W. V. Grant Replies to wokr-tv

In the Dawn of a New Day periodical Grant sends to the faithful, now renamed Where Eagles Fly, he displayed his panic at what WOKR had aired. And his mendacity was suddenly very evident in print. What follows is a series of outright lies manufactured by Grant to deceive the believers even further. On page 12, volume 22, number 3, of the Summer 1987 issue of his publication, Grant wrote (the numbers refer to the notes that follow the quotation):In the Rochester/Syracuse area Al Waite,¹ a self-described troubleshooter,² followed our evangelistic party around, hiding with T.V. cameras in the halls of our motels, until we had almost no privacy at all.³ Inspired by the Secular Humanists’⁴ wicked and slanderous⁵ accusations that the healings were not real, he went to several homes of those who had testified⁶ to undeniable healings, ⁷ attempting to talk them out of the healings,⁸ and saying “Grant must be exposed.” ⁹ This reporter, claiming to be a “fellow Christian”¹⁰ as he rang their doorbells offered people money,¹¹ and “Christian advice,” in apparent underhanded tactics. We have letters in our files,¹² handwritten from supporters in the Rochester area, telling us how he came to their homes, trying to talk them “out of” their healings, giving them “offerings” of $50.¹³ In some cases he tried to talk one elderly couple into discontinuing our Bible Correspondence Course they were actively taking.¹⁴ He said he would get them “in touch with another reputable course.” Mr. Waite, inspired by these same humanists ¹⁵ who are out to destroy our children, ran a 5-part series¹⁶ in his area on television, downgrading our ministry, claiming it was an “exposé.”¹⁷ In this same crusade, someone tried to “set us up”¹⁸ with a young woman by having her write to us inviting us to call her.¹⁹ God watched over us and protected us.²⁰

1. It’s Al White, not Waite. 2. Al is not “self-described.” Now with WWOR-TV in New York, he was at that time a recognized, responsible investigative reporter for WOKR-TV, Channel 13, in Rochester. His program was a regular feature on WOKR, and his highly regarded work has appeared on network television as well. 3. True. The cameras found the Grant crew in the hotel bar after midnight, and Grant himself was wandering around the Holiday Inn in bare feet. 4. Not so. Al White was not thus inspired. He did his investigation because he, like so many of us, is angry and dismayed by the shameless flimflam being perpetrated by W. V. Grant. 5. “Slander: A false tale or report ...” (according to Webster’s ). The statements were not “accusations”; they were true. Note that Grant does not deny the truth of White’s revelations. 6. True. 7. Not true. White found no healings. He says: “Undeniable healings? Well, they denied ’em!” 8. Not true. White says, in response: “I went to them as an investigative reporter, and asked them to describe their healings, and how they were healed. They weren’t!” 9. If White said that, I heartily agree. That is one purpose of this book. 10. Al White is a devout, church-going Christian. 11. Not true. The only person to whom Al White offered any money was Evelyn Green. Says White: “Evelyn Green was not a lady of means. She said she was going to send for Grant’s Bible course, and out of compassion, I said, ‘Look, I’ll pay for a course and I’ll give you the name of a reputable Bible company.’ That part is true. It wasn’t as if I was offering her money for her story. That’s clear, and I have a witness to that. And I didn’t try to talk her out of her healing. I asked her to explain how come she was healed twice of the same thing!” Did White pay people for their stories, or to reverse their testimonies, and did he offer anyone $50? His answer is simple: “No! Actually, I did give [Evelyn Green] money for the Bible course, but not for the interview, and not to say anything.” 12. May we see them? 13. Not true. 14. A wise suggestion, if Al White made it. 15. See No. 4, above. 16. It was a six-part series. 17. It certainly was! 18. Grant is using “us” to mean “me.” This usage is reserved for royalty and the Deity, but Grant finds it appropriate for his use. And he didn’t need any “setting up” at all. The young lady, Lynda Oxley, was a former Grant worker and ex-Playboy bunny who left the ministry because Grant was “putting the make on her” and she had discovered his tricks. She fought him off when he made advances, and he left, being filmed in the process by the WOKR crew. Says White, in response to this accusation: “[Grant] is entitled to his interpretation of whether it was a set-up. This lady volunteered to come here to expose him—at her own expense—because of some alleged prior contact with her that was, ummm, less than Christian.” 19. Not so. Grant met her in the Holiday Inn, recognized her, and got her room number. He didn’t need an invitation. 20. If so, why did He allow WOKR to uncover and broadcast all the damning evidence it gathered on Grant and his ministry?   The truth has hurt W. V. Grant, and his only defense, it seems, is to try to cover up with another set of lies. I am enraged that he has attacked a well-informed and careful investigator like Al White by trying to perpetrate misinformation about both his work and his reputation. I’ll let Al have the last word on this matter. He exhibits a far more charitable attitude than I would be able to summon up: “My overall reaction to what [Grant] says? I stand behind my story. It is absolutely correct, and it is a very different, inaccurate picture he is portraying of our investigation.”