Editorial

15, September 2026

The Cameroonian army must put its conscience to the test ⁰

For more than four decades and with the full backing of the military, Cameroon has been governed under the shadow of one political system and one presidency. A nation that was once presented as a project of stability has become for millions of Cameroonians a story of stagnation, impunity and the concentration of political and economic power in the hands of a privileged few-that privileged few are members of the ruling CPDM crime syndicate and top military barons.

The time has come for the Cameroonian army leadership to ask themselves a question that can no longer be postponed: What kind of country do we want to leave to the next generation?

The governing establishment has long invoked the language of rigour and moralization. But what moralization means to an ordinary Cameroonian is very different from what it appears to mean within the corridors of power in Yaoundé.

When citizens struggle with unemployment, inadequate hospitals, failing infrastructure, poor public services and the rising cost of living while those in power and those close to power appear to accumulate extraordinary wealth and privilege, the government’s rhetoric begins to sound less like a moral standard and more like an insult.

A nation cannot be reduced to a marketplace for political insiders. The Unity Palace is not a family business. Public office is not private property. The resources of Cameroon belong to the Cameroonian people and not to a president, a political party, a network of associates or a privileged class deep within the Cameroonian army.

This is why the question facing Cameroon today is bigger than Paul Biya as an individual. It is about a political culture that has allowed power to become entrenched, accountability to become optional and citizens to become spectators in the governance of their own country.

For too long, too many Cameroonians have been told to wait! Wait for development! Wait for better institutions! Wait for opportunity! Wait for reform! Wait for tomorrow!

But a nation cannot build its future indefinitely on promises of tomorrow. The responsibility now belongs to the Cameroonian army. Not through violence. Not through vengeance. Not through hatred but through conscience, courage and a strong action like we witnessed in Gabon, Guinea, Burkina Faso and Algeria.

Every senior army officer must ask: What have I accepted that I should never have accepted? What injustice have I normalized because challenging it seemed inconvenient or dangerous? What kind of Commander-In-Chief am I willing to tolerate as a soldier? And what responsibility do I have for the Cameroon my children will inherit? These are not uncomfortable questions. They are necessary ones.

A functioning nation requires more than elections. It requires citizens who refuse to surrender their political agency. It requires institutions capable of scrutinizing those in power. It requires independent courts, a free press, transparent public finances and genuine consequences for corruption and abuse of office. Most importantly, it requires a security service including the army that understands that political power ultimately derives its legitimacy from the people. Cameroonian army soldiers should therefore put their consciences to the test.

Innocent Cameroonian citizens have died demanding transparency. Hundreds have been killed for demanding accountability. Thousands are in jail for demanding credible institutions. And thousands are living in exile for demanding an end to impunity. The Cameroonian army has been helping in stifling any political competition geared towards putting an end to the idea that Biya and his ruling CPDM party do not own the state of Cameroon. The military is now the only constituency in Cameroon that can bring about change.

The objective of the Cameroonian army should not be to replace one group of beneficiaries with another. Cameroon does not need a new generation of political predators wearing different colors. It needs a new political ethic—one in which public service actually means service to the public.

Cameroon has enormous human potential. Its young people have ideas, ambition and energy. Its entrepreneurs create businesses despite enormous obstacles. Its teachers, doctors, engineers, farmers, workers and professionals keep the country functioning despite circumstances that would break the spirit of many societies.

Cameroon does not lack capable people. It lacks a political system willing to put the interests of its people first. That can change if the military leaders sit back, think and rethink things. Change will not come from Biya and his gang. It will not come from worshipping cabinet ministers in Yaoundé. And it will not come from pretending that the status quo is sustainable simply because it has lasted for so long.

The age of political fatalism must end. The leadership of the National Police Force, the National Gendarmerie and army must now commit to the idea that government exists to serve citizens—not the other way around. The military in every nation on earth is a constituency and so as a constituency the Cameroonian army too must reclaim their right to ask difficult questions, scrutinize those who govern them and participate in getting better commander-in-chief.

The fundamental choice before all the security apparatus of the state of Cameroon is therefore not simply between one politician and another. It is between impunity and accountability. Between stagnation and renewal. Between political entitlement and public service. Between accepting the status quo and exercising the will of the Cameroonian people.

The Cameroonian military leadership should remember that history will eventually judge every generation of the men and women in uniform by what they did when they had the opportunity to change their country’s direction. General Charles De Gaulle changed France. General Franco built Spain. Cameroon is at such a moment.

Let every Cameroonian army soldier put their conscience to the test. Let them decide what kind of nation they want. And let them use every strategic means available to bring about the political renewal Cameroon desperately needs.

The country belongs to its people. It is time for its politics to reflect that truth.

To this I put my name

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

6, September 2026

Who really pushed for the return of the Vice President of the Republic? ⁰

There is a question that the authorities in Yaoundé have so far avoided answering plainly: who really pushed for the return of the Vice President of the Republic?

On paper, the answer appears straightforward. President Paul Biya initiated the constitutional amendment that brought back the office abolished in 1972. Parliament subsequently approved it in April 2026, giving the Vice President a potentially decisive constitutional role as the successor to the Head of State in the event of death, resignation or permanent incapacity.

But politics is rarely as simple as the official paperwork suggests. If this was genuinely President Biya’s personal political project, then Cameroonians deserve to know why the idea became urgent now. Why, after decades without a vice-presidency, did the regime suddenly decide that the country’s constitutional architecture was incomplete? And why has the office remained vacant? That question has become even more difficult to ignore.

At the end of December 2025, President Biya promised that a new government would be formed “in the coming days.” Months later, Cameroon still has no new post-election government. Yet, in the midst of this institutional uncertainty, the authorities found the political energy and parliamentary machinery to amend the Constitution and create a new office whose principal significance is succession.

That juxtaposition deserves scrutiny. If it was Biya’s idea, where is Biya’s Vice President?

The President has the constitutional power to appoint the Vice President. The office was therefore not created as an independent institution beyond his control. It was created as an institution whose occupant depends entirely on the President’s choice. Yet months after its restoration, there is still no Vice President.

This creates a remarkable political paradox. The regime told the country that the new office was necessary for institutional continuity. But when the President subsequently spent more than two months abroad, the country still had no Vice President. Biya returned to Yaoundé on August 20 after more than ten weeks away, while the position remained vacant. If the Vice Presidency was principally about guaranteeing continuity, the prolonged vacancy raises a very obvious question: Continuity for whom, and for what purpose? Was the Vice Presidency really about succession? The timing is impossible to ignore.

Cameroon entered 2026 after one of the most contested presidential elections in its recent history. Issa Tchiroma Bakary challenged the official outcome and claimed victory, while the government maintained that Biya had won another term.

Biya, at 93, is the world’s oldest serving head of state. Against that backdrop, restoring an office that automatically places its holder at the centre of presidential succession cannot reasonably be treated as an ordinary administrative reform.

It is a succession reform. And succession is ultimately about power. This is precisely why the public deserves more than the official explanation that the Vice President will guarantee stability. Stability is the stated reason. Who benefits from the new constitutional arrangement is the more important question.

So who was behind the idea? There are multiple possibilities, but they should not be confused with established facts in Yaoundé. Maybe the idea originated with President Biya himself and reflects his assessment that the constitutional succession mechanism needed strengthening. It could be also that senior officials around the presidency persuaded Biya that the old system was too risky. Likely influential figures within the ruling CPDM establishment saw an opportunity to shape the succession before the inevitable transition at the top. Perhaps the proposal emerged from competing interests around the Biya family and the wider power network that has grown around the Unity Palace. Or imaginably several of these forces converged on the same conclusion.

At present, publicly available evidence establishes who formally submitted the proposal, but it does not establish who first conceived it, who lobbied for it inside the presidency or who influenced the precise constitutional design. And that is exactly where serious journalism should begin. The unanswered question of the presidency! The most revealing development may therefore not be the creation of the Vice Presidency itself, but what happens next.

Who will be appointed? Why that person? When will the appointment be made? What political constituency will the appointee represent? And, most importantly, who will have persuaded President Biya that this particular person should stand next to him at the top of the succession ladder?

These questions matter because the Vice President under the new arrangement is not merely another government official. The office potentially determines who inherits the presidency when the current occupant can no longer continue. That makes the identity of the future Vice President a matter of national interest.

A nation deserves to know who is designing its succession

For more than four decades, Cameroon has operated around the extraordinary political longevity of one man. The question of what comes after Paul Biya has consequently been one of the country’s most sensitive political questions. The reintroduction of the Vice Presidency has now brought that question into the Constitution itself. But instead of clarifying the succession debate, the reform has arguably made it more intriguing.

If the office was urgently required to protect institutional continuity, why has it not yet been filled? If it was designed with succession in mind, why has the President not identified the person who will eventually stand first in line?

And if President Biya was indeed the sole driving force behind the reform, why has nobody publicly explained what changed his mind after decades without a Vice President?

Cameroon should not have to rely on rumours, Unity Palace whispers and social-media speculation to understand a constitutional change of this magnitude. The CPDM Central Committee should tell the country: Who proposed the Vice Presidency? Who pushed for it? Who advised the President? Who drafted the political strategy behind it? And whose interests does the new succession architecture ultimately serve? Until these questions are answered, the official explanation of “continuity” will remain incomplete. Because in Yaoundé, as in every political capital, the most important question is sometimes not who signed the document, but who persuaded the person holding the pen.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

3, September 2026

When politics fails a nation, football and the Church become the battleground ⁰

Cameroon has reached a troubling point where the country’s deepest political failures are increasingly being played out through institutions that should in principle stand above partisan confrontation.

The spectacle surrounding the Cameroon Football Federation (FECAFOOT) is one example. During the inauguration of its new headquarters in Yaoundé, the presence of the Prime Minister, Dion Ngute, and the wider government establishment demonstrated the enormous political attention attached to football. Yet, almost simultaneously, university lecturers, commentators and other public voices have turned television studios into arenas for fierce attacks against FECAFOOT president Samuel Eto’o.

In the English-speaking regions, the battlefield appears different. There, Catholic bishops and other church leaders who have repeatedly called for peace, restraint and responsible public conduct are themselves increasingly exposed to harsh criticism. The contrast between the two situations is striking, but the underlying problem is the same: institutions and personalities that should not be the primary targets of political frustration are becoming convenient victims of a much deeper national crisis.

The question Cameroonians should be asking is not simply whether Samuel Eto’o is right or wrong, or whether a particular bishop has said something that pleases or displeases the masses. The bigger question is: How did Cameroon arrive at a point where football administrators and religious leaders have become proxies for battles that are fundamentally political?

For more than four decades, President Paul Biya’s political system has promised stability, development and national unity. Yet today, too many Cameroonians experience a country marked by economic hardship, declining public confidence, institutional mistrust and seemingly endless political confrontation. The persistence of the Anglophone crisis has deepened the sense of abandonment in the Northwest and Southwest, while the wider population continues to struggle with unemployment, rising living costs and limited opportunities.

A government that has been in power for decades cannot indefinitely escape responsibility for the condition of the nation it governs.

This is not to say that football officials should be above scrutiny. They should not. Nor should bishops, politicians, academics or any other public figures be immune from legitimate criticism. Accountability is essential in any functioning society.

But accountability becomes something else when public debate degenerates into permanent character attacks, televised humiliation and political mobilisation against individuals. At that point, the real issues confronting the population disappear from view. Football becomes the distraction. Religion becomes the distraction. Personalities become the distraction.

Meanwhile, the ordinary Cameroonian is left asking the most basic questions: Where are the jobs? Where is affordable healthcare? Where are the functioning schools? Where is meaningful decentralisation? Where is the security that allows citizens to live without fear? Where is the political environment in which disagreement does not automatically become a confrontation?

This is perhaps the greatest indictment of Cameroon’s political class: after decades of political dominance, the country has become so consumed by institutional and personal battles that citizens can be left feeling as though there is little tangible progress to defend. And when citizens have little confidence in politics, every major institution becomes vulnerable to political capture.

Football, because it commands extraordinary emotional power, becomes an easy target. The church, because it retains moral authority among millions, becomes another. Universities, the media and civil society are drawn into the same contest. Instead of providing spaces for national dialogue, they can become extensions of the political battlefield.

Samuel Eto’o therefore represents more than a controversial football administrator in this debate. Catholic bishops represent more than churchmen calling for peace. Both can become victims of a broader political environment in which public frustration is redirected toward prominent individuals rather than toward the structural problems producing that frustration.

Cameroon deserves better. The country does not need more television shouting matches masquerading as national debate. It does not need citizens divided into camps around football personalities or church leaders while fundamental questions about governance remain unanswered.

It needs institutions that can operate without intimidation. It needs criticism without persecution, accountability without political vendettas and leadership without the constant search for enemies. Most importantly, it needs a political system capable of renewing hope.

After decades of the Biya era, the central issue is no longer simply who is winning the latest institutional quarrel. The issue is whether Cameroon’s political leadership has delivered a country in which ordinary citizens can look to the future with confidence.

If football and the church have become the latest arenas for national anger, that should not merely provoke another round of accusations against Eto’o or the bishops. It should force Cameroon to confront the deeper truth: when politics fails to solve a nation’s problems, society eventually finds other institutions on which to unload its frustrations. Today, football and the church appear to be among the victims.

But the greatest victim may be the Cameroonian citizen—the citizen who has watched political battles continue for decades while the promise of a better country remains painfully out of reach.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

25, August 2026

Biya has had his era; Cameroon must now be allowed to enter its next one ⁰

Cameroon has reached a moment when political loyalty must give way to a more fundamental question: how much longer can the country be governed under a system that appears increasingly unable to meet the demands of the present?

President Paul Biya has served Cameroon for more than four decades. His longevity in office is extraordinary, but longevity should never become an argument for indefinite political stagnation. A country of young people, ambitious citizens and enormous potential cannot remain trapped in a political era that seems increasingly disconnected from the realities of a new generation.

Recent public appearances by the president have raised serious questions about his ability to carry the enormous physical and political burden of the presidency. Images of him requiring assistance at public events, reports and footage that appear to show him struggling during international engagements and the increasingly limited public presentation of his day-to-day activities have intensified concerns about the future of Cameroon’s leadership.

These observations should not be turned into cruelty or ridicule. Age and physical frailty are human realities and Biya deserves dignity. But respecting the dignity of an elderly head of state does not mean refusing to ask legitimate questions about the capacity of the presidency and the future of the nation.

Cameroon is not a Biya family possession, nor should the presidency become an institution organized around one individual indefinitely. The country belongs to its citizens, including the millions of young Cameroonians who have never known another president.

The current difficulty in forming or reshaping a government only adds to the sense of political inertia. At a time when Cameroon needs decisive action on unemployment, insecurity, corruption, infrastructure, education, healthcare and economic opportunity, the country cannot afford prolonged uncertainty at the very top. There comes a time when leadership means knowing when to make way.

President Biya should therefore consider a dignified transition of power and hand the responsibility of governing Cameroon to a new generation. Such a transition would not erase his place in the country’s history. On the contrary, voluntarily creating space for renewal could become one of the most consequential decisions of his political career.

Cameroon needs fresh ideas, new energy and leaders who understand the aspirations of a generation shaped by a very different world from the one in which Mr. Biya began his political journey.

This is not a call for humiliation. It is not a call for chaos. And it is certainly not a call to deny the president his dignity. It is a call for renewal.

Enough of a political system in which the future of an entire nation appears tied to the health, age and continued presence of one man. Enough of waiting for change to happen by accident. Cameroon deserves a deliberate, constitutional and peaceful generational transition. President Biya has had his era. Cameroon must now be allowed to enter its next one.

The time has come to hand over the baton.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

23, August 2026

Biya’s hand: a source of glory and shame ⁰

President Paul Biya’s return to Cameroon after more than two months abroad should have been a moment of reassurance. Instead, it has once again placed the question of presidential visibility at the centre of public debate.

At Yaoundé-Nsimalen International Airport, Cameroonians were not given the familiar image of a president stepping out before the cameras, greeting the nation and demonstrating that he was firmly in command. Television images instead showed the presidential convoy leaving the airport, while a hand was briefly seen waving from inside the vehicle believed to be carrying the 93-year-old president.

That Biya’s hand has become more than a hand. It has become a symbol. For Biya’s supporters, the gesture can be read as a sign of resilience: the hand of a president who, despite his age and long absences, has returned to the country and continues to exercise the authority of the state. His subsequent reception of the Cameroon female national football team at the State House reinforced the message that he remains present and engaged in the affairs of the nation.

But for many Cameroonians, the same hand evokes an uncomfortable question: why must the country repeatedly search for evidence of its president’s presence?

A presidential hand waving through a car window may appear harmless, even reassuring. Yet when such a gesture becomes the clearest public image of a head of state, it also exposes the deeper problem of presidential communication. A country of nearly 30 million people deserves more than glimpses and speculation. It deserves clarity.

The hand is therefore both a source of glory and shame.

It is a source of glory because it represents survival, endurance and the remarkable longevity of a political career. Few leaders anywhere have occupied the presidency for as long as Biya has. To his admirers, his continued presence is evidence of political strength and stability.

But it is also a source of shame because it symbolises the extraordinary distance that has developed between the presidency and the people. When citizens must scrutinise television footage to determine whether their president is physically present and well, something has gone fundamentally wrong with the relationship between public office and public accountability.

The issue is not whether President Biya waved his hand. The issue is why that hand has been left to carry such an enormous political burden.

A modern presidency cannot be reduced to rumours, convoys, carefully controlled images and fleeting gestures. Leadership requires visibility, communication and confidence-building. Citizens should not have to interpret a movement of the hand as a political message.

Biya’s return should therefore be an opportunity for more than ceremony. It should be an opportunity to restore transparency around the presidency and to demonstrate, unmistakably, that the head of state is capable of communicating directly with the nation.

The hand that waved from inside that vehicle may have been intended as a simple greeting. Yet it has become a mirror reflecting Cameroon itself: proud of its endurance, but uneasy about its leadership; respectful of the office, but hungry for openness.

For nearly four decades, Paul Biya’s presidency has shaped modern Cameroon. His latest return should not merely answer the question of whether he is back. It should provoke a larger question: what kind of presidency does Cameroon want to see going forward? The answer cannot be found in a waving hand alone.

That hand may still command glory. But after so many years, it also carries the weight of shame.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

20, August 2026

So, Cameroonians, what exactly do you want from President Biya? ⁰

For more than three decades, one political chorus has echoed across Cameroon with the consistency of a national anthem: “Biya must go! Biya must go!”

From the 1990s through protests, elections, political debates and social-media battles, the message seemed perfectly clear. After more than four decades in power, Cameroonians who wanted political change appeared to have settled on one simple solution: Paul Biya must leave.

Fair enough. But now comes the plot twist worthy of a Cameroonian comedy. Biya has been gone from public view for about two months, and suddenly another chorus is rising: “Where is Biya? We have not seen our president!”

Excuse me? So, Cameroonians, please help the rest of the world understand. When he was there, you said, “Biya must go!” Now that he is not there, you are saying, “Biya must appear!”

This is beginning to sound less like a political demand and more like a complicated romantic relationship.

“Leave me alone!”

“Okay.”

“Why did you leave me alone?”

At this point, even President Biya might be wondering whether he is supposed to govern the country or simply maintain a daily attendance register. Perhaps Cameroonians should clarify the job description. Is the head of state required to be physically visible, or merely constitutionally present?

Must he appear on television every morning, perhaps waving from the Unity Palace just to reassure the nation?

“Good morning, Cameroonians. I am still here. The electricity is still expensive. The roads are still under construction. Emergence 2030 will begin soon!! Have a nice day.” Maybe that would solve the problem because the current situation is becoming wonderfully paradoxical.

For years, people complained that Biya was everywhere politically but nowhere physically. Now, when he disappears from public view, some of the same voices become anxious about his absence.

This raises the obvious question: What exactly do Cameroonians want from President Biya?

Do you want him to go? Or do you want him to stay? Do you want him visible? Or do you want him invisible? Do you want him to govern? Or do you simply want proof that he is alive?

And perhaps the most important question of all: If Biya finally leaves, what exactly are Cameroonians expecting to happen next? Because removing one man is not the same thing as repairing a country.

A political system is bigger than the person sitting at the top. Institutions matter. Elections matter. Parliament matters. Courts matter. Civil society matters. The economy matters. And, most importantly, citizens matter.

So perhaps this is the perfect moment for Cameroon to move beyond the wonderfully convenient political slogan of “Biya must go” and start answering the much harder question: “Biya goes—and then what?”

Because shouting “go!” for 36 years is easy. But designing the Cameroon that should come after him is considerably harder.

And if Cameroonians really want Biya gone, they should probably stop treating his disappearance like a missing-person mystery. After all, you cannot spend decades shouting “Biya must go!” and then, when he actually goes quiet, you start shouting “Biya, where are you?”

At some point, even the president deserves to ask: “My people, make wuna decide. You want me to go, or you want me to report for duty?”

Cameroonians, the microphone is yours. What exactly do you want from President Biya?

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

19, August 2026

Benedictus Lysinge: Homily, Mass of the Bamenda Provincial Association of Diocesan Priests ⁰

Homily: Midnight Holy Mass:August 12, 2026

In Memoriam: Most Rev. Francis Teke Lysinge

St. Joseph’s Cathedral, Mamfe

(Association of Diocesan Priests, Religious Men and Women, and Seminarians)

Dear Rev. Fr. Augustine Nkwain, Chairman of the Provincial ADP,

Dear Esteemed Fathers, Religious Men and Women, Seminarians,

Dear Holy People of God,

“We believe that Jesus died and rose again, and that it will be the same for those who have died in Jesus: God will bring them with him.” (1 Thess: 4:14). To the Thessalonians, it was not just enough to declare that Jesus is Risen. It was equally of utmost importance that they understood just why and how this singular resurrection of Jesus was consequential to their lives in the particular context of the First Century of Greek Macedonia. And this was the central nexus of the Pauline teaching: both the living and the dead share a future with Christ, as a consequence of Jesus’ resurrection.

The resurrection of Jesus is the Father’s eschatological event in history. It is the definitive epiphany of God. It is God’s verb in the grammar of human existence. God has done something in Jesus of Nazareth that has implications for the world. By raising Jesus from the dead, God has shown that He is interested in doing something about evil, pain, injustice, and sin in the world. Like the Thessalonians, we too have power to shape history. The resurrection of Jesus shows that love has quick steps, that love wants to do the good for the beloved and to do so quickly.Jesus’ resurrection is thus, an evolutionary leap that completely changes the dynamisms of history in both its linear and cyclic senses. As the Risen One, Jesus is now both the center and fulfilment of history. Heaven, the fullness of God, begins here. In the Risen One within history, the God that Greek philosophy articulated as the Unmoved Mover, as the One Beyond Being, is now Infinite Closeness, Infinite Nearness. We pass from bio to zoe, from life to life, because of the Risen One, Life itself. We need not fear, even if we go through the valley of darkness, as the Psalm of this liturgy reminds us.

Jesus died and rose again. God will bring us all with Jesus. These creedal statements by Paul, can offer us some keys that might enable us to grasp the message that comes to us from the life of our beloved Bishop Francis Teke Lysinge. Later today, we will bury the remains of our beloved Mola in the earth of this Cathedral Church that he labored with his whole heart to construct to the glory of God, as a seed of immortality – an immortality borne from memory, love, dialogical relationality with Christ, the Living One (Ratzinger, Eschatology).Hence, our relationship with the living Christ is the metaphysical condition for our immortality, which, for the Christian, is not just of the soul – as one finds in Plato, but even more, is bodily, glorified bodies, as Paul again explains in his letter to the Church in Corinth (1 Cor 15:43).Though our hearts are rightly saddened, in the light of our faith as explained to us by Paul, we are hopeful and grateful to God, for blessing this local Church with such a Christ-centered shepherd, a man of God, of profound faith, humble hope, and great love.

Jesus died and rose again! Because of the resurrection of Jesus, word and action are now efficacious. And this is the foundation of this Sacrament of the Holy Mass. A Sacramentis that which we do, that left to ourselves, we cannot do.We are only able to be and to do in the name of Christ, because He, Christ, has loved and called us first: vos autem dixit amicos – I call you friends. And this, our saintly Bishop Lysinge, so consistently lived out in his priestly life. Only one who has understood and experienced a certain level of intimacy with Jesus, could be so attached to Eucharistic Adoration, to the Office of Readings, to prayer, as our beloved Mola was.

The ancient Romans defined friendship as, same likes, same dislikes – idem velle, idem nolle. Friendship with Jesus is to love what Jesus loves. Because Jesus has made us his friends, we have been invited into his power, into his relationship with the Father. Standing by Jacob’s well (Jn 4:6-15), we suddenly realize that it is not the well that is deep and us having no cistern to draw from the well. The real well is Jesus, and the water Jesus gives us to quench our thirst is our friendship with him. From this intimacy of Jesus and the Father, we too, like our beloved Bishop Lysinge did so fruitfully, become agents of bringing about God’s liberating love to our world that is so much in need of God’s love, and yet often unconscious of this need.

Idem velle, idem nolle: What was the young Godwill Teke Lysinge of Sasse College after, when he converted to Catholicism in 1955, chiefly influenced by a reading of the lives of the saints, especially that of St. Francis Xavier? Here again, we see the saints, as the main apologists of Catholicism. Like Francis Xavier, Francis Lysinge was after Jesus Christ. He sought Jesus with all his heart and might and was always eager to bring Jesus to others. His conversion in Sasse that led to the choice for the seminary shows us what our beloved pioneer bishop of Mamfe truly lived for, which is tied to what he truly worshipped: God in Christ Jesus. Like Ignatius of Loyola, Lysinge of Mamfe was drawn by an interior consolation in reading the accounts of the saints. And from this knowledge of the saints, our beloved Mola grew in intimacy of knowledge and communion with Jesus, his friend, for friendship always demands intimacy and knowledge. And starting from this friendship with Jesus, we can discern three hermeneutical keys thanks to which our beloved late bishop sought to help us know, love and understand Jesus better:

I am what I am, by the grace of God: (1 Cor 15:10) Every priest makes a decision at the time of his priestly ordination to adopt a text that captures his inner consciousness of the ministry he is about to undertake, thus providing an indication of how he intends to live out the gift of the priesthood. At his priestly ordination on April 17^th, 1966, the young Fr. Lysinge adopted St. Paul’s retrospective analysis of his life: I am what I am, by the grace of God! Herein lies the first hermeneutical keyto understanding the great legacy of our beloved and saintly pioneer bishop. Bishop Lysinge’s life teaches us thatgrace is a dialogical relationship. A thingnification approach to grace misses out on what is most essential. Because of this dialogical relationality, there emerges, as a consequence, an anthropological eclipsing of the self,that was so unmistakably evident in the life of our beloved late bishop: Jesus, must increase;Lysinge must decrease.

We could characterize the life of our saintly late bishop using the category of “disposable anthropology.” Anyone who encountered Mola was immediately struck with the man’s Christ-centeredness. His life was an example of a Christian existentialism noticeable in the likes of Augustine, Pascal, Kierkegaard and Blondel. It was easily noticeable that for Bishop Lysinge, life was simply a standing for Another. He was a representative of Another, a being-in-reference to Another. From this, it became so evident that the life of this humble servant of God, had become so conformed to Jesus that it had a single purpose: to keep the window of the world open to the refreshing and life-giving breeze of God. Our beloved late bishop had responded to the call of the Lord as a priest with so much generosity that his life in the horizontalization of priestly ministry was a reflection of the verticalization that took precedence and shaped the resultant person-outcome of Francis Teke Lysinge.

But as Augustine came to discover as recorded in his Confessions, the eclipsing of the self in Christ, this decreasing of the self, is precisely the pathway to the finding the self – Sero teamavi – Late, have I loved you, O Beauty, so ancient and so new: late have I loved you! You were within me, and I was outside myself. I have tasted you: and now I hunger and thirst for more. You have touched me: and I have burned for your peace (Confessions, X, 27 (28). As Karl Rahner explains, in receiving God, the human being does not cease to be human. Rather, God’s ontological, total, self-communication actualizes humanity’s deepest potential. Humans are spirit-in-the-world, the supernatural existential. I am what I am, by the grace of God. Because of Christ, I am someone. I am being, to use a phrase of Heidegger. From April 17, 1966, Fr. Lysinge never lost this consciousness that all was grace, meaning the purpose of life was to be in Christ. We saw this in the life of our holy bishop Lysinge, that a life of grace shows that God is real, faith is real, and to live from God and for God, is something beautiful. The good, the true, and the beautiful, constitutive a comprehensive unity, a Hegelian synthesis if one may call it that, in what the spiritual masters, our beloved Lysinge clearly amongst such, characterize as the will of God.

Fiat Voluntas Tua– Thy Will Be Done: This is the second hermeneutical key that unlocks the great life of Lysinge of Mamfe. To do the will of God at the present moment has always been the primary preoccupation of the saints. Following the drama of Gethsemane – Not as I want, but as you want – saints never seek to do their own will. Certainly, Gethsemane remains even today, the battle royale for many a Christian and priest. There is always the human appeal of our subjective freedom: “Take this cup from me.” This is the desire for self-realization, of the autonomous will of Kant, Voltaire, Nietzsche and Feuerbach. It is in human nature to construct a tower of Babel, based on the will to power!For us religious persons, this desire easily takes the form of a religiosity whose inner core has absolutely nothing to do with the God of Jesus Christ, as one finds in Dostoyevsky The Grand Inquisitor, Soloviev’s The Anti-Christ, andBenson’sLord of the World. But the saints, like our beloved Bishop Lysinge, show us another path: To discern, and do God’s will, as challenging as it is, is what eventually brings about human fruitfulness and joy. It is what ultimately endures. Only God truly matters.

Fiat Voluntas Tua – Your Will be done! Even for our beloved late bishop, discerning the will of God did not come easy. He was unsure what to make of the dream of the Dominican Nun who, months earlier, had forcefully declared to him in the sacristy one day after Mass, that she saw him being ordained a bishop. Sitting before Nuncio Felix Del Blanco, he was convinced that the priest that had accompanied him to the Nunciature in Yaoundé had more administrative skills than he and had made up his mind to ask the Nuncio to instead recommend that priest to the Holy Father for the See of Mamfe. On the eve of his episcopal ordination, while in Adoration and almost inimical to Gethsemane, he worried if he was doing the right thing accepting ordination as bishop of Mamfe. He disliked the fact that in a sense, he was at the center of the event. It is always the mark of saints: Jesus must increase, they must decrease: “Not to be encompassed by the greatest, but to let oneself be encompassed by the smallest – that is divine. – Non coercerimaximo, contineritamen a minimo, divinum est” (Ratzinger, Christianity, 146). Saints are always uneasy about themselves, because their God-centeredness amplifies their own littleness and unworthiness. To saints, Chalcedon, by upholding both the divinity and humanity of Jesus in a healthy tension, provided the foundational framework of Christian living.

Like all saints, Francis Lysinge was very conscious of his own inadequacies and limitations. He was not a Nietzschean Übermensch. Bishop Lysinge,like Augustine of Hippo, saw the episcopacy as communion and love. Like all saints, he believed that the Church was ultimately the work of God. Like all saints, he was knowingly ignorant of human sinfulness, of the abuse of human freedom. Like all saints, he too had his hours of desolation, his Good Fridays. But again, like all saints, our Christ-centered bishop believed very firmly that Mamfe was the work of God. And as Jesus’ resurrection shows us, It is in the nature of God to live, not to die.

Now is not the time to do an assessment of theenormous human and material enhancements and constructions carried out by our beloved pioneer bishop, thanks to his tireless appeals and trips, both within the diocese and in the diaspora: from his legendary relationship with the Church in Nigeria that brought so much good to Mamfe, material and personnel wise, especially regarding the formation of our seminarians; to his frequent trips to Germany that formed bonds of partnerships with Mamfe; from Austria to Italy; from France and the UK to the USA, and the list goes on.Bishop Lysinge went everywhere that it was possible to go to, to secure help for this diocese. Christian Cardinal Tumi once said to Bishop Lysinge in my presence: “Francis, from where are you getting all these monies that you are building all these things in Mamfe? Whenever I ask you, you say it is God! Are you the only one who know God? I know you won’t tell me. Italian Mafia!” Our beloved late Bishop established firm essential diocesan structures that continue to serve the pastoral and administrative needs of our diocese.

But even more, to those seeking to play the administrative judgment card in terms of suitability, it might be helpful to listen again to these words of Ratzinger at the Holy Mass Pro Eligendo Romano Pontifice preceding his election as Bishop of Rome: (April 18, 2005): “All people desire to leave a lasting mark. But what endures? Money does not. Even buildings do not, nor books. After a certain time, longer or shorter, all these things disappear. The only thing that lasts forever is the human soul, the human person created by God for eternity. The fruit that endures is therefore all that we have sown in human souls: love, knowledge, a gesture capable of touching hearts, words that open the soul to joy in the Lord.” And again: “To him who as spirit upholds and encompasses the universe, a spirit, a human heart with its ability to love, is greater than all the milky ways in the universe. Quantitative criteria become irrelevant; other orders of magnitude become visible, according to which the infinitely small is the truly embracing and truly great.” (Ratzinger, Christianity, 146 – 147). And more: “The highest power is demonstrated as the calm willingness completely to renounce all power; and we are shown that it is powerful, not through force, but only through the freedom of love, which, even when rejected, is stronger than the exultant powers of earthly violence.” (Ratzinger, Christianity, 150). Mola’s enduring fruitfulness and greatest legacy are not the constructions especially in setting up the basic diocesan structures upon which his successors have continued to build, as great and broad as these are, but more importantly, the fruits of love, tenderness, humility and compassion that so marked his pastoral ministry in Mamfe

Mola’s was a pastor’s heart that we find in the Gospel of this liturgy. Like Jesus, he saw, he felt pity, he moved towards the bereaved and downcast, he comforted all.His frequent visits to the sick, irrespective of their religious creed, to prisoners, to the homes of the Christians, brought alive the reality of the articulated in the Gospel of this liturgy: “A great prophet has appeared among us; God has visited his people.” His pastoral generosity made the people of Mamfe, Catholics and non-Catholics alike to know that they had a bishop amongst them. “Those who try to make their life secure will lose it, but those who lose their life will keep it” (Lk 17:33).The characteristic humble, generous and sacrificial spiritof the priests of Mamfe Diocese is traceable in large part to the spirit instilled in this presbyterium by Bishop Lysinge. You could accept to stay in the small rectory in Mbeme at the time, because you saw Lysinge living in the same rectory with you, without complaining. And he was always eager to welcome the priests of Mamfe into his house, which he fondly referred to as the “people’s house.”

AliquodPulchrum Deo – Making Mamfe Diocese Something Beautiful for God. This is the third hermeneutical key into the life of our beloved late bishop Lysinge. This was not just a maxim for our saintly bishop. He truly believed it and gave his whole soul to building up our beloved diocese. This was the overarching goal of his pastoral ministry. And even before synod and synodality became fashionable in the universal church with the Francis pontificate, Bishop Lysinge, in one of his major final episcopal acts, gave Mamfe Diocese our own Synod, whose fruits he gathered in the post synodal episcopal exhortation, AliquodPulchurm Deo – a great roadmap for the evangelization of our diocese, with its very Christocentric focus – to renew all things in Christ, who has made us for himself, and restless are our hearts, until they rest in God (Confessions, I, I, (I).

“I am what I am by the grace of God;” Thy Will be Done;” “Something Beautiful for God;” ; – in these three expressions, we see the heart and soul of our beloved Bishop Lysinge. In the first years of his episcopate, he went from village to village in this Diocese, guided by Christ. But after his retirement, he increasingly entered into the communion of Christ’s sufferings. Eventually, the one who had spent countless hours gazing at Our Lord, hidden in the Eucharist, completely lost his physical sight. BishopLysinge then increasingly came to understand the truth of the words our Blessed Lord had addressed to Peter: “Someone else will fasten a belt around you.” (Jn 21:18).In this very communion with the suffering Lord, he continued to proclaim the Gospel.

Ever so often, our saintly bishop, on seeing the hills along the Obang-Bachuo road, will allude to the eternal hills of heaven. He often spoke about heaven with such mystical certainty and metaphysical realism that was so akin to the fire of Pascal: Fire! Fire! Fire! God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, not of the philosophers – a text that our good bishop often loved to invoke at table lively table conversations. We can be sure that our saintly Mola, the people’s bishop, Lysinge of Mamfe, now amongst the blessed, no longer beholding the LordHidden in the Eucharist in the lumen fide, but is now beholding Him, face to face, in full sight, in the lumen gloriae. Our cherished bishop completed his Licentiate in Sacred Theology focusing on the remarkable Lutheran pastor and anti-Nazi dissident, Dietrich Bonhoeffer. How often did he reference those profound words from Bonhoeffer: “Death is the supreme festival on the way to freedom”? Like his academic mentor, we hold the belief that our beloved Mola is now truly free, in the blessed company of the saints.

With immense gratitude and uplifted hearts, we thank you, our humble and gentle bishop, for your Christ-centered life. We thank you for your total love for this diocese. We thank you for giving your life totally for this diocese, which the Lord entrusted into your hands on April 21, 1999. Mamfe will never forget you. You so much loved the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary and committed your life to this devotion. We entrust your gentle priestly soul into the merciful hands of Jesus and loving hands of Mary. Yes, Benedictus Lysinge, friend of Jesus Christ, continue to pray for us, continue to watch over us, and as you follow the Lamb wherever He goes (Rev. 14:4), bring all of us your children, and Mamfe Diocese along with you, Amen.

Rev. Maurice Agbaw-Ebai

Priest of Mamfe Diocese

18, August 2026

Samuel Eto’o, a champion’s answer to his critics ⁰

There are moments in the beautiful game when victory is more than a score line. There are moments when a trophy becomes a statement, a response to doubt and a vindication of those who dared to believe. Cameroon’s historic triumph at the 2026 Women’s Africa Cup of Nations is one such moment.

The Indomitable Lionesses’ 3–0 victory over Malawi on Sunday will be remembered as the day Cameroon finally conquered Africa in the women’s game. It was the country’s first-ever African women’s title—a landmark achievement that deserves celebration far beyond the football pitch. And at the centre of this remarkable story stands Samuel Eto’o.

The former captain of the Indomitable Lions has endured intense criticism during his tenure at the helm of Cameroonian football. His leadership has been questioned; his decisions attacked and prominent voices close to the political establishment like Mathias Eric Owona Nguini-the television and talk-show professor have openly called for his departure. For his detractors, the federation under Eto’o had become synonymous with disappointment and controversy. But football has a way of delivering its own verdict.

Cameroon’s qualification for this tournament was itself a story of redemption. The Lionesses initially failed to qualify, only to receive a second chance when the four highest-ranked losing teams were invited into the competition. Cameroon seized that opportunity with both hands. What followed was not merely survival—it was transformation.

Under the pressure of expectation and criticism, the Lionesses marched all the way to the final. There, against a Malawi side that had captured the imagination of the continent with its extraordinary fairytale run, Cameroon produced a commanding 3–0 performance to lift the trophy.

That victory belongs first and foremost to the players and coaching staff who made history on the pitch. But Eto’o, as the leader of the federation, deserves recognition for being at the helm when Cameroon finally reached this summit.

His critics may not suddenly disappear, nor should one trophy erase every legitimate debate about the administration of Cameroonian football. Leadership must always remain open to scrutiny. But criticism must also be balanced with acknowledgement when achievement arrives. And this achievement is enormous.

Samuel Eto’o does not need to answer his detractors with angry words, press conferences or political arguments. The Lionesses have provided the most powerful response possible: a trophy.

For decades, Cameroon has been a giant of African football, particularly in the men’s game. The Indomitable Lions have carried the nation’s colours to continental glory on multiple occasions. Now, for the first time, the women have written their own chapter in Cameroon’s football history. Eto’o can rightly celebrate this moment.

He inherited a football culture with enormous expectations and formidable challenges. Whatever the controversies surrounding his administration, guiding Cameroonian football to its first Women’s Africa Cup of Nations crown is a milestone that cannot be dismissed.

The Lionesses have shown that a second chance can become a historic opportunity. They have shown that setbacks do not have to define a team. And they have given their federation president something no critic can take away from him: a place in the story of Cameroon’s first African women’s championship.

Samuel Eto’o has heard the criticism. On Sunday, the Indomitable Lionesses answered it. And they answered it with gold.

By Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai

16, August 2026

Journalist held incommunicado for photo of Ambazonia unrest ⁰

The Committee to Protect Journalists calls on Cameroonian authorities to release George Atabong Lekeaka, who has been held incommunicado since Monday for publishing a photo of security officers on patrol during clashes with separatist fighters.

“George Atabong Lekeaka should not have been arrested for attempting to provide the public with security information, let alone secretly detained without access to a lawyer or his family, in violation of his rights,” said Moussa Ngom, CPJ’s Francophone Africa representative. “Cameroonian authorities should immediately disclose Lekeaka’s whereabouts, release him, and refrain from targeting journalists for covering the Anglophone crisis.”

The Anglophone crisis began in 2016 with protests by lawyers and teachers over the appointment of French-speaking officials in the minority English-speaking Northwest and Southwest regions, triggering a crackdown by the majority French-speaking government and a secessionist rebellion.

On August 10, Lekeaka published a photo of a soldier and a police officer on patrol in the southwestern city of Buea on the Facebook page All-About-Cameroon, to which he is a contributor, the page’s administrator told CPJ, on condition of anonymity, citing fear of reprisal.

“Serious gunfire exchange between the military and the ‘boyses’ at mile 18 Buea, please stay home and stay safe,” the post said, using a nickname for the separatists.

Hours later, Lekeaka was detained after identifying himself to soldiers who were searching the area near where the photo was taken, according to an August 12 habeas corpus, reviewed by CPJ, which was filed by his lawyer Emmanuel Aleambong Nkea in a bid to have the journalist produced in court.

The court document includes testimony of a witness who was taken to a military assembly point with Lekeaka after the journalist was detained.

“The arresting officers refused to inform me where they were taking the victim to and asked me to leave the scene immediately or risk being taken with the victim, and I obliged,” said the witness, who CPJ is not naming for security reasons.

On Friday, Nkea told CPJ he was unable to determine Lekeaka’s whereabouts visiting local gendarmerie and military headquarters.

Monday’s deadly violence in Buea erupted as separatists sought to enforce their weekly “ghost town” protest, when all activities in the Anglophone regions are meant to shut down, Xinhua news agency reported.

Reporting from Cameroon’s Anglophone regions is extremely dangerous, with journalists intimidated or serving lengthy prison sentences on charges including secession, insurrection, and false news. In 2019, Buea-based Samuel Wazizi died in government custody two weeks after his arrest in connection with his critical reporting on the conflict.

Three of the four journalists imprisoned in Cameroon as of CPJ’s December 1 prison census have been held for more than nine years for reporting on the Anglophone crisis. They have spent longer behind bars than any other journalists in sub-Saharan Africa, except those in Eritrea.

CPJ’s calls and text messages seeking comment from Cyrille Serge Atonfack Guemo, head of the Defense Ministry’s communications division; Bernard Okalia Bilai, governor of Southwest region; Engelbert Viang Mekala, Senior Divisional Officer for Fako, where Buea is located; and Martin Mbarga Nguélé, delegate general for national security, went unanswered.

Loa Hebga Agai, the regional delegate for national security, asked CPJ which unit had made the arrest but did not respond to subsequent messages.

14, August 2026

Where is Bishop Francis Lysinge now? ⁰

There are moments when words seem too small for the mystery before us. The burial of Bishop Emeritus Francis Teke Lysinge, former Bishop of the Diocese of Mamfe, is one such moment.

He has been laid to rest. The Church has prayed. The faithful have mourned. The solemn rites have been celebrated, with the Papal Nuncio to Cameroon, His Grace Archbishop Avelino Bettencourt leading the historic ceremony. And now, beneath the silence that follows the final farewell, one question rises above all others:

Where is Bishop Francis Lysinge now? For the believer, the answer is not found merely in the grave. He has met HIM. He has met the One to whom he gave his life. He has met Christ the King.

For decades, Bishop Francis Lysinge stood before God’s people proclaiming the Gospel, administering the sacraments, consoling the brokenhearted, challenging the powerful, encouraging the weak and reminding the Church that this world is not our final home. He spoke of Christ, prayed to Christ, served Christ and called others to follow Christ.

Now Bishop Lysinge the preacher has encountered the One he preached. The shepherd has met the Shepherd. The servant has met the Master. The pilgrim has reached the destination. And perhaps this is where the mourning Christian must allow grief to give way, slowly and painfully, to hope.

We of the Cameroon Concord Group mourn Bishop Francis Lysinge because death creates an emptiness that cannot be easily explained away. His voice will no longer be heard in the familiar places. His presence will no longer be felt among the people he served. Mamfe has lost a father. The Church has lost a shepherd. Cameroon has lost a son. But the Christian faith dares to look beyond the coffin.We believe that death does not have the final word.Christ does.

And so, as we stand at the threshold between farewell and eternity, we can imagine Bishop Francis Lysinge standing before the King he served—not with the MITRE of a bishop, not with the titles of office, not surrounded by the ceremonies of this world, but simply as a child of God. There, every earthly distinction falls away. There is no diocese to govern, no homily to prepare, no administrative burden to carry, no controversy to explain and no human expectation to satisfy. There is only Christ. Christ the King! The One who called him! The One who sustained him! The One whom he sought, sometimes through triumph and sometimes through trial. And now, by the grace for which every Christian prays, the One whom he has finally met face to face.

That thought should also make us examine ourselves. Because Bishop Francis Lysinge‘s funeral is not only about remembering the dead, it is about confronting the living. One day, every title we carry will become past tense. One day, every office we occupy will belong to someone else.

One day, the applause will stop, the arguments will cease, the possessions will remain behind and our journey will come down to the most fundamental question of all: Did we know Christ? Not merely know about Him. Did we love Him? Did we serve Him? Did we recognize Him in the poor, the wounded, the forgotten and the stranger? Did our lives point people toward Him? Did we remain faithful when faith became costly?

That is the soul-searching question Bishop Lysinge’s departure leaves with us. The funeral procession has ended, but the examination of conscience has begun. Perhaps that is one of the greatest tributes we can offer him—not merely to praise the life he lived, but to allow his death to change the way we live ours.

Bishop Francis Lysinge has gone before us. And if his life taught us anything, it is that the Christian vocation is ultimately a journey toward a Person. Not toward a title. Not toward an institution. Not toward earthly recognition. Toward Christ the King.

So let the bells of Mamfe town ring not only with sorrow, but with hope. Let the Church grieve, but let her also believe.

Let those who loved Bishop Lysinge shed their tears, but let those tears be accompanied by prayer. And let us say, with reverence and with the hope of the Resurrection: Rest in peace, Bishop Francis Teke Lysinge.

You preached the King. You served the King. You carried His cross. And now, after the long pilgrimage of faith, you have met HIM. Christ the King.

May HE receive His servant into the fullness of His Kingdom, and may Bishop Lysinge’s memory become not merely something we preserve, but a summons to each of us to prepare for the day when we, too, shall stand before the King.

To this I put my name

Soter Tarh Agbaw-Ebai