When United Church of God split off from the Worldwide Church of God, they had a chance to boldly step out and reform the way the church operated and how it treated its members. Unfortunately, this never happened because the top men who gathered for a year before UCG's formation, planning their exit, were men already corrupted and tainted by the power structure and poor operational principles practiced by the church. Many in Pasadena watched these men and knew how they operated, but they wanted no part of UCG's formation. These men were not servant leaders but men who coveted their positions of power as a minister or as a department head.
Sadly, they took the same operational patterns over to UCG, where servant leadership never came to fruition. Their long-held belief was that members were there to serve them. There was and still is a total lack of transparency in how they operate. WCG ingrained this in them all too well. UCG ministers today feel they are no more accountable to the members than they were while in WCG.
Nathan Albright had this up on his blog around the time UCG was stabbing their former president in the back and seeking to elect a new leader who conformed to their desires instead of the members.
The recent decision not to confirm our widely respected president for another term, conducted behind closed doors and seemingly at odds with the will of many elders and members, has understandably created confusion and distress. When decisions that affect the entire body are made without transparent processes or clear explanations, trust inevitably suffers. Combined with concerns about financial stewardship, media strategy, and potential conflicts of interest, we find ourselves at a crossroads that demands thoughtful consideration of how we might better align our governance practices with our shared values and mission.
The Current Crisis of Confidence
Understanding the Root Issues
Before prescribing solutions, we must candidly assess the nature of our current difficulties. The non-confirmation of our president despite his popularity points to a disconnect between formal governance structures and the wider community’s perspectives. This disconnect becomes particularly troubling when:
- Decision-making processes lack transparency
- Resource allocation appears inconsistent with results (expensive rebranding versus cost-effective video production)
- Technical expertise gaps exist in critical ministry areas
- Informal power centers seem to exert undue influence over formal governance structures
- Potential conflicts of interest threaten to compromise objective decision-making
These challenges are not unique to our church. Throughout church history, religious communities have struggled with the tension between institutional authority and communal discernment, between tradition and adaptation, between leadership continuity and renewal. The task before us is to address these tensions in ways that strengthen rather than weaken our community.
The Cost of Inaction
If we fail to address these governance challenges, the consequences could be severe:
- Erosion of trust between leadership and members
- Declining engagement and participation
- Reduced financial support
- Difficulty attracting and retaining talented leaders
- Impaired mission effectiveness
- Potential factional division within the church
Biblical Principles for Church Governance
Transparency and Accountability
Scripture offers clear guidance regarding leadership accountability. The apostle Paul’s instructions to Timothy emphasize that church leaders must be “above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2), implying that their conduct should withstand scrutiny. Jesus himself taught that “everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed” (John 3:20). These passages suggest that while privacy has its place, secrecy in governance often works against the church’s spiritual health.
The Church of God has never practiced transparency. They got by with it all through the decades until people started having access to email and the internet. At that point, they could no longer hide things. Sure, they would lash out and disfellowship members who dared to question them and would publicly tell members not to read dissident literature or read stuff on the internet, but people ignored them, and they have never been able to stop the flow of information that surrounds the church to this day. They still try and hide stuff from members, but it gets out eventually and when it does the shit hits the fan. Literally!
Servant Leadership
Jesus established the paradigm for Christian leadership when he washed his disciples’ feet and taught that “whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant” (Mark 10:43). This model stands in stark contrast to worldly power dynamics where authority flows downward through command and control. In Christ’s kingdom, authority flows upward through service and sacrifice.
Servant leadership in Armstrongism is a joke. They love to talk about it all the time, but the broad majority never practice it. I remember to this day three of UCG's top men who, while in Pasadena before the implosion, would hand-pick the men who would wash their feet at Passover. We had to have warm water for them and large fluffy towels ready to dry their immaculate feet. These guys treated members with contempt at times. One who worked in the Church Offices would stand in the hallway after counseling sessions with members and laugh and joke with other ministers about the person they had just met with. Granted, there were a few men who did practice servant leadership, and members respect them to this day, whether in or out of the church. These men tended to be treated like dirt and sent off to the neither lands to run small churches.
Wisdom in Decision-Making
The Book of Proverbs repeatedly emphasizes the value of seeking counsel: “Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed” (Proverbs 15:22). The Jerusalem Council described in Acts 15 demonstrates a collaborative decision-making process that involved testimony, scriptural reflection, and consensus-building. These examples suggest that important decisions benefit from diverse perspectives and open deliberation.
Wise decision-making from church leaders and councils? What an oxymoron!
Unity and Consensus
Paul’s letters frequently emphasize the importance of unity in the church. To the Philippians, he writes, “make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind” (Philippians 2:2). While unanimity on every decision is unrealistic, governance processes that seek consensus rather than mere majority rule better reflect this biblical value.
Albright ends his article with this vision he sees that the church can actually do. History proves it will not and is incapable of doing, but it's a good dream.
Conclusion: A Call to Faithful Governance
The governance challenges our church faces are significant but not insurmountable. With wisdom, courage, and commitment to biblical principles, we can transform this moment of crisis into an opportunity for renewed faithfulness and effectiveness.
The path forward requires contributions from everyone in our community:
- From current leadership: Humility to acknowledge legitimate concerns, courage to implement meaningful reforms, and wisdom to balance tradition with needed change.
- From elders and ministers: Constructive engagement with the reform process, patience during implementation, and commitment to unity amid disagreement on specifics.
- From members: Grace toward leaders navigating complex challenges, active participation in new feedback channels, and continued financial and volunteer support during the transition.
- From all: Prayer for divine wisdom, discernment of God’s leading, and recommitment to our shared mission and values.
The ultimate measure of successful governance reform will not be structural changes or process improvements, though these are important. Success will be measured by renewed trust, increased engagement, improved stewardship, and most importantly, enhanced effectiveness in advancing the gospel and making disciples.
Our church stands at a crossroads. One path leads to continued frustration, declining trust, and diminished impact. The other—the path outlined in this essay—leads to renewed vigor, restored confidence, and revitalized ministry. The choice before us is clear, though the journey will require sacrifice and commitment from all.
May we choose wisely, act faithfully, and move forward together in the confidence that God remains at work in and through our community, even amid institutional challenges. The future of our church depends not primarily on governance structures or leadership personalities, but on our collective willingness to pursue faithfulness in all aspects of our common life—including the critical dimension of church governance.
In the spirit of the apostle Paul’s exhortation, let us “make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3) as we navigate these waters together. And may our governance reforms, like all our endeavors, ultimately serve to bring glory to God and advance the kingdom of Christ in our world.
The entire article can be found here: Restoring Trust and Accountability: A Path Forward for Church Governance
42 comments:
A HUGE step would to go to a 100% unpaid voluntary ministry, and allow members to actually choose who their pastor should be by vote. This should go for all churches.
"Leadership accountability" with transparency is a Biblical model, but not a common 2025 business model. It might bring legal action.
Council of Elders Tim Pebworth said in a video about Rick Shabi's non-renewal that questions about the reasons for it are not beneficial. In other words, they might cause more division.
No wonder new President John Elliott is emphasizing "oneness," especially among the membership. But his calls to "forgive everybody of everything," indicating that's what God does, seem quite simplistic.
Elliott said to "forgive everybody of everything"?????? Hey John, better look at Luke 17:3.
his calls to "forgive everybody of everything,"
Forgive everybody except Rick Shabi, apparently, according to the Council of Elders.
I can't even imagine what it would be like today had I continued with Armstrongism. If you have "the right attitude" you would not be allowed to evaluate "what we did right and what we did wrong". And yet there would be a litany of such things! Talk about cognitive dissonance!
I must have said this about eighteen kajillion times over the years. If God wanted to pick an elect group and their spokesman to get an urgent message to humanity, He couldn't possibly use Armstrongism to do it. There is zero credibility there. The group has been totally burned as prophets or outstanding examples of Christian behavior, so God would need to start afresh with a new group!
People in the ACOGs pretend to be modern day versions of the prophets and patriarchs. Somehow they never choose a Biblical character who accurately represents them. I'll give you a little clue! He had a talking donkey! See what I mean? God actually had to use a donkey to make the needed corrections! There is apparently very good reason for Dave Pack to have his horses!
Meh. They’ll never get it. UCG to its credit looked into servant leadership resources shortly after its inception, but scrapped it as the ministry felt their standing would be diminished.
But, later, Cogwa dudes split from the UCG claiming that UCG was moving from some of hwa’s unique…ly plagiarized teachings. So, cogwa double downed with Armstrong’s teachings and UCG not to be outdone did likewise. Both groups are more into Armstrongism than before their split.
Like I said, they’ll never get it.
Earl
What caught my eye about the article is that there's no mention of members rights. The church culture is that ministers "authority" trumps justice and any natural right. They are basically above the law, with members being at the mercy of their whims. Based upon my ten year stay in HWA's church, the ministers are just bible quoting thugs.
Why should God call any new person to such an organization?
It's 2025 not 1985.
Why is Nathan Albright being 'presented' as the voice of reason from UCG all of a sudden ? Who's supporting him, or "encouraging" him to write about these subjects in the first place? He's being pushed forward again and again in recent weeks on this blog.
The findings of the UCG 2025 member survey is still to be presented. Yet here's Nathan Albright, possibly jumping the gun on writing sobering posts on accountability and rebuilding trust.
Everyone who thinks their someone, seems to have a blog in UCG these days. All voices chattering and keyboard warriors typing, but not much change of character.
This blog has always been filled with UCG ministers trying to undermine the church.
And yet, you are still here, 12:06. Got a bromance going with the Boogey Man?
Must be the 70 year old beef tallow affecting your memory 'Earl', when he was UCG President Roy Holladay also tried establishing a servant leadership movement but it didn't take root and was mostly ignored. Then Clyde Kilough became President.
So technically, in a round-a-bout, way 'Earl' your admitting UCG did have plans to bring in doctrinal changes but had to double-down and change plans to stem the exodus to Cogwa.
Thanks for the slip up 'Earl' !
First time to visit this site and I've read every comment. My first glaring observation is everyone is written by "Anonymous". What little value must your comments have in your own minds, or how fearful must you be to hide your identity? Its really quite sad. And, as far as the topic of correct governance in God's church, to begin, Jesus Himself in Matthew 20:25-26, instructs us on what the limits will be on Elder's authority. "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet, it shall not be so among you, but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant." Paul adds in 1Corinthians 1:24 "Not that we have dominion over your faith, but are fellow workers for your joy; for by faith you stand." Acts 14:23 shows the Apostles went about raising up churches and "they appointed elders in every church, and with prayer and fasting, they commended them to the Lord in Whom they had believed." Note; they did not raise up individual Pastors to rule each church congregation with absolute authority! Instead, they left two or more elders to lead by example and to guide their congregation in the way it should go. The authority actually came from Christ through the congregation collectively.To see this in action one must only look at the case of the son having a sexual relationship with his step mother in full knowledge of the congregation, and Paul's reaction to it. 1Corinthians 5:4 shows Paul instructing, not a single Pastor or elder, but the entire congregation on what to do. "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for destruction of the flesh that his spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus." Then in 2 Corinthians 2:6-8 Paul revisits the same issue after the sinner has repented he says,"This punishment (censure) which was inflicted 'by the majority' is sufficient for such a man, so that, on the contrary, you ought rather to forgive and comfort him, lest he be swallowed up with too much sorrow." What we see in the COG's today and UCG is no exception, is a usurping by the ministry the place of Jesus Christ as the head of His Spiritual Body, and His leading that Body through His directing of the spirit within each member. This may seem more efficient to those in charge, but by taking the decision making authority away from the congregation, they actually are robbing the congregation of an invaluable opportunity to grow in righteous judgement, spiritual discernment and unity. How unity you ask? Because, just as in actual combat, units of men become more cohesive and united when fighting a common enemy, so spiritually we become more cohesive and united when we witness Satan's fiery darts being aimed at our fellowships through individual failings and offenses. As these issues are dealt with by the congregation with much prayer and fasting and, "yes", Elders guidance, greater unity and love is the result! God's ways actually work when given an opportunity! But when we think we know better because "we can't do that for legal reasons" or "some subjects are for adults only", we embark on a path of human reasoning and ultimate failure. Every objection I have ever heard against following clear instructions in scripture can be easily handled if there is a desire to obey God. Instead we see Matthew 18, 3rd step modified to "take it to the pastor" instead of "take it to the called out ones". We see 1Timothy 5:20 totally ignored or have I missed "sinning elders being rebuked publicly so others may fear"? I don't think so. So long as UCG and the others refuse to obey God's clear instructions in governance in favor of a self serving system, we will see continued failure to successfully preach the gospel, for indeed, God will not call new people into a dysfunctional family. And I haven't even broached the COG's biggest failure, but that's for another time. Happy preparation day!
Unfortunately, Vince hasn't learned one of the fundamental laws of communication among God's people: USE PARAGRAPHS!!!
Oh, 10:48, Shhhhh! The Armstrongites want to know who we actually are, and for us to consider them as our intellectual equals, regardless of their errors in grammar and spelling.
We don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but, can't you just hear it now? This is how they grew up!:
Vinnie: "Hey mom! I just seen...."
Mom: "Vinnie! I just seen? Where's your grammar???"
Vinnie: "That's what I was tryin' to tell you, Mom! I just seen her fall out the window!!!"
~A. Nonymous Unum
"Its really quite sad."
++++++++
Well, no, not really. ANONYMOUS may want to offer a comment very valuable in the mind without playing "king". The value may be determined somewhat by comparing the comment with God's Word.
So, the best you can do is correct my grammar and non-use of paragraphs? Nothing about the content of my post? And I never considered Identifying yourself as "playing king" but instead, only that it simply allows readers to know who to respond to and to be able to distinguish between comments. Have a blessed Sabbath.
So, the best you can do is correct my grammar and non-use of paragraphs? Nothing about the content of my post?
What arrogance! Paragraphs, like correct grammar, show respect for the reader. A wall of text, especially one with mistakes, is very difficult for many people to read. If you respect your reader, you will present your message in a manner that makes it as understandable as possible. But such arrogance is quite appropriate if your goal is not to help others understand, but simply to preen as if you consider yourself superior to those you believe should be required to plod through your clumsy presentation.
Yes, Vince, even using set pseudonyms at least help to sort which reader is saying what. People could still lie, but it might help.
The convention here is to use the timestamp of a comment to identify it when replying to it.
Definitely use paragraphs. It is difficult to understand what you’re saying without them. All I could get out of it was wanting a congregational application of Matthew 18 and ministry called out publicly.
As for the substance, you’re obviously still heavily in Armstrongism. This post, with information taken from my own blog, will hopefully be of interest to you. https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2025/05/is-armstrongism-defined-by-its-identity.html?m=1
“Anon617”,
No slip up there. I recognized some might say what you did, but cogwa never said a lean toward servant leadership was a reason for the split.
There were a lot of doctrinal claims for why the ucg and cogwa dude ministers split up Ucg, but none have come to fruition.
The real reason is egos couldn’t deal with disagreement and so they did what minister cog dudes are best at: division and separating people and families.
But, it was worth it to them to split up so each separated group of dude ministers could once again drink bourbon with people they agree with at their minster dude meetings.
Vince,
Glad you are here. Just check out what’s being said before making too many assumptions. We’re generally sincere and want to reveal the many flaws in Armstrongism to help those in the cogs that question the teaching and practice and to help others to never get wrapped into the Armstrongist web.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Heavy on the old Armstrongism, Vince. I'm just hoping you are awakening to certain things and have come here to learn, and not to attempt to correct us with the old vomit. Welcome, I think.
Ha! What nonsense 12:42! Wishful thinking! What ego's you have!
Always a underneath condescending and holier than thou current in your comments. Interesting how non Christ like that really is.
The 'middle level', always looking down on the members, but surrounded by 'yes people' cronies. Which then carries the grave danger of never being told the truth by them and ending up victims of your own hubris.
But for some reason, not fully accepted by the top level elites and left out in the cold.
You like to judge others with your own dishonest judgment rules, that only ever favours yourselves. Forever judging other's on grammar.. by UCG writers.. who've had all the time in the world to sharpen their grammar skills, whilst being funded by the very members they look down on. Another non Christ like quality.
Oy vey!
And not Vince!
'But COGWA never said a lean toward servant leadership was a reason for the split.'
I never wrote they did, fake name.
Vince,
I Read your portion on how the ministers usurp a portion of the role of Christ and thwart members’ development. Very true. The hierarchy of elevating the ministry far above the members is one of the most damaging things in the Cogs.
The Crapmeister (HWA) did a number on us. Some of it is like "forever chemicals" in that it's permanent damage you can never get rid of. As an example, you can never get rid of PTSD. Most of us have found ways to manage and work around the permanent damage and to have a good life. We share new understanding and techniques and, in general, encourage people who have been deceived by Armstrongism, yet are fearful of leaving the cult.
If any of that seems wrong to you, perhaps this is not a good site for you to visit.
That would be a good idea. In CGI most of their minister are unpaid volunteers, but no one gets to vote for who is the pastor.
I have said it before, people should use some sort of name, even just a pseudonym which one can do without having to log in. But still many posters think that all sharing the same username is cool.
Many ministers feel that there are two classes of church members, a them and us approach. Ministers first, members second. I actually heard a minister preach that, back in the 1990s in COGaic.
Cool? Protection.
Your corrupt judgment scales only favouring the ones in the blog clique. Log in ? Only the blog clique repeatedly write: "oops sorry that comment was me, I forgot to log
in..."
Your comment doesn't explain your view of a ministerial concept of two classes of members.
Of course members know this all to be rubbish. Many ministers don't know members at all, if truth be told, and members are nothing more than 'cartoon characters' to them.
I remember a user from pre-pandemic days who used his real name here—Kevin McMillen, I think it was—who even shared where he was from—West Virginia IIRC. Let me say he quickly learned the value of anonymity! Given the direction the world is heading, I believe we’re all going to come to appreciate that lesson soon enough and how those early internet days of the ’90s offered a kind of anonymous freedom on forums like this that now feels like a glorious dream in our social media deranged world. So thank you, Gary, for keeping this site one of the last bastions of free speech and anonymity!
I agree Tonto and have suggested similarly myself ie We are all brothers snd sisters so no one should have titles like Mr or Dr etc. And the “ministry” in the church should basically comprise of all the men in the church in a voluntary and unsalaried capacity (as they would have jobs outside of church) sharing their learning via sermons, studies, etc. or their skills via Sabbath School, etc. Just my thoughts.
I went further than that, 5:42. Back at the dawn of the new millennium, I used a more specific screen name, and actually posted one of my email addresses on the then primary Armstrong related site. Four friends with whom I had lost contact back in the 1970s got in touch with me, almost immediately, and we did some catching up. A guy from the UK who was searching for evidence that HWA had been funded by the CIA, particularly with regard to England's pirate radio ships also made contact. Our conversation was pleasant, but I had no such evidence, and to be honest, his theory seemed way off base.
One anonymous person who contacted me by email was angry about some of the things I had posted, and very confrontational. I turned him. By the time our exchange had ended, he realized that I was not the enemy he had assumed from my posts, I didn't hate church people, and there were also good things I remembered. What we used to call the web masters of some of the sites also reached out. Again, pleasant, civil conversations.
Oh, there was hatred and flaming occasionally, and when there were many "dissident" sites, people would follow me to other sites that had not even been involved in the original conversation to continue their attack there, and would actually send threatening email to the webmasters of those sites for blocking their hateful attacks. Poor Gavin! He was always so gracious, and professional, but a couple of these people totally exasperated him. Gary had a couple of experiences with these crazies as well! None of these people ever showed up at my house with their guns and Bibles, though.
My own rationale for maintaining anonymity was that I'm a PK, and although I am in disagreement with my parents' beliefs, I did not want people from their church community hassling them. People in the church do that. It's funny. Some of the nephews and nieces have read here and figured out who I am. I know this because in family lists of email they have captioned me as "Byker Bob". It's not possible to keep everything secret and secure, but my parents did live out their lives not having been affected by anything which I've posted that counter their church or beliefs. The friends here I mentioned who know me and know my parents were totally on board with the secret, and never let on. Thanks guys! We did the right thing by the parentsl units!
So, that is how it has worked. Some participants go even further and post as "anonymous". I assume they have their reasons. Everyone has something which they do not want to lose. We should be gracious with people who seek to protect that thing or things.
BB
The point is, is that you don't have to actually log in at all. Just type in whatever username you want to use. When making a comment, there is a drop-down list, which defaults to "Anonymous", but has the options of "Google Account" and also "Name / URL". Choosing that last option lets you put in any name you want.
"Your comment doesn't explain your view of a ministerial concept of two classes of members." -- I did not agree with the minister on that at all, and shortly thereafter left that church (COGaic).
"Your comment doesn't explain your view of a ministerial concept of two classes of members." UCG and I think even worldwide had two classes of members. Those listed in the articles of incorporation are only members on the board. Everyone else is considered more like a subscriber, people along for the ride.
What ARE the two classes of members ?
Byker Bob:
I understand there is sensitivity to the situation, but please consider passing on my blog post to your father, and/or others who may find it of interest or have internal Armstrongist connections. I know it has been passed around a very little bit in UCG and LCG. The more it circulates, the more it can slowly have an impact.
The problem in attacking Armstrongism is less about the substance and more about their armor — that is, bypassing, censorship, and information blockades. I don’t really attack what they believe religiously (the Armstrong use of John 6:44, etc, blocks those sorts of attacks), save that “true church” stuff. So they need to not feel insulted, just having been uninformed on a few facts. You can actually read it, and think that Armstrong was simply mistaken, while still getting the reality of their situation.
It might work!
I should’ve done this sort of thing back when The Journal and all of them were operating. It just wasn’t my focus at the time.
Here is the link to my blog post of it. This way they don’t have to come to this site to see it. Indeed, a lot of them might find some of my other posts on their interesting. On social matters I am probably more in line with them then this site is. (No disrespect intended, moderators/administrators.)
Please consider.
https://catsgunsandnationalsecurity.blogspot.com/2025/03/reference-to-followers-of-armstrongism.html?m=1
Well, Lee, we're about 5 years late on sharing your blog post, cause my parents have both passed away.
Unlike some of my siblings, I had come to the conclusion that it would be a cruel and confusing experience for my parents if they were to leave Armstrongism at their advanced ages. Not that I had a heck of a lot to do with them, but whenever I was around them, I tried to keep the conversation light, and not to share the body of knowledge which I had accumulated, or to use it in such a way as to debunk or challenge their beliefs.
Not really a heck of a lot more to say about them.
BB
Anon244, You are a peculiar bird. You mock someone's name as fake while you post as anonymous. Weird.
Your first post made little sense. Here's a snippet: "So technically, in a round-a-bout, way 'Earl' your admitting UCG did..." There are at least 3 errors in that snippet of your sentence. I wouldn't generally point that out, but you are annoying.
I understand. There was a time I would’ve thought like that. Not anymore, but I respect it.
Maybe somebody else?
Post a Comment