Pastor Justin Edwards denies ‘close’ relationship with Bishop E. Bernard Jordan, says he was 'contract laborer'

By Leonardo Blair, Senior Reporter Friday, February 27, 2026

Justin D. Edwards, senior pastor of Holy Cross Baptist Church South in Chicago, Illinois, has denied having a “close personal” unpaid relationship with televangelist Elijah Bernard Jordan, better known as Archbishop E. Bernard Jordan, and insists he was a “contract laborer” for the New York City minister.

Edwards’ statement made in a recent interview with The Christian Post comes as Jordan, a married father of five, filed a defamation lawsuit seeking at least $80 million, naming Edwards, media personality Larry Reid, several YouTubers, and others for allegedly using illicit telephone recordings to make defamatory comments accusing him of abuse and questioning his sexuality.

The alleged “close personal relationship” between Jordan, who is the founder of Zoe Ministries in Manhattan, and Edwards, who was installed as pastor of Holy Cross Baptist Church South some three years ago, is presented as a key driver of the events that led up to the illicit telephone recordings made on Nov. 4, 2025, that are at the center of the lawsuit. 

When asked about the specific quote from the lawsuit and the nature of his relationship with the televangelist, Edwards insisted to CP that he was hired to serve as Jordan’s “chief adjutant” in Chicago, and he was paid for that service.

“I understand that he is playing a verbal game to cover himself," Edwards told CP. "That’s what I understand. In terms of compensation, everything was an exchange. I was a contract laborer. I’m not a member of Zoe Ministries. I’ve never been a member of Zoe Ministries, so any exchange between he and I was per compensation."

Jordan's lawsuit claimed that he and Edwards had "a close personal relationship" that did not involve "coercion, compensation, or any exchange of value."

"When it became apparent that Edwards’ motivations were financial and inconsistent with Plaintiff’s values and boundaries, Plaintiff ceased communication,” reads the lawsuit, which was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey last Friday by a Manhattan federal judge for lack of jurisdiction.

“At no time did Plaintiff compensate Edwards for intimacy or engage in prostitution, solicitation, or any form of transactional sexual conduct. Any financial assistance Plaintiff provided was charitable and pastoral in nature. Edwards gained access to Plaintiff through positions of trust and proximity created by Plaintiff’s ministerial role."

The filing claims Jordan provided limited financial assistance to Edwards and his spouse, including “covering a vehicle payment when they lacked reliable transportation necessary for ministry work.” Jordan “also retained and paid for legal counsel for Edwards’ son when he became involved in a legal matter.”

“These actions were undertaken philanthropically and as an extension of pastoral care. After Edwards revealed his true intentions, Plaintiff discontinued and terminated all such assistance,” the lawsuit states.

When asked what exactly Jordan paid for, he replied, “Time, talent, availability, my building.”

“I pastor a church in Chicago he served as a co-facilitator in administration. There were a number of different things. So yes, there was an exchange financially on both ends. My church paid him to do multiple things in terms of teaching, preaching, instruction. So yes, it was compensation,” he said.

He insists he was not paid for any sexual favor.

“Now if you’re referring to if there was any exchange for compensation sexually, no, there was never any exchange, request or demand financially for any sexual exchange,” the married father said. “I don’t know where that came from. I don’t know why he even included this in the conversation. I have never said that or suggested that.”

While stating that Jordan made some financial contributions to his church for ministry purposes, Edwards maintains that Jordan was not a benefactor of his family.

“He did not financially support myself, my family, or my church. He made charitable contributions to my church. In reference to your post in The Christian Post about a car, etc. He never purchased me a car. However, because he is in Chicago, … he asked me to be his chief adjutant and his chief adjutant needed to be driving a certain vehicle while in transport of him,” he said. “Zoe ministry agreed to pay the car note based upon the … years he was supposed to be in Chicago.

“As it relates to my relationship with Bishop Jordan, Bishop Jordan and I were colleagues in the ministry. He was not my mentor. I never claimed him to be my pastor — none of those things. I was a contract laborer at best.”

District Judge Margaret M. Garnett ordered that Jordan’s lawsuit be transferred last Friday because the alleged defamatory comments were not made against the televangelist in New York. The recordings of the telephone conversations at issue in the lawsuit were made while Jordan was allegedly in New Jersey.

In addition to Edwards and Reid, who operates the "Larry Reid Live" show based in Georgia, Jordan’s lawsuit lists as defendants Texas pastor Calvin Blake, Sr.; Davyon Augustus, who runs a YouTube channel called "Consciouz TV" in South Carolina; Marcellus McMillian, who runs the "Mad Church Disease" YouTube channel in California; Tyesse Jackson, who operates the YouTube channel “The Tyesse Report” in Georgia; James Singletary, a show guest; Kendall Peacock; Chamaco Bryant; and 10 John and Jane Does who are yet to be identified.

Jordan accuses Reid, Edwards and Blake of violating the Federal Wiretap Act and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. He also accuses Reid, Edwards, and the YouTubers of defamation per se.

The lawsuit further alleges civil conspiracy charges against Reid, Edwards and Blake, along with an intentional infliction of emotional distress charge against all defendants for pushing a narrative that questioned his sexuality, accused him of sexual abuse, grooming and targeting young boys.

Jordan alleges that on Nov. 4, 2025, Edwards initiated multiple telephone calls from Illinois with him while he was in New Jersey. At approximately 3:58 p.m. that day, the lawsuit claims Edwards called Jordan and had a conversation lasting approximately 1 hour and 2 minutes.

During the call, Edwards allegedly sent Jordan a photograph of himself with Reid and stated that a “story” was allegedly being prepared about him and denied any involvement.

Jordan alleges that the call quickly became confrontational and hostile, and he told Edwards he was ending their relationship “due to Edwards’ conduct and inappropriate language.”

At approximately 9:55 p.m. that day, Edwards initiated a call to Jordan, which lasted approximately 18 seconds. Around 9:56 p.m., Edwards made another call to Jordan that lasted approximately 45 minutes. Jordan alleges that this is the call that was secretly recorded.

“During the 9:56 PM call, Defendant Edwards merged Defendant Reid into the call without disclosing Reid’s presence and without obtaining Plaintiff’s consent. For the entirety of the call, Plaintiff was unaware that Reid was present or recording the conversation,” the lawsuit states.

“Defendant Reid has since admitted that he was located in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, that he was merged into the call by Defendant Edwards without Plaintiff’s knowledge or consent, and that he recorded the conversation without Plaintiff’s knowledge or consent. Reid admitted that he recorded Plaintiff’s conversation with Edwards,” it adds.

The lawsuit then cites a statement Reid allegedly made in a public broadcast on Oct. 15, 2025, before the Nov. 4 call.

“There’s someone else that has came to me by night. They were not coming to me to be messing. But because they were lied to, they thought they could come to me about their truth. And the truth of my former mentor. I recorded every conversation and told them. I recorded that every conversation,” Reid states.

Jordan said Reid made even more explicit admissions about the recordings in his private “members only” broadcasts.

“It's on audio. It's on the audio. Mm-hmm,” Reid notes. “I can tell my truth about what I was told by Justin. I can tell, I can tell that and he can tell another story or edit story, but the audio verifies what I'm saying.”

The plaintiff accuses Edwards and Reid of coordinating the Nov. 4 call and "subsequent recording in advance with the intent of capturing Plaintiff’s private communications for later use, dissemination, leverage, and monetization." 

"They recorded Plaintiff’s private conversations and disseminated them with the intent to construct and promote a false narrative concerning Plaintiff’s sexual orientation, alleged criminal conduct, and financial improprieties," the lawsuit states.