Write up below is copied as shared by Gbenga Alabuja on Facebook Please read:

Author of the piece below is Gnenga Alabuja:

My wife was an executive of the RCF (the campus arm of the Redeem Christian Church of God) during her undergraduate days. Even after we got married, it was obvious she finds more liberty and expression worshiping with RCCG. As for me, Latter Rain Assembly has been my home Church for about 11 years now. Even when I am outside Lagos, the default for me is to logon online to join LRA rather than attend any Church around. I am extremely choosy on what I feed on especially with respect to doctrines.

In the last 3 years, I have been away from home more than 75% of the time. By default, RCCG has become a home church for my wife as a parish of the church is closer home and she understands the tenant of the Church. She is an active worker there. No wahala for us. I am not the type who will muzzle a spouse to follow my will. Her desire and aspiration should be for God first and I will support that as much as I can. Summary, we both don't presently share a common home Church.

So she returned from Church yesterday and as our custom has been, we talked about 'service' and all that transpired. Then she told me how she had to do series of explanation to some of her fellow church workers who were peddling rumours about what they wrongly assumed to be the reasons why the GO stepped aside. Summary of their stand:
* PMB forced GO to step down because of GO's comment in Ekiti. That PMB was angry cos GO praised Fayose
* It is an affront on the church and a deliberate attempt to islamise Nigeria.

Of course, I was shocked initially then I became indifferent about the matter. They can't be serious I concluded.

However, within the last 24 hours I have seen concerted efforts by some to change the narratives and steer a debate where there is none. The worry for me is not the debate. The worry is the erroneous passion it built among the cult-like followers of the proponent of these mindsets. As a people, the desire to seek the truth and challenge ourselves is lost on the alter of what a revered leader says or do. That is my worry.

Whatever I post here after isn't my attempt at rubbishing a pastor or any clergy. It is exceedingly important to say this at this juncture because I am aware that one of the Church leaders (and founder) that I have very high regards for has posted a contrary post to what I am about to say here. So sir, this isn't a personal attack.

Now to the issue at hand. The Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria, for the purpose of transparency had produced 3 separate codes for Government Agencies, the Private sector and the Not For Profit Organizations (which include churches, mosques, NGOs, Political parties etc). The code for NFPO became effective in October 2016. The whole document can be accessed on the financial reporting council website. Here are the key highlights as it affects the current buzz:

"Section 3: Need for Corporate Governance in Not-for-Profit Organisations

The need for corporate governance in NFPOs is hinged on good governance and orderly succession in view of the volume of funding they attract.

Urged on by humanitarian concerns over either glaring poverty and neglect, or economic
mismanagement of some countries, donors have made significant donations directly to relevant NFPOs in the hope that they would engender greater mission fulfilment, donor value, and greater beneficiary satisfaction and trust than those given by Governments.

Apart from foreign donors, domestic donors out of conviction, knowledge, philanthropy, need, deceit or ignorance contribute large sums of money to NFPOs.

Many NFPOs operate with unknown frameworks, but with governments completely
in the dark as to both their ownership and principal accountability. In the context of
current global insurgency, the operations and funding of NFPOs raise serious security concerns, hence the need for good governance of NFPOs in the country."

Section 8 of the code talks about the Organisational structure. Three Governing Structures namely;
* the Board of trustees
* Governing board
* management committee

Section 9 is dedicated to the founder, 'visioneer' etc
Summary of what it says in my words:
* the Founder can't simultaneously be the head of the 3 governing structures for the purpose of separation of power and for the purpose of preventing the concentration of power on a single individual. Why will a pastor want to be chairman BoT, chairman governing council and chairman management committee all at the same time? Let him 'kukuma' become the choir, usher, cleaner, protocol, preacher and congregation at the same time...
* where that has been the case, the founder must relinquish leadership of 2 out of the 3 posts and shall choose to head anyone he likes subject to a ratification by the AGM or whatever name it is called
* where the founder has occupied the leadership of the 3 governing structure for a period more than 10 years each, he can only be a board of trustee leader especially if he is older than 70 years
* A special caveat was added to protect spiritual and cultural leader..... "In the case of religious or cultural organisations, nothing in this code is intended to change the spiritual leadership and responsibilities of Founders, General Overseers, Pastors, Imams and Muslim Clerics, Presidents, Bishops, Apostles, Prophets, etc. which are
distinguishable from purely corporate governance and management responsibilities and accountabilities of the entities."

I have seen where founders have erroneously claimed that the government didn't call them to ministry so the government can't dictate to them how they run their ministries... Hmmm. The government isn't attempting to take away your call or platform cos they aren't responsible for that. However, it is the duty of government to monitor and safeguard corporate governance

My question:
1. Why is it that most mega churches, in Nigeria, break up when the founder dies? And why is it that a mega bank GTB didn't break up or fold when the MD/CEO died?
2. Why is it that most of these churches are inherited by the spouse and children at the demise of the founder? Were the children or spouses equally called? If it is personal or family business (not an NFPO), why are they not paying corporate tax?
3. Why will a founder wants to be the spiritual head, the corporate head and the management head all at the same time? Is it because they thought as the spiritual head they have superior understanding in ALL matters?

We mustn't muster sentiments on the platform of transparency. Nigeria can't be islamised or Christianized. Good morning

I haven't had time to edit the message, pls pardon the typo and grammatical bullets...

We don tire for this matter abeg

I like your write up sir and must commend you on those pertinent questions which I hope to just mention a few things:
1. Let's face the fact, some religious organizations are run like private businesses but that does not preclude others running on the vision given to them by God
2. Pastors or religious leaders who hand over their ministires/concern to their families are answerable to God and their members and it is not the duty of anyone outside of the mission to determine who leads them.
3. I cannot remember if there are churches or religious organizations that receive government funding in Nigeria and churches are run through VOLUNTARY contribution of members based on their physical or spiritual convictions. So, if government adjudged them to be self funding and not for profit, why trying to determine who head what
4. It is true that churches are involved in profit generating activities like running schools, publishing books etc, are those not incorporated separately? if they are, is government not earning tax incomes from such? If not, churches can be compelled to incorporate such so that they pay taxes except for, if money generated from such are actually plunged back into the church in absolute terms.
5. Sir, it is not the responsibility of the government to fix terms for church leaders, and you cannot separate spiritual leadership without alluding to well being and administrations, wetin consin govt in that?
6. Government has the right to demand for corporate governance for profit making organizations like schools and the like, but for government to decide who a church leader cannot be is tantamont to putting its fingers in the eyeball of the almighty.
7. I think what the code should have read is that the church BOT should determine the tenure of their leaders and not government saying 20years or 10 years fixing terms of purpose, i bet you are biting more than you can shew
8. I feel what has just happened will have a wide reaching implications for the political class as the giants in us are waking up to see that we occupy the political space too and kick out this crop of leaders and its going to be very costly to the political class , mark my word

Thank you bro, i will want to hear from you or anyone with interest.

The problem with this policy lies on this provision below:

* Where the founder has occupied the leadership of the 3 governing structure for a period more than 10 years each, he can only be a board of trustee leader especially if he is older than 70 years

Why select for them which office among the three they should choose?

Why not give them the option than imposing the option of the board of trustee on the GOs?

This is the problem that should be addressed,