Category Archives: Memphis
75 year old COGIC pastor in KY convicted of rape
It happened almost 25 years ago, but the wheels of justice finally caught up with Prince Wilbert Woolfork of Owensboro, KY. Even after the rape was reported in 2007, Woolfork had remained an active pastor for a full year in Kentucky First Jurisdiction until his resignation. The Associated Press reported that a grand jury reached the verdict on Jan 30 giving the man a 20 year sentence for first degree rape.
A grand jury has indicted a former western Kentucky preacher on charges that he raped a teenager nearly 25 years ago.
Owensboro police Sgt. Randy Boling the family of the alleged victim filed a complaint against 75-year-old Prince Wilbert Woolfolk in July. No criminal charges were filed at the time, but the case was presented to the grand jury on this week.
Woolfolk gave an interview to the Messenger-Inquirer in which he denies a rape occurred. But he acknowledges having some sexual contact with the then 17-year-old girl.
Woolfolk resigned in June as pastor the Seventh Street Church of God in Christ in Owensboro and the Branch Street Church of God in Christ in Madisonville.
The Owensboro Message-Inquirer also reported that the victim’s mother told the court Woolfork used scriptures to discourage her from notifying the police about the rape. Very typical of these wolves to cloak themselves in scripture to hide their crimes.
Its not clear why COGIC leadership didn’t enact its so-called zero tolerance policy and remove the rapist from the two churches he pastored. But then again, we all know zero tolerance is just a window dressing rule COGIC leadership conveniently refers to when questioned about the frequency of clergy sexual abuse in the denomination.
Only 20-25 cases of sexual abuse in COGIC?
In November 2009, Presiding Bishop Charles Blake told 1, 592 delegates to the 6.5 million member church’s General Assembly that COGIC spent on average $800, 000 on clergy sexual abuse cases.
According to official minutes of the meeting, both Blake and Enoch Perry, the denomination’s lawyer-in-chief addressed what they called “significantly small” number of sexual ” misconduct” cases.
Judge Enoch Perry, Chief Counsel, gave a brief status report on the topic of sexual misconduct and legal matters of the church. He reported that in over 100 years, there have been 20-25 processed cases of sexual misconduct. He stated statistically the numbers are significantly small; however there should not be one case among us. Judge Perry reported there has not been one successful lawsuit against the church; cases either have been settled or dismissed. He further stated that Bishop Blake supports the church’s zero tolerance policy against sexual misconduct. The delegates were encouraged to purchase the book entitled, “The Church of God in Christ’s Continued Stand Against Sexual Misconduct”. He reminded delegates that there was no statue of limitations for sexual misconduct.
Bishop Blake thanked Judge Perry for his remarks regarding the church’s policy in relationship to sexual misconduct. He pointed out that, on average, the church spends about $800,000 to settle legal matters many of which have to do with accusations of sexual misconduct. (Who made this comment? And that one single lawsuit has the potential to bankrupt the church.) Our bold.
If we’re seeing this correctly, Bishop Blake is saying that the nearly 1 million dollars per year is spent on sexual abuse cases, yet Enoch Perry, using a 100 year time construct, is saying that its a significantly small number? The report showed COGIC’s 2008-2009 budget just over 10 million dollars in expenditures. Report COGIC Abuse has tracked over 30 cases in just the last 30 years. Most of the cases are not small errors in judgment, but heinous crimes rivaling those of serial rapists. Something just doesn’t add up.
There’s much to be said about these comments (and we will fully review them later) but here are some unavoidable questions delegates should demand specific answers to in the upcoming April Call Meeting.
1. What’s the definition of a “processed case”? Is COGIC leadership using the most restrictive definition possible in order to make cases against the church appear “significantly small”?
2. If the church has settled sexual abuse lawsuits, just how many have been settled in comparison to those won in a court of law? What what the settlement amount and who authorized it?
3. How does the church effectively conduct and ratify such serious matters when a whopping two thirds of the delegates are missing from the meeting?
4. From what departmental budget is the 800k deducted from?
5. Why does COGIC continue to present budgets with no actuals at the time new information is introduced? At best this is unprofessional perhaps even unethical.
6. If the zero tolerance policy is supported by the Presiding Bishop, why was Prince Woolfolk, Larry Weems and others allowed to remain in office?
7. Why should delegates have to purchase to so-called sexual abuse book? Purchasing certainly minimizes the possibility of the book being widely disseminated, unless of course the leadership really doesn’t care about the book being widely seen and read.
In our opinion, this administration is either corrupt to the core with no regard for truthfulness or God is asleep on the throne.
COGIC’s sexual abuse policy change document surfaces
On November 7th, COGIC Presiding Bishop Charles Blake held a forum where he handed out a paper with proposed changes to the current sexual abuse policy. According to the church about 1000 people received the handout entitled “The Church of God in Christ’s Continued Stand Against Sexual Misconduct”. Read the proposed changes [pdf]. While one news outlet reported the changes were adopted, no such vetting and ratification occurred. As it stands, they are only proposals.
Supt. Harvey Burnett reviewed the proposed changes calling it “good and bad news”.
In our opinion, here are the major flaws of the proposal:
1. There is still no identification of the alleged “professionals” working on the changes. Who are they and what are their credentials? Are they hand-picked yes men/women whose goal is to do the Presiding Bishop’s bidding or are they objective individuals who sincerely want to craft a comprehensive, workable sexual abuse policy? Does the proposal team include any victims or family members of victims who are able to give critical input?
2. Neither the policy or new proposals include elements of outreach, care, or restoration of victims of clergy sexual abuse.
3. The proposals contains no enforcement mechanism.
4. The proposals contain no timelines for completion or implementation. Without this critical component, there’s nothing to hold the church accountable for.
5. Instead of a forward thinking perspective, the handout is apologetic in nature, seeming to defend the church’s past conduct and rarely known or understood policies which have been largely ineffective.
6. Although the handout cites general sexual abuse statistics, it steers clear of any statistics on COGIC. Such information would help to ascertain the depth of the problem in the church, thus better application of the solution. But the question is, does the COGIC even keep records on file of sexual abuse allegations reported to its national offices? If they do not, doesn’t this violate the law and its mandatory reporting system? If they do, who is allowed to access this information?
7. The policy does not address “consensual” sexual activity among leadership. Whether consensual or nonconsensual, illict sexual activity has the same devastating effects on the health and spiritual welfare of the church.
8. The proposals are only suggested adherence for subsidiary elements of the church such as jurisdictions. These elements form the bulk of the church’s membership. In short, it is the same as before.
9. The proposals are only mandatory for a tiny group of individuals in COGIC, namely an alleged 75 odd employees of the national church. That’s 75 out of 6.5 million.
10. An information desemination plan isn’t fully expressed nor does it have a mechanism to gauge effectiveness. For instance, most church members depend on (and actually only trust) the information passed down to them by their pastor. What if a pastor decides this isn’t important enough to share with his congregation?
Major commendations of the proposal:
1. It is a public acknowledgement that clergy sexual abuse is fundamentally out of control in the denomination.
2. It appears to expand some aspects of screening to all national office/credential holders.
3. The biblical language is strong.
4. There’s an undated promise to post the sexual abuse policy of the church’s website for all to see
Overall, the proposal leaves very little to applaud. Its language vacillates back and forth in a fairly tortured manner which leaves the reader wondering if the stated commitment is serious or if it is just an attempt to say “the right words” to quiet growing objections. Citing biblical language does reinforce that clergy sexual abuse is not purely a matter of legal or social importance, but such language aside if an organization cannot adhere to corresponding biblical admonitions regarding honesty, integrity and reasonable care for the least among them, its questionable whether its policies will effect change.
Bishop Blake called on seemingly every quarter of church leadership to respond to the call, but how will he know if they will or won’t? The recent alleged rape arrest of Dwayne Wilson was a proving ground which produced more confusion than resolution. Read the latest development in the case where the church’s jurisdictional bishop was allegedly voted by membership to be the church’s CEO.
Have an opinion on COGIC’s proposed clergy sexual abuse policy changes? Leave a comment here or go to reportcogicabuse.com and participate in our poll.
Police, security show up at SNAP press conference
Yesterday, the Tennessee Chapter of SNAP (Survivor Network of those Abused by Priests) held a peaceful press conference in front of COGIC’s world headquarters in Memphis. The press conference was called in the wake of a controversial rape case involving a COGIC music minister and a 16 year girl at Greater St. Mark COGIC pastored by Ronald Rolfe.
But the few people that showed up were met with an overwhelming show of force at the bequest of COGIC officials.
David Brown, the chapter’s president and chief spokesman told me that four police squad cars with a police captain as well as COGIC’s internal security guards met them.
Brown said SNAP had done similar press conferences many times before and had never encountered any police presence. The show of force he said was highly unusual but he was told by an official with Memphis police that they [the police] received a call and were asked to come out.
In addition to all the police and security, Brown said he observed what appeared to be COGIC officials standing on the other side of the street on headquarters property watching them.
The press conference was covered by two local media outlets.
I found it highly ironic and hypocritical that COGIC would so quickly call out the police and security against unarmed and peaceful press conference and yet do nothing against the many sexual criminals who have raped and pillaged innocent children and adults in its church.
This is more mounting evidence that the window dressing rhetoric of Bishop Blake proves he is only interested in “the name, image and assets” of the COGIC. Protecting members from predators is low –if any– priority in his administration.
