Divide or mobilize? Rixi Moncada’s gamble against the churches

Amidst an already divided political scene, the presidential contender of the ruling party in Honduras, Rixi Moncada, stirred further debate by directly challenging the influence of churches within the nation. Her remarks, voiced at a party gathering, elicited swift responses from both religious figureheads and the populace, who labeled her statements as an insult to the longstanding significance of religious entities in the public sphere of Honduras.

The incident contributes to a history of past conflicts between the governing party and multiple social groups, during an election period characterized by significant ideological splits and increasing concerns about the nature of political discussions.

Assertions at the heart of the discussion

During a speech broadcast on social media, Moncada said that churches “remain silent in the face of social injustices” and “are at the service of economic power.” The statements were interpreted as a direct challenge to the role of religious institutions in the Honduran political and social context.

These remarks were swiftly dismissed by leaders from various religious communities. Pastor Marco Tulio López, from the Council of Evangelical Churches, stated that “belief does not bow to political or financial authority.” He cautioned that “what truly brings a country down is animosity pretending to be fairness,” clearly alluding to the stance of the candidate from the governing party.

Within the context of the Catholic environment, Father Luis Javier Mejía, who serves as the representative for the clergy in the capital, voiced his unease regarding what he perceives as the manipulation of religious beliefs in political rhetoric. “The Church stands with the community. It has always been this way. However, we refuse to be utilized as a pawn in campaigns driven by ideology,” he stated.

Public responses and appeals for adherence to institutional protocols

The controversy not only mobilized religious leaders, but also spread strongly on social media, where multiple voices demanded respect for the right to freedom of worship and the role of churches as spaces for community cohesion and mediation in times of crisis.

Among the most widely shared opinions was that of a political analyst who, through social network X, argued: “When a candidate attacks the faith of the people, it reveals more about their intolerance than their proposal.”

Given the increasing societal pressure, the Episcopal Conference and the Evangelical Confraternity released statements urging mutual respect between religious groups and political entities. These messages highlight the necessity of preventing churches from becoming focal points for election strategies, especially when the populace is seeking solutions for the nation’s deep-rooted issues.

A political atmosphere characterized by conflict

The clash between the candidate of the ruling party and religious groups is occurring amid a backdrop of escalating aggressive speeches from leaders within the Libertad y Refundación (LIBRE) party, which assumed power in 2022. Political analysts suggest that these remarks are a component of a polarizing strategy intended to bolster the support of the ruling party’s core followers, potentially sacrificing engagement with other social groups.

This dynamic has coincided with growing citizen frustration over persistent structural problems such as poverty, unemployment, and insecurity. For some analysts, the emphasis on ideological or symbolic debates is diverting attention from the population’s priority agendas.

Pressure uncovers issues in management

The debate over the remarks made by Rixi Moncada highlights a wider conflict concerning the role of conventional establishments, like churches, in Honduras’ present political scene. By challenging their function as social intermediaries, the governing party may undermine areas that have traditionally helped in managing disputes and promoting discussion during crises.

In this situation, the episode emphasizes the obstacles confronting the voting process: guaranteeing that the public discussion remains centered on tangible proposals without harming the relationships between critical participants in institutional life. How these conflicts are handled will be crucial for maintaining democratic stability on the path to the elections.