Answer to charges that Names were used without consent

[stmatthew]

One question was asked specifically if any men were added to the General Council list without consent. Bro. Crawford Coon very thoroughly explained how that a few months back, the six men that are in the Executive Council thought and discussed every name on that list before calling them or putting them on a list. When it came time to call these men for their approval, they divided up the names among the six of them to call and request their support and to be in the General Council. Every man in consideration was called upon; and every man considered accepted. Bro. Coon then said that three of four men of that number (much later, and after the list was already in print) called and asked that, because of various reasons including sickness, and church problems, that their names might be removed from that list.
When they heard the accusations made about the men’s names being on the list without their permission, the six got together again trying to figure out if one of the names could have possibly been mistakenly overlooked, or what else may have happened to cause this accusation. They thoroughly examined their list, and each man confirmed each name they had called and that their permission to be added to the list had been specifically given. Every name was accounted for. So, like I thought, these were simply false accusations.

http://apostolicsummit.blogspot.com/...alot-of-q.html

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Are you quoting another post, or are those your words?

Sorry for the confusion (I fixed it). I'm quoting the Apostolic Summit Blog. The link to the blog is below the quote.

[The Dean]

I heard the identical same thing, StMatt. They were open about it and had nothing to hide - said that EVERY name on that list had been contacted and agreed. A few later changed their mind for one reason of the other and they were changed.

They said they heard 'rumors' coming out of different mediums (like forums) that there were names there without their permission and regathered and covered the list again. NONE.

In fact, they made quite a joke about the forum activity and openly discussed some of the rumors. They said at one point that NW said, "But what do I know, I'm only here because I couldn't get a position" to the roaring laughter of the crowd.

Those are good men. Proven men. You may not agree with their present actions but they have proven their 'metal' in days gone by.

God bless them all.

[BoredOutOfMyMind]

Awwww come on. You spoiled all the hype with Truth and Facts.

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by BoredOutOfMyMind

Awwww come on. You spoiled all the hype with Truth and Facts.

Facts aren't high on the list of priorities for some. 'Preciseness' isn't quite as important when you're on the wrecking crew as it is if your trying to build something right.

[PastorD]

Brother Haney, precisely stated that men had contacted him that DID NOT want their name on the list. I suppose he is not a good or proven man and his 'metal' is worthless. Someone somewhere Telleth not the truth.

[The Dean]

Originally Posted by PastorD

Brother Haney, precisely stated that men had contacted him that DID NOT want their name on the list. I suppose he is not a good or pr oven man and his 'metal' is worthless. Someone somewhere Teller not the truth.

Perhaps the breakdown is not in either Bishop Haney or the Elders of Tulsa. I do know that they took specific time to address this accusation there today and all were in agreement that these men had been contacted.

It was not just 'one man's' responsibility but all of the coordinators made the calls and it was verified by all on that list. Again, a few changed their minds later. It was addressed openly and before all there with questions and answers being allowed at the time. Lying men don't do that kind of thing.

Somehow you may have confused my compliment on the conduct of the 'Tulsa' crew as a slam against Bishop Haney. Nothing could be further from the truth.

These forums - and the irresponsible suppositions that get hurled around on them - go far to fuel many accusations that aren't true. I have great admiration for those associated with Tulsa. By virtue of the fact that I'm still in the UPC it goes without saying that I feel the same for our leadership.

Again I say, God bless them all.

[Todd]

Originally Posted by PastorD

Brother Haney, precisely stated that men had contacted him that DID NOT want their name on the list. I suppose he is not a good or pr oven man and his 'metal' is worthless. Someone somewhere Teller not the truth.

WOW!!! Before we jump straight to the 'you say he is worthless, and someone is lying' please consider that there is a possibility that all may be truthful. If some originally said OK to inclusion on the list then withdrew, the time element comes into play, when did the 7 talk to them? and when did Rev. Haney speak to them? It seems a little harsh and assuming to jump WWAAYY to an extreme like this.

[connielori]

Originally Posted by The Dean

Perhaps the breakdown is not in either Bishop Haney or the Elders of Tulsa. I do know that they took specific time to address this accusation there today and all were in agreement that these men had been contacted.

It was not just 'one man's' responsibility but all of the coordinators made the calls and it was verified by all on that list. Again, a few changed their minds later. It was addressed openly and before all there with questions and answers being allowed at the time. Lying men don't do that kind of thing.

Somehow you may have confused my compliment on the conduct of the 'Tulsa' crew as a slam against Bishop Haney. Nothing could be further from the truth.

These forums - and the irresponsible suppositions that get hurled around on them - go far to fuel many accusations that aren't true. I have great admiration for those associated with Tulsa. By virtue of the fact that I'm still in the UPC it goes without saying that I feel the same for our leadership.

Again I say, God bless them all.

I don't know you 'The Dean', however, by your fruits tonight,...I KNOW YOU!
Thank you!

[PastorD]

Originally Posted by The Dean

Perhaps the breakdown is not in either Bishop Haney or the Elders of Tulsa. I do know that they took specific time to address this accusation there today and all were in agreement that these men had been contacted.

It was not just 'one man's' responsibility but all of the coordinators made the calls and it was verified by all on that list. Again, a few changed their minds later. It was addressed openly and before all there with questions and answers being allowed at the time. Lying men don't do that kind of thing.

Somehow you may have confused my compliment on the conduct of the 'Tulsa' crew as a slam against Bishop Haney. Nothing could be further from the truth.

These forums - and the irresponsible suppositions that get hurled around on them - go far to fuel many accusations that aren't true. I have great admiration for those associated with Tulsa. By virtue of the fact that I'm still in the UPC it goes without saying that I feel the same for our leadership.

Again I say, God bless them all.

Dean...no confusion. I don't think you are slamming the Bishop. I just think it is silly ( not to be taken personal ) to think that the 'Tulsa Crew' are not capable of being a bit political themselves. Sorry, but the history is there.

Did Bishop Haney not say that men had contacted him? Those were his words not the accusation of a forum.

Again, someone somewhere . . .well, anyway.