By Odesola JF., PhD
Before making allegations that could damage reputations, Rev. Prof. Mosy Madugba owes Nigerians an explanation, not just a sensational sermon.
Necessity compelled me to respond again after reading something on this matter on the media again. Even after RCCG has responded to this unsubstantiated allegation. There is a difference between asking legitimate questions about the wealth of religious institutions and making allegations that certain individuals acquired their wealth through questionable political favours. There is also a difference between expressing an opinion, sharing information, and making a factual claim that ought to be supported by verifiable evidence.
This distinction has become particularly important following the widely circulated remarks by Rev. Prof. Mosy Madugba, founder and president of the Ministers’ Prayer Network, in which he alleged that former President Olusegun Obasanjo allocated oil wells to some prominent Nigerian Christian leaders, including Pastor Enoch Adejare Adeboye, General Overseer of the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG).
According to the circulating sermon, Madugba named Pastor Adeboye, Bishop David Oyedepo and Pastor William Kumuyi as beneficiaries of alleged oil well allocations. He went further to suggest that these supposed oil interests explained the establishment of their universities, hospitals, schools and, in some cases, the acquisition of private aircraft.
This is a serious allegation. It is serious because it concerns the integrity of respected religious leaders, the financial credibility of major Christian institutions and the possible misuse of presidential power.
But perhaps the most important question is one that deserves a direct answer: Where did Rev. Prof. Mosy Madugba obtain this information, and can he substantiate it with documentary evidence?
That is the question at the heart of this controversy.
An allegation is not evidence
Let us be clear: Madugba is entitled to express his views, ask questions about religious institutions and raise concerns about the relationship between religion, wealth and public office. Nobody should deny him that right.
However, when a person publicly identifies another individual as the beneficiary of an alleged allocation of national resources, the responsibility to provide credible evidence becomes unavoidable.
Did he personally witness the alleged allocation?
Was he present when the purported arrangement was made?
Did someone who participated in the transaction provide him with the information?
Did he obtain official government documents, petroleum licensing records, company ownership records or other verifiable materials?
Was the information obtained from a credible government official, an insider or a documented investigation?
These are not hostile questions. They are necessary questions.
If the allegation is based on information supplied by another person, who supplied it, and how was the information independently verified? If it is based on documents, where are those documents? If it is based on personal knowledge, what exactly did he witness?
A statement made from a pulpit does not automatically become established truth because the speaker is a respected minister of the gospel or holds the title of professor.
Indeed, the higher the public standing of the person making an allegation, the greater the responsibility to ensure that the information is accurate.
As things stand, the reports concerning the circulating sermon have not identified any documentary evidence establishing that Obasanjo allocated an oil well to Pastor Adeboye. Neither have they disclosed an official allocation instrument, a beneficiary’s name in a petroleum licence, a company registration document or any other evidence linking Pastor Adeboye to such an arrangement.
This does not establish that no document could ever exist. It establishes that the allegation remains unsubstantiated in the public domain.
There is a world of difference between the two.
I speak about Pastor Adeboye because I know the history
I may not be in a position to speak for the other ministers or their respective ministries. They are capable of responding to allegations concerning them, and I will leave them to do so.
However, I can speak about Pastor Enoch Adeboye and the Redeemed Christian Church of God from a position of considerable personal knowledge.
I have been in RCCG for over five decades. I have also worked closely with Pastor Adeboye for more than four decades. My relationship with the church is not something I acquired yesterday, nor is my understanding of its development based on social media publications.
I have witnessed different stages of its growth, its administrative development, its missionary expansion and the sacrifices that have accompanied its journey.
I have seen the church move from a relatively modest Nigerian Pentecostal denomination into a global Christian movement with an international presence.
I have also witnessed the leadership style, spiritual convictions and administrative decisions that have contributed to that development.
This is why I consider it necessary to address the allegation concerning Pastor Adeboye.
I am not writing to suggest that religious leaders should be beyond scrutiny. Nobody, irrespective of spiritual position, should be exempt from legitimate questions about the management of resources.
Rather, I am concerned that an allegation of this magnitude should not be allowed to become accepted as truth without evidence.
Understanding the growth of RCCG
One of the arguments advanced by Madugba appears to be that because RCCG has a university, hospitals, schools and other substantial institutions, its General Overseer must have benefited from an oil well allocated by a former president.
That reasoning is fundamentally flawed.
The existence of an institution does not establish the source of its funding, much less prove that its founder or spiritual leader acquired an undisclosed petroleum asset.
RCCG’s history did not begin with the Obasanjo administration.
The church was founded by Reverend Josiah Olufemi Akindayomi, and Pastor Adeboye became its General Overseer in 1981 following the founder’s death in 1980.
The church’s remarkable expansion therefore spans decades of missionary work, evangelism, institutional development, sacrifice and the commitment of millions of members.
Pastor Adeboye was not an unknown individual who suddenly appeared in public life with unexplained wealth. Before becoming a full-time minister, he had established an academic career.
He obtained a degree in Mathematics, a master’s degree in Hydrodynamics and a doctorate in Applied Mathematics. He taught in secondary schools and served as a university lecturer.
These are verifiable aspects of his professional history.
The official RCCG history and Pastor Adeboye’s published biography provide an account of his academic background and the development of his ministry.
It is therefore inaccurate to present the growth of RCCG as though it has no history, institutional foundation or explanation beyond an alleged political gift.
The church’s expansion involved the development of parishes, missionary structures, evangelistic programmes, administrative systems and the mobilisation of people across different countries.
Thousands of individuals have contributed their time, resources, professional expertise and financial support to the work.
The growth of RCCG is a collective institutional story, not the unexplained personal accumulation of wealth by one individual.
What about Redeemer’s University?
Madugba specifically referred to universities and hospitals as though their existence establishes the alleged oil well arrangement.
Let us consider Redeemer’s University.
Redeemer’s University was established by RCCG as a private university. The Federal Government approved its establishment on January 7, 2005, and it commenced academic operations on October 11, 2005, with 473 pioneer students.
These are not secret facts. They are contained in the university’s official records and published financial statements.
The university is an institutional investment established by the church, not proof that Pastor Adeboye personally received an oil well.
Its establishment was the result of a vision, institutional planning, regulatory approval, land acquisition, organisational commitment and financial investment.
The university has also developed significant academic and research capacity, including its African Centre of Excellence for Genomics of Infectious Diseases (ACEGID), which has received World Bank support.
If somebody wishes to investigate the financial history of Redeemer’s University, there are legitimate questions to ask.
What were its original sources of funding? What contributions came from the church? What other institutional or external funding supported its development? How have its finances been managed?
These questions can be answered through institutional records, audited accounts and appropriate investigations.
But jumping from the existence of a university to the conclusion that its General Overseer received an oil well from a former president is neither sound reasoning nor responsible public discourse.
The same principle applies to hospitals, schools and other church-supported institutions.
An institution’s existence is not evidence of an oil concession.
The oil well question requires facts, not assumptions
There is another important issue that should not be overlooked.
Oil wells are not ordinary gifts that a president can simply hand over to friends, acquaintances or religious leaders without a regulatory and legal framework.
Nigeria’s petroleum resources are governed by laws and established administrative procedures. During Obasanjo’s presidency, petroleum exploration and production activities operated under the petroleum regulatory framework then in force, including the Petroleum Act.
Oil prospecting licences and oil mining leases involve identifiable legal and commercial arrangements.
Consequently, if an oil well was allocated to Pastor Adeboye or to a company in which he had an interest, there should be a trail of information capable of investigation.
What was the name or number of the oil block or oil field?
Which company received the licence or lease?
Who were its registered shareholders and beneficial owners?
When was the allocation made?
Which government authority approved it?
What was the relevant licence or lease instrument?
Was Pastor Adeboye personally named, or was the alleged beneficiary a company in which he had an interest?
These are the elementary questions that any credible investigation should establish.
If Madugba has such information, he should publish it or make it available to the appropriate investigative authorities.
If he does not have it, he should explain the actual basis of his statement.
It is not enough to say that somebody has an oil well because that person has a university, a hospital or a private aircraft.
That is an assumption, not proof.
The private jet argument is equally problematic
Another part of Madugba’s statement referred to private jets, suggesting that their ownership was connected to the alleged oil well allocations.
But even the question of aircraft ownership requires careful investigation.
Who owns the aircraft? Is it privately owned by an individual, registered to a company, operated under a lease arrangement or owned by an organisation? Who finances its acquisition and maintenance?
These distinctions matter.
An aircraft used for ministry-related assignments does not automatically establish personal ownership by the minister who uses it. Equally, the existence of an aircraft does not establish the source of its financing.
If there is evidence of an illegal acquisition, let it be produced.
But a private jet, like a university or hospital, cannot independently establish that somebody received an oil well from the Federal Government.
One cannot use an asset as proof of a particular source of funding without establishing the connection.
What has RCCG said?
Following the controversy, reports published by Sunday PUNCH on November 8, 2026, indicated that an official in RCCG’s media unit said the church would not respond substantively until Madugba provided evidence to substantiate his allegation.
That position deserves to be understood in its proper context.
RCCG is not required to manufacture a detailed response to every allegation circulated on social media. The responsibility for substantiating a specific factual allegation rests primarily with the person who made it.
However, the public deserves clarity, and if verifiable evidence is presented, the appropriate authorities and the church should be willing to address legitimate questions.
It is equally important to note that the reports did not establish that former President Obasanjo had been reached for a substantive response when they were published.
Therefore, the matter should not be presented as though an official government investigation has already established the truth or falsity of the allegation.
The facts available publicly are straightforward: a serious allegation has been made, the churches have challenged or rejected it, and no documentary proof was presented in the circulating sermon.
The danger of damaging public trust
Religious leaders are not beyond accountability. In fact, their positions of spiritual influence demand a high standard of integrity.
Churches should be transparent in their institutional dealings. Their financial practices should comply with the law. Their investments should be properly documented, and their leaders should be prepared to answer legitimate questions.
But accountability must not become an excuse for irresponsible accusations.
It is particularly troubling when a statement capable of damaging the reputation of an individual is made without accompanying evidence.
The consequences extend beyond the individual concerned.
Millions of people identify with RCCG. They include professionals, academics, business owners, public servants, artisans, students, civil servants and ordinary working people who have contributed to the church’s growth.
Many have made sacrifices to build churches, support missions, establish institutions and advance humanitarian programmes.
To casually suggest that the achievements of such an institution are the product of an undisclosed oil well allocated by a former president is to disregard the contributions of countless people.
It also risks creating an impression that every successful religious institution must have acquired its resources through questionable political connections.
That is neither fair nor intellectually defensible.
We must not confuse the responsibility to question powerful people with the freedom to invent or circulate unverified explanations for their achievements.
Rev. Prof. Madugba should provide answers
I believe the most constructive way forward is for Rev. Prof. Mosy Madugba to clarify his statement.
He should tell Nigerians precisely where he obtained the information.
He should identify the alleged oil well or oil block, provide the relevant dates, name the beneficiary company, explain the connection with Pastor Adeboye and produce whatever documents support his claim.
If his information came from an individual, he should explain whether that information was independently verified.
If he relied on a government record, he should make the record available.
If he has no documentary evidence, he should have the courage and integrity to clarify that his statement was not based on verified documentation.
And if he discovers that the information was incorrect, he should be willing to correct the record.
There is no shame in correcting an inaccurate statement. Indeed, the willingness to do so is a mark of integrity.
The Christian ministry should be a place where truth is respected, not where allegations acquire credibility simply because they are delivered from a pulpit.
The Bible says in Proverbs 18:13:
“He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.”
It also says in Proverbs 18:17:
“He that is first in his own cause seemeth just; but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him.”
These scriptures remind us of the importance of hearing, examining and establishing facts before reaching conclusions.
My position is simple
I have spent more than five decades in RCCG and worked closely with Pastor Enoch Adeboye for over four decades. I have witnessed the development of the church and have a considerable understanding of its leadership, administration and missionary journey.
I do not claim that this personal experience makes the church immune from scrutiny. Neither am I suggesting that Pastor Adeboye or any other religious leader should be above the law.
But I will not accept an unsubstantiated allegation as established truth simply because it has been repeated by a respected minister.
If there is evidence, let it be produced.
If there are documents, let them be examined.
If there are questions about the finances of RCCG or any of its institutions, let those questions be asked through appropriate and responsible channels.
But if there is no evidence that Pastor Adeboye received an oil well from former President Obasanjo, then the allegation should not be allowed to stand as an established fact.
I have deliberately confined this intervention to Pastor Adeboye and RCCG. The other ministers and their ministries should speak for themselves.
The issue is not whether Pastor Adeboye has become a prominent religious leader, whether RCCG has grown into a global Christian movement, or whether the church has established impressive institutions. The issue is whether there is credible evidence that a former Nigerian president allocated an oil well to him.
Until such evidence is produced, Nigerians should distinguish between an allegation and a proven fact.
Respect for truth requires no less.
And those who occupy positions of religious and intellectual authority should understand that the responsibility to speak the truth includes the responsibility to prove serious claims made against others.
Truth does not need sensationalism to survive. Evidence does not need exaggeration to speak. And a person’s reputation should not be put on trial by an allegation that its author cannot substantiate.
