BRICKS, BELIEFS, AND BROKEN TRUST: WHY THE NATIONAL CATHEDRAL DRAMA FEELS SO PERSONAL

Bricks, Beliefs, and Broken Trust: Why the National Cathedral Drama Feels So Personal

A few years ago, I was in a taxi in Accra, stuck in traffic near Ridge. The driver, an older man with gospel music playing softly in the background, suddenly pointed at a massive construction site and said, “That’s the National Cathedral. By the time they finish, it’ll be the pride of Africa.”

I nodded politely, but honestly, I didn’t know what to say. Because even then—when the project was still fresh and full of promise—something about it felt... complicated.

Now here we are, years later. The concrete’s barely set, the controversy is louder than ever, and former President Mahama just called for the board to be dissolved entirely. And, in response, the National Cathedral Board says they’re “disappointed.”

Disappointed. That word hit me.

Because I think a lot of Ghanaians feel that same emotion—but for completely different reasons.

Let’s be real. The National Cathedral was supposed to be a symbol of unity, faith, and national pride. A place where we could go, regardless of denomination, to reflect and connect. But somewhere along the way, the whole thing turned into a hotbed of mistrust, political back-and-forth, and well… missing money.

And now, when Mahama suggests it’s time to dissolve the board—probably out of frustration with how things have gone—the board claps back, more upset about the statement than about the chaos itself.

In my opinion (and hey, I might be wrong), this whole thing has stopped being about faith a long time ago. It’s more about power, ego, and saving face. The board says they’re working with integrity, but people are still asking: Where did the millions go? Why is construction still crawling? Why are pastors resigning quietly, one by one?

I've noticed that anytime something becomes too "political" in Ghana, the truth becomes slippery. And the National Cathedral has become one of those things. You say anything against it, you're called anti-Christian. You support it blindly, you're accused of ignoring corruption.

Honestly, it’s tiring. And confusing.

I don’t think Mahama’s suggestion was meant to mock religion. I think, like many of us, he’s just asking the hard questions: If this board hasn’t delivered, then why are they still in charge? That’s not blasphemy. That’s basic accountability.

But at the same time, I get why the board would be defensive. No one wants to be labeled a failure. Especially when the project you’re managing is tied to something as sensitive as national faith. Still, brushing off people’s concerns or hiding behind disappointment doesn’t fix anything. If anything, it just makes people more suspicious.

Look, I may not be a pastor or politician. I’m just someone who grew up believing that when we say something is for God, we should treat it with extra care. Not less. And if a project meant to honour God ends up dividing a nation, maybe—just maybe—it’s time to hit pause and ask: What went wrong?

So here's my question, and maybe it’s the one we should all be asking:

Is the National Cathedral still about worship and unity—or has it become just another monument to human pride?