John Piper may be many things, but a woke theologian he is not. He has platformed the idea that empathy is sin, and earlier this month on his podcast, he argued that certain forms of lament are sinful as well. “There is a way to define lament so that it is a sin. And there is a way to define lament so that it is not a sin,” Piper wrote, before laying out five corresponding statements. Labeling expressions of grief as sin is hardly a woke theological position. Yet that is precisely how some Christian conservatives are now characterizing him.

So what transgression warranted such a rebuke from those who are typically his allies? He did not switch political parties. He has not denounced Trump’s policies, nor declared that Black Lives Matter. His offense was something far more mundane: he quoted the Bible.

Piper quotes scripture daily on Twitter. But on February 25th, his selected text offended the very people who claim scripture as their highest authority. Before your mind wanders, no, it was not the Song of Solomon.

It was Leviticus 19:34: “You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” He ended the tweet, as he always does, with a personal reflection: “Christians know the miserable bondage we were all in.”

The response from the Christian right was swift and telling. Sean Feucht quote-tweeted Piper and wrote, “Never imagined a theologian I once looked up to would become so unbelievably WOKE while weaponizing scripture to justify the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation.” Note the framing: Piper did not exegete the passage, did not apply it to policy, did not offer commentary. He copied and pasted a Bible verse. Yet Feucht characterized this as “weaponizing scripture.”

Joel Webbon, a prominent figure in Christian nationalist circles, who is unabashedly racist, offered his own diagnosis: “John Piper has always been a pietistic leftist.” And Tanner Cartwright went further, invoking a familiar trope on the Christian right, the conflation of weakness with femininity. “Nine years ago I told my wife to stop reading anything from John Piper’s ministry because every single thing they put out was weak and effeminate,” Cartwright wrote. “Turns out he’s been a leftist the whole time.”

The patriarchal assumptions embedded in Cartwright’s statement — treating his wife as a subject to be managed, and equating moral softness with womanhood — deserve their own analysis. But that is a discussion for another post.

What Happened to the Bible?

The Christian right regularly presents itself as the guardian of biblical authority. We see this across their rhetoric, in their positions on family values, abortion, and gender roles in the church. The late John MacArthur’s famous dismissal of Beth Moore exemplifies this posture, “Go home…There is no case that can be made biblically for a woman preacher. Period. Paragraph. End of discussion” MacArthur stated.

The message is clear: scripture is the final word, and it must be obeyed.

Yet when Piper quoted Leviticus — offered no interpretation, no political application, just the text itself — members of this same movement went ballistic. This reveals a fundamental inconsistency; the claim to biblical authority is not as simple and unconditional as advertised.

To be clear, I do not think complexity in one’s engagement with scripture is inherently problematic. Indeed, we should wrestle with the text. It should challenge us. If reading, understanding, and obeying the Bible feels easy, you are probably not doing it right.

But the backlash to Piper’s tweet does not reflect people earnestly wrestling with a difficult text. It reflects people being exposed as selective in their fidelity; willing to invoke scripture when it serves their agenda, and willing to attack it when it does not.

Religion as a Tool for Power

What this episode ultimately reveals is that for much of the Christian right, scripture is not the foundation of their politics; it is the justification for it — it is a way to reinscribe white supremacy. The distinction matters.

Consider which verse provoked this response. Not a passage on gender roles or sexuality, but one commanding care for the immigrant and the stranger. That is not a coincidence. The Christian right’s current political project requires the demonization and removal of immigrants. A direct command from Leviticus to “love the stranger as yourself” is not merely inconvenient, it is threatening. It must be neutralized, and the person who quoted it must be discredited.

Meanwhile, figures like Doug Wilson deploy the Bible to argue that women should not vote — a position for which there is no biblical text whatsoever. The asymmetry is instructive: where scripture actually speaks, it is ignored or attacked; where scripture is silent, it is invoked with confidence. This is not biblical faithfulness; it is the use of religious authority to construct and maintain a particular social order.

The deeper irony is that following the mandate of Leviticus does not diminish anyone’s power or security. More just societies are more stable societies. Treating others with dignity is not weakness, but rather, it is a sign of strength through obedience.

Scripture is genuinely difficult. It resists easy application and demands sustained, honest engagement. But what Piper’s backlash makes plain is that for a significant portion of the Christian right, that difficulty is not the point. The Bible is a tool — deployed when useful, discarded when not.

Share

Subscribe now

Twenty-eight time Stellar Award winner and GRAMMY nominated gospel artist, Pastor Mike Jr. (PMJ), has once again proven the power of faith filled music in the digital era. His latest single, “He Can,” debuts at #1 on the Billboard Gospel Digital Song Sales Chart, marking another milestone in an already groundbreaking career. The single’s immediate impact propelled it to the top of the digital sales chart upon release, underscoring Pastor Mike Jr.’s unique ability to connect spiritual conviction with contemporary sound and a testament of PMJ’s loyal fanbase.

“He Can” is a bold declaration of unwavering faith and divine possibility, reminding listeners that no situation is beyond God’s reach. The song encourages believers to keep the faith, praise God through every season, and trust Him beyond circumstances.

For Pastor Mike Jr., the mission behind “He Can” was clear: Honor God, Bless and Inspire People and Upseat AI-Generated Music. In tandem with the release, PMJ launched a bold and headline-grabbing social media initiative titled “PMJ vs AI.” The campaign challenges the growing presence of AI-generated artists and songs dominating Christian and Gospel music charts. The campaign spotlights a critical and timely industry conversation: the increasing volume of AI-generated songs entering the Gospel and Christian marketplace — and competing directly against human artists. PMJ has been vocal about his desire to see a separate chart category for AI-generated music, ensuring that human creatives are not unfairly competing with algorithm-driven content.

“This is bigger than me,” says Pastor Mike Jr. “I’m fighting for every creative, every songwriter, every producer, and every real artist who puts their heart and soul into their music. Gospel music comes from experience. It comes from prayer. It comes from testimony. There is nothing God can’t do — and no machine can replicate what God breathes into a human spirit.”

Dubbed “The New King of Urban Inspiration,” Pastor Mike Jr. has scored seven consecutive number-one singles on Billboard’s National Gospel Airplay chart. His breakout single “B!G” was recognized as Billboard’s #1 Gospel Airplay Song of 2020. He serves as the Senior Pastor of Rock City Church in Birmingham, AL.

“He Can” is available now wherever music is sold and streamed.

In 1980, the Supreme Court struck down a Kentucky law requiring the Ten Commandments to be posted in public school classrooms in Stone v. Graham. Forty-five years later, Louisiana passed nearly the same law, and this time, a federal appeals court let it stand. What changed? The courts. And that was always the point.

Last Friday, the full Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals voted 12-6 to lift the injunction blocking Louisiana’s House Bill 71, a law requiring poster-sized displays of the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, from kindergarten through state-funded universities. A district court had blocked it. Later, a three-judge panel had called it “plainly unconstitutional.” Then the full Fifth Circuit held an en banc hearing and reversed course, thus clearing the way for those posters to go up.

More importantly the court allowed the posters to go up on school walls without finding the law constitutional.

Subscribe now

What the Court Did and Didn’t Do

To understand how the court could allow what a previous panel found “plainly unconstitutional” first a brief discussion of an important procedural concept called ripeness. Essentially the majority argued that it was too early to rule on whether the law violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. How prominently will the text be displayed? Will teachers reference it in lessons? Will it appear alongside other historical documents?

These are the questions the majority maintained were unanswered, thus preventing the issue from being ripe and stopping them from ruling on whether the law was constitutional. As a result, they lifted the ban, let the posters go up, and kicked the constitutional question down the road.

To be sure, the answers to these questions do not actual change the constitutional nature of the law, but it helps create the appearance of legitimacy by deflecting the issue.

What they did not do is declare this law legal. What they did do is hand the state a significant tactical win while placing the burden of future challenges squarely on the families who object, who will now have to fight each school district’s displays one at a time. The Freedom From Religion Foundation aptly called it “constitutional whack-a-mole.”

That is not a neutral procedural outcome. That is a burden deliberately placed on religious minorities, contrary to goals of religious liberty. This ruling further empowering white christian nationalism by reinscribing white protestant normativity and hegemony.

Let’s Call This What It Is

This is not about the Ten Commandments. This is about whose version of God gets stamped on the walls of public institutions — and whose children are told, without a single word being spoken, that this nation was not built for them.

White Christian nationalism is a political theology. It operates on the premise that America is, at its core, a white Protestant Christian nation, and that law and policy should reflect that identity. It doesn’t announce itself as such. Rather, it relies on what Khyati Joshi refers to as white Christian normativity and christian hegemony. It speaks the language of history, heritage, and tradition. It insists that the Ten Commandments are not religious but historical, and the bedrock of Western law. In other words, Christian concepts are idea are so ingrained in society that they aren’t seen as religious, but merely simply “American.”

Note that the Louisiana law required only the Ten Commandments. Officials floated the idea of displaying secular documents alongside them, but that was never mandated. Only the Christian version of the Commandments were compulsory. That tells you everything you need to know about the secular purpose — or lack thereof — that the Supreme Court required back in 1980 when it struck down a nearly identical Kentucky law in Stone v. Graham.

This Was Always About the Supreme Court

This result is not a surprised. It seems rather apparent that the point of the proponents of this statute is to take this issue to the supreme court to reverse Stone v. Graham. This current court is very apt to help push further pro-White Christian nationalist agendas under the banner of religious liberty.

I am not merely speculating here. When Louisiana’s governor signed this bill in 2024, he said openly that he hoped it would be challenged in court. A state official signed a law he expected to be unconstitutional under existing precedent. The goal was never simply to hang posters. The goal was to generate a legal vehicle, move it through the most reliably conservative appellate court in the country, and land it before a reconfigured Supreme Court that this movement spent decades building toward.

It is also important to note that the Fifth Circuit is not an accidental venue. It is the preferred launchpad of the conservative legal movement, known for propelling right-wing, at times whacky, policy positions toward a sympathetic Supreme Court. And the Court that awaits this case has already signaled its appetite for revisiting settled Establishment Clause law.

One judge in the Fifth Circuit majority went further than his colleagues, writing in a concurrence that this law affirms the nation’s “highest and most noble traditions.” Not only is that not true, it is also not a legal standard. That does not meet strict scrutiny. That is a manifesto. And it is a preview of the precedent this movement is hoping to enshrine.

How Can the Black Church Tradition Provide an Answer to White Nationalism

As a person of faith, to see Christianity be coopted to promote White nationalist objectives further ostracized the marginalized, compels me to speak. Black religious tradition in America was forged in resistance to the weaponization of Christianity. Enslaved Africans were handed a curated Bible designed to produce compliance. The hush harbor was born because our ancestors knew the difference between the God of liberation and the god of the master’s house. The Black church became the backbone of the Civil Rights Movement precisely because it understood that faith and justice are inseparable, and that state-sponsored religion has never been a friend to the marginalized in this country.

Therefore, when white Christian nationalism wraps itself in the language of faith, we should not be deceived by the packaging. The question is always: whose faith? Whose God? Who is empowered by this? And who gets to go home when the school day is done feeling like a stranger in their own country?

This case is headed to the Supreme Court. The movement behind it is counting on our exhaustion and our distraction.

Don’t give it to them.

Share

Subscribe now

Share

TAMLA continues to bridge the legacy of Motown with the future of faith-driven music with the release of “Just Believe,” the latest single from viral Christian Hip Hop artist Dante Pride, available now on all streaming platforms.

Rooted in having unwavering faith, “Just Believe” delivers an uplifting message for listeners navigating uncertainty and purpose. With bold lyrics like, “It ain’t easy but you gotta trust and believe,” the record serves as a reminder that faith remains essential, even when the journey gets tough. The song reflects Dante’s personal walk with God while resonating universally with anyone striving to push forward despite obstacles.

Hailing from Decatur, Alabama, Dante Pride has emerged as a dynamic voice at the intersection of culture and the Kingdom. Known for his authenticity, energy, and bold lyricism, Pride first broke through in 2024 with his viral hit “Yeah, Yeah, Yeah,” capturing the attention of fans worldwide. The Gospel rap artist is redefining what faith sounds like in real life. He represents believers who pray hard, struggle daily, and still choose God. Through raw storytelling and modern rap, Dante Pride becomes a spokesperson for a generation that believes deeply—but refuses to fake perfection.

Subscribe now

“To release Just Believe through TAMLA is surreal,” shares Dante Pride. “This song comes from real moments where trusting God was the only option. It ain’t easy, but faith never fails. I hope this record encourages people to keep going and never let go of what they believe.”

“Dante Pride is a game-changer for this generation of music,” says Walter Thomas, SVP of TAMLA and Motown Gospel. “His authenticity, energy, and heart for God translate powerfully through his music. Just Believe is more than a song, it’s a message that speaks directly to culture today.”

With “Just Believe,” Dante Pride continues to solidify his place as one of Christian Hip Hop’s most compelling voices, carrying the torch of legacy while boldly shaping what’s next.

For more information on TAMLA Records and its artist roster, visit tamlamusic.com or follow @tamlamusic on all social platforms.

In a story that has major implications for religious journalism and denominational accountability, a former professor at a Georgia Baptist college has filed a defamation lawsuit against Baptist News Global (BNG) — the Christian news outlet that has been a central source of reporting on sexual abuse within Baptist life.

What Happened?

In late 2025, Jeremy Lyon, who formerly taught Old Testament and Hebrew at Truett McConnell University in Cleveland, Georgia, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against BNG, alleging that the publication defamed him in articles it ran in June 2025.

The articles, written by BNG, discussed a sexual abuse scandal at Truett McConnell involving former vice president Bradley Reynolds, whom a law firm’s letter alleged had engaged in misconduct and that university leaders had mishandled the situation. The letter also suggested a second complaint involving Lyon.

Lyon’s lawsuit contends that BNG published “false and defamatory accusations” that he committed sexual abuse and that BNG did not contact him before publishing the stories. His lawyers argue the publication relied on a single source and inaccurately represented the existence and nature of any complaint or law firm involvement.

According to the complaint, Lyon “categorically denies” the allegations and maintains he never was contacted by BNG prior to publication. He also disputes that any law firm ever represented a complainant against him.

Allegations and Consequences

In the lawsuit, Lyon says he has suffered significant professional and personal damages as a result of BNG’s reporting. The complaint asserts, among other things, that: His contracts as an adjunct professor at several institutions were terminated; He lost leadership roles, including serving as president of a scholarly society; He has struggled to find employment in his field and is working in retail at a reduced income; He has experienced emotional distress.

Lyon’s filing seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

BNG’s Response

BNG’s leadership has publicly stood by its coverage. Mark Wingfield, BNG’s executive director and publisher, released a statement asserting that the publication “operates with the highest ethical standards of professional journalism” and has been “at the forefront of covering sexual abuse in the Southern Baptist Convention,” framing the lawsuit as, in his view, a pushback against that work.

BNG’s coverage of abuse at Baptist institutions, especially within the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), has been extensive over the last several years, chronicling allegations, institutional responses, and leadership decisions.

The Broader Abuse Context

To understand this lawsuit, it helps to zoom out to the larger backdrop: the SBC and related Baptist institutions have been facing a prolonged reckoning over sexual abuse allegations. Publications like BNG and others have been key sources of reporting on allegations, internal investigations, and leadership responses across the denomination.

Some individuals named in those broader controversies have pursued defamation claims in civil court, including high-profile leaders and professors, claiming reputational damage from media attention and investigative reports.

This pattern reflects a broader tension within Baptist circles and evangelicalism generally: efforts to uncover abuse and encourage institutional accountability often intersect with concerns about due process, reputational risk, and journalistic standards.

Looking Ahead

Lyon’s lawsuit is now in its early stages. BNG has said it will defend its reporting; the case itself could become a test of how courts balance journalistic freedom, accountability reporting, and defamation law in contexts where allegations carry profound professional and personal consequences.

For readers and observers of the ongoing reckoning over sexual abuse in Baptist life, this case raises essential questions about who tells the story, how it’s told, and what safeguards, legal and ethical, are appropriate when reporting on sensitive, high-stakes allegations.

As the legal process unfolds, it will be worth watching both the specifics of the lawsuit and its broader implications for religious journalism and institutional accountability in a landscape that has already been deeply shaken by abuse revelations.

Share

Late last night and early this morning, federal agents arrested two Black journalists, former CNN reporter Don Lemon and Minnesota journalist Georgia Fort, in connection with their reporting on last week’s church protest in Minneapolis. Both were taken into custody after federal prosecutors secured an indictment that has not yet been released to the public.

These arrests come only one week after a magistrate judge refused to sign arrest warrants for Lemon and Fort, a decision that was later upheld by a higher court. Despite that history, the government has released no statement explaining how it ultimately obtained the warrants or what legal basis the indictments rely on.

Subscribe now

What We Know About the Arrests

According to Fort, who went live on Facebook moments before being taken into custody, agents claimed they had secured a warrant through a grand jury within the previous twenty‑four hours. “I wanted to alert the public that agents are at my door right now,” she states in the video. “They are saying that they were able to go before a grand jury sometime in the last twenty-four hours and that they have a warrant for my arrest.” Fort also notes that her children were present during the arrest, and a child can be heard crying in the background.

Lemon was arrested in Los Angeles, where he was reporting on the Grammy Awards. His attorney, Abbe Lowell, issued a statement noting that “Don has been a journalist for 30 years, and his constitutionally protected work in Minneapolis was no different than what he has always done.” The statement stresses the importance of safeguarding journalists who hold those in power accountable and highlights the government’s “hypocrisy in going after journalists and not the murderers of peaceful protestors.”

A Troubling Trend

The hypocrisy identified by Lemon’s attorney is part of a deeper and longstanding pattern. It reflects not only the government’s failure to protect journalists and protestors, but also the broader history of whose religious liberty is protected in this country, and whose is not.

Religious freedom has functioned as a shield for white Protestant Christians while often being withheld from those outside that norm. Scholars like Khyati Y. Joshi describe this as “Christian normativity;” the assumption that Christian identity defines the default American experience. This dynamic has shaped the nation’s legal landscape for centuries.

Religion was used as a justification for the conquest and control of Native Americans, who were labeled “heathens” and forcibly converted. Yet when Native communities sought to practice their own religions, such as the Ghost Dance, the Shaker movement, or prayers involving peyote, these practices were criminalized, particularly when they were seen tools of cultural resistance. A similar pattern appeared during slavery, when pro‑slavery Christians invoked scripture to defend bondage and framed their support for slavery as a matter of freedom of conscience (religion). During the Civil Rights era, segregationists argued that maintaining racially separate schools reflected their religious beliefs, casting resistance to integration as a violation of their religious freedom.

This historical pattern helps clarify what is happening now. The government appears to be framing the church protest, and by extension, the journalists who covered it, as a violation of the religious liberty of church members under the FACE Act – a law meant primarily to protect abortion providers. But this reading sits uncomfortably beside the administration’s decision last year to reverse longstanding policy by allowing ICE agents to enter houses of worship to arrest and detain people. If the government is genuinely concerned about intimidation in sacred spaces, then surely the threat of arrest, detention, or removal by federal immigration officers constitutes far greater intimidation than protesters standing up in a church.

WHY THIS MATTERS

If history is any indication, then I am greatly concerned about where the country is headed. The rights of the minority, whether racial, religious, or otherwise, are often trampled in favor of the majority.

But make no mistake, the true measure of a right is not whether the powerful may exercise it without interference, but whether those on the margins can do so without fear or harassment. It is only then that we know whether we have a right or merely an illusion

Share

In bitter sub-zero temperatures Friday, faith leaders from across Minnesota and beyond took a stand that would land many of them in handcuffs, not in a pulpit, but on the tarmac of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.

Roughly 100 clergy and faith leaders were arrested as part of a protest against aggressive immigration enforcement by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The demonstration was part of a larger “ICE Out” day of action that drew thousands of residents, unions, and community members into the streets of Minnesota to oppose federal immigration tactics they say violate basic human dignity.

A Prayerful Protest in the Deep Cold

The protest began outside the airport’s Terminal 1, where clergy knelt, sang hymns, and prayed for those being deported, including children and workers whom organizers say have been taken from their homes and workplaces in the state. When demonstrators moved beyond the bounds set by their demonstration permit, airport police began issuing misdemeanor citations for trespassing and failure to comply, then detained about 100 faith leaders before releasing them later that day.

Rev. Mariah Furness Tollgaard of Hamline Church United Methodist in St. Paul was among those arrested. She later told local media that her decision to stay, even when ordered by police to disperse, was rooted firmly in her Christian calling. “We cannot abide living under this federal occupation of Minnesota,” Tollgaard said, framing the protest as both spiritual and civic resistance

These leaders didn’t just pray, they also publicly urged major airlines like Delta and Signature Aviation to reconsider contracts that help facilitate deportation flights out of Minnesota. Organizers said flights chartered from the airport carry individuals across the U.S. to detention and removal proceedings.

Broader Protests Against ICE Enforcement

The airport protests were not an isolated incident. Across Minneapolis and surrounding cities, thousands rallied and marched in protest of ICE. Many braved near-arctic conditions, demanding legal accountability for the killing of civilian Renee Good by an ICE agent earlier in January.

Unions, labor groups, and grassroots organizations joined in what some called a “general strike,” urging Minnesotans to refrain from work, school, and shopping to protest what they describe as an unconstitutional, militarized federal presence.

A Call to Action and Reflection

For many faith leaders, the arrests were both a moral imperative and a prophetic act. They argue that scripture calls the church to defend the stranger, to welcome the “least of these,” and to hold systems of power accountable when they harm God’s children.

Share

Comments made by Texas pastor and podcaster Joel Webbon are drawing sharp concern and criticism after he declared that the overwhelming majority of Black churches in America are “heretical” and should be dismantled in favor of white pastoral leadership.

Webbon made the remarks on his podcast while responding to a clip of Pastor Mike Todd, lead pastor of Transformation Church, performing a rap song about “living in the overflow.” Rather than focusing narrowly on Todd’s theology or preaching style, Webbon, without any data to support his claim, made a sweeping generalization critiquing the Black church as a whole.

“About 90 to 95% of the Black church in America is objectively, by the standards of Scripture, heretical,” Webbon said. “It doesn’t even constitute a true church… If you listen to the message and if you believe what they’re saying, you will go to hell.”

He went on to assert that Black churches lack qualified leadership, claiming there are not enough Black Christian men with sufficient theological knowledge to pastor Black congregations. Webbon concluded by calling for Black churches to dissolve and submit to white leadership.

“The Black church in America needs to be split up,” he said. “It needs to go and find a good God-fearing white church with biblically qualified men so that they can hear the real gospel of Jesus Christ and come to saving faith in him.”

While Webbon prefaced his remarks by saying he “loves Black people” and wants them to “know Christ,” the substance of his comments were laced with the long history of paternalism and racism found in White Protestant spaces in America.

A Familiar Pattern, Not a New One

For Black church communities, Webbon’s statements are not merely provocative, but rather, they echo a long and painful history. The Black church itself was born out of exclusion; formed when enslaved and later segregated Black Christians were barred from white churches or relegated to balconies and back pews. From those conditions emerged institutions that sustained faith, community, resistance, and survival.

To suggest that the Black church is broadly illegitimate — and must be corrected by white leadership — mirrors the same paternalistic logic once used to justify segregation and religious control. Critics note that Webbon did not name specific doctrines, denominations, or theological traditions. Instead, he issued a sweeping racial indictment, collapsing centuries of diverse Black Christian theology into a single, dismissive category.

The Black church in America includes Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Holiness traditions, non-denominational congregations, and historically Black denominations with deep theological scholarship and global influence. To dismiss that entire ecosystem as spiritually dangerous is, for many observers, not theological discernment but racial hierarchy expressed through religious language.

Subscribe now

Why This Moment Matters

Webbon’s comments arrive amid a broader trend in which some Christian nationalist and white supremacist figures are speaking more openly, and more boldly, from pulpits and podcasts. What distinguishes these moments is not simply the content, but the claim of biblical authority used to support them.

When a pastor declares that following the teachings of Black churches will lead people “to hell,” and that salvation requires submission to white leadership, it raises urgent questions about power, race, and who is deemed fit to speak for God.

For many Black Christians, the concern is not only insult, but influence. Statements like these circulate widely online and can reinforce dangerous narratives, particularly for younger audiences seeking truth, that portray Black faith traditions as inferior, deceptive, or unbiblical.

For the Black church, which has historically stood at the intersection of faith and justice, Webbon’s remarks serve as a reminder: progress is not guaranteed. The work of affirming Black faith, leadership, and theological legitimacy remains necessary, especially when racism resurfaces not on the margins, but from behind a microphone labeled “Christian.”

Share

When comedian Druski’s megachurch parody exploded across social media earlier this month, it set off a wave of commentary, jokes, and comparisons to real-world pastors, including Tulsa, Oklahoma’s Pastor Mike Todd of Transformation Church. What began as a humorous skit quickly turned into a broad online conversation, prompting Todd to address the situation during a recent Sunday sermon.

What Druski’s Skit Was About

Druski’s video, which went viral with millions of views and tens of thousands of comments, satirized aspects of megachurch culture through an exaggerated character: a preacher in Christian Dior and Christian Louboutin designer gear, theatrically interacting with a congregation and making over-the-top fundraising demands. Many viewers drew parallels between this caricature and discussions about prosperity-oriented ministries online.

Todd’s Measured Take

In his sermon, Todd acknowledged the skit after being told about the online buzz. He described the video as “hilarious” and “funny,” but he was careful to frame the discussion beyond simple humor. According to multiple reports, his principal concern was not whether the satire was accurate, but rather, how the ensuing debate pulled people into unproductive conflict and distraction.

“The thing that I was most taken aback by was how much frustration it created in people,” Todd said. “You thought it was some attack on the church. No, it was an attack on focus.”

Todd emphasized that many internet users spent more energy debating and denouncing one another in comment threads than focusing on what he sees as the central purpose of their faith. He described the skit and the chatter around it as a “distraction,” even calling it a kind of “weapon of mass distraction.”

Addressing Public Misconceptions and the “Luxury Pastor” Narrative

Alongside the sermon, Todd addressed some of the more viral aspects of the online reaction, including AI-generated images that superimposed his face onto the pastor character in the skit. He joked that he has neither a Rolls-Royce nor the exaggerated lifestyle shown in memes, saying, “That’s crazy! I don’t even got a Rolls-Royce.”

His response suggests a desire to separate the parody’s entertainment value from assumptions about his personal life or ministry style.

Reactions on Instagram

Reactions to Todd’s response online varied, reflecting different ways people interpreted the moment online. Some comments echoed a lighthearted, proverb-style take on the situation, such as, “If it hurts say ouch, if it don’t apply let it fly.” While other commenters leaned into what they saw as the point of Druski’s satire, “a hit dog is gonna holler.”

Waynorth Music recently celebrated a decade of chart-topping hits and life-changing moments by GRAMMY-winning triple-threat, Jekalyn Carr, including the release of another top Billboard Gospel album, JEKALYN X THE LEGNDS. Yesterday, Jekalyn Carr made a special appearance on the nationally syndicated daytime talk show SHERRI, hosted by Emmy Award-winning television personality Sherri Shepherd.

During the special episode of SHERRI, Carr performed her brand-new single, “History (Breakthrough)” with 11x GRAMMY winner Shirley Caesar for a powerful performance that underscores her continued impact as one of gospel music’s most influential voices. Carr has spent half a decade on top of the charts as a top-selling independent recording artist with ten Billboard No.1’s including ten No.1 radio singles, two No.1 albums, two No.1 digital singles, and seven Top 10 songs.

The appearance comes at a milestone moment in Carr’s career, as her latest album has earned two nominations at the upcoming 57th NAACP Image Awards, further solidifying her standing as a leading force in contemporary gospel music.

Carr can also be heard weekdays on Atlanta’s Praise 102.5 as the host of her midday show “Jekalyn Carr Family Affair Show.” Follow Jekalyn Carr on social media using the handle @JekalynCarr, visiting Facebook and on her website at: IAMJekalynCarr.com.

Protesters disrupted Sunday worship at Cities Church in St. Paul, Minnesota, calling attention to the church’s connection to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The demonstration centered on Pastor David Easterwood, who, according to ICE’s official website, serves as a Field Office Director for the agency.

Easterwood was not present during the service. Instead, Lead Pastor Jonathan Parnell was preaching when the protest began.

The disruption was live-streamed by journalists Georgia Fort and Don Lemon, who were invited in advance by protest organizers. One organizer described the demonstration as part of “Operation Pull Up,” a strategy intended to confront individuals and institutions in unexpected spaces in order to interrupt what organizers call “business as usual.”

Midway through Parnell’s sermon, one protester stood and questioned the pastor about Easterwood’s role at ICE, publicly identifying him as a Field Office Director. Other protesters soon joined in, chanting slogans such as “ICE out,” “hands up, don’t shoot,” and repeatedly invoking the name of Renee Goode, a young woman who was fatally shot earlier this month by an ICE agent.

“So someone who claims to worship God, teaching people in this church about God, is out there overseeing ICE agents?” one organizer shouted into a microphone. “How dare you claim to be a pastor of God while you are involved in evil in our community!”

As the chants continued, reactions among congregants were mixed. Some members exited the sanctuary, while others remained in worship toward the back of the church, largely disengaged from the protest. Pastor Parnell eventually addressed the situation, asking the demonstrators to leave.

“Our church gathered today for worship, as we do every Sunday,” Parnell said. “We asked them to leave, and they have not done so.”

One church member later acknowledged the protesters’ right to free speech but questioned their approach.

“I don’t think it’s good to fight fire with fire,” the member stated. “I think it’s good to speak up and it’s good to protest, but I think it’s better to do it in a peaceful way.”

The organizer with Operation Pull Up responded by framing the protest as an act rooted in faith and accountability.

“The reality is that the house of the Lord is a place where love lives,” the organizer said. “It’s not a place where you can have a pastor masquerading as a Field Office Director in St. Paul.”

Motown Gospel continues to affirm its leadership in contemporary Gospel music with multiple nominations at the upcoming NAACP Image Awards, recognizing outstanding artistry, faith-driven storytelling, and cultural impact. The 57th Annual NAACP Image Awards will air live on February 28, 2026. Select categories will be announced during the two-hour televised special at 8 p.m. ET/PT on BET, with a simulcast on the CBS Television Network.

Motown Gospel, one of the most prominent gospel music companies in the world, boasting over two decades of chart-topping and award-winning artists, received nominations across key Gospel/Christian categories, spotlighting some of the genre’s most influential voices:

Outstanding Gospel/Christian Album

• Tasha Cobbs Leonard – TASHA

• Tye Tribbett – Only on The Road LIVE

• JJ Hairston & Youthful Praise – The Live Reunion: Washington, DC

Outstanding Gospel/Christian Song

• Tasha Cobbs Leonard feat. John Legend – “Church”

These nominations highlight Motown Gospel’s commitment to elevating music that inspires, uplifts, and resonates across generations while honoring the rich legacy of Gospel excellence.

“These nominations underscore the importance of faith-driven music and its enduring influence across our culture,” says Walter Thomas, Senior Vice President, Motown Gospel. “Music has long played a vital role in the forward progress and ongoing pursuit of equality for our people. Having our artists recognized by the NAACP Image Awards during this pivotal time in our nation’s history is deeply meaningful. Motown Gospel remains committed to delivering music that uplifts and ministers to the soul during these challenging times.”

Nearly two weeks ago, news broke that gospel singer Donnie McClurkin is facing a lawsuit filed by his former personal assistant and mentee, Giuseppe Corletto. The three-count complaint alleges that McClurkin sexually assaulted Corletto over the course of several years beginning in the early 2000s. The allegations are graphic and describe what Corletto claims were years of sexual abuse and manipulation.

The Background

Corletto first met McClurkin in 2003 when he was 21 years old. At the time, Corletto says he was struggling with his sexuality and sought guidance from McClurkin, who publicly maintained that he had been delivered from homosexuality. According to the lawsuit, what followed were years of unwanted sexual contact and emotional manipulation, with McClurkin allegedly using spiritual authority to keep Corletto from leaving.

The Parties

The lawsuit names only Donnie McClurkin as a defendant. While other individuals are mentioned or alluded to in the complaint, Corletto has chosen to pursue claims solely against McClurkin.

The Venue

Although Corletto resides in Orlando, Florida, the case was filed in New York. This makes sense legally. McClurkin lives in New York, giving the court jurisdiction over him, and most of the alleged events occurred there, making venue proper.

Subscribe now

The Three Counts Explained

The first claim is brought under the Gender-Motivated Violence Act (GMVA), a New York law that provides a civil remedy for victims of gender-based violence. This statute allows victims to seek damages even if there were never any formal criminal charges filed.

To succeed, Corletto must show three things: (1) that McClurkin’s actions constituted a crime of violence under New York law, which means a misdemeanor or felony; (2)that the acts were motivated, at least in part, by gender-based animus, and (3) that there is a causal connection between the violence and that animus. If proven, the GMVA allows for compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees.

The second claim is sexual assault, which focuses on the fear of unwanted sexual touching. The third is sexual battery, which alleges that McClurkin did in fact subject Corletto to unwanted sexual contact.

What Happens Next? My Predictions

McClurkin has already issued a public denial. Based on standard litigation strategy, I expect his legal team to file a motion to dismiss, likely arguing that the allegations are insufficient or barred by the statute of limitations.

The statute of limitations may be a critical issue here. Under the GMVA, the filing window is seven years, but a temporary amendment extended the deadline until March 1, 2025. The last alleged incident occurred more than seven years ago in 2015, which means the defense will likely argue that the claims are time-barred.

Parties can enter into a “tolling agreement,” whereby they agree to “toll” or pause, the statute of limitations. There is no indication that such an agreement exist between the parties, and given McClurkin’s vehement denial, it seems unlikely he agreed to such tolling. Nevertheless, this may prove to be the first and biggest hurdle for Corletto.

What Do You Think? How should churches and faith leaders respond when allegations like these surface—should there be independent oversight, or is internal accountability enough? Share your thoughts in the comments. Your perspective matters in shaping this conversation about faith, trust, and justice.

Subscribe now

Share

Speaker Mike Johnson recently rallied House Republicans to pass one of the most appalling bills in recent U.S. history. Not only does this legislation provide unprecedented tax breaks for the wealthy, but it does so by harming the most vulnerable members of society.

The bill slashes funding for essential social safety net programs, including Medicaid and SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). It imposes work requirements on some able-bodied adults receiving Medicaid—even though the majority of Medicaid recipients already work. It also introduces more frequent and burdensome eligibility checks, which appear to be designed less to ensure compliance and more to increase red tape. According to the Congressional Budget Office, this bill would result in 11.8 million Americans losing their Medicaid coverage.

And that’s not all. While gutting healthcare and food assistance, the bill simultaneously expands the police state. It allocates:

• $30 billion to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for hiring, training, and resources

• $45 billion to expand immigrant detention capacity

• Over $46.5 billion to continue construction of a border wall—an ineffective and politically symbolic project

As those of us with a heart and a conscience mourned the implications of this bill, House Republicans were caught on video celebrating to the tune of “Y.M.C.A.” Yet, more disturbingly, I saw Christian leaders online urging people to pray for the passage of this bill.

Subscribe now

It brought to mind Speaker Johnson’s interview with Sean Hannity shortly after he assumed his role, when he declared:

“Someone asked me today in the media, 'People are curious, what does Mike Johnson think about any issue under the sun?' I said, 'Well, go pick up a Bible off your shelf and read it. That’s my worldview.'”

But how?

How can the Bible be your worldview, and yet you fight to pass legislation that explicitly harms the people we are commanded to protect? As a Christian, I am compelled to ask: Are we serving the same God?

Johnson cannot possibly be referencing the same Bible that includes Isaiah 1:17:

“Learn to do good. Seek justice. Help the oppressed. Defend the cause of orphans. Fight for the rights of widows.”

Or Matthew 25:44–45, where Jesus says:

“‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”

These verses are not suggestions for charitable behavior. Jesus was not offering a metaphor. He placed himself squarely among the hungry, the stranger, the sick, and the imprisoned. They embody Christ in the earth. To harm them is to reject Jesus.

This bill is not just an attack on the poor and marginalized—it is an affront to the very character of Jesus.

And yet, many evangelical leaders seem unfazed. Instead, they cling to a theology that idolizes power, strength, and dominance—ideals embodied in their devotion to Donald Trump. But let’s be honest: this is not Christian conviction. It’s cowardice. It’s worship of a golden calf wrapped in the flag.

Mike Johnson may believe that his rise to power is divinely ordained. He may think his position proves God is using him. But being used by God does not automatically equate to being approved by God. God once used a donkey to speak to Balaam (Numbers 22:28–30). That doesn’t mean the donkey was righteous. It simply means God can—and will—use whatever means necessary.

Share

Leave a comment

Thank you for reading.
If this post resonated with you, feel free to share it, leave a comment, or subscribe to join me on this journey of truth-telling, reflection, and spiritual accountability.

Subscribe now

In a year marked by one of the most unified and effective Black-led boycotts in recent memory, the National Baptist Convention USA has chosen a curious moment to announce a $300,000 partnership with Target Corporation. The timing is not just unfortunate—it’s revealing.

According to Roland Martin, the NBC released the statement during the Convention’s gathering in Montgomery, Alabama. Issued by Dr. Boise Kimber, the statement frames the donation as a step toward “community empowerment” through entrepreneurship, education, and workforce development.

But for many, this reads less like empowerment and more like selling out. At a time when Black consumers are flexing their collective economic power to hold corporations accountable, the NBCUSA’s decision to accept corporate funds from a company under boycott feels like a betrayal.

A Moment of Resistance, Undermined

The boycott against Target has galvanized a wide swath of the Black community, uniting people across ideological and generational lines. It’s not just about one company—it’s about the broader attacks on the Black community through anti-DEI initiatives and blatant erasure of our history.

In this context, the NBCUSA’s partnership with Target sends a chilling message: access to corporate dollars are being prioritized over solidarity with Black people. The statement’s tone is conciliatory, even celebratory, praising Target’s “generous donation” and ongoing dialogue.

But what’s missing is any direct acknowledgment of the boycott itself, or the reasons behind it. The silence is deafening.

A Familiar Pattern: The NBCUSA and Civil Rights Tensions

This isn’t the first time the National Baptist Convention has found itself at odds with the broader Black freedom struggle. During the height of the Civil Rights Movement, Reverend Joseph H. Jackson, then-president of the NBCUSA, famously clashed with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.. Jackson advocated for a more conservative, gradualist approach to racial justice—one that emphasized law and order over direct action.

King, by contrast, believed in the urgency of nonviolent protest and civil disobedience. Their conflict came to a head in the early 1960s, when Jackson refused to support King’s more confrontational tactics and even sought to block his influence within the Convention. This ideological rift led to the formation of the Progressive National Baptist Convention, a breakaway group that aligned more closely with King’s vision of liberation.

Today’s announcement echoes that historical divide. Once again, the NBCUSA appears to be aligning itself with institutional power rather than prophetic resistance.

The Black Church: A Complicated Site of Liberation

To be clear, the Black church is not a monolith and has always been a complex and multifaceted institution. It has birthed revolutionaries and reformers, prophets and pragmatists. It has been both a sanctuary and a battleground. The tension between spiritual leadership and political action is not new—but it is newly urgent.

The NBCUSA’s decision to accept Target’s money during an active boycott is not just a PR misstep. It’s a reminder that not all Black institutions are aligned in the fight for Black liberation. Some are still negotiating with Pharaoh while others are trying to part the Red sea.

What Is the Cost of Silence?

The NBCUSA claims it is “changing the course, but not our conviction.” But conviction without courage is just branding. And partnerships without accountability are just payoffs.

As we reflect on this moment, we must ask: What do we expect from our institutions? Who do they serve? And at what point does partnership become complicity?

The Black community deserves more than scholarships and workforce programs. And certainly more than a mere $100,000 a year for three years. We deserve solidarity. And we deserve leaders who won’t trade our collective power for a corporate check.

✊🏾 Call to Action

If this moment troubles you, speak up. Share this article. Ask your church leaders where they stand. Demand transparency from the institutions that claim to represent us. And most importantly—keep the pressure on. Boycotts only work when we stay united.

Let’s not sell our power for thirty pieces of silver.

Share

Leave a comment

Thank you for reading.
If this post resonated with you, feel free to share it, leave a comment, or subscribe to join me on this journey of truth-telling, reflection, and spiritual accountability.

Subscribe now

The Clip That Found Me

Earlier this year, during the inauguration of 45/47, I tried my best to avoid watching any part of the ceremony. But in the age of social media, that was nearly impossible—unless I was willing to bury my head in the sands of denial. Snippets found their way into my text threads and newsfeeds. One clip that particularly irked me was the “prayer” delivered by Rev. Lorenzo Sewell.

“This man was clearly playing church, as the elders would say.”

The blatant use of Dr. King’s words from his “I Have a Dream” speech, the decontextualization and misuse of scripture, and the exaggerated, performative delivery made the “prayer” difficult to watch. I cringed every time he uttered a theatrical grunt.

In a follow-up interview, Rev. Sewell claimed his prayer was unscripted:

“I just talked to God... I stood up there and talked to God in the context of Dr. King’s dream.”

Translation: I didn’t know what to pray, so I borrowed the spirituality of an authoritative figure because I lacked my own.

When Performance Replaces Truth

Sewell’s “prayer” immediately reminded me of a viral clip featuring Kristina Java, a white preacher who delivered—nearly word for word—a sermon originally preached by Bishop T.D. Jakes at the 2000 Woman Thou Art Loosed conference. Like Sewell, her performance was cringeworthy and inauthentic. She struck me as a child imitating an adult.

“They attempt to wear Black spirituality like a costume, hoping it will cloak them in spiritual legitimacy.”

While many commentators have discussed the appropriation of Black culture over time, what I see in these moments is not merely appropriation—it’s cosplay. These individuals attempt to wear Black spirituality like a costume, hoping it will cloak them in spiritual legitimacy. But because cosplay is, at its core, real life imitating fiction, what they’re doing is refusing to take Black spirituality or theological thought seriously. They see us as legitimate, yet not real. We are admired and debased at the same time. It’s a strange duality we exist in.

The Paula White Paradox

Paula White, the president’s spiritual advisor, is a great example of this duality. She rose to prominence by mimicking the preaching style rooted in Black churches. She aligned herself with prominent Black pastors like Bishop Jakes, which helped propel her forward. But she always struck me as inauthentic. Like Java, she seemed to be performing what she thought her audience wanted to see.

Her bizarre moment calling on angels from Africa while pretending to speak in tongues was perhaps the height of this performance. There has always been an air of pretense with her—constantly mimicking and mocking the very community that made her famous.

But her dual approach to the Black community—imitating while debasing—was on full display during the last election. At a press conference, she made comments that revealed how she sees herself as aligned with God, in contrast to Black and Hispanic communities. Specifically, she said:

“Do you know that when conservative Catholics and socially conservative Catholics who are faithful to the church and evangelicals come together, we are 38% of the electorate? That is bigger than the Hispanic, Black, and union vote all together.”

It is striking to hear someone who gained spiritual legitimacy by cosplaying as a Black preacher turn around and pit that same Black community against God. This is what it means to cosplay.

“I use Blackness to get ahead, and once I arrive, I shed and debase the very thing that got me there.”

Can Black People Cosplay the Black Church?

Some may ask, “I can see how White cosplays, but what about Sewell? He’s a Black preacher—how can he cosplay the Black church? Doesn’t his Blackness prevent him from doing so?”

The simple answer is no. Cosplay isn’t just about who is doing it—it’s about why and how. Are you using the Black church to evoke spiritual legitimacy while denying the truth of the very source you invoke?

In Sewell’s case, the answer is clearly yes. He is a Black man aligned with 45/47 and MAGA—a white supremacist ideology that actively works against the Black community. He has allowed himself to become a Black glove on a white fist. Spiritually speaking, he is in the community but not of the community.

What Now?

The question for those of us in the Black church what do we do with this reality? How do we address the duality we live in? More pointedly:

If others look to us for spiritual legitimacy, how do we use that influence for good—how do we make sure we’re not creating more Whites, Javas, and Sewells, but nurturing true prophetic voices?

Answering that question is part of what this blog is about. I don’t claim to have the solution, but I believe it begins with calling out cosplay wherever and however it shows up. Figuring out the rest is a journey I hope you’ll take with me.

Thank you for reading.
If this post resonated with you, feel free to share it, leave a comment, or subscribe to join me on this journey of truth-telling, reflection, and spiritual accountability.