UCG: Unaccountable Stewardship — The Structural Problems of Perpetual Operations Managers in the UCG

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Worldwide Church of God (WCG), founded by Herbert W. Armstrong, faced turmoil due to doctrinal shifts toward mainstream Christianity, coupled with accusations of hypocrisy and deception from its leadership. Disillusioned by these changes, a group of WCG ministers and elders, many of whom were department heads deeply embedded in the church’s operations, began meeting regularly at the SOG Apartments to plan a new organization. These men, having benefited from decades within the WCG’s hierarchical structure, were accustomed to its sometimes questionable stewardship practices.

In spring 1995, these dissenting ministers and members convened in Indianapolis, Indiana, to establish the United Church of God (UCG). Their goal was to create a church that preserved Armstrong’s teachings, including Sabbath-keeping, biblical holy days, and a non-Trinitarian theology, rooted in what they imagined were the practices of Jesus Christ and the first-century apostles. They formed a 12-person Council of Elders, elected by a General Conference of Elders (ordained ministers), to oversee budgets, strategic planning, and doctrine, with annual meetings held each May. David Hulme was chosen as the first president but was ousted in 1998 over disputes, including his refusal to move the church’s headquarters to Ohio. He was succeeded by Les McCullough (1998), Roy Holladay (2002), Clyde Kilough (2005), Dennis Luker (2010), Victor Kubik (2013), and Rick Shabi (2022)—all men deeply rooted in the WCG’s inner workings.

Despite the opportunity to reform, the UCG’s leadership carried over the WCG’s entrenched, sometimes unethical control tactics. As the UCG faced internal strife, splintered, and reemerged as a smaller entity, it had multiple chances to redefine itself. However, critics argue that the persistent influence of a “good old boys club” from the WCG’s Pasadena era stifled meaningful change. Nathan Albright, a UCG member and occasional critic, has written about the church’s structural issues, pointing to the repetitive appointment of the same leaders. Though titles may shift, the faces remain largely unchanged, perpetuating a cycle of stagnant leadership.

Albright writes:

This paper examines a governance weakness within the United Church of God (UCG): the absence of term limits or genuine accountability for Operations Managers, particularly those overseeing Ministerial and Member Services and Media and Communications Services. While the UCG was formed in response to prior authoritarian abuses within the Worldwide Church of God, its own governing structure has permitted long-term consolidation of administrative power. This paper demonstrates how this concentration of power in non-rotating managerial positions undermines transparency, spiritual health, and biblical principles of servant leadership, and it proposes structural reforms to restore accountability and prevent the calcification of authority.

This paragraph alone is a bold statement of the current unhealthy governance that undermines healthy leadership and meaningful change within the United Church of God.

Albright goes on to talk about how certain department heads seem immune to "broad accountability".

The United Church of God, established in 1995 as a biblically grounded, collegial alternative to hierarchically governed churches, sought to preserve doctrinal continuity while avoiding the centralization of power that had marked its predecessor. However, over time, the Church’s structure has allowed certain roles—especially Operations Managers over key departments like Ministerial and Member Services (MMS) and Media—to become semi-permanent and virtually immune to broad accountability. This paper explores the consequences of that entrenchment, critiques the constitutional and procedural design that permits it, and proposes reforms in alignment with biblical and organizational best practices.

He continues:

The UCG was formed following the doctrinal upheavals in the Worldwide Church of God. In an effort to prevent unchecked top-down authority, UCG established a Council of Elders elected by a General Conference of Elders (GCE), with a President appointed by the Council. However, the daily administration of the Church—particularly its ministry and public communications—is managed by Operations Managers. These men are appointed and reappointed internally, often from within a small leadership circle. Although their roles are administrative, they exercise disproportionate influence on the Church’s public image, ministerial culture, and internal communications. 

 

Over the past two decades, these managerial positions have become de facto long-term offices, resistant to scrutiny and insulated from meaningful challenge. This development threatens to replicate the very kind of power centralization UCG was created to prevent.

Resistance to scrutiny is a deeply rooted trait of Armstrongism. Ministers, believing they were divinely set apart, often viewed themselves as above questioning by members or outsiders. Those who dared challenge this authority were quickly labeled as rebels or dissidents and cast out from the congregation. Such accusations were easily wielded against members living in constant fear of losing their salvation.

The ministry's control held firm until the internet age disrupted their authority. Public questioning and criticism now spread rapidly online. While the United Church of God still expels dissenters, the damage is done—reasons for their removal circulate globally within hours, undermining the leadership’s ability to suppress scrutiny. 

Albright then goes on to describe the operations mangers' positions and the power they weld:

The Operations Manager for Ministerial and Member Services holds extraordinary sway over the spiritual climate of the Church. He supervises ministerial assignments, disciplinary procedures, credentialing, and field minister communication. This authority allows him to shape the doctrinal emphasis of the ministry and gatekeep the internal culture of the pastoral corps.

The Media and Communications Manager similarly holds the reins over UCG’s public image—producing Beyond Today, managing the Church’s digital and print presence, and directing responses to doctrinal controversies. This role, too, functions largely without structural oversight. The individual in this position can determine what the Church says, how it says it, and who gets to say it, all without input from the general membership or an independent editorial board.

Though these roles are administrative in theory, their impact is profoundly spiritual. They determine who is heard, who is promoted, and who is silenced.

V. Structural Weaknesses and Consequences

The consequences of having perpetual managers in such key positions are both organizational and spiritual:

No Term Limits: Without institutional rotation, Operations Managers can remain in place indefinitely. This fosters dependency, stifles innovation, and discourages emerging leaders from contributing new perspectives. Limited Accountability: There are no regular evaluations by the GCE. Council oversight is hampered by personal loyalties, lack of transparency, and reluctance to provoke internal conflict. Lack of Transparency: Operations Managers do not publicly report to the membership in a meaningful way. Their decisions are largely shielded from scrutiny unless a crisis prompts investigation. Conflict of Interest: Because many appointees come from within the same ministerial networks, a culture of mutual deference can prevent corrective action even when performance or decisions warrant review. Concentration of Influence: Media control means narrative control. Ministerial oversight means the shaping of theology and discipline. When combined in a handful of unchanging individuals, these powers make the church vulnerable to stagnation and groupthink. 

 

The Worldwide Church of God and its splinter groups, including the United Church of God, bear no resemblance to the first-century church’s operations. Their claims of promoting “proper church government” are a facade, used to subjugate and intimidate members rather than uphold doctrinal purity, revealing a structure rooted in control rather than authentic biblical practice.

So what happens if there is an ethical minister who speaks up? It is the same as when they were all in WCG.

Ministers who express dissenting views often find themselves reassigned, isolated, or quietly retired, even when they enjoy widespread respect. The Media Department has periodically downplayed theological issues or silenced voices that do not conform to the managerial narrative. Certain doctrinal initiatives, once launched by Operations Managers, have remained in place despite objections, indicating a top-down imposition inconsistent with the Church’s conciliar ideals. 

 

These patterns suggest not merely individual failings but a systemic flaw in governance design.

How many ministers do you remember from WCG days who were suddenly transferred, isolated or forced out when they decided to make a stand? I am not talking about the abusive men like David C Pack or Gerald Flurry, but regular ministers and elders.

What are some of the suggestions Albright recommends?

Other churches and nonprofits implement practices that balance stability with accountability: 

 

Rotational Leadership: Term limits ensure that no one holds too much long-term sway. 

 

Independent Oversight Committees: Reviews conducted by members outside the immediate administrative circle. 

 

Member Engagement: Allowing congregants to give formal input on leadership performance. 

 

Transparent Succession Planning: Open processes for identifying and training new leaders.

These practices—rotational leadership, independent oversight, and transparent succession—work well for many churches and organizations, fostering accountability and stability. However, “member engagement” is a non-starter for the United Church of God. Allowing members to have a voice in church operations or governance is treated as near-blasphemous, bordering upon committing the unpardonable sin, with the leadership viewing such input from “lowly” members as an affront to their authority.

Albright continues with more recommendations:

Amend the Bylaws to Impose Term Limits: Five-year renewable terms, with a mandatory sabbatical after ten years, would prevent undue entrenchment.

Establish Transparent Review Mechanisms: Annual reviews by the Council, informed by anonymous surveys of field ministers and relevant staff, should be codified.

Separate Spiritual and Administrative Oversight: The Council should more clearly distinguish between the strategic guidance of the Church and the day-to-day discretion of managers, reducing blurred lines of unchecked influence.

Foster a Culture of Servant Leadership: Leadership training should include explicit instruction on avoiding institutional idolatry and promoting transparency.

Introduce Broader Involvement in Appointment Processes: Involving more than the Council and President in appointments—such as advisory panels or confirmations from the GCE—would reduce the perception of backroom control.

Albright ends with this lofty goal, which sadly we will never see instituted in the UCG or any other Church of God, for that matter:

The United Church of God has noble origins in resisting ecclesiastical overreach. Yet without meaningful reform, it risks reproducing the very patterns it once rejected. Operations Managers must not become unaccountable power centers. Instead, the Church must reaffirm its commitment to transparency, biblical leadership, and shared responsibility—lest spiritual stewardship be replaced by bureaucratic permanence. 

 

The Church of God, across its various affiliations, has consistently been dominated by a small group of men. This top-heavy bureaucracy has fueled the decline of these churches. Even newer splinter groups led by figures like Bob Thiel, COGWA, and Sheldon Monson cling to this model, where power flows from the top down. Members endure this control until the church implodes or they reach their breaking point and leave.

You can read the complete article here: White Paper: Unaccountable Stewardship — The Structural Problems of Perpetual Operations Managers in the United Church of God