In Defense of Bishop Blake

I have been a member of West Angeles Church of God in Christ since 1987. I am a minister in training aspiring to move forward in my calling. I serve as the Recording Secretary for the West Angeles Community Development Corporation. Through my job as Marketing Director of KJLH Radio, a station that has served the African American Community of Southern California for 50 years, I have a birds eye, frontline view of the issues of our community and at many times am the catalyst for communication and solutions in our community.

I have been following the story of Elder Earl Carter since last year’s “I’m not Gay No Mo’” situation. And as I thought the issue had run its course, I see it has taken an unfortunate and ugly turn. I see some incredible allegations, vicious insinuations and some straight up lies. Please allow me the liberty to offer some observations:

Bishop Blake: I am blessed to interact with a plethora of Bishops, ministers, elders, politicians and community leaders from every aspect of the community. Accordingly I bear witness that Bishop Charles Edward Blake is a leader among leaders. There is none like him. Not in this City. The work he has done in our community and indeed across the globe is unmatched. It is a living testament that he sees the ills of our community and has activated the Church to be a central and essential catalyst for solutions toward the betterment therein. The man exudes honesty, fairness, integrity, humility, and excellence. Without question. It is hard to fathom how people can launch an attack on Bishop Blake with such insidious and twisted accusations. 

 Bishop Blake on Homosexuality: I have NEVER heard Bishop Blake come anywhere near approving or endorsing homosexuality. In fact, in my years as a member of the church, he has always been quite serious about the preservation of the family. Marriage being a Godly union between a man and a woman. He has always been about the sanctity of marriage. He has always pushed the men to be men. He has always been against ANY type of sexual immorality. I would call Bishop Blake a man’s man. I have heard Bishop Blake strongly speak out against homosexuality again and again. I keep hearing these stories and with all due respect, this notion that Bishop Blake endorses homosexuality is patently ridiculous. Farcical. In fact, when he was the Jurisdictional Bishop ordaining the new elders, it always struck me that he made it a point to insist and encourage the new elders to rebuke and refrain from sexual immorality. As a man, I have always appreciated this message from the pastor. Even when folks criticized him for endorsing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that criticism fell short to me because the signing of that document had nothing to do with endorsing gay marriage. The gay community has manipulated the core concept of that historic document to fit their cause just as they have manipulated the message of the Civil Rights Movement to promote their agenda and we fall for it. Bishop’s signing of the document is to endorse world peace and justice. Now THAT’s honorable. 

Bishop Blake and Bishop Husband: Really? Come now... Cut it out right now.

 The Apology (after the I’m not Gay No’ Mo’ incident): I too was saddened and flabbergasted by the entire incident. And as a broadcaster, I still say, no microphone, no incident. While the young man answered the altar call to claim his deliverance from homosexuality, I still find myself questioning his credibility and sincerity. I see a book by the same name(I’m not Gay No More), I see a song that generated a healthy amount of downloads, the viral nature of his proclamation of deliverance fulfilled his lust for fame. A lust he has coveted publicly on interviews. The two weeks after the convocation gave that man an international platform that he exploited to the fullest. Even here at home, the air personalities at the radio station where I am employed had a field day with it. It was painful. Yet, the actions that the Church took to damage control the situation were effective. And in my opinion the apology issued by Bishop Blake was correct and proper at that instance. I do feel that Bishop’s magnanimous position was weakened by Andrews insistent presence in the media. Instead of the story dying, we saw Andrew resurfacing in ridiculous situations that are to me, an attempt to milk the last drops of fame from of his Internet stardom. He is making a mockery of the church and he should have just sat himself down somewhere and concentrated on his “deliverance”. 

Elder Earl Carter: So the man of God has taken on a vendetta against Bishop Blake. Certainly, one has to actually take note of his language and delivery in his sermon on that fateful night. I actually get what he was saying and admittedly I tend to agree with some of what he said. However; I definitely feel that he should have chosen a different verbal strategy to make his points. I understand the passion and disdain he has for these open displays of effeminacy and homosexuality at church events particularly the Holy Convocation. It is indeed shocking and completely adverse to who we are and what we represent not to mention the effect these sights have on those who have their children attending the event. But to what gain does abusive elocution achieve? So for me, Bishop Blake’s statement is accurate. He says the man of GOD’s choice of words were inappropriate. I agree. They were. Bishop also says his statement in no way compromises the Church’s stance on homosexuality. He was clear. We still believe homosexuality is wrong. Period. In these days and times, we need the men of GOD to be unified in our stance against homosexuality. They are forcing same sex marriage on the church. Instead of helping to create strategy on how to deal with this, we are hurling insidious and libelous accusations. Its OK to disagree about the method of delivery as we stand on Godly Principles, but now, more than ever we need to be on one accord as to how to deal with this. This argument strengthens the homosexual agenda. Why go so far to advance such evil lies about Bishop Blake??

The Gomes situation: Ok. This is the gift that keeps on giving. Gomes came to West Angeles years ago. And now he’s dead. I am so sorry to all those that keep holding this up as evidence that Bishop Blake is supportive and endorses homosexual lifestyles. First of all I was there that Sunday. The firestorm that ensued after Gomes preached is unfortunate. As a member, in hindsight, I see how folk would object to him being in the pulpit at our church. From a pew-view, perhaps we should have done more research to see his background.. maybe we were blinded by the Harvard-ness. I don’t know. But all that being said, in all the years of this story, I have failed to see how this is powerful and convincing evidence that Bishop Blake is supporting the LGBT agenda. And to infer or straight accuse that Bishop Blake had some sort of inappropriate relationship with Gomes is utterly ridiculous. Libelous, disrespectful, ill informed and downright stupid. Shame on whomever is spreading that one. 

Magic Johnson: I bring him up because most name Earvin when advancing the notion of homosexual support at West Angeles. Yes, Magic Johnson and other celebrities are members of West Angeles Church of God In Christ. Don’t stars and celebrities need the LORD too? A lot of us entertainment industry executives attend also. Not because it’s some Hollywood event, but because we need to hear the Word of GOD. Now, trust and believe I am not financially blessed like Earvin and others but they aren’t going to get me to heaven. The notion that his membership somehow demonstrates Bishop Blake’s endorsement of homosexuality is ridiculous. Yes. we in the community were disappointed with Mr. Johnson’s stance against Proposition 8. I know I was.  Most disagreed with him. And I don’t know because I am not in the one on one conversations between Bishop Blake and Magic Johnson, but If I were to speculate, I am sure that made for healthy debate between the two because Bishop Blake is positively and vociferously against same sex marriage. My further speculation and this one is really deep – Magic’s life perspectives are complex in this area. He has had to interact with the Gay community because of his HIV status, that was, after all, the most affected population. But you must admit that the nation had to do something about this deadly disease. And so he lent his name and face to the fight against HIV/AIDS. We can disagree at this association if we want, but one must admit that said interactions have resulted in increased awareness and even better access to the necessary medicines and treatments needed to combat this deadly epidemic.  I think we can say that this man is saving lives!!! I don’t think we need to turn our backs on Earvin Magic Johnson. I don’t think we cast him out of the church. We can disagree. But we must continue to love and support this man who is mainly about the community development and uplift of our people. We can disagree with his position back then on Prop 8 and we can tell him so. He’s accessible! And so we did. And he is still in church. Praise God!

West Angeles Church – I want you to understand that West Angeles Church of God in Christ is a biblical ministry of excellence. Keyword: biblical. Folk across the nation seem to be critical of the church. The church doesn’t in anyway shape form or fashion endorse homosexuality. We are consistent with the Word of GOD and the doctrines of the Church of God in Christ. Sure, stars attend the church. As they should. They need salvation too. And it wasn’t just their money that built our beautiful cathedral. Us normal folks got some significant dollars on it too!!

 B. Slade(aka Tonex): Another example that folk use to say Bishop Blake endorses homosexuality.  I was at that John P Kee Concert. When Bishop Blake opens the door of the 5,000 seat Cathedral to the community for a gospel concert, it is always free and always features the top gospel artists of the day. It is a major event in the City. The community anticipates these events because as a major edifice and beacon of hope in the ‘hood, it is awesome that West A gives back to the community in this manner. The industry also comes out (LA is one of the strongest retail markets for gospel music and the gospel stars come out). In the gospel world it is the place to be. And so this is the context that the artist B. Slade was at the Cathedral that night. Those of us from the radio station were surprised actually because he is doing R&B now and he has had so much controversy in recent years. But as is the nature of a live gospel performance, John P. Kee called him up and others as an impromptu musical guest. It wasn’t planned or scripted. It was a “pass the mic” sort of thing. So to say Bishop Blake “allowed” this is inaccurate. It is something that happened in context of the concert. As to the assertion that nothing was said, you don’t know what was said. We don’t know. So to assume Bishop "allowed" this is again.. ridiculous.    

In the grand scheme of governance of the Church of God in Christ, my observations herewith are just comments from the peanut gallery. You may not even read this.  However, my words are true, wholly accurate.  I’m a humble man of GOD. I’m faithful to the Church of God in Christ. I’m faithful to West Angeles Church of God in Christ. I see what I see and I hear what I hear. And certainly, the accusations are evil, libelous, misdirected, ill-informed, crazy and utterly ridiculous lies.  

Bishop Charles Edward Blake is morally centered. Right thinking. And to suggest anything other than that is just wrong. And as a member of the Grand Old Church of God in Christ, I whole-heartedly object to the accusations made against the Presiding Bishop.

Gay Rights: A Moral and Spiritual Conflict

Last fall’s election was historic and monumental not only because we elected the first African American President, but also for the unprecedented social movement of the masses of the people calling for change. The movement resulted in an emotional season of self evaluation for the nation. The nation paused to reinvest itself into the established system, using it to debate the political, military, economic and moral issues facing the nation. We’ve re-examined the way our nation and society views folkways and mores of the United States. One such examination is the issue of gay rights.

The issue of gay rights is one of the most hotly contested issues of today’s society. The LBGT segment is growing rapidly as more and more people profess to the lifestyle. Thier emergence or “coming out” is met with vociferous objection. Vociferous objection based on moral precepts emanating from tenets of our faith. Vociferous objection based on our political values which have been in place since the inception of the Republic. Vociferous objection based on societal folkways, mores, traditions and community standards.

Conversely, the masses of the gay community say to object to thier demands is tantamount to hate, prejudice and bigotry. They say the struggle for gay rights is a struggle for civil rights. A struggle for human rights. The LBGT community has demanded tolerance and social acceptance of the lifestyle.

And so during the last election, the nation engaged in one of history’s most wide open debates on gay rights. Proposition 8 in California asked if the State should ban same sex marriage. Most of the voters answered YES. It remains a passionate issue in the state even as most argue that we should not allow the government to legislate who one chooses to sleep with let alone who one should marry. To say anything against this makes you a bigot… a fascist… So they say…
and so off to court we go…

There are those of us who voted yes on 8 based on the moral standards of faith. Is this bigotry? This is a question asked in one of my earlier blogs. However; those of us in opposition of gay marriage have to know and agree that the gay community deserves protection against violence, discrimination and tyranny. The right to live safe in this nation and indeed the world should be a proprietary human right. I don’t agree with the lifestyle, but I do agree that they should not be judged by me(that’s between God and them) and have a right to live free and safe in this world just like me. Therein lies the dilemma for the Christian. Our spiritual center makes us disagree with the lifestyle and we certainly do not agree with same sex marriage, but that spiritual center also makes us disagree with human rights atrocities. Rape, murder, genocide, discriminiation, bigotry, hate… After all aren’t gay people human? So, what do we do?

Last week, my spiritual leader, COGIC Presiding Bishop Charles E. Blake was criticized for signing an affirmation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It was a major ceremony and world diplomacy action as religious leaders and heads of state from all over the globe converged on The Netherlands at the invitation of Queen Beatrice to participate in this signing. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was originally drafted by the United Nations and executed in 1948 in the aftermath of World War Two. It was meant to provide a global, legal platform to protect the rights of humans from tyranny, genocide, rape, chaos. In fact, the document is one of the foundations for the issuance of a United Nations arrest warrant for Sudan President Omar Al-Bashir for crimes against humanity particularly in the region of Darfur. The affirmation ceremony marked the 60th anniversary of the Declaration and re-committed heads of states and religious leaders to the protection of human rights.

Bishop Blake was strongly criticized for signing the document. The criticism started with a headline that said “”Bishop Charles Blake endorses gay marriage declaration “ This headline is a misleading, untruthful, slanderous statement which was widely discussed and written about all over the internet. It did not have anything to do with sexual orientation and homosexual rights. Again the affirmation of the UN declaration signed by Bishop Blake was about human rights and their inherent right to protection from genocide, tyranny, rape and other chaos. The Church of God in Christ is pretty clear and implicit in its position on same sex marriage.

This morning, we heard the news that the Obama administration intends to endorse a declaration for the world wide decriminalization of homosexuality. And now church folk are demanding that Bishop Blake rescind his signature from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They are calling it an unholy covenant.

Now as I understand the story, this is a separate and “new” declaration that would not have Bishop Blake’s signature on it. It has nothing to do with the UDHR or Bishop Blake’s support of it. It has everything to do with the goals and objectives of President Obama’s administration to seek justice for all.

So for a Christian movement that voted for Barack Obama, this poses an interesting scenario… It was known that he was a supporter of certain gay rights.. I mean, hey, the LBGT community is huge and that equals votes. This is the moment we had in the back of our minds - The moment when we would, perhaps, disagree with the administration of President Barack Obama.

The report says that one Obama Administration official said that “The United States is an outspoken defender of human rights and critic of human rights abuses around the world” The Bush Administration refused to sign the document when it was presented at the United Nations on December 19.

66 of the United Nations’ 192 member countries signed the declaration.

More than 50 countries oppose the declaration.

Homosexuality is illegal in 70 UN member countries.

Some Islamic countries say that protection of sexual orientation could lead to “the social normalization and possibly legalization of deplorable acts”…. This leads to spiritual immorality and corruption within the people… The Vatican also opposed the declaration.
In some countries, homosexuality is punishable by execution.

Do we want that in our society? No. We may disagree with the lifestyle, but do we consider homosexuality a capital crime? We may disagree with the lifestyle, but when people inflict violence against the homosexual in a rage of hate, we know that is wrong. We disagree with the lifestyle, but I don’t think we want discrimination in the workplace, schools, etc. (although as a veteran, I do not think homosexuality in the military should be tolerated.)

So then how do we protect folk from widespread violence and discrimination while still maintaining our moral position? This is the dilemma of human rights when it comes down to Christian values and thought.

To what degree do we define and defend Human Rights? Do we even care?