Archive for November, 2014

Dreams and Visions II

November 22, 2014 3 comments

deadbishopThe events (a summary in case you are clueless) of the past several weeks involving the COGIC, its Presiding Bishop and the issue of homosexuality caused me to remember a dream I had on May 15th. I shared it with a select few on facebook at the time and asked for some insight. Aside from some obvious meanings, some elements of the dream puzzle me.  I want to share it here with you. Feel free to comment as you feel led to do.

In my dream, I attended the funeral for a major church leader in a black Pentecostal denomination. When I arrived at the service dressed in what I would say was the clerical garb of a bishop, the processional for the clergy was already lined up. The denomination’s new bishop was at the head of the procession and right behind him in line was OC Allen, the gay Atlanta bishop. He (Allen) appeared to be in greater regalia than the “presiding bishop”.  As I approached, an assistant was sent to me. In my hand, I held two glass roses. The assistant told me to go to the back of the line and I did. Then the assistant followed me back,  got in my face and said “A carry on? Really? A carry on?”. He repeated this to me several times with a tone of disappointment as if I had embarrassed every one.


The Founders Dream



Categories: dreams

Bishop Blake and the ministry of apologizing

November 21, 2014 3 comments

blakeapologyOver 60% of the people polled on our survey of the Blake vs Carter issue, support Supt Earl Carter’s preaching. Notwithstanding, Carter used words and phrases many would call unacceptable, the truth still produced repentance and change.  Only 23% said Bishop Blake was right to repudiate Carter’s message and apologize. Still, 17% felt both were right to say and do what they did.

But an IL COGIC pastor is calling out Bishop Charles Blake’s selective apology-mongering with challenges about other more serious issues Blake has ignored or failed to give an apology for while acting as Presiding Bishop. Calling the massive PR disaster “a sad day for COGIC”, Supt. Harvey Burnett elaborates on six serious issues in the COGIC that Bishop Blake has neglected to take responsibility for.


Since we are apologizing or in an apologetic mood…I would like to know when our Presiding Bishop will apologize to me and the nearly 12,000 member churches and pastors for signing us on the section of the UDHR (Universal Declaration Of Human Rights) which affirms gay unions. May we remind the people that the UDHR is currently a document used to affirm gay unions and the rights of gay to marry all around the world? In fact this document is the pathway to gay rights as gay advocacy holds it, delivering gay rights to the gay community all over the world and the United States.

Since we are in an apologetic mood…WHEN will COGIC apologize for the neglect of ALL the victims of clergy and church related sexual abuse? When will COGIC apologize for our church’s failure to implement, create, or act upon a SOLID Victim’s Advocacy plan? I mean it has only been about 7 to 8 years that I have been after the church about implementing a plan to address the fallout that victims and those who have survived sexual abuse have experienced within this church. In fact, I personally delivered a topical proposal into Presiding Bishop Blake’s hands, in Joliet, IL. with a tentative agreement to personally meet with he certain church and representatives in STL. during the 106th Annual Holy Convocation (last year)…Well that meeting NEVER happened. Is there an apology for either me or more importantly to the victims and survivors for our church’s apparent failure to act since we have been so keenly made aware of the problems?

Bishop Charles Brown
We are proud that we have planted flowers in STL, gave folk blankets and haircuts and even read books to children while we were there, but what about the terrible weeds that have been allowed to grow around our victims such as those stemming from the alleged perverted actions of a Bishop from Louisiana for example whom the church has never tried in adequate council? I could name many other places and persons. They are self evident and additional information thoroughly posted on….Are we saying that “flowers” and cleaning up neighborhood garbage is more important that these souls that have survived one of the worst type of attacks from the enemy?

In conjunction with that, I wonder and listened for additional apology to the church in general for waiting so long to openly address alleged clergy and member pedophiles and sexually immoral persons that use our name and our pulpits to take advantage of the sheep. we have NEVER apologized for the sexual immorality of former General Board Bishop JD Husband, yet alone anyone else. I know that some of those we need to apologize for have nothing to do with homosexuality, but relieving them (the offenders) from office or at least trying them in front of their accusers in an open and fair forum SHOULD be the standard. Now, shouldn’t it? Yet only SILENCE? Why???

To the issue of the message at the convocation, As our Bishop states, there were over 15 messages delivered. There was one delivered at a round-table banquet that Bishop Blake annually sponsors for COGIC Charities. The message at that banquet was delivered by a West Angeles member who openly affirms gays and their “right” to marry. I didn’t hear an apology to anyone for allowing Earvin “Magic” Johnson to speak to folk who otherwise believe that what he affirms as OK, is condemned by the church. Although we certainly love Earvin, has he ever apologized for his support of gay inclusion in the face of our church’s supposed teaching and “stance” on the issue? Did Earvin ever apologize for wanting Prop 8, the gay marriage ban of CA. approved by the citizens of CA, overturned? I still remember what he said in his call:

“This is Magic Johnson calling to ask you to join me and Barack Obama in opposing Proposition 8. Prop 8 singles out one group of Californians to be treated differently – including members of our family, our friends, and our coworkers”…. “That is not what California is about. So this Tuesday, vote no on Proposition 8. It is unfair and wrong. Thanks.

I know that’s over, (yea right) and the courts of California overrode the will of the people and the legislative branch of the system of government and approved gay marriage, but did the church ever apologize for Earvin’s support of gay marriage in any way especially since we are hailing him as a great leader among our ranks?

It seems to me that IF there is going to be apologies issued, that some of them should be based on this and things like this that the church has allowed.

The bible says:

2 Tim. 4:2 ~ Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

Now, which and whose is a greater command or commendation? The command to preach the truth or the command of men, to preach something, nearly anything, that accommodates men and their desires? What should Carter have done? Cowered to public opinion, even that of the Presiding Bishop, and the world who doesn’t care about the church or God anyway? Should there be an “apology” for a “harsh, un-compassionate, disrespectful spirit, on the part of that speaker” ?

I wonder if how “harsh” and “un-compassionate” they thought Ezekiel was when he was commanded by God to deliver a message to Israel and their leaders while laying on his side eating cow maneuver mingled with certain food and wasting away? I wonder would our church and those who agree with the Bishop’s apology tell the prophet that he was being “harsh, un-compassionate, disrespectful spirit”? So it sounds like that the “prophet” as Dr. Carter called himself, may need an apology as well, for being called names when his claim is that he was only delivering a message that he received from the Lord?

Further, I would like to know when, since a message is given or delivered under the rights of free speech in AMERICA, the land of the free, that the message needs to be apologized for. In a free and civil society when no threat was made a person, a group of individuals either based on religion, creed or anything else, would a church associate statements with

“violence against and the subjugation of any person to verbal or physical harassment on the basis of their sexual stance.”

It seems that an apology is in order for the violation of the guaranteed and protected right of free speech. Then, when I examine our church we find that this church has a history of people who have taken the church’s largest stage and have either inadvertently or purposefully said something wrong. YET the statements and presentation of a preacher, delivering a message in the pulpit is apologized for??? WHAT IS THAT???

In addition, I would like to know why Bishop Blake felt a need to apologize to a person that claims that they need nothing from the church. Andrew Caldwell, like him or leave him, has not asked the church for anything to my knowledge but for a book sale, CD sale and prayers…Why is this church in the habit of apologizing to folk who are not asking for an apology, while overlooking those whom we should REALLY and SINCERELY apologize to? According to the Bishop, it was because we “think” we have arrived when we are criticized by a comic like Jimmy Kimmel? (whom I’ve NEVER watched nor considered a source of entertainment)

Read full commentary at Dunamis Word Blog

Categories: Bishop Charles Blake

POLL: Was Bishop Blake right to repudiate Supt Earl Carter?

November 17, 2014 27 comments

The negative fallout from the COGICs 107th Convocation has been massive to say the least. The message preached by Supt Earl Carter of Florida has been rebuked publicly now by Bishop Blake. Which do you support? Was Earl Carter right to call out this sin and strongly rebuke COGIC leadership for enabling it or was Bishop Blake right to rebuke Earl Carter and apologize to the homosexual community? Watch the two videos and then vote.

Federal lawsuit seeks to unseat COGIC General Assembly Chairman

November 15, 2014 Leave a comment

rcagraphic-johnsonvshuntAlleging abuse of power and refusal to abide by the Church of God in Christ constitutional mandates among other grievances, a 17 page federal lawsuit was filed November 8th in the US District Court of Northern Illinois against General Assembly Chairman, Bishop James Hunt, Sr.  The COGIC, Inc was also named as a defendant.

Hunt became Chairman of the General Assembly when Bishop J.O. Patterson Jr. of Memphis died in 2011.

The suit was filed by Pastor Andre Johnson, who is listed as the “court overseer”. [source]

Since the suit is not filed on behalf of the church’s Judicial Court, its unclear where the battle lines will fall in this case.

Johnson is no stranger to legal battles.  In 2008, he sued Kimberly Ann Lewis in the same court for libel, slander and assault. [source]  The suit identified Lewis as a member of St Paul COGIC in Detroit. According to court documents, the married pastor carried on a “brief but intense”  sexual relationship with Ms Lewis while on a ministry engagement in Detroit and that due to his deception, should be removed from office.  Johnson contended that the woman showed up at the 2008 Bishops Conference in Chicago to accused him openly but was later legally forced into silence about the case.  Johnson said he had already been disciplined by his jurisdictional bishop Robert Sanders for the adultery but what that discipline entailed is unknown. In 2009,  both parties agreed to an existing permanent injunction order. Read the full court case Johnson vs Lewis

This latest lawsuit reflects yet another example of how the church hierarchy seems to be imploding. Unable to quell the lust for power, authority and the money it brings, legal battles continue unabated.

We’ve posted the official court document under Letters and Documents.

Board of Bishops Secretary wins defamation lawsuit against William McCray III

November 3, 2014 Leave a comment

Report COGIC Abuse has obtained a copy of the lawsuit in which Board of Bishops Secretary Bishop Larry Shaw was awarded a judgment against controversial COGIC personality William McCray III. Shaw had filed suit against McCray and Board of  Bishops Chairman John H. Sheard of Detroit over a sordid defamation issue alleged to have been instigated by Sheard to “destroy” Shaw’s run for office. The case has become an example of the behind the scenes civil war-type political thuggery some COGIC leaders have become known for. See our story here.

The default judgement of $150,000 was issued October 27th in Fulton Country Superior Court by Judge Henry Newkirk after McCray failed to respond to the charges per the 30 day window given by the court.

McCray however, claimed in a May 14th  posting on his website that the lawsuit against he and Sheard had been dismissed.

Judge dismisses bogus charges brought by Bishop Larry Shaw against “Obnoxious” blogger, William G. McCray III and Bishop John Henry Sheard.

Last Monday Judge Henry M. Newkirk dismissed the lawsuit filed in Fulton County Superior Court, against William McCray III and Bishop John Sheard of Detroit. In the suit filed last year, Bishop Larry Shaw sought national attention by falsely accusing Bishop Sheared and journalist, William McCray III of conspiring to defame his character. McCray is the founder of the wildly popular blog, Obnoxious. In his ruling, Judge Newkirk stated that Shaw did not have enough evidence to support his claims and he dismissed the case without prejudice.

But the case against McCray wasn’t dismissed. On April 28th, the case  against Sheard was dismissed because the judge ruled the Georgia court had no personal jurisdiction.  Attorneys hired by Shaw plan to refile suit in a Detroit court. We’ve placed a copy of the lawsuit in our Letters and Documents section.

Categories: Uncategorized