New COGIC Rule...Are Bishops Beyond Critique?

I want to be the first to say that within the Church Of God In Christ, there are various and varying opinions on politics and political, social and even moral issues. It seems that within the church there are even varying interpretations on what holiness is, what the Bible says and even how it should be interpreted to a varying degrees. 

While the church's Statement of Faith seeks to unify her basic tenets of doctrine and belief, there is little that unifies the church politically and socially, or even morally other than what the General Assembly, the only policy making authority within the church, seeks to affirm. 

Quite naturally, since COGIC is built on a "Faith Mission" concept and is "Episcopal" as opposed to congregational in its leadership structure, the door appears to be open to allowing some to state various  kinds of positions and when they are in some sort of position, or office, they can be being given credibility as a "spokesperson" of the church on particular subjects. 

The Leadership Of The Church

To be clear, in absence of the General Assembly, the ONLY individual entrusted with the ability to make and act with full and indiscriminate authority on behalf of the church is her Presiding Bishop. Bishop J Drew Sheard. He is the only one who affirms the official position of the church, and may appoint members of the General Board either in lieu of himself or in addition to himself to perform certain tasks. However, even in all of that, his authority is ultimately subject to the General Assembly when it is in session. So, in an ultimate sense, not even the Presiding Bishop of our church has unencumbered or unchecked power and authority. 

Unchecked Power???

Evidently Bishop Talbert Swan, who has been given authority to act as the church's leader of "Social Justice Ministry" feels that, not only has he been authorized by the church to speak on and even make official statements on Church policy and positions of social justice but that he is also above everyone, irreproachable and that all individual, ministers, elders and other clergy, who are not in the Bishopric class, are "beneath" him. 

In a statement to one, Elder Chris Turner, who was critical of Bishop Swan's statements in a recent message called "Who Are You Calling Garbage?" regarding President Trumps recent statements regarding Somali residents of MN, specifically them who had taken part in the recent and ongoing public fraud scandal that has cost tax paying citizens of MN and the United States over 2 Billion dollars and counting.

In response to Elder Turner's commentary or disagreement, on December 11th,2025 the alleged Bishop Swan said this on Facebook:

"CLAPBACK: “STAY IN A CHILD’S PLACE” EDITION 

Chris Turner has now elevated his desperation to calling a Bishop in his denomination a “fraud” who “doesn’t know the truth of God’s word.”

He came for me. I didn’t send for him. So let me help this ELDER understand something clearly:

There is protocol in the Lord’s church. There is order in the clergy. And there is a difference between an Elder and a Bishop the same way there is a difference between a student and a professor.

Chris Turner is not my peer. Chris Turner is not my colleague.

Chris Turner is not qualified to sharpen or correct me. And Chris Turner does NOT have the theological education, the ministry experience, the ecclesiastical authority, nor the spiritual depth to speak on my level.

This is an Elder with no formal theological training, no academic foundation in hermeneutics, no history of scholarship, and no demonstrated ability to rightly divide anything beyond Fox News talking points. A man who has substituted MAGA propaganda for biblical literacy now wants to lecture someone who actually studies, teaches, writes, and preaches the full counsel of God.

Brother, you cannot rebuke UP. You do not correct authority you do not possess. And you certainly do not step out of order trying to drag a Bishop you couldn’t carry water for.

You are loud, but you are not learned.

You are offended, but you are not anointed.

You are zealous, but you are not rooted.

And your theology proves it.

You’ve made it abundantly clear that:

• You defend white supremacy but attack Black liberation

• You’re triggered by sermons that confront racism

• You believe “social justice” is anti-Jesus

• You think salvation is a tunnel to heaven instead of liberation for the oppressed

• You oppose any Gospel that stands with Black people

That is not Christianity. That is the plantation gospel—chains wrapped in Scripture.

You are the very embodiment of the coon pulpit I warned about. A Black man weaponized against his own people. A preacher more offended by a Black Bishop confronting Trump than he is by Trump degrading Black people as “garbage.” A man whose theology bows to whiteness and whose mouth rebukes Black truth.

Let me be crystal clear:

I am not your playmate.

I am not your equal.

I am not your contemporary.

I am a Bishop in the Lord’s church, a national officer, a scholar, a theologian, and a preacher with decades of ministry, education, and leadership behind me.

You are an Elder with a Facebook page and a MAGA crush.

I will continue preaching the liberating Gospel of Jesus Christ, confronting injustice, exposing wickedness, and standing with the oppressed—because THAT is the biblical mandate. 

If my preaching intimidates you, convicts you, or exposes the weakness of your theology, that’s not my fraud—that’s your fragility.

Stay in a child’s place.

The grown men are talking.

Talbert Swan 

Now, there are so many things wrong with this statement, it is like a potpourri of where to begin???  

Let me first say that I don't know what Elder Turner stated other than that Talbert's statements were a "fraud" due to Talbert's stated positions on the issue. I DON'T know the background or why Elder Turner's statements were so poignant, but it seems that Bishop Swan is using the same or similarly worded post to intimidate or at least wart off all of them critical of his statements.

The REAL Issue 

To my point, the Bishop is totally out of the Bible in his belief that his office of Bishop exalts him beyond the level of scrutiny, and that us "ordinary" lower class preachers and ministers have no business calling anything he says into question. In other words, we are on a lower level of subjugation and should "dare not" take him to task over anything he says, because everyone else is "lower" than he. This is a sort of Jim Jones, I know more than your bible, Guyana kill 'em all type of sentiment. It is a totally dangerous sentiment and one that is filled with arrogance. 

Let's examine Bishop Swan's statements for truth:

First: Aside from calling this grown man a "child" which I will deal with at the end, the alleged Bishop asserts this:

There is protocol in the Lord’s church. There is order in the clergy. And there is a difference between an Elder and a Bishop the same way there is a difference between a student and a professor.

"Protocol in the Lord's church"...Is there? 

The word "protocol" is a secular word which deals with an official system of rules governing affairs of the state or operation of leadership and authority. Now, the Elder, as far as I know, and I may be wrong, did not attack or go outside of the "rule of the church" to claim that the Bishop was a "fraud" and did not know the "truth of God's word". He simply responded to Swan's statements. 

In contrast, it seems that what Elder Turner actually presented was a "polemic" against the Bishop and his opinion on the subject being addressed. Christian polemics is exactly the method that the Biblical writers and those who often stood against unrighteousness within the culture used to reveal the seriousness of the issues. Christian polemics have been used throughout the ages to speak clearly against heretical and false doctrines, false teachers and those that damage the reputation of Christ and Christianity. A Christian polemic is strong in content and specifically deals with subject matter, such as erroneous doctrines and false beliefs to make a strong distinction between them and the truth. 

In Acts 8, Peter, when confronted with the desire to be relevant by Simon Magus, a Zoroastrian Priest, said that he, Simon, was worthy of death v.20, had no place with God because he wasn't right v.21, was not saved because he was not forgiven v.22, and was in the "gall of bitterness, and "bond of iniquity" ie: condemned/unsaved, a sinner, coming under judgement v. 23.

Was Peter Unloving? 

Now, maybe Elder Turner wasn't specific enough on Bishop's "fraud" and should have been more specific as to how he was a "fraudster". I know nothing of that neither do I infer it, but from reading his retort to the Elder, Swan is certainly not biblically literate.  

In short, there is no "protocol" for an Elder, Bishop, or anyone else to criticize anyone's statement within COGIC. There is no prohibition on criticizing anyone. I don't find restrictions or a process in any manual or code of conduct, nor is it a church rule. I don't find it any any General Assembly note or code adopted by the General Assembly. Anyone is free to speak, and enjoys their 1st Amendment rights even within the church even at the level of Bishop, Pastor, Supt, Elder, Minister, Missionary, Saint or Friend...enemies too!

Now, there is the Biblical mandate to leave one's gift at the alter so far as reconciliation is concerned (Mt. 5:24). Interestingly if an accusation was to be brought against an "Elder", it was supposed to be before 2 or 3 witnesses, but Elders who had done wrong knowingly were to be rebuked publicly.

2 Timothy 5:19-20

19-Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. 20-Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. 

Was Elder Turner calling out the SIN of Talber Swan?

Yes, we certainly know that we are to address one another in the "spirit of meekness", "considering thyself" if one is overcome in a fault, (Gal 6:1) but there is no "protocol" or subjugation in action as the Bishop outlines in his statements. 

So, while claiming that his critic(s), speaking against his statements from within COGIC, are out of order, he has created a nonbiblical rule and a brand new church policy, inserted by himself, that I assume he goes by to determine the "authority" and viability of his critic. 

This leads to the next unbiblical issue that he presents in this sad diatribe:

"There is protocol in the Lord’s church. There is order in the clergy. And there is a difference between an Elder and a Bishop the same way there is a difference between a student and a professor."

Applying the secular word, "protocol" once again, the alleged Bishop goes further to say that there is a "difference between and Elder and a Bishop" in a similar manner that there is a difference between a "student and professor"...Now, if that is not an untrue statement, I have no idea what is...

Within COGIC, all Bishops, are Elders with appointment. All Bishops have been trained and ordained to be Elders within the church. A Bishop has appointed and consecrated the Elder to serve within the capacity in which he serves. This appointment is not and never has been based on "knowledge" or "education" to the degree where some are excluded or included by their ability to matriculate through seminary. That is more associated with the Methodist and Baptist church, from which some of our leaders have come, but most holiness churches have never been led by seminarians. To the contrary, many of us have observed that far too many appointments have been based on MONEY and the ability of individuals to buy positions. Yep, that is sad, but in too many cases true. 

The Late Bishop LH Ford once said that the church had appointed too many Bishops that were gay and that we did not and do not need any more of them. Bishop Chandler D Owens later joined in the same or similar chorus. How did that happen? It happened because some were willing to purchase their positions and used their monetary means as a hedge to enter in and gain position. Love me, hate me, many of us know it has been true with far too many. 

Most of the Bishops I know within the church are very good men and are folk full of integrity. A Bishop in COGIC is not Bishop because he is a "professor" and Elders are not "lower class" preachers who know nothing. There are many brilliant and dynamic Elders and Ministers within the church and status or recognition among men, means NOTHING to them when it comes to the recognition of God, his favor and his anointing.  

Rules For Thee, Not Me...

The alleged Bishop's statements are rooted in "classim", not in any Biblical mandate.  

Although he should have simply stopped, Swan, doesn't stop there. He goes on to double down on his self exaltation and intoxication with self:

Chris Turner is not qualified to sharpen or correct me. And Chris Turner does NOT have the theological education, the ministry experience, the ecclesiastical authority, nor the spiritual depth to speak on my level...This is an Elder with no formal theological training, no academic foundation in hermeneutics, no history of scholarship, and no demonstrated ability to rightly divide anything beyond Fox News talking points...

The alleged Bishop outlines 8 accusations against Elder Turner. While I say again, I DO NOT KNOW Elder Turner, what Swan is actually saying is that Elder Turner does not deserve to be an Elder in COGIC...How can he be an elder, without any training and or knowledge? 

In other words, Swan CREATES a NEW STANDARD for COGIC leadership! I wonder does the Chairman of our General Assembly know this.? That there are Bishops, not the Presiding Bishop, but other Bishops, such as Swan, making sweeping, declarative statements that duly licensed and ordained Elders in this church are not qualified. Under Swan's directives, there are NEW REQUIREMENTS to be a leader in this church and them that do not have those qualifications as he has outlined them, are UNWORTHY to even speak on or against what Swan outlines or even discern truth from error.  

So get this...Talbert is vicariously rebuking the Bishop that ordained Elder Turner! You see, in this church anyone can claim a call, but noone receives church credentialing without approval of first a Pastor, and secondly, so far as ordination, the approval and recommendation of an Ordination Board and the Bishop who oversees that Board, the Jurisdictional work, and makes the ordination. So there are a lot of unqualified people who have promoted Elder Turner along the way and Talbert tells the whole story because he is not "MAGA"...

Then, it gets worse... 

Brother, you cannot rebuke UP. You do not correct authority you do not possess. And you certainly do not step out of order trying to drag a Bishop you couldn’t carry water for.

So, rebuke cannot be "up"...In other words, noone in this church at least, has the ability to rebuke anyone who is of a "higher class"...I wonder did Paul have that reluctance to be afraid to "rebuke up" when he was addressing Peter and the Apostles who had seen and been with the living Jesus regarding their doctrine and teaching and refusal to accept Gentiles without circumcision in Acts 15.  

Paul says this in Galatians 2:11 ~ "But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong..." then v.14 ~ "But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?"

One could and invariably will say that this is different because Paul was an Apostle. That is true. However, he wasn't an Apostle because the remaining Apostles had chosen him. They chose Justus and Matthias, and the lot fell upon Matthias (Acts. 1:26). Paul however, was an Apostle because God expressly placed him in that position and Paul consistently recognized himself as one who was made an Apostle "out of season" and "unworthy" to be one (1 Cor. 15:8-9). There was no self-exaltation or "I am above you" mentality presented with Paul. He led by example, not by bringing others down or belittling them.

 

The Black Boule Oligarchy

Now since, the early development of church leadership, outside of Apostles, who were the preeminent foundation of the church, the titles of both "Bishop" and "Pastor" from the context of the Greek word (Episkopos), is actually indistinguishable. The truth is that if one is already a Pastor, Elder or leader, they are on the same level of due respect. Now, based on the truth of the language, if a Pastor rebukes a Bishop in some way, is that "rebuking up"??? From a theological and linguistic standpoint, that is a very difficult case to make. It would be better said that, form an organizational standpoint, a hierarchy has been imposed, rather than a rank established through scripture. 

However, what Swan is actually outlining is a socialist/oligarchical styled hierarchy, woven into the fabric of the church, claiming that such a system exists. What makes his rendition Biblically untenable is the self-exaltation he describes. He feels that he is more "qualified" and above the fray because of his associations, education and ministerial history. Notice, nowhere in his own self ascriptions are "called by God", "anointed by God" and or "appointed by God". For him, it seems the calling of God is not necessary to make his case for ministerial superiority. 

In this it is clear that Talbert feels that the church and the Black community itself should be overseen by the "Talented 10th" as WEB Dubois outlined in his quest for civil rights. Within that structure, which Swan appears to have followed hook, line and sinker, the rest of us (the lower class folk) are to be "tended to" and "ruled over" and are not equal to the Black Boule oligarchy/hierarchal leadership in any manner. 

Specifically, in this case, Elder Turner is "beneath" this Bishop because, as he states:

 I am a Bishop in the Lord’s church, a national officer, a scholar, a theologian, and a preacher with decades of ministry, education, and leadership behind me.

Swan has declared that he is beyond critique, certainly by this man, and more over, from a political and social standpoint, above the over 77 million folk who accept the political tenets and precepts of Donald Trump and MAGA and who are glad that the fraud and theft by those in MN is finally being addressed.  

The Real Concern, Church Related Abuse

Probably the most damning thing that Swan does here is conclude that Elder Turner, a grown man, a fully ordained Elder in the COGIC, was a "Child" and should not speak, and was not qualified to speak regarding the substance of Swan's conversation. This is clearly the actions and acts of a CHURCH ABUSER. 

Church related abuse has become so common that people have written off certain actions as the way things go, allowing an excuse for the abuser and relegating the people to abusive behavior. For many, a leader who belittles people in a certain manner is "giving instruction" and is one that is walking in a greater knowledge than others, or has a deeper "insight" and therefore has a spiritual cloak for their abusive behavior.  

We have seen it recently. From "Close the doors" to "you in the wrong line and should have more money than this" to now, "you can't even hold my water" these are the statements of abuse. Yes, they may come from some people who would not hurt a fly physically, but those same people have either been psychologically abused or learned abuse by association and see nothing wrong with their demands and responses to the actions of people that they have been entrusted by God to serve. 

In addition, why can't we get this same energy when it comes to VICTIM'S ADVOCACY for those who have been sexually abused within our church(es)? As a unified strategy, why can't the office of Social Justice, find room to gain and advocate for JUSTICE for victims, families and survivors of sexual abuse and clergy sexual sins? 

It seems we lose all kinds of energy when it come to fighting FOR the people, but have much energy when it comes to self preservation and the seduction of the minds of those among us. 

Since, none of us, are, according to him, are on his level, why does he not hold his alleged colleagues accountable for their sexually deviant sins and ways, and for the harms and evil that they have brought upon some associated with this church? It seems we get crickets when it comes to sincerely fighting for others but all kinds of energy when it comes to salvaging reputations or making others believe that we are superior in some way. 

Yes, we decry White supremacy...But we also decry Clergy supremacy! We decry, a lack of compassion for them less fortunate...we also decry no compassion at all from clergy for and toward them abused by their colleagues...Let's keep the same energy for those who have been abused and are suffering attempting to put their lives back together as we do for being "questioned" and "criticized" about our positions, beliefs and social positions. 

With over 900 articles on this blog alone, I have been criticized by the best of them, both Christian and non-Christian. I have addressed both political and spiritual issues and have vehemently defended my positions. I have been hated by many for speaking on what some wanted me and others to remain silent about. But one thing I have never had to do, was exalt myself as some great mystery, while belittling others as irrelevant (other than when necessary-LOL) Never have I seen the complete hubris that I have witnessed in the retort of Talbert Swan. 

Hubris aka PRIDE, is what Plato claimed that destroyed Atlantis and relegated it to potentially its banishment from earth. Hubris is self exaltation. In this little quip and in his own self defense, we see the hubris of Talbert Swan, the Bishop beyond rebuke, and evaluation of us little ole Ministers, Elders and Pastors as being irrelevant. That sad part is that hubris, was promoted by eager cheerleaders in the comments section which gives way to understanding the even greater issue...that the church seriously lacks discernment and cannot perceive God. 

Hopefully discernment will come back to the body of Christ and that all followers of the Lord will know that we are only HIS servants and we follow him in whatever capacity HE has chosen for us. It is not talent or gift that we have so great that has made him call us, but it is all about, with and through HIM that we are able to serve and we do that respectfully, no matter how we are enjoined, because everything, including all the people, belong to HIM, and if we are on the right path, we can expect push-back from this world, because this world loves its own before it loves Christ or any of HIS. 

I really believe that we have forgotten those lessons in general. We have proverbially "smelled" ourselves and overrated the odor. However, it is only flesh, and no matter how we try to detoxify it, the FLESH still stinks and is rotten all by itself. 

It is my hope that our Social Justice leader would consider that real justice begins by walking humbly before God!

Micah 6:8 ~ He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

Blessed!