Digital Strategist and Head of Creative Economy at the Office of the President, Dennis Itumbi, has responded sharply to Anglican Church Archbishop Jackson Ole Sapit’s concerns about the newly built church within State House grounds.
Ole Sapit had questioned whether President William Ruto was planning to become the bishop of the massive structure, estimated to cost over Ksh1.2 billion.
But Itumbi, in a detailed response, said that the question was misdirected—and that by tradition, the rightful State House Bishop should already be Archbishop Ole Sapit himself.
Itumbi Defends Ruto and Names Ole Sapit the Rightful State House Bishop
Dennis Itumbi issued a lengthy rebuttal on July 5, defending the president’s actions and laying the historical foundation for the construction of a church inside the State House compound. He said Ole Sapit should not be confused about who should serve as the State House Bishop.
“Your Grace, my Archbishop, Most Reverend Ole Sapit, you do not need to ask who should be the State House Bishop. By tradition, geography, and divine proximity, you already are,” Itumbi stated.
He explained that when the British built State House during the colonial era, they deliberately set aside a parcel of land called Archbishopbourne, located right next to Gate A. According to Itumbi, this was meant to house the Anglican Archbishop and position him as a spiritual adviser to the Governor, a role that should have evolved into being the religious guide to the President.
He further revealed that a chapel already exists within the current State House grounds—a 100-seater room meant to offer prayers and spiritual counsel to the country’s Head of State.
While Kenyans.co.ke confirmed some elements of this account, including the proximity of Archbishopbourne to State House, experts have noted that Itumbi’s framing lacks legal backing and may be more symbolic than practical.
Historical Traditions Meet Modern Tensions
Itumbi’s response was not just about defending President Ruto — it was also a subtle rebuke to the Anglican Church. He argued that although the tradition allowed the Anglican Archbishop to play a national spiritual role, the church has repeatedly failed to take up this position.
“The opportunity has always been present, but the church I grew up in has not always stepped into it,” Itumbi said, suggesting that the Anglican Church’s hesitation has led to the current confusion.
His statement implies that had Ole Sapit embraced the traditional role of national chaplain, there would be no controversy over who should lead prayers at State House or serve as its bishop.
But Itumbi’s appeal to historical context does not address the modern constitutional and ethical questions at play—particularly around the role of religion in a secular state.
Ruto’s Church Project Faces Public and Constitutional Backlash
On July 4, Archbishop Ole Sapit had expressed open concern about the church project, questioning whether it was appropriate for the president to construct a religious facility within State House.
The church, which reportedly has a capacity of over 8,000 people, has raised both religious and constitutional questions.
Critics argue that having such a large religious facility on public land may violate Article 8 of Kenya’s Constitution, which states that there shall be no state religion. Moreover, Sapit warned that such alignment between the presidency and one religious denomination risks excluding others and sparking unnecessary religious conflict.
He added that religious sanctuaries must remain independent from political institutions to maintain their integrity and avoid becoming tools of state propaganda or control. The uproar grew louder when details emerged about the church’s estimated cost of Ksh1.2 billion.
Though President Ruto claimed he would fund the project from his personal resources, many Kenyans were unconvinced and pointed to broader national challenges such as unemployment, inflation, and public debt.
Observers have also questioned how an individual—even the President—can build a personal project on public land and designate it as a religious site with unclear governance.
Despite this, Itumbi’s defense did not touch much on these constitutional or financial concerns. His focus remained on tradition and symbolism—an approach critics say dodges the real questions at hand.
A National Debate on Religion and Power
The battle over the title of State House Bishop has turned into a larger conversation about the role of faith in politics, state neutrality, and constitutional limits. On one side, Itumbi calls for the Anglican Church to claim its place in history and embrace a guiding role.
On the other, religious leaders like Ole Sapit warn of blurred lines and potential constitutional violations. The church inside State House, no matter who leads it, is now a flashpoint in the debate over faith, power, and governance in Kenya.
As pressure mounts on President Ruto to clarify the legal status and funding of the project, both religious leaders and constitutional watchdogs will likely remain vocal in the weeks ahead.
One thing is clear—the issue of who serves as State House Bishop is no longer just a religious question. It’s now a political, legal, and national matter.
