A Brother in Trouble

I must mention one more item used by W. V. Grant in his Dawn of a New Day tirade against secular humanism. A thinly-veiled accusation read like this:In some areas, after the “Amazing Athiest” [sic] magician had had free media time to lie and downgrade the Power of the Holy Spirit in our ministry, we have had death threats against our lives. These threats were probably not by criminal types, but by well-meaning pseudo-Christians he had incited.... Just today, (April 23, 1987), as I write this, a prominent local pastor’s wife was strangled nearly to death, after a series of threats. At this writing, she is still in a coma. Secular humanists, and people they incite, mean business!

As of this writing, four months later, much more has been discovered about that case. The preacher Grant writes about is the Reverend Walker Railey, of Dallas. He is known to have a lady friend who is not his wife. The threatening letters he said he received from the secular humanists turned out to have been written with his own office typewriter. He is the only suspect in the crime. His wife is still in a coma and is not expected to survive. A trial is pending.

Another Well-Informed Reporter

In May of 1987, the Oakland (California) Tribune teamed up with Don Henvick, a mover and shaker with the Bay Area Skeptics who has been on Grant’s trail for several years. Reporter Don De Main was carefully prepared by Henvick and his associates to attend a “crusade” at Oakland’s Calvin Simmons Theater. He knew what to look for, and he found it. In the May 22 issue of the Tribune a story appeared describing De Main’s experience at the Grant vaudeville show that said, in partVictoria, wearing dark glasses, is called up from the front row. “How many think God can heal this blind sister? Everybody say, ‘Praise the Lord.’ “ Everybody does. Grant says Victoria is totally blind. “I’m just crazy enough to believe God can heal a blind eye. I’m going to start praying. Victoria, I’m going to take my hand off your eyes. Say, ‘Jesus, you healed blind Bartimaeus.’ “ Grant places his hands in front of her face. She says she can see his ears, his nose, and the number of fingers he is holding out.

Now, De Main knew something more about this case than the rest of that audience did. He knew that Grant, during his dramatic “healing” of Victoria, had hyperbolized her claim of “limited sight” to “total blindness.” De Main also knew that Grant had approached John Taube, another Bay Area Skeptics member, in the auditorium lobby before the program and had asked about the young lady accompanying him. John had told Grant that it was his “niece” Victoria who was having sight problems. Taube had been at Grant’s meeting the week before and had been “healed.” Taube felt that Grant would recognize him, but he didn’t. The mnemonic system he uses is short-term, of necessity. What De Main missed was a statement by Grant that shows his careful and clever use of implications. He had said:It’s not God’s will for her to have a white cane and walk around with dark glasses.

The truth is that “Victoria” did not carry a cane. Grant’s statement is designed to allow listeners to assume that she did. This semantic trick is commonly used by conjurors, too. The conversation between Grant and Taube had gone like this:Grant: Have you been in an accident? Taube: No, Reverend Grant. Don’t you remember me? I think you’re the most wonderful man in the world. Grant: No, Jesus is. Taube: ... The reason that I’m here tonight is because I’m concerned about my niece, who is blind. Grant: Is she completely blind? Taube: Oh no. She sees a little. Grant We’re going to have a “laying on of hands,” so we’ll pray for her. What’s your name? Taube: I guess you forgot from last week. My name is John. Grant: What’s your niece’s name? Taube: Victoria. Grant: Her doctor is who? Taube: Dr. Rice. In San Francisco. Grant: Well, we’re gonna have a “laying on of hands.” We’ll be praying for her.

Thus prepared, the Reverend Grant launched into the public part of his meeting. Reporter De Main had watched as Grant got the information from John Taube and witnessed the performance as “Victoria” was “healed.” He wrote in his story: But in Victoria’s case, Grant had gotten the wrong message from God. “Victoria” is really Genie Scott, an anthropologist from San Francisco, accompanied by John Taube, who had been called out two days earlier and “healed” of crippling arthritis. They are both supporters of the [Bay Area Skeptics] who went through Grant’s “miracles” for the society’s efforts to uncover the chicanery of faith healers. Both are healthy.... Grant got his information about Genie from chatting with [John] before the faith healing session. But [he] told him she was not totally blind, and could make out lights and shadows and contrasting objects, like Grant’s ears, nose and fingers. Where Grant gets his information on his healing subjects is more mundane than from God. It comes from carefully phrased, casual chats early in the four-hour sessions by Grant’s associates, notably his chief aide, the Rev. Glen Cole, who talks to companions of the would-be subjects and passes on the information.

In this case, De Main told the whole story, based on personal experience and observation in the field, assisted by experts who had the ability to prepare him for the experience. He had to suppose nothing. It was all there for him to see, and he made a complete revelation of Grant’s deception to Tribune readers. One of his sentences sums up the entire faith-healing phenomenon:The real miracle of Grant’s performances, and others like him, is not in their healing, but in charismatic convincing of those who want to be convinced.