{"id":3162,"date":"2026-11-05T17:18:24","date_gmt":"2026-11-05T17:18:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/?p=3162"},"modified":"2026-11-05T17:18:24","modified_gmt":"2026-11-05T17:18:24","slug":"the-pulpits-reckoning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/","title":{"rendered":"The Pulpit\u2019s Reckoning<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

There are moments in Pakistan\u2019s political life when a single sentence raises so much dust that the real question disappears from view. Parliamentary debate assumes the cadence of the public rally; disagreement hardens into accusation; and matters of national consequence are surrendered to personal grievance. Maulana Fazlur Rehman\u2019s controversial remarks concerning the state, and the forceful responses of Mohsin Naqvi and Khawaja Asif, have brought several fundamental questions into sharp relief. Where does the state end and the government begin? What responsibilities attend religious leadership in political life? How should those who have long occupied public office account for their stewardship? And how can the enforcement of law be protected from the suspicion of political reprisal?<\/p>\n

These questions cannot be answered merely by taking sides for or against an individual. They require the testimony of history, the scrutiny of fact and the exercise of moral judgement. The concern at the heart of the present political disquiet is understandable: leaders who have participated for decades in Pakistan\u2019s legislatures, institutions and governing arrangements bear a correspondingly greater obligation to speak of the state with restraint and responsibility. Yet this argument retains its force only so long as criticism remains within the bounds of inquiry, and accusation is not permitted to stand in place of proof. Newspaper accounts of the controversy that emerged in late October 2026 indicate that the Interior Minister strongly objected in the Senate to words attributed to the Maulana which he regarded as contemptuous of the state.<\/p>\n

The state is not another name for a minister, a party or a powerful individual. It is the larger framework of a people\u2019s common political existence: their national sovereignty, the continuity of their institutions, and the reciprocal rights and duties that bind them together. A government exercises authority within that framework and serves its allotted term; the state embodies a covenant between generations. To challenge a government\u2019s failings is therefore not the same as to disparage the state. When that distinction is effaced, rulers begin to conceal their shortcomings beneath the mantle of national dignity, while their opponents, carried away by political anger, risk wounding the common political life itself.<\/p>\n

If the Maulana\u2019s words do indeed amount to an affront to the state, a demand for clarification is justified. A leader possessed of religious learning and long parliamentary experience is expected, even in anger, to retain command of his language. Words are more than sound spoken by a person of influence, they may become a disposition in the public mind. Where a leader commands devotion, the responsibility that attaches to his speech is greater still.<\/p>\n

Respect for the state does not, however, extinguish the citizen\u2019s right to question. Having held public office does not render every subsequent criticism an act of ingratitude. Public office is no private estate bestowed by the state; it is a responsibility entrusted to its holder. The proper question is whether an objection rests upon reason or upon the loss of advantage, and whether the reply is grounded in law and performance or merely in the intimidating weight of office. Political maturity consists in preserving these distinctions.<\/p>\n

Religious political leadership must also be answerable to the moral standing it claims for itself. When a party invokes justice, integrity and an Islamic order, the public is entitled to seek some reflection of those principles in its internal affairs, its finances and its appointments. The expectation is hardly unreasonable. If the counsel delivered from the pulpit loses its meaning at the threshold of power, religious trust itself suffers the deepest injury.<\/p>\n

Prominent in public and parliamentary discussion is the charge that religion has been used for political advantage. No such accusation is established by rhetorical vehemence alone. Yet the questions beneath it remain substantial. Are the party\u2019s decisions governed by intelligible principles? Are the reasons for entering and abandoning alliances explained to the public? May party workers question their leaders? Is a credible account available of how financial resources are used?<\/p>\n

These standards should not be reserved for religious parties. Religious leadership nevertheless finds it more difficult to evade them, since it lays claim to moral guidance as well as political success. In Islamic political ethics, office is a trust. That trust is fulfilled not by securing it, but by accounting for its exercise. Wherever sacrifice becomes the worker\u2019s allotted portion while comfort remains the preserve of a few families, the demand for reform will inevitably arise.<\/p>\n

Nor has the nation forgotten the Maulana\u2019s bitter observation that \u201cour elders did not share in the sin of creating Pakistan\u201d. Historical inquiry requires a more discriminating judgement. The Deobandi scholarly tradition did not speak with one political voice on the questions of independence and Partition. Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani and the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind supported composite nationalism, whereas Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani supported the Muslim League and the creation of Pakistan. Usmani became a prominent leader of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, established in 1945. To consign the whole tradition to a single category of opposition to Pakistan is therefore to disregard its historical diversity.<\/p>\n

The advocates of composite nationalism envisaged a common political life for different religious communities within one territorial homeland. The ulema who supported Pakistan regarded a Muslim-majority state as the means of safeguarding Muslim political and collective interests. The consequences and limitations of either position remain open to debate. To compress that debate into easy verdicts of loyalty and treachery, however, is to evade the complexity of history.<\/p>\n

Once Pakistan had come into being, its citizens\u2019 responsibilities became part of a new national covenant. The pre-Partition opinions of a family\u2019s elders do not diminish the civic rights of later generations. Equally, past political opposition cannot furnish a present justification for disparaging the state. History confers an inheritance; it does not grant release from contemporary obligation. Respect for the past acquires substance only when the duties of the present are also discharged.<\/p>\n

An assessment of Maulana Fazlur Rehman\u2019s parliamentary responsibilities should not be confined to the Kashmir Committee. During Benazir Bhutto\u2019s second government, from 1993 to 1996, he also chaired the National Assembly\u2019s Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs. Any appraisal of his performance in that role requires the record of visits undertaken, their purposes, the composition of delegations, the expenditure incurred and the diplomatic results obtained. Every charge upon the public purse must be answerable to the public. The value of a journey is measured neither by the distance travelled nor by the number of meetings attended, but by the demonstrable service it renders to the national interest.<\/p>\n

The Maulana may reasonably be asked why, after such prolonged participation in Pakistan\u2019s political arrangements, his words should convey an impression of wholesale estrangement from the state. His leadership of the Pakistan Democratic Movement, his service as Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly, and his chairmanship of the Kashmir Committee for approximately a decade all testify to his extensive place in national politics. These offices are recalled not to demand gratitude, but to summon accountability. In the case of the Kashmir Committee especially, the nation is entitled to know what measurable contribution its resources, diplomatic opportunities and political influence made to advancing the Kashmiri cause. The measure of national service is not the length of tenure, but what that tenure accomplished.<\/p>\n

The political and administrative offices associated with members of the Maulana\u2019s family and close relations form a considerable list. Their wider political influence also invites scrutiny. The record includes the parliamentary participation of the Maulana and his son; Atta-ur-Rehman\u2019s membership of the Senate; Haji Ghulam Ali\u2019s service as Peshawar\u2019s district nazim and subsequently as governor; Zubair Ali\u2019s municipal leadership in Peshawar; and Lutf-ur-Rehman\u2019s tenure as Leader of the Opposition in the provincial assembly. The Maulana\u2019s sister-in-law, Shahida Akhtar Ali, served twice in the National Assembly; another sister-in-law, Nair Sultana, also served in that chamber; and a third, Rehana Ismail, twice held a seat in the provincial assembly. Such varied offices have, at different times, been held within the family circle. Yet the Maulana asks what the state has ever given him and has resorted to the insult of speaking of spitting upon it.<\/p>\n

The precise relationships and periods of service are matters of record. Kinship alone neither disqualifies a citizen from politics nor confers a permanent entitlement to preference. A leader\u2019s son, brother or close relative may possess both ability and public support. The failure begins where internal competition becomes ceremonial, advancement is closed to the ordinary worker, and proximity to the leadership becomes the principal credential for office. A party then comes to resemble a circle of familial influence rather than a common school of political participation. The underlying question is plain: how much does family connection weigh against a worker\u2019s ability and record of public service?<\/p>\n

In the matter of administrative influence, the central objection concerns the procedure by which Zia-ur-Rehman moved from an earlier technical post into the provincial administration and subsequently became a deputy commissioner. There is also an allegation that, while heading a tourism body, one of the Maulana\u2019s brothers obtained a government vehicle beyond his entitlement and failed to return it. A fair determination requires the appointment orders, the applicable rules, and the records authorising and recording the vehicle\u2019s return. If influence is shown to have secured a departure from the rules, neither political necessity nor religious standing can provide a shelter. Public office is a trust; to treat its facilities as a family entitlement is to violate the spirit of that trust.<\/p>\n

The remedy lies in a verifiable method of selection, rather than in personal taunts. The party should explain the principles by which candidates were chosen, priorities established for reserved seats, organisational offices distributed, and merit assessed in administrative appointments. Where the procedure is transparent, allegations are more readily answered; where it is concealed, suspicion takes root. The dignity of national politics requires that personal proximity should never take precedence over the public\u2019s rights.<\/p>\n

The Maulana is entitled to take pride in his association with the elders of Deoband. Any comparison, however, requires care in the treatment of both history and electoral evidence. The BJP\u2019s victory in Deoband\u2019s 2022 Assembly election, alongside Umair Madani\u2019s tally of 3,501 votes, exposed the political weakness of the Deoband grouping. The reference to a Muslim population of approximately seventy per cent, and the announcement attributed to Brijesh Singh concerning the renaming of Deoband, must also be borne in mind. Yet the difficulties faced by Muslims in another country cannot justify restrictions upon civil liberty in Pakistan. A better expression of attachment to one\u2019s country is to ensure that law, religious freedom and the right to dissent are more secure within it. An appeal for love of Pakistan carries greater force when accompanied by respect for its citizens. National belonging is weakened by rehearsals of favours bestowed and strengthened by justice. The more meaningful question is how far the leadership\u2019s conduct reflects an appreciation of the freedom of expression, representation and political influence available in Pakistan. That question, too, deserves an answer.<\/p>\n

A politics which proclaims its own indispensability to the formation of governments, whichever party practises it, eventually converts democratic partnership into a demonstration of personal power. The claim attributed to the Maulana\u2014that no government can be formed without him, and that any government formed without him cannot endure\u2014is commonly understood as an expression of such political self-assurance. Yet the worth of a national state does not depend upon any leader\u2019s participation in, or exclusion from, government. Oppose the government; scrutinise the decisions of powerful institutions; assert your rights with the full force of conviction. But keep both the object of criticism and its language clear. Appreciation of Pakistan\u2019s political freedoms and acknowledgement of its shortcomings can proceed together. Clarification of the words attributed to the Maulana is necessary precisely because personal resentment must not become contempt for the nation\u2019s common political existence.<\/p>\n

The criticism concerning parliamentary responsibilities for Kashmir carries particular emotional weight. This is a national question bound up with divided families, human rights and anxiety over the region\u2019s future. The value of an office devoted to it cannot be determined by honours received or photographs of meetings. The question is what those entrusted with responsibility made of the authority available to them.<\/p>\n

Fair accountability requires the record of committee meetings, recommendations, expenditure, foreign contacts and follow-up by the relevant ministries. Only then can it be established where useful work was undertaken, where authority was constrained and where responsibility went unfulfilled. A long tenure increases the obligation to account; duration alone is not evidence of financial corruption.<\/p>\n

Severe language has been used concerning the expenditure of the budget. Proper inquiry requires that financial irregularity be established through authenticated accounts, audit or the relevant legal proceedings. Unsubstantiated accusations of corruption may weaken the exposure of actual failures. The public needs an account more than it needs a slogan; and claims of national service find their true value in that account.<\/p>\n

The standard of accountability must therefore be uniform. Whether the office-holder is a religious leader or a representative of another party, the same questions should govern the use of public resources: under what authority, for what necessity and for how long? A question founded on principle cannot easily be dismissed as mere hostility.<\/p>\n

The same obligation of stewardship applies to the use of state resources for a sacred journey such as the Hajj, or for a stay abroad. If the personal expenses of an office-holder or travelling companions have been charged to the treasury under the description of an official delegation, diplomatic hospitality or national service, their authorisation, necessity and entitlement must be examined. The Qur\u2019an commands that trusts be restored to those entitled to them and forbids extravagance. The use of public money for personal comfort without entitlement is therefore contrary to Islamic stewardship. The application of that principle to any particular individual must nevertheless rest upon established facts. Religious standing affords no exemption from accountability; it imposes a greater duty of care. The sanctity of worship and the legitimacy of the means used to finance it are distinct moral questions. (Al-Nisa: 58; Al-A\u2018raf.)<\/p>\n

It should also be recalled that the incidents concerning hospitality during the Hajj, the entertainment of travelling companions and related travel facilities provided through the Pakistani embassy were, to my knowledge, reported in leading Pakistani newspapers; no denial has since come to light. The final determination of sums and payments must, however, rest upon the relevant accounts and diplomatic records. The ethical question remains: if expenses incurred for personal comfort were charged to the national treasury without entitlement, what justified them? Public money is a trust. Religious distinction does not lighten the obligation to account for it; it makes that obligation more exacting.<\/p>\n

The controversy surrounding the visit to Iran contains two separate questions: the right to inquire into the composition of a delegation, and the impropriety of presenting an unsubstantiated purpose as established fact. Asking why the Interior Minister accompanied a foreign visit may fall properly within parliamentary oversight. The government, for its part, should provide as clear an explanation as circumstances permit, allowing known facts to displace conjecture. Mohsin Naqvi stated that he had travelled to Iran on a special assignment from the Prime Minister and that the visit had not concerned a defence agreement. That is the government\u2019s explanation and should be recorded as such. Any leader possessing documentary evidence to the contrary may present it through the appropriate parliamentary procedure.<\/p>\n

The sensitivity of foreign relations calls for caution in speculation, but sensitivity cannot be made a permanent injunction to silence. A reasonable explanation from the government and a well-founded question from the opposition may both strengthen confidence in the state. The failure occurs when the question becomes ridicule and the answer becomes a threat.<\/p>\n

According to reports from late October 2026, notices concerning building violations were issued in relation to the Maulana\u2019s Islamabad residence and seminaries said to be administered by ulema associated with the Jamiat. The reported objections included unauthorised construction, the use of mandatory open spaces, and the use of residential premises for another purpose. These are administrative allegations. Their final standing depends upon the responses submitted, inspections undertaken and subsequent proceedings.<\/p>\n

Religious education does not exempt an institution from building safety or civic regulation. The lives of students, unobstructed access and the structural safety of premises are also matters of collective responsibility. At the same time, enforcement immediately following a bitter political exchange naturally raises the question of selective application. Proximity in time does not establish retaliation, but it does require a more transparent explanation from the institution concerned.<\/p>\n

The authority of law rests upon its equal application. If comparable violations attract different standards for different people, regulation loses its moral force. Seminary administrations must be afforded an opportunity to respond and seek legal redress. The relevant authority must likewise demonstrate that its action forms part of a general policy.<\/p>\n

The danger of using seminary students for political purposes must also be kept in view. Leadership has a duty to guide the young towards learning, peaceful expression and civic understanding. Government has a corresponding duty to distinguish legitimate assembly from actual violence. Peace endures when protection and justice advance together.<\/p>\n

The outcome of this controversy should not be the humiliation of any one individual. Maulana Fazlur Rehman should clarify the full context of the disputed remarks concerning the state and answer legitimate questions about his political performance with the relevant record. The Interior Minister must preserve the dignity of his office even in sharp disagreement and confine his accusations to evidence that can be examined.<\/p>\n

Religious politics must substantiate its moral claims through transparency within its own organisations. State institutions must demonstrate their impartiality through the equal application of law. Writers, too, are bound by an obligation: no false assertion should be admitted merely because it serves a favoured argument. Once the pen dispenses with inquiry, eloquence cannot repair its want of justice.<\/p>\n

The country is a common trust. Respect for that trust is expressed through civility of language, accountability in the exercise of power and regard for the dignity of the citizen. Political disagreement, when given the language of reason, becomes an instrument of reform. Surrendered to personal anger and unsubstantiated accusation, it wounds national confidence. Pakistan\u2019s politics now requires precisely that discipline which permits the truth to be spoken with full force, while allowing no person\u2019s rights to be diminished.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

There are moments in Pakistan\u2019s political life when a single sentence raises so much dust that the real question disappears from view. Parliamentary debate assumes the cadence of the public rally; disagreement hardens into accusation; and matters of national consequence are surrendered to personal grievance. Maulana Fazlur Rehman\u2019s controversial remarks concerning the state, and the …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3163,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,33,26,27,25],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3162","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-featured-columns","category-important-columns","category-pakistan-columns","category-today-columns","category-top-articles"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Pulpit\u2019s | Reckoning<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Respect for that trust is expressed through civility of language, accountability in the exercise of power and regard for the dignity of the...\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Pulpit\u2019s | Reckoning\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Respect for that trust is expressed through civility of language, accountability in the exercise of power and regard for the dignity of the...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Bitter Truth\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-11-05T17:18:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Web_ENG-1024x512.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1024\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bitter Truth\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bitter Truth\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8\"},\"headline\":\"The Pulpit\u2019s Reckoning\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-11-05T17:18:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3108,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Web_ENG-scaled.png\",\"articleSection\":[\"Featured Columns\",\"Important Columns\",\"Pakistan Columns\",\"Today Columns\",\"Top Articles\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/\",\"name\":\"The Pulpit\u2019s | Reckoning\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Web_ENG-scaled.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-11-05T17:18:24+00:00\",\"description\":\"Respect for that trust is expressed through civility of language, accountability in the exercise of power and regard for the dignity of the...\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Web_ENG-scaled.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/11\\\/Web_ENG-scaled.png\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":1280,\"caption\":\"The Pulpit\u2019s Reckoning\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/the-pulpits-reckoning\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Pulpit\u2019s Reckoning\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"description\":\"News, Technology, Sports, Health and more\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/BT-Logo.3.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/BT-Logo.3.png\",\"width\":280,\"height\":153,\"caption\":\"Bitter Truth\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/bittertruth.uk\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8\",\"name\":\"Bitter Truth\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Bitter Truth\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Pulpit\u2019s | Reckoning","description":"Respect for that trust is expressed through civility of language, accountability in the exercise of power and regard for the dignity of the...","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Pulpit\u2019s | Reckoning","og_description":"Respect for that trust is expressed through civility of language, accountability in the exercise of power and regard for the dignity of the...","og_url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/","og_site_name":"Bitter Truth","article_published_time":"2026-11-05T17:18:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1024,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Web_ENG-1024x512.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Bitter Truth","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bitter Truth","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/"},"author":{"name":"Bitter Truth","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8"},"headline":"The Pulpit\u2019s Reckoning","datePublished":"2026-11-05T17:18:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/"},"wordCount":3108,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Web_ENG-scaled.png","articleSection":["Featured Columns","Important Columns","Pakistan Columns","Today Columns","Top Articles"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/","name":"The Pulpit\u2019s | Reckoning","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Web_ENG-scaled.png","datePublished":"2026-11-05T17:18:24+00:00","description":"Respect for that trust is expressed through civility of language, accountability in the exercise of power and regard for the dignity of the...","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Web_ENG-scaled.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/11\/Web_ENG-scaled.png","width":2560,"height":1280,"caption":"The Pulpit\u2019s Reckoning"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/the-pulpits-reckoning\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Pulpit\u2019s Reckoning"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/","name":"Bitter Truth","description":"News, Technology, Sports, Health and more","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#organization","name":"Bitter Truth","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/BT-Logo.3.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/BT-Logo.3.png","width":280,"height":153,"caption":"Bitter Truth"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/e31346c22b0671ebcda8fa9ebe76f7e8","name":"Bitter Truth","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/0d346e70c8d11329fc7d070f28a7bfb4c20fd0e1e6ea1d2af1d3de255a8793e0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Bitter Truth"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3162","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3162"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3162\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3164,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3162\/revisions\/3164"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3163"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3162"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3162"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bittertruth.uk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3162"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}