July 20, 2013


Reset Your ClockRead this stunning article written by Dr. Lenard Lovett.  The subtitle is “A response to the Trayvon Martin verdict”.  Click on the image to read the Ebook.  Click here to read the PDF. Please Do Not Forget to Reset Your Clock

July 18, 2013


07-18-2013 02;12;18PM The struggle for justice is not a new one.  Here is a struggle over church property the courts in Florida got right.  If someone with the clout of say a General Board Member had come to Wichita, Kansas to dispute the testimony of former General Counsel Bishop Enoch Perry the outcome would have been different.  Click on the picture to the left to read this book written by Bishop Charles E. Blake when Supt. Derrick Hutchins was at the Orlando Institutional Church of God in Christ?

Here is an account of the story written in the O.I.C. NEWS.  Bishop Blake showed a willingness to fight for the underdog, to go against the system to correct an injustice.  What has happened to that?   He did not show up in Wichita, Kansas.

Click on the image below to read the story

Web button

July 13, 2013


This is a topic whose time has come for it to be revisited.  The Constitutional Rights Expose was written by Brenda Stidham and the Response to the Constitutional Rights Expose was written by Bishop Samuel P. Nesbitt.  The documents are presented in Ebook form a more comfortable reading experience.

Click here on the title to view The Constitutional Rights Expose

Click on this title to read Bishop Nesbitt’s Response to The Constitutional Rights Expose

If you cannot open the Ebooks, here are the PDF versions;

Constitutional Expose 

Bishop Nesbitts Response

Here is another critique of the governmental system of COGIC.  COGIC GOVERNMENT

July 10, 2013

Part II: Bishop Holsey, a case of injustice

Bishop HolseyHere is a copy of the Judiciary Boards Order on the Bishop Thomas Holsey case.  General Board

In its order dated April 12, 2011, the Judiciary Board retained jurisdiction “…for the purpose of ensuring the terms of the November 15, 2010 order …” was carried out (Click here for the complete April 2011 Judiciary Order).  By retaining jurisdiction, (similar to the way a federal court made sure its busing orders were enforced) it was not necessary to make another appeal.  Since the Judiciary Board ( COGIC Supreme Court) retained jurisdiction, the May 29th order brought the case to a close;  click here to read the order Judiciary Board Order 106-11

Bishop Sheard

Or did it?  Here is a copy of a Joint Motion for Reconsideration from the General Board (Uleses C. Henderson Attorney) and the Board of Bishops (Bishop Enoch Perry III and Elder C. Edward Watson are the BOB attorneys) of which Bishop John Sheard  is the Chairman.  Is this similar to the story Nathan the prophet told David about the rich man killing and dressing the lamb.

Normally when a Bishop dies, the Executive Branch comes in, plunders the Jurisdictional coffers and the new bishop starts from scratch.  Is it possible, this is what happened?  Somehow someone overlooked something, and discovered to their chagrin, there were assets they missed?  These are hypothetical questions for intelligent thinking individuals to ponder.  There is a saying, “follow the money”, the answers will be there.

General Counsel Enoch Perry III





Bishop Enoch Perry III (Former General Counsel of COGIC, Inc., one of the attorneys for the Board of Bishops)


Charles E. Watson II





Charles Edward Watson II (Attorney for the Board of Bishops)


uleses hendersonAs a question, is it ethical for brother Henderson to be the Special Counsel to the Presiding Bishop and also the General Counsel for COGIC, Inc.?  This is a question, not an accusation.  What happens if the interest of the Presiding Bishop and COGIC, Inc. (General Board) are different?  Since the actions of the Presiding Bishop require the approval of a majority of the General Board, the possibility exists their interest and desires could be different.



Uleses  C. Henderson (General Counsel COGIC, Inc.)

July 1, 2013


Since 2010, we have heard accusations against Bishop Thomas Holsey of improper use of a Delaware Jurisdictions funds.  This jurisdiction had a reported 4 million dollars in its coffers of which a substantial amount has been depleted.  At first mention, it was rumored Bishop Holsey had converted some of this money for personal gain.  We then find he had loaned a number of people money and had given money for various reasons to others,  (see the letter from Bishop Holsey to Bishop Sheard).  He made a large investment of  $700,000.   It seems like the catalyst for the action against him was  the return of checks written on the Jurisdictions accounts to the National Church for credential holder reports.

Does the action of the General Board signal that all Bishops who write insufficient fund checks are now subject to have charges of misfeasance brought against them?

Bishop Holsey had a total of nine counts brought against him, of that nine the Board of Bishops found him guilty of of one; nonfeasance and misfeasance.  These were combined and considered one count, the fourth of the nine counts brought against him.  He was acquitted of the other eight.

MisfeasanceRead these excerpts from The Whole Truth  written by Bishop Samuel P. Nesbitt.  Click here to read the complete article The Whole Truth

To read the original charges against Bishop Holsey, the order of the Board of Bishops and other documents click here and read the Case Against Bishop T. Holsey.

Whose report do you believe?

Definition from  Blacks Law Dictionary 2nd edition

Blog at