I don't participate in religious events during elections
Em um ano eleitoral, o presidente Lula escolheu a ausência como forma de presença: ao recusar comparecer à Marcha para Jesus em São Paulo, ele enviou uma mensagem sobre os limites que acredita dever existir entre fé e disputa política. A decisão, comunicada por telefone ao bispo Estevam Hernandes e transmitida publicamente pelo procurador-geral Jorge Messias, revelou a tensão permanente entre o sagrado e o estratégico na vida democrática. Num evento que reuniu rivais como Flávio Bolsonaro e Tarcísio de Freitas, a cadeira vazia de Lula falou tão alto quanto qualquer discurso.
- Com as eleições de outubro se aproximando, a Marcha para Jesus deixou de ser apenas um ato de fé e tornou-se um palco onde candidatos disputam a simpatia do eleitorado cristão e evangélico.
- Lula optou por não comparecer justamente para não alimentar a percepção de que estaria instrumentalizando o sagrado em benefício próprio — uma ausência calculada num ambiente de alta tensão simbólica.
- Seus adversários políticos, incluindo Flávio Bolsonaro e o governador Tarcísio de Freitas, marcaram presença no evento, tornando ainda mais visível o contraste com a decisão presidencial.
- O presidente enviou o procurador-geral Jorge Messias como representante e fez uma ligação ao bispo Estevam Hernandes, transformando um gesto privado em declaração pública sobre ética e religião.
- A ironia histórica não passou despercebida: foi Lula quem, em 2009, assinou a lei que instituiu o Dia Nacional da Marcha para Jesus — ele ajudou a construir o palco que agora recusa usar.
Na quinta-feira de Corpus Christi, enquanto milhares de fiéis tomavam as ruas de São Paulo para a Marcha para Jesus, o presidente Lula estava ausente — e fez questão de explicar por quê. Em uma ligação telefônica com o bispo Estevam Hernandes e o procurador-geral Jorge Messias, que representou o presidente no evento, Lula foi direto: em anos eleitorais, ele evita participar de celebrações religiosas para não dar a impressão de que usa a fé como instrumento de campanha. A conversa foi compartilhada nas redes sociais de Messias, transformando um diálogo privado em posicionamento público.
A decisão ganhou relevo diante do que acontecia no evento. Flávio Bolsonaro, pré-candidato à presidência e principal adversário de Lula, estava lá. O governador Tarcísio de Freitas e o prefeito Ricardo Nunes também marcaram presença, confirmando que a Marcha para Jesus há muito transcendeu o campo espiritual e se consolidou como espaço de disputa política — um lugar onde líderes demonstram vínculo com o eleitorado cristão do país.
O gesto de Lula carregava uma camada adicional de significado. Foi ele próprio quem, em setembro de 2009, assinou a lei que criou o Dia Nacional da Marcha para Jesus, inscrevendo o evento no calendário oficial brasileiro. Ao recusar agora o uso desse mesmo espaço para fins eleitorais, o presidente tentou separar o ato de fundação institucional da exploração política — sinalizando que respeitar algo pode significar, às vezes, manter distância dele.
President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva made a phone call on Thursday to explain his absence from São Paulo's March for Jesus, an annual gathering that drew thousands of worshippers on Corpus Christi. He spoke with Bishop Estevam Hernandes and Jorge Messias, the Attorney General of the Union, who had attended the event in the president's stead. The call was later shared on Messias's social media accounts, turning a private conversation into a public statement about faith and politics.
Lula's reasoning was direct: he does not participate in religious events during election years because he refuses to create the impression that he is using sacred matters for political advantage. With the October presidential race approaching and his own candidacy for reelection still taking shape, the decision reflected a calculation about how religious engagement might be perceived. The statement carried weight precisely because it acknowledged what others were doing—and what he was choosing not to do.
The event itself became a gathering place for politicians across the spectrum. Flávio Bolsonaro, Lula's rival and another presidential hopeful, attended. So did Tarcísio de Freitas, the governor of São Paulo, and Ricardo Nunes, the city's mayor. The presence of these figures underscored what the March for Jesus had become: not merely a religious observance but a political stage, a place where candidates could demonstrate their connection to Brazil's evangelical and Christian constituencies.
Lula's own history with the event added texture to his absence. In September 2009, he had signed the law that established the National Day of the March for Jesus, embedding the gathering into the country's official calendar. That act of institutional recognition meant his current refusal to attend carried particular significance—he had helped create the very platform he was now declining to use.
The phone call itself became the mechanism through which Lula communicated his position. By speaking directly with Hernandes and having Messias relay the conversation publicly, he managed to address the religious leadership while also signaling to voters that he took the boundary between faith and electoral politics seriously. It was a form of political communication that worked precisely because it appeared to reject political communication. The message was: I respect this space too much to exploit it, even though I could.
Notable Quotes
I don't participate in anything religious during election time because I don't want to give the impression that I'm trying to take political advantage of something sacred— President Lula, in a phone call with Bishop Estevam Hernandes
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would a president who created the law establishing this march choose to skip it now?
Because the calendar changed. When he signed that law in 2009, he wasn't running for reelection. Now he is. The same event that was a legitimate policy achievement then becomes a potential liability if he shows up during campaign season.
But couldn't he argue that attending shows his commitment to faith and to the law he created?
He could, and his opponents did attend for exactly that reason. But Lula seems to have decided that the appearance of using religion as a campaign tool would damage him more than the absence would. It's a bet that his base will respect the restraint.
Is this restraint genuine, or is it just a different kind of political calculation?
Probably both. You can respect a boundary and benefit from respecting it at the same time. The phone call to the bishop—that's the real move. He's not hiding; he's explaining. He's telling religious leadership directly why he's not there.
And what does that tell them?
That he takes their space seriously enough not to treat it as a campaign stop. Whether they believe that or not is another question.