On this page, some of the published opinions and decisions of the Judiciary Board of the Church of God in Christ can be viewed:
May 2009
EMMANUEL CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST, WICHITA KANSAS
VS
KANSAS SOUTHWEST, CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST, INC
Click the links below to view the opinions.
MAJORITY OPINION DISSENTING OPINION
April 12, 2011
The Judiciary Board became involved in this case when Bishop Holsey appealed a ruling of the Board of Bishops which occurred at an exparte hearing (a hearing with only one side present) which they later withdrew.
Click this link to view the OPINION
May 29, 2013
CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST, INC
VS
BISHOP THOMAS HOLSEY
Click this link to view the ORDER
This case was before the Judiciary Board when Bishop Holsey requested an update on the status of his two (2) year probation.
December 20, 2013
Ruling on the eligibility of Auxiliary Bishop Enoch Perry III
Click on this link to view the ORDER
JANUARY 2014
Ruling on eligibility of Auxiliary Bishop Clemmons
Click on this link to view the ORDER
MAY 1, 2014
This Special Order was the Judiciary Boards response to a letter from the Chairman of the General Assembly.
Click this link to view Special Order-SP2014-1
October 2014
Ruling on Bishop Washington request for reconsideration
View the ruling on the request for Reconsideration by Bishop F. W. Washington
May 27, 2016
Ruling and Order in Bishop Rufus Kyles Appeal
View the Order
Has the Judiciary Board ruled on The Greater First COGIC request for transfer yet? Can the results be published for viewing.
To my knowledge, no ruling has been issued yet.
The Judicary Board of the Cogic has issued a ruling on church transference on June 2, 2016. Special 2016-1 says the Constitution is silent on the issue of geographic location as it relates to transfers. Therefore, it is the finding of this court that the Constitution does not prohibit nor restrict local churches from transferring their jurisdictional affiliation regardless of geographical locations(s) .
The word is that Presiding Bishop Blake is furious as a baboon in heat at the Judiciary Board for their ruling regarding jurisdictional church transfers. He has essentially decreed their ruling to be null and void. Does the COGIC now have a King? What happened to the mandate that all members of the COGIC including the Presiding Bishop and the General Board must be subject to the rulings of the Supreme Court? Let’s pray for Chief Justice Jackson that the Lord will keep him and protect him from the vindictive darts of Bishop Charles Blake. Let’s also pray for Bishop Blake that he will not hardened his heart like Pharaoh but begin to submit himself to the Spirit of Christ and foster the peace of God among the brethren.
Bishop Blake signed in the Resolution committee in November 2015 a resolution that be it resolved that all rulings from the judiciary board are final and binding upon all cogic members and it cannot be reviewed nor up for scrutiny by any individual. The constitution of the Cogic says also that the rulings by our supreme court is final and binding. Only the General Assembly can review an order by the Judicary board and then can’t change it, but can amend it. But then it has to be read three times during the General assembly come togethers before it can become law for the Cogic. Bishop Blake was charged and took a oath to defend and obey the constitution of the Cogic. But now because he don’t agree with a ruling, he wants to create a executive order which is unconstitutional to change the ruling of the judiciary board. The presiding Bishop should have to obey the ruling by our supreme court just like any member of the Cogic.
The rulings of the Judiciary Board are notsubject to review, they are final. The General Assembly can change the law but only by amendment. It cannot legally be done with a resolution as they try to do.
I stand Corrected on that the General Assembly can review an order by the judiciary Board. The Rulings of the Judicary Board are not subject to review. They are final.
The General Assembly in 2016 approved a resolution in November 14, 2016 that all local jurisdiction transfers can only be to states that are connected to yours. But that all churches including GFC in Knoxville tn can stay in the jurisdiction they moved to.
I am not defending the Board of Bishops decision regarding Rufus Kyles nor am I for it I have not got the right amount of information, but couldn’t the decision to remove him from the pastorate of his church be filed under making any other decisions necessary to protect and preserve the church of God in Christ. (The exact wording escapes me sorry!) Just an honest question there or does that fall under another ruling?
The suspension can be done under that, however contrary to popular belief resolutions are not law. The removal process is, just as your state or city might pass a resolution to make you mayor or governor for a day it is not law and if you tried to exercise any rights you could not do so. The constitutional removal process is also part of the amendment to the Charter filed with the State of Tennessee. That is a legal document between COGIC and the State of Tennessee, to violate it can cause your 501 (c) 3 status potential problems. The Charter, trumps all documents in COGIC.
did they ever make any kind of ruling on Chief Justice Johnson’s removal from office
No, the procedures for impeachment require a trial. See Trials of C.O.G.I.C. Elected Officials
Has there been any ruling or retrial of Bishop Kyles as of now or does he still sit in limbo.
There are no charges there are also no pending trials. The authority to suspend him as Pastor has fallen away. Any action against or attempt to is a violation of his rights and the constitution. There have been many unethical, unconstitutional, deceitful and immoral things done concerning him as bishop. The ruling of the Judiciary Board in May of 2016 was all action against him as Pastor was void from the beginning. There was an attempt in January to appeal the finding of the Investigating Committee (which violated the May 2016 Ruling) but the Judiciary Board declined to hear it which means He is the Pastor of Evangelist Temple. Any further actions are violations of COGIC constitution.
why do you continue to allow known homosexual gossip blogger william mccray to prance around and be a reproach to the church this man(born) has not truly repented yet all he does is go on various social media sites and spill lies false accusatons same with so called bishop talbert swann an known adulterer who on youtube foolishly said he rather go to hell than spend eternity in heaven if whites are there arent we supposed to follow peace with all men? swann does alot of political racebaiting on social media yet cogic leadership stands silent
Remember when Jesus said “the sick need a physician? Anytime one life or words do not align with the Word of God, and the do not repent to God, their fruit tells you who they belong to. Titles are not what makes one righteous. Also Jesus said let the wheat and the tare grow together; He would do the separating.
The one thing worse than inaccurate reporting is selective reporting. In your reporting of the Rufus Kyles Case, I find in interesting that you reported the Judiciary Board’s reversal and remand but did not report that Kyles’s later ADMITTED that the charges he had denied for years were TRUE. You also failed to report that he had a later charge against him for conduct unbecoming a Bishop …, the charge for which he was actually removed from the office of Bishop. In that case he again appealed his removal to the Judiciary Board. This time, the Judiciary Board rejected his appeal and let stand his removal from the office of Bishop. You had access to that opinion but chose not to report it. Slanted and incomplete reporting may serve your prupose of protecting someone who is you friend, but it damages the Church by making people think the wrongdoer is the victim! Why not put all the facts out there as opposed to using your platform to deceive people into believing a predator is the victim.
I also find it interesting how your assessment glosses over the constitutional violations at each level which were the cause of the reversals. How the “charges” you speak of were in fact pulled out of the clouds and were not things found in the constitution. In Article * Section B there is an explicit list of things a pastor can be brought up on. Proven Constitutional violations abounded in this case. I have all the details beginning with the first trial (transcripts) up to and including civil court filings. Men of integrity do not have to resort to such Kangaroo court style tactics. I also have your video where you accused the Judiciary Board of not knowing what they were doing. This forum does not purport to give every miniscule bit of information, it would overload the average reader and they would lose interest. If you notice I also did not include the fact that a Texas lawyer seemed to ignore the FACT, when Bishop Kyles repented in his letter to the Chairman of the B.O.B. that you continued to persecute him. With the same mercy you mete, it will be meted to you.