One of the most contentious national debates of 2025 has been whether the church should be regulated. This column seeks to interrogate the matter one final time before the curtain falls on the year. Should the church in Eswatini answer only to God, or should it also be held accountable by the State?
Different crucial voices have asked whether the church should remain entirely self-governed, or if some form of oversight is necessary to protect the public from human failings within the church.
These questions have been at the centre of the national debate, shaking longstanding principles of faith, government, public safety and the authority of God. And even though these are difficult questions, Eswatini cannot afford to politicise the matter at the expense of seeking the right answers.
What is the Church?
The conversation about regulating the church should begin with this fundamental question: “What, in its truest sense, is the church?”
Some argue that it is simply another social institution—no different from any other association that must comply with national standards of accountability. Others insist that the church is not an institution at all, but a spiritual body instituted by God and therefore answerable only to Him.
If one turns to scripture, it is clear that the church is not portrayed as a building, a registration certificate, or a human organisation. It is described as “the body of Christ” in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians; “a chosen people and royal priesthood” in the words of Peter; and “the household of God” in Ephesians.
ALSO READ | Complacency is the new enemy
Yet, the church is made up of human beings who gather, organise, lead and administer local congregations. Wherever humans play leadership roles, structures of accountability become not only reasonable but necessary.
The Central Dilemma
Can a church that is both divine in purpose and human in leadership be subject to regulation by secular systems?
The Bible provides examples of earthly powers attempting to regulate worship—Nebuchadnezzar demanding worship of his golden image; Darius forbidding prayer; or the Sanhedrin ordering the apostles to cease preaching. In all these instances, believers resisted and proclaimed that they must obey God rather than men.
At the same time, scripture depicts God’s people living under earthly authorities, contributing to the well-being of society, maintaining order and respecting governance structures.
In Eswatini, the church plays an undeniably significant role in shaping society. It anchors communities, comforts the distressed, and provides moral and spiritual grounding. But, the church does not always operate in alignment with this noble mandate.
Some churches influence how families make health decisions, sometimes discouraging vital medical treatment in favour of purely spiritual remedies. Others sway educational choices, while some amass extraordinary financial power without transparency.
The Case for Regulation
Government intervention need not limit freedom of religion or “regulate God.” Rather, regulation ensures that those who claim to act on behalf of God do so ethically, responsibly and transparently.
Many leaders have exploited vulnerable members for financial gain, manipulated doctrine to silence survivors of abuse, or discouraged education and medical care under the guise of divine instruction. Commercialisation of faith—selling holy water, oils, mantles and other “miracle” items—has further complicated matters.
Thus, the State cannot remain passive when citizens’ health, finances, and rights are at stake. Heavy-handed legislation, however, is not the solution; balance is crucial.
Other nations, including Rwanda and Zambia, have implemented regulations requiring qualifications for pastors, licensing for churches, and financial accountability. The results are mixed, but accountability need not infringe upon religious freedom; it can strengthen it.
Finding the Balanced Middle Ground
Accountability should be viewed not as an adversary, but as a safeguard. Formal registration, audit trails, protocols for abuse, and minimum pastoral standards protect both the church and the public.
Eswatini’s Constitution already recognises faith, setting a precedent for responsible oversight. The real question is not if, but how regulation should occur—through legislation, policy frameworks, or self-regulation by a united, responsible church fraternity.
Author Contact:
-
Email: johnpires@live.com
-
Mobile: +268 7606 5993
-
WhatsApp: +268 7602 7758
