Retired Gen David Sejusa has warned that close ties between influential pastors and political leaders could fuel religious conflict in Uganda, arguing that Frank Gashumba’s Shs200 million miracle challenge has exposed growing public resentment towards some religious institutions.
In a statement, Sejusa, a former coordinator of intelligence services, said the controversy surrounding Gashumba’s challenge went beyond proving whether pastors could perform miracles, pointing instead to deeper concerns about church wealth, accountability and political influence.
“It was like a lit-match on petrol,” Sejusa wrote, describing the public reaction to the challenge.
Gashumba recently challenged preachers who claim to possess healing powers to demonstrate them on critically ill patients in Kampala hospitals, offering Shs200 million. The challenge sparked heated public debate about miracles, religious accountability and the treatment of vulnerable believers.
Sejusa Questions Pastors’ Wealth and Political Influence
Sejusa argued that the widespread support for Gashumba’s challenge, alongside angry reactions from some religious leaders, reflected existing frustrations among sections of the public.
He accused some Pentecostal and Charismatic churches of operating like family businesses, alleging that certain religious leaders prioritise donations, land acquisition and political protection over spiritual service.
However, Sejusa did not name specific churches or provide evidence for his allegations concerning business arrangements between some religious institutions and security organisations.
He also criticised the prosperity gospel, arguing that it had shifted parts of the church towards commercial interests at the expense of serving disadvantaged communities.
According to Sejusa, pastors who enjoy wealth and privileges through their relationships with political elites risk being perceived as part of the same system that many struggling Ugandans blame for their economic hardships.
“When the sacred aligns too closely with the sword, then, religion ceases to be useful to the oppressed,” he wrote.
Anglican and Catholic Churches Cited as a Different Model
Sejusa contrasted the churches he criticised with established Anglican and Catholic institutions, which he described as organisations that pool resources to build schools, operate hospitals and support vulnerable people, including widows and orphans.
Drawing on his family background, he noted that both his parents were preachers and that his father served as a Church of Uganda canon.
He argued that established administrative structures and shared financial contributions offered a different approach to church governance compared with ministries largely controlled by individual pastors and their families.
Sejusa Challenges the Monopoly on Miracles
The retired general also questioned the idea that miracles are the exclusive preserve of pastors or churches.
Drawing on biblical accounts and African traditions, he argued that witnessing extraordinary events does not automatically establish religious authority or guarantee faith.
He urged the government to address what he described as the exploitation of poor worshippers, warning that failure to confront such concerns could deepen public hostility towards religious leaders.
Miracle Debate Opens a Wider National Conversation
The dispute sparked by Gashumba’s Shs200 million offer has expanded beyond the question of whether pastors can demonstrate supernatural healing.
Sejusa’s intervention has placed the spotlight on broader issues concerning religious accountability, the influence of money in churches and the relationship between spiritual leaders and political power.
His central argument is that the public reaction to Gashumba’s challenge reflects grievances that existed long before the offer was made.
He warned that when religious authority becomes closely associated with wealth, political privilege and the interests of powerful individuals, it risks losing the trust of the very communities it is meant to serve.
The debate now raises wider questions about how religious institutions can maintain public confidence while balancing spiritual leadership, financial accountability and their relationship with the state.
