosophy of the PdP: mindless objection? He alleged to the press that there was no way for him to vote against if he wanted to. We now know that not to be true. The Parliament makes rules to regulate itself, and parliamentarians were instructed that with the ballot paper, they could have indicated approval, disapproval or abstention, with a tick, an x or ‘abstain’. What then is the true reason for his conduct?

Worst of all, the gentleman cast a long shadow over one of this country’s most historic days. A survey of the social media platforms suggests that the national conversation was not dominated by this country decisively reaffirming our confidence in ourselves or by the fact that a young woman from St. Philip would be this country’s first President. No sir, these events were seemingly overshadowed by the gentleman’s conduct. Whether it was his intention or not, his conduct gave rise to this distraction. This, perhaps, is his greatest sin. That on a day that was about Barbados, about all of us, about our past and our future, about hope tempered by pragmatism, we discussed none of these things, we discussed a single man all day. 

I don’t know when, but at some point, we began to think that democracy is an adversarial blood sport of scorched earth tactics. I say, emphatically, that it is not. That if we want a solid democracy as we transition to republican status, we must have politicians who exercise maturity, who can disagree with dignity and honestyand still reach across the aisle in times of national crisis and times of national pride. That is the democracy to which we ought always to aspire.

The gentleman may continue to disagree with everything, as is the right of any in this country, but like the rest of us, he can do so outside of the precincts of Parliament, where will not affront our democracy and our nation.

Bishop Atherley, I know you to be a man with an abiding love for our nation. Every second that this iniquity persists is a stain on this country. The people of Barbados do not deserve this. I ask you, sir, simply, to do the right thing.

Yours Sincerely,

Khaleel Kothdiwala,

A Patriot

212 comments

  • “Sadly One person can be all things to all men. All of us have our roles to manage the ecosystem we have to exist.”

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    How much should churches change their message and methods to suit the culture around them? Some believe that whatever methods will connect with people are justified. The gospel must be “contextualised” they say. This means that we must adapt everything but the core message to suit the culture. The main Bible verse that they use to support this idea is when Paul speaks of being all things to all men in order to save them. Does that mean that we must adopt the culture around us and everything we do must be changed? How should we understand this verse?

    Like

  • “@ WURA
    I see the front page of today’s nation highlights the massive Kingston plantation corruption. A very large settlement has been announced.Noticed also that Barbados Underground and Barbados Free Press were given mention. I wonder if the corrupt lawyers will be now exposed …………..Expect a cover up!!”

    yeah, i heard they finally got around to putting it in local media, but i saw it the same day i posted the vaccine scam link among other cases that the corrupt from Barbados and other jurisdictions have in Miami for corruption….told John to check it out then….

    don’t know if they were waiting for the vaccine scam to run out of steam or never stop….lol…..hope all the lawyers/parasites names get called, they never thought the exposure would arrive, but the family in Miami kept at it until they got a judgement…

    they can only cover up things on the island….IT’S EXPOSED EVERYWHERE ELSE…and they have to face other people in other countries…

    Like

  • RE How much should churches change their message and methods to suit the culture around them? Some believe that whatever methods will connect with people are justified. The gospel must be “contextualised” they say. This means that we must adapt everything but the core message to suit the culture.

    How much should churches change their message and methods to suit the culture around them?
    SANE SOUND SERIOUS STUDENTS OF THE SCRIPTURES WHO ARE PREACHERS SHOULD PREACH THE WORD OF GOD IN SEASON AND OUT OF SEASON…….THAT IS THE INSTRUCTION.

    THERE IS NO INSTRUCTION ABOUT ADAPTING TO THE CULTURE- THAT IS MODERNISM WHICH HAS CREPT IN SINCE EARLY 1900’S. THE HEART OF MAN AND HIS TENDENCY TO SIN IN ONE OR ALL OF THE THREE WAYS AS SUMMARIZED IN I JOHN 2: 15-17 HAS NOT CHANGED, OVER TIME. THE HEART IS STILL DECIETFUL AND DESPERATELY WICKED.

    THE WORD HAS ADDRESSED ALL THE LIKELY SCENARIOS PERFECTLY.
    THOSE WHO WANT TO SIN WILL ALWAYS FIND ALL KINDS OF WAYS TO EXCUSE THEMSELVES

    IT IS STILL TRUE WHAT YOU MIGHT HAVE LEARNED AS A CHILD, I.E SIN WILL KEEP ME FROM THIS BOOK AND THIS BOOK WILL KEEP ME FROM SIN.

    JOSHUA 1:8 IS STILL TRUE
    ALSO Psalm 119:11 “Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.”

    Like

  • RE The main Bible verse that they use to support this idea is when Paul speaks of being all things to all men in order to save them. Does that mean that we must adopt the culture around us and everything we do must be changed? How should we understand this verse?

    ON Becoming All Things to All Men to Save Some ( 1 Corinthians 9:19–23)

    hERE IS A GOOD WORD ON THAT SUBJECT

    For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, that I might win the more. 20 And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law, though not being myself under the Law, that I might win those who are under the Law; 21 to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, that I might win those who are without law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some. 23 And I do all things for the sake of the gospel, that I may become a fellow partaker of it.
    Should We Imitate Paul’s Strategy?
    The first question to ask is whether this remarkable testimony of Paul is something we should imitate, or is this just something that apostles did—or that missionaries do who must adapt to other cultures?

    The answer comes from one of the clearest commentaries on these words that Paul himself wrote in the next chapter. Look at 1 Corinthians 10:31–11:1. Here the issue is exactly the same as in 9:19ff., namely, how to relate to Jews and Greeks so as to win them for Christ. He says,

    Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God. 32) Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; [in other words, adapt as much as you can in non-sinful ways] 33) just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of the many, that they may be saved. [That’s the same as 9:22, “I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some.” Then comes the answer to our question, in 11:1.] Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ.

    So that answer is: No, this is not a specifically apostolic or missionary way of life. It is something that he meant for all the Corinthian believers to imitate. He was imitating Christ, and he wants us to imitate him. So hear this message this morning a Word from God for you particularly and not just for someone else. Ask how you, in your sphere of life, can use your freedom the way Paul and Jesus did, if by any means you might save some.

    What Is Paul’s Aim?
    Now the second question to ask in this text is what Paul’s aim is. Why has he made himself a slave to all? Why is he becoming “as a Jew” to the Jews? Why did he make himself as a “lawless one” to the lawless, and weak to the weak? Which is the same now as asking, Why should we?

    It’s a tremendously important question. Paul is telling us to live and act in ways that are different from the way we would act if we didn’t share his aim in life. So it makes a big difference if we have the same aim Paul does here. What was his aim?

    To Win Others

    Five times he says that his aim is to win people. Verse 19: “that I might win the more.” Verse 20: ” that I might win the Jews . . . that I might win those under the law.” Verse 21: “That I might win those who are without law.” Verse 22: “That I might win the weak.”

    To Save Others

    So five times he says that his aim in adapting to the way people live is to win them. Then at the end of verse 22 in his summary statement he says, “I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some.” So he says his aim differently here. Five times it was “to win” people; and now it is “to save” people.

    To Be a Partaker of the Benefits of the Gospel

    Then in verse 23 he gives one last aim: “And I do all things for the sake of the gospel, that I may become a fellow partaker of it.” I believe this means exactly what R.H. Lenski says it means. Paul is saying, “If I omit this concern of love for others, although through my work, devoid of such love, many others may be saved, yet I myself would not be saved.” In other words, Paul knew that his faith in Christ would be utterly inauthentic and false, if he abandoned the pattern of life set by Jesus and no longer cared for other people.

    So Paul tells us his aim in three ways:

    to win others;
    to save others;
    to be partaker in the benefits of the gospel himself.
    Now what does this mean? Win others for what? Save others from what? Partake in what benefits of the gospel?

    Saved from the Wrath of God

    The most straightforward answer is given in Romans 5:9: “Having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath [of God] through Him.” Of all Paul’s uses of the word “save” in his letters this is the one place where he tells us explicitly what we are saved from. When we put our trust in Christ, we are saved from “the wrath of God.”

    So that is the aim of Paul in becoming all things to all people. Verse 22: “I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some”—from the wrath of God. The gospel is the good news that God has made a way to save us from his own wrath. In 1 Thessalonians 1:10 Paul says that “Jesus delivers us [=saves us] from the wrath to come.”

    Partaker of Eternal Life

    That’s what Paul seeks to save people from, when he adapts to their way of life. But now what does he win them for? Or: what benefits of the gospel does Paul hope to share in when he is saved from the wrath of God?

    Jesus tells us the alternative to the wrath of God. In John 3:36 he says, “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” The alternative to the wrath of God abiding on us is eternal life. This is what Paul wins people for. This is what he wants to be a fellow partaker of.

    So now we know our goal and aim. Our aim, like Paul’s is to save people from the wrath of God and to win them for eternal life; and in loving people like this we prove the reality of our own faith and confirm our participation in the gospel.

    Like

  • Living Tribute to:
    Mia Amor Mottley EGH, OR, QC & Prime Minister of Barbados.

    And now the end is near
    And so I face that final curtain
    My friend I’ll make it clear
    I’ll state my case, of which I’m certain
    I’ve lived a life that’s full
    I traveled each and every highway
    And more, much more
    I did it, I did it my way
    … Regrets, I’ve had a few
    But then again too few to mention
    I did what I had to do
    I saw it through without exemption
    I planned each charted course
    Each careful step along the byway
    And more, much, much more
    I did it, I did it my way
    … Yes, there were times I’m sure you knew
    When I bit off more than I could chew
    But through it all, when there was doubt
    I ate it up and spit it out
    I faced it all and I stood tall and did it my way
    … For what is a man, what has he got?
    If not himself then he has naught
    Not to say the things that he truly feels
    And not the words of someone who kneels
    Let the record shows I took all the blows and did it my way.

    She is truly destined for the Norwegian Nobel Committee selection.

    Like

  • Let the unyielding then wrangle and quarrel about earthly and temporal things, the meek are blessed, for they shall inherit the earth, and not be rooted out of it; that earth of which it is said in the Psalms, Thy lot is in the land of the living, (Ps. 142:5.) meaning the fixedness of a perpetual inheritance, in which the soul that hath good dispositions rests as in its own place, as the body does in an earthly possession, it is fed by its own food, as the body by the earth; such is the rest and the life of the saints.

    Like

  • No change.

    London Bridge shored-up for bajan commuters. Business as usual 2022.

    Thanks to Mia.

    Like

  • One question remains: is the outspoken senator vaccinated at all or a follower of the no vaxx cult?

    If the outspoken senator is unvaccinated, the police must in any case deny him access to the Senate in future. Anyone who is unvaccinated is a danger to the people and the state.

    Like

  • Two most dangerous and deadly cults on earth religious and political,,,neither of them ever end well.

    Like

  • TronOctober 25, 2021 6:10 AM

    One question remains: is the outspoken senator vaccinated at all or a follower of the no vaxx cult?

    If the outspoken senator is unvaccinated, the police must in any case deny him access to the Senate in future. Anyone who is unvaccinated is a danger to the people and the state

    Xxxxxxx

    Watch out the long arm of the govt yardfowls have plans to throw unvaccinated people in jail
    But the upside would be free meal and housing
    The downside at vaccinated people like tron expense by use of taxes
    The only thing the unvaccinated have to fear are people like Tron who are using the communist tactics to put people in jail that opposed govt policies

    Like