Dear Mr. ******

You asked me to address some questions regarding the the letters that have been circulating about what has recently happened. Let's remember in all of this that our responsibility as Christians has not changed, nor has one single word of the Bible. We must still be loving, forgiving, kind, practice God's laws, seek 1st the KOG, preach the gospel and plan of God to the world as a witness,and feed the sheep. Let's keep that focus, and be able to love our brothers, which ever side
of this mess they come out on.

You also asked me which of the 12 Council of elders members were supporting Dr. Meredith. As I understand it, the Council were made up of:: Rod Meredith, Raymond McNair, Carl McNair, Colin Adair, Charles Bryce, Richard Ames, John Ogwyn, Debar Apartian, George Meeker, Jean Carion, Dave Pack, Richard Ames, and Edwin Pope. Of those 13, Mr. Pack was removed some time ago by the Council, and Mr. Adair died. That left 11. Of those 11, five are with the Board, and 6 for Dr. Meredith. In support of Mr. Meredith their is: Dr. Meredith, Carl McNair, Richard Ames, Dibar Apartian, Charles Bryce and John Ogwyn. I do not know the positions of Misters Jean Carion or George Meeker.

Then there were your questions about Mr. Adair's comments of support for Mr. Meredith's leadership role remaining until his death. As I said, I think it distasteful to begin trying to say: Mr. Adair would have done this, or Mr. Adair would have done that.... Mr. Adair's own actions and words will speak for themselves. Let's let the man rest now. However some have tried to judge what he would have done... I don't know any more than anyone else does. I know that Mr. Adair always tried to be a fair man. He did encourage me when I was in concerned recently. Following is what Mr. Adair wrote to me on November 2nd this year: "There needs to be multitude of counsel. It is Mr. Meredith's job to chair meetings,
preside over meetings and help bring us all to agreement. That is his role as leader, and no-one here is trying to remove him from that job. He has it for life, providing of course he does not disqualify himself."Read into that what you may, but it was said to encourage me in light ofmy concern of a power struggle. With that, I suggest we not drag Mr.Adair out of the grave and through our squabbles with forecasts of what he might have done or thought had his purpose and service for God been extended.

Let me also say that this letter represents what I believe to be the facts. My opinions herein given are based solely upon what I have personally experienced and/or confirmed by the words of more than one of those involved or multiple eye witnesses. This letter is not intended to be the defining point of decision for any, but is intended to try to clarify misconceptions so those reading may be better able to discern the truth, avoid confusion and division caused by misunderstandings.

Following are only some of my concerns that I feel need to be addressed for our brethren to be able to decide and defend their position. Inessence, they're being asked to "choose". To do so they need accurate information. That has not been easy to come by of late. You mentioned that someone had reffered to me as a "Meredith man". That just shows that that individual simply does not know me. In fact, those who do know me would tell you that if I had in the past leaned in a certain direction it was in the direction of Mr. Raymond McNair as much as it was Dr. Meredith. I have held them both in high regard. This is not a matter of following a man. This is a matter of following Christ and the one He has been primarily using to revive and preach the gospel of the KOG, as he too follows Christ. This is a matter of 50 years of fruits of teaching God's true doctrine, law, grace, hope, the witness of the gospel of Christ and our calling. By their fruits you shall know them. I have seen those fruits in Dr. Meredith. They're OUTSTANDING! I now offer for you and any others who wish to consider the following points, regarding the recent letters by Mr. Salyer and the Board accusing Mr. Meredith and defending the recent MAJOR SPIRITUAL DECISIONS of the Board (not the Council), of the Church of God, Global.

Point 1
We must not get into a "spitting" contest. Though we may the "other side" is misguided and wrong, they are supposedly still our brothers. Let's remember who is the accuser of the brethren. (Rev.12:10) Please let's not fall into the trap of doing Satan's job for him by attacking or accusing the persons of our brethren -- even if the accusations are right!. If we take the "high road", dealing only with known facts, not condemning or imputing, the brethren will see this. Those led by God's spirit will respond in the positive! Can we please stick to facts and actions and not attack persons, impute motives, or act too overly emotional? Otherwise the responses will go back and forth tearing down and attacking... and so on... The result would be similar to what many politicians have found in their mud-slinging campaigns, both sides will come to "stink" to the brethren and to God. We must please God. We can't afford to offend the sheep!

Point 2
On page 3 of Mr. Salyer's 1st letter dated Nov. 25, he stated the Counsel of Elders "unanimously confirmed that we would practice government by consensus of the Council." Yet it was the BOARD and NOT the Council that removed both Mr. Carl McNair and Dr. Meredith from the positions on the Board of the church. The appearance is that the Board
is the one that did not submit to and follow the unanimous decision of the Counsel for making such MAJOR decisions with HUGE spiritual consequences, by taking such unauthorized moves itself?

Point 3
Page 4 of Mr. Salyer's 1st Nov.25th letter quotes Mr. Meredith as saying; "Well I wrote the booklet on government to help people come out of WCG, but I never believed it was the way the Church should be governed" This statement needs to be addressed as to it's accuracy and context etc... You will notice that in the church government booklet, page 2, Mr. Meredith put IN BOLD the following statement: "This booklet is NOT intended to be a thorough discussion of all  the details and ramificationsof church government." He goes on to state that it was written to help those whose leadership was eading them away from the truth and into heresy! Such was not the case in this take over by the Board (not the Council of elders). I do not see a variation from what Dr.Meredith had written in the government booklet and his statements. However, those statements written by Mr. Salyer are crafted in such a way that they give the impression that Mr. Meredith had "changed" to take more power. The way Mr. Salyer selectively took various comments by Mr. Meredith out of context, and presented them to the sheep, I believe leads to a distortion of the truth, and paints the inaccurate and deceptive picture that Mr. Meredith had "changed" his teaching as he grew more "power hungry". If Mr. Meredith was so "power hungry" and had been trying to keep all the power to himself, then why did he share enough power with others for them to ultimately turn on him and take over?

Point 4
Page 5, 1st Salyer letter. The concern over the calling in of some loans by some ministers and brethren is presented in such a way, that I believe it makes Mr. Meredith out to be some kind of a criminal or bad man. Many of those loans were taken at great risk and sacrifice by many for the strict purpose of continuing or improving our TV media effort -- NOT TO CUT IT BACK! Many loaned money to support Mr. Meredith in preaching the gospel, and not for Misters Pope, Link or Salyer! At the time, I was told those loans could be repaid upon demand. In fact I know of at least one large loan that was repaid a couple of months ago, with no apparent "special authorization", other than a one time simple brief phone call. Point 5 Page 5, 1st Salyer letter, Mr. Salyer mentions many "chiding me, (Salyer) personally for not doing more", in  the previous WCG heresy. That's right -- and many also chided him for also TEACHING THAT HERESY! And in the same paragraph, "democracy" is imputed to Mr. Meredith. Yet was it not the board who was doing the voting and politicking? The pot calling the kettle black?

Point 6
1st page Board letter dated Nov.25, Mr. Meredith was accused of "self aggrandizement", and quote; "priding himself on God having used him to start Global because he had been pushed out of the WWCG -- whereas, in fact, he only left that Church after his request to at least work as a writer, local elder or a youth coordinator was rejected. Dr. Mere dith, then, would presumably have stayed in Worldwide while the Work collapsed if he had been allowed to work with young people in one local congregation"... The GALL OF SUCH AN INCREDIBLE STATEMENT! Trying to put down Mr. Meredith's humility, for being willing to humble himself (an ordained evangelist) to continue to serve and preach the truth -- even if limited only as an elder in the field -- and then turn around in the  same breath and insinuate that he is a proud power-monger full of self-aggrandizement? INCREDIBLE! Which is it? Is Mr. Meredith proud and self aggrandizing? O r is he humble and willing to submit to a lesser role? What is he being condemned for -- it's a little unclear!!! This brings to me a question: WHERE WERE THE MEN ON THE BOARD WHO SEEM TO BE BELITTLEING MR. MEREDITH FOR THIS PAST STAND FOR THE TRUTH, WHEN HE WAS IN THE HOT SEAT, WITH HIS PAY, CAR, AND WHOLE WAY OFLIFE ON THE LINE? Where were they at that time? Were they speaking out loudly enough to even be heard or noticed enough to be "called in"? In all respect, where were they? True -- at least one was preaching loudly enough to be heard while he was still director of the ministry back then. I know, because I heard the heresy he preached with my own ears and read his heresy with my own eyes -- all this while he took a
comfortable salary. And will he now sign on to a letter belittling Mr. Meredith who had the intestinal fortitude to make a stand, and be called in for it? "By their fruits you shall know them". Yes, we know what the fruits of the past were of both these past directors of the ministry! What about the fruits of Mr. Pope? Should we follow him? Well I don't know. You see, I never even heard of Mr. Pope until after Global started. Ditto for the recently ordained Mr. Link! While I have never in the past known Mr. Raymond McNair to teach heresy, he was so quiet at the time that he kind of seemed to
blend in for quite a while, and was not bothered. He was willing to stay in WWCG for quite some time after Mr. Meredith's departure. Mr. Meredith at HQ was the threat, because he has always been doctrinally right on for God's law, Truth and the gospel, without compromise! (See Isa.8:20) Even his closing prayers were filled with enough content to get him "called in" for it! Where were these men on the Board who dare to sign   such a letter when Mr. Meredith stood with the truth -- WHEN THERE WAS NOT YET ANYPLACE TO GO??? WHERE WERE HIS ACCUSERS THEN?

Point 7
Page 2 of board letter. Mention is made of the lawsuit that developed out of Mr. Raymond McNair's divorce, because of comments that were made in a private meeting that was supposed to remain private. Both Raymond and Rod were "in the trenches" together through this event that happened many years ago. I am appalled that Mr. McNair would sign on to  a letter that would try to compare that situation with todays. This is coming down to sad and rank finger pointing! Should we follow suit and try to make something of Mr. Raymond McNair's part in the divorce? With this kind of finger pointing and accusing, where should we draw the line? Please! Can't we stick to the facts? Let us take the high road and not get into this kind of trying to belittle one another. I hope Mr. Salyer takes his own advice when he said: "Many people said and did things they now regret. Why don't we try to avoid such pitfalls this time around?" (Page 3, Nov.25th)

Point 8
Board letter Nov.25. Mr. Meredith's comments of having his hands tied and the work being hindered by the board were made light of and belittled as almost laughable. If that is so, WHY did the Board (not the Council) in effect, censor Mr. Meredith by taking the sermon scheduling at San Diego (where all the sermons are taped that are sent to all the churches) away, placing it in the hands of Mr. Salyer -- who then removed Mr. Meredith from the scheduled sermon that very next  Sabbath? Was this the first time of many? Why say, on the one hand Mr. Meredith was not having his hands tied to do the work, and then, control when he can speak? Which is it? Are we playing a game of deceitful semantics here?

Point 9
Nov.25 board letter, page 2 more belittling of Mr. Meredith for only "half writing" some of the booklets, and even then having their "depth and substance" coming from other writers -- making Mr. Meredith sound like a man of little productivity and ability. Again, which is it? Is Mr. Meredith taking everything to himself or sharing it with others? Had
he written these booklets in their entirety, as he has in the past (10 commandments one case in point), would he then have been accused of "hoarding all the glory"? He didn't. He shared, but seems accused anyway. Then he is also belittled in a way that presents him as a man with a more ego than accomplishment and ability. Why do these accusations seem so contradictory?

Point 10
There is a mention made of the "inquisition" of the field pastor that was accused of causing dissention in a "malicious" way. What of the conduct of the one being investigated? I understand the Council (not the Board) was unanimous in removing that individual from the Council -- and that later his conduct and accusations were confirmed? How can the Board mention Mr. Meredith's supposed insubordination, when Misters Salyer and Meeker refused to carry out the unanimous decision of the council to investigate the actions of this council member? Are the insubordinate, accusing someone else of insubordination? Is the kettle calling pot black again?

Point 11
WHAT IS ABSOLUTELY INCREDIBLE, is the admission that the tried and proven evangelist Mr. Carl McNair was removed by the Board (not the Council) simply for the stated reason that he was "tolerant" of Mr. Meredith. It seems that quite a few Council members were also "tolerant". Will they too be removed? Is being "tolerant" a Biblical reason for removal from an office in the Church of God?-- if so, I'd like to see that scripture. Sounds like rank politics. I've noticed whenever you have voting -- you have politics. Whenever you have politics, you have politicians! What a pity!

Point 12
Mention is made often of Mr. Meredith's book on church government, claiming that he was no longer following what he had written. Balderdash! On pages 12 and 13, Mr. Meredith mentions that Peter was clearly the leader to the gospel of the circumcision, as Paul was to the uncircumcision -- but that this leadership was not as an overlord. He showed us that this leadership WAS NOT BY VOTING! He goes on to discuss Peter's leadership was with the 12 apostles -- not apart  from them. This is why Mr. Meredith states that he had the Council of Elders put in place -- to prevent and protect us from heresy and abuse. I believe the Board did not follow their own booklet on church government. Why are they apparently wresting control without instructions or consensus from the Council of elders and accusing their leader --even to the point of finally firing him -- all WITHOUT THE COUNCIL? Why are they voting? Why? Why not follow the booklet they think that Mr. Meredith is ignoring? Why? The kettle calling the pot black again??? How in the world four men (apart from the Council of elders) can wrest control of the church and  claim it is Biblical is mind boggling to me. In the church government booklet, Mr. Meredith speaks of the Council of elders being over the major issues (with his leadership). Yet the Board acted to remove Carl McNair and their leader Rod Meredith -- in this most major spiritual
decision without even a majority support by the Council of elders -- totally contrary to the principles of the government booklet they claim to be following. Mr. Meredith does follow that booklet. That's why he set up the Council. Like Peter and the apostles and elders working together, the Council was to work with Mr. Meredith. Instead of an emotional distortion of the facts, perhaps we should follow one more piece of advice from that same church government booklet on separating as "departed brothers", but still as brothers. Let's put an end to the emotionally charged character assassinations and avoid the work of the devil -- the accuser of the brethren. If we can not walk together today, let's depart as brothers in love (1 Jn.3:10), and let the people judge by the fruits over the past 50 years, whom God has been primarily using to teach the true doctrine; and follow them as they continue to follow Christ.

Respectfully and sincerely,

Don E. Haney

• Rebuttal to 12 Points
• Rees Ellis Rebuttal