The Norris Challenge Accepted
For the past ten years J. Frank Norris, of Fort Worth, Texas, and Detroit, Michigan, has exhibited a bitterness unparalleled in the realm of religious polemics. His venom has exuded in both oral and written propaganda as he has relentlessly berated churches of Christ in general and Foy E. Wallace Jr., in particular. Had the victory in the Fort Worth debate a decade ago been his, why all of the raving and ranting in a manner little short of the maniacal all these ten years? Like Saul of Tarsus in one respect, smarting under the lash of defeat he is "yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord." Very definitely not like Saul in another respect, Norris has not "lived in all good conscience before God," nor exercised himself "to have a conscience void of offence toward God and toward man." It is evident to all who are familiar with the course and conduct of J. Frank Norris in these things, and all matters to which they relate, that he has not acted in "good conscience," nor could he conceivably convince himself that he could possibly conclude that he "verily thought" that he "ought to do" the things that he has been doing.
I. CHALLENGING THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST
Breaking out with a new fury a few weeks ago, Mr. Norris boasted that he had given the "Church Of Christ" such a "shellacking" in the Fort Worth debate that they did not want another. He averred that Wallace had been demoted, put on the shelf, so to speak, and withal he could not even get the "Church Of Christ" to look like they wanted another debate. For a time his boastings were apparently unheard and unheeded. Again, he takes to the air, and with an arrogance equaled only by two men of this age known to the whole world, both dictators --Herr Hitler and his "jackal" Benito Mussolini -- this dictator of his very recent Fundamentalist Baptist defection rides high and mighty, defying and demanding that he be met again in the polemic arena by a man of "national reputation" among the churches of Christ. Upon what meat has Caesar been feeding that he has grown so great! For ten years he has fed upon the meat of remorse and revenge and he seeks his satiation by maledictions.
When the churches of Christ in Oklahoma City, Dallas and Fort Worth, in a cool and even manner, accepted Mr. Norris' latest challenges, it was the very thing that he least expected. He had been led to believe that the churches of Christ would not do it; he thought that they would not "agree on Wallace" and was foolish enough to believe that he could split the churches of Christ and drive a wedge in their ranks. He never had any idea of debating again; he has no idea of doing so now. Therefore, when his challenges were accepted in writing, with proper and manifold signatories, J. Frank Norris began to back-track, and is still craw-fishing out of his own blatant boastings.
First, he declaimed that the "Church of Christ" did not want another debate-- he could not dare them into one. Now, he turns it around, and with another tune he is saying that it seems that The Church Of Christ' wants to debate again-- what a people, never satisfied, always wanting to debate, trying to force another debate on him, like they did the other time!
So, in order to escape the encirclement resulting from his own poor strategy, he now hides behind demands which he figured could not be met. First, he demanded that the "pastors" of the numerous churches of Christ must endorse the debate and the debater. When it began to appear to him that practically all of the preachers and churches would do that very thing, and with but little exception have already done so, this bold (?) challenger then changed his demand and said that a majority vote of all the churches of Christ in the city would be required! What a tactical strategist, the gentleman (?) is! He would have the churches of Christ to adopt "Baptist usage" of majority voting or he will not debate! That is not even good back-tracking, and is an insult to honorable craw-fishing.
It would have been better for Mr. Norris to do as he did in reference to the Dallas debate ten years ago-- just cancel it. We all know about that. Before the Fort Worth debate was held, Mr. Norris wrote me and wired me that he wanted the second debate all arranged for and set, at Dallas, before the Fort Worth debate was held. We accepted his proposal. The Dallas churches agreed to it, endorsed me for his opponent and engaged the coliseum. But on the last day of the Fort Worth debate, after the Dallas debate had been publicly announced before that vast Fort Worth audience, Mr. Norris arose and cancelled the Dallas debate. When he was pressed to state his reason, his ridiculous excuse was that I had made some uncomplimentary remarks about his premillennial friends of the church of Christ!
But since Mr. Norris roars forth again with his challenges, it is altogether fair and reasonable that he should be reminded of his previous Dallas engagement and asked to make it good. And that is what the Dallas churches have done.
Furthermore, since the first debate was held in Fort Worth, Mr. Norris' home city, it is also entirely reasonable and right that a second debate be held between us in Oklahoma City, my home city. That is what the churches in Oklahoma City think about it-- and that is what they have asked.
The public no doubt would like to see these acceptances of Mr. Norris' challenges. It is with pleasure that I submit them all, and with particular pride the endorsements from the churches where I live.
Ii. Oklahoma City Speaks As Follows
We submit first the letter from the Tenth & Francis church, where I have preached with considerable regularity for more than twenty years, and where I now, with my family, have membership. We offer next a letter from the Capitol Hill church, established under my preaching twenty-one years ago, one of the best churches in Oklahoma City. This letter was voluntary and in addition to their signing of the statement in which the group of Oklahoma City churches joined.
* * * *
May 2, 1944
Dear Bro. Wallace
Our attention has been called to the challenges of J. Frank Norris in his paper and over the radio for a debate with some man of "national reputation" among the churches of Christ. We observe that your name is being repeatedly mentioned in these challenges, and many references are being made to the debate which you had with Mr. Norris some years ago.
We hereby authorize you to accept Mr. Norris' challenge for this debate. Inasmuch as the former debate was held in Ft. Worth, Mr. Norris' home city, we propose that this debate be arranged for Oklahoma City, your home city, and that it be held in a public auditorium under terms and conditions to be agreed upon, and set forth in a legal contract to guarantee a correct report and publication of both sides of the debate.
We anticipate that it will probably be impossible for Mr. Norris to obtain the endorsement of a single Baptist Church in this city, but we are willing to waive that usual and proper procedure in order to enable you to meet his challenges in interest of the truth.
Faithfully and fraternally,
W. B. Barton; L. L. Estes; L. E. Diamond; A. W. Lee; Elders, Tenth & Francis Church. Yater Tant, Minister, Tenth & Francis Church.
May 2, 1944
Dear Brother Wallace:
It is our understanding that Mr. J. Frank Norris of Ft. Worth, Texas, has been issuing challenges in his paper and over the radio for a debate with some well-known, representative man of the churches of Christ. It seems to us that the churches of Christ have been called upon in this challenge to defend the truth.
We are taking this means of letting you know that we are for you in accepting this challenge; and shall feel grateful to you for doing so.
It is generally known that the Capitol Hill Church of Christ sponsored the Wallace-Webber Debate in the Coliseum here in Oklahoma City, and we want the public to know that if proper arrangements can be made we stand ready to back you in the same way in a discussion with J. Frank Norris.
Fraternally Yours,
H. C. Harris; E. H. Messenger; A. D. Davis; Chas. N. Wilson; Elders, Capitol Hill Church. Hubert Roach, Minister, Capitol Hill Church.
May 8, 1944
Dear Brother Wallace:
We have seen the letter written to you by the Tenth and Francis congregation by which you are authorized to accept Mr. J. Frank Norris' challenge for a debate with some representative man from the churches of Christ.
It is our feeling that Mr. Norris will withdraw his challenge and seek every way possible to avoid this debate, once he realizes that you are the man he will have to meet. But if there is any way at all by which you can get him to meet you either in Ft. Worth, Dallas, or Oklahoma City, we want you to know that you have the unqualified endorsement and support of the churches of Christ in Oklahoma City.
Faithfully yours,
Capitol Hill Church of Christ, By Hubert Roach. Culbertson Heights Church of Christ, By Jno. H. Banister.
19th & Byers Church of Christ, By J. M. Gillpatrick. 31st & Blackwelder Church of Christ, By Glendon W. Walker.
Southwest Church of Christ, By T. J. Ruble.
III THE DALLAS CHURCHES ARE UNANIMOUS There are twenty-one churches of Christ in Dallas, and I have twenty-one letters of personal endorsement and acceptance of the J. Frank Norris challenge. Space in this issue forbids the printing in full of all these letters. The letters are not identical, but similar in content. Submitted here is the letter from the Pearl & Bryan Streets church, followed by the list of twenty-churches with the names of the elders and the preachers signing them. It ought to satisfy J. Frank Norris, if endorsements are what he is waiting on.
May 15, 1944
Dear Brother Wallace:
It is our understanding that J. Frank Norris has challenged the churches of Christ for a discussion. This challenge has been published in his paper and broadcast over the radio. He also demands an opponent of national reputation, one who is nationally known and whose position on the points of differences involved has been published in some of his publications.
Since the Cause of the Lord Jesus Christ is involved in this challenge, we join the other churches of the city of Dallas in inviting the discussion to Dallas. We, with the other churches of the city, whose endorsements are herewith made known, take pleasure in cooperating fully in this proposed discussion.
We believe the discussion should be held in a neutral auditorium, one what will accommodate the vast audiences that will be certain to attend all the sessions.
We are convinced too, you are more than able to meet all of Mr. Norris's demands and under the present circumstances, you are the logical choice among the brethren to discuss the issues involved. We therefore take pleasure in commending you-- without reservation, for the work in this discussion. We promise to lend every reasonable assistance in making the debate a happy realization.
Sincerely,
S. H. Crawford; W. G. McConnell; T. C. Walker; C. T. Ward; J. C. Jackson; Elders, Pearl & Bryan Streets Church. Coleman Overby, Minister, Pearl & Bryan Streets Church. * * * *
LIST OF DALLAS CHURCHES ENDORSING THE WALLACE-NORRIS DEBATE
Pearl And Bryan
S. H. Craword, W. G. McConnell, C. T. Ward, J. C. Jackson Elders, and Coleman Overby, Minister. OWENWOOD
Coleman T. Fikes, John A. White, James Taggart, Andrew Davis, and Cline B. Drake, Minister.
Edgefield
S. H. Peeler, W. W. Bowman, D. 'E. Holbrook, and Hugo McCord, Minister.
Trinity Heights
H. Milburn Smith, J. T. Coffman, F. D. Harmon, J. W. Michael, M. B. Fleming, and Hulen L. Jackson, Minister.
Highland Park
C. C. Mize, N. D. McCord, O. M. Caskey, and Flavil R. Yeakley, Minister
Hatcher Street
Leaders: R. M. Cathey, C. H. Moore, R. C. Payne, R. Medford, H. O. Newell, H. O. Blackstone, J. Blackstone and H. C. McCoghren, Minister.
Page Street
Elders: Tim Walker, W. H. Duncan, and C. T. McCormack, Minister
Urbandale
Elders: Dewey Brawner, L. F. Allen, W. W. Wynn, W. E. Gray, and J. P. Johnston, Minister
Western Heights
A. U. Britain, S. J. Chennowith, J. H. Pollard, and Brooks Terry, Minister
PRESTON AND McFARLIN
Elders: All of the elders and Minister, Avis C. Wiggins.
Sunset
Elders: R. B. Riggs, M. S. Phillips, Fred A. Pribble, and minister, J. L. Hines.
Cliff Park
Leaders and Minister Eugene E. Vivrett. MOCKINGBIRD LANE
Elders: W. O. Beeman, J. B. Smith, Flavil L. Colley, and Flavil Colley, Minister.
Saner Avenue
Elders - One of the elders and the minister, Fred Boshart, authorized me to say this. Written endorsement will be in soon.-Coleman Overby.
Colonal Avenue
Elders - V. A. Silman; Lon Layton; L. D. Perigo. Minister - Olan Hicks.
Sears And Summitt
They passed on it when it first came up. Brother Wise has been out of the city and the endorsement will be drawn up the first of the week.-Coleman Overby. SHAMROCK SHORE
Leaders: Joe Jones, Guy Wood, Neal Craig, and Homer Hailey, Minister.
Letot
Frank Phillips authorized me to say "yes" to the endorsement.-Coleman Overby.
Lisbon
Elders: J. D. Standley; R. L. Humphreys; B. R. Kerr; L. L. Bolden; H. E. Edmond. Minister, J. A. Hardin. PEAK & EASTSIDE
Elders: B. D. Terry; S. T. Bookout. Minister - Joe Malone.
* * * *
The Dallas churches are unanimous. What an outburst in the face of J. Frank Norris in answer to his challenge. They have not forgotten that he wanted a Dallas debate that is, he did want one, before the Fort Worth debate. He arbitrarily, without cause or sensible excuse, cancelled it. Now the Dallas churches are very properly replying to his challenges by demanding that he come on over to Dallas and make good the debate he cancelled. We promise him a warm reception if and when he comes. He should either do it or blush and hush.
Iv. Fifteen Fort Worth Churches Go On Record
In 1934 the Fort Worth debate was endorsed by ten churches of Christ. That was acceptable to Mr. Norris then. Today, in the year 1944, fifteen churches of Christ have accepted his challenge. That ought to be acceptable to him now. Who is he to demand so much when he has presented no endorsements of himself--not even one Baptist church. Perhaps, his Fundamentalist Baptist Church would endorse the debate and endorse him to do the debating--but as yet we have no such endorsement. It is by no means certain that his own church wants the debate. Would they "vote" for it? Do they want it? Or, is Norris bluffing and brow-beating?
Be that as it may, the Fort Worth churches have called the bluffs of J. Frank Norris. We give below the joint letter of the Polytechnic and Castleberry Heights churches, signed by their elders and preachers. This letter is followed by the list of endorsements of the other churches and their preachers--fifteen in number. Has there ever been in all history of religious debates such an overwhelming acceptance of a man's challenge for debate?
* * * *
May 18, 1944
Dear Brother Wallace:
J. Frank Norris, of the Fundamentalist Baptist Church, has issued challenges to the churches of Christ, of this city, to meet him in debate. These challenges have gone to thousands by means of his radio preaching and his paper, "Fundamentalist."
We believe it is our responsibility to God, to this generation and to the generations which are to follow, to do something about these challenges. Hence, the Polytechnic and Castleberry churches request you to meet Mr. Norris in debate, if fair and honest arrangements can be made. Mr. Norris wants to meet a nationally known debater; you meet this demand. He has further requested that the debater for the churches of Christ be a man who has works in print on the subjects to be discussed. He says that fairness demands this because his speeches and writings on such subjects are in print. Thus, Mr. Norris should be glad to meet you again because he has the speeches you made in the debate ten years ago unless he has destroyed them; because no member of the church of Christ was ever allowed to see them. If that is not enough to satisfy that demand, Mr. Norris may get your many other works which are available to all. You are definitely the man to meet him.
It is gratifying to note Mr. Norris' insistence for fairness relative to the published works of the debaters. Fairness also demands some other things; some of which are: First, it be held in a neutral place. Second, each debater have a moderator and the two moderators select a chairman moderator. Third, no admission fees be charged; we are interested not in the people's money but in their hearing the truth. Fourth, all speeches be taken by dictaphone, phonograph records, or by a staff of reputable court reporters. Fifth, the debate be published by a neutral publishing company. Sixth, the agreement for the debate be made a legal contract and notarized. If Mr. Norris is wanting a fair and honorable discussion, he will be happy to comply with the same. If Mr. Norris is not willing to with such just and impartial conditions, it will be evident to the whole world that he used the wrong word in demanding fairness and that he is not interested in an honorable discussion. If he debates, truth will triumph just as it did in1934; if he does not, it will be an admission on his part that he cannot in a fair and honest manner defend the doctrines he advocates and the church of which he is the founder. Fraternally yours,
Elders, Polytechnic church of Christ
T. B. Echols G. W. Mitchell J. L. Stephenson
Minister: Leroy Brownlow
Elders, Castleberry Church of Christ
J. H. Richards
S. J. Lightfoot; H. Hooper
J. A. Swam W. A. Gardner
C. V. Hale A. W. Pringle
A. H. Norvelle L. L. Scarborough
Minister: Cleo E. Jones
List Of Fort Worth Churches Endorsing The Wallace-Norris Debate Polytechnic
Elders: T. B. Echols, G. W. Mitchell, J. L. Stephenson, J. H. Richards, S. J. Lightfoot, J. A. Swain, C. V. Hale, A. H. Norvell, Sr. and Leroy Brownlow, Minister.
Riverside
W. C. Sparkman, J. H. Tew, W. E. Stewart, Elders and J. Willard Morrow, Minister.
Castleberry
H. Hooper, W. A. Gardner, A. W. Pringle, Elders and Cleo E. Jones, Minister.
Calmont Ave.
Elders: Lewis Snyder, Lloyd T. Crouch, W. W. Penick. Had no regular minister at time of letter. NORTHSIDE
Elders: J. A. Jones, C. W. Atherton, B. A. Davis, S. M. Knott, J. A. McCall, Minister.
Central
Elders: Glenn M. Holden, L. E. Robinson, J. C. Cash, Minister.
Arlington Heights
Deacons: C. A. Gardner, G. A. Norman, J. E. Turner, J.L. Standridge, H. G. Syrgley, James L. Standridge, Minister.
White Settlement
Leaders: A. F. Hardin, N. E. McKillip, J. C. Lemons, W. M. Holland, Eddie Anderson, B. W. Proctor. No regular minister at time of letter.
Samuels Avenue
Elders: F. E. Stowe, Jeff Hall, J. K. Bentley, Don C. Bentley, Minister.
Highland Park
Elders: G. L. Brownlow, R. V. Castles, T. D. Boston, Paul A. Thompson, Minister.
Handley
Elders: Mead Reno, Earl Grady, Otis Thomas. John W. Pigg, Minister.
Birdville
Elders: A. W. Campbell, A. T. Sanders. Fred McClung, Minister.
Washington Heights
Leaders: G. F. Hanes, L. R. Cotton, Mack Bowers, C. W. Mayner. Earl Gardner, Minister. , LAKE WORTH
Elders: Elmer T. Atkins, R. A. White, Harry Brumbough. C. J. True, Minister.
Rosen Heights
Leaders: J. Willard Morrow, W. C. Moore, E. A. White, Sam Lundie, C. L. Brown, W. A. Shirley Sr., W. B. Alldridge, R. L. Chaffin, W. N. Helm, Joe B. Mays, T. M. Bearden, L. H. Pollock, L. A. Murray, Herbert Norton. Bennett Morrow, Minister.
* * * *
In usual procedure it is altogether sufficient for one recognized congregation to accept a challenge for debate, select the man they desire to represent them, and endorse him for the debate. Mr. Norris has no more right to demand that all the churches of Christ sign up endorsements for a debate--than we would have to demand that all the Baptist churches sign up endorsements of him for the debate. How many Baptist churches in Fort Worth can J. Frank Norris get to endorse him for this debate?
It is obvious that Norris is seeking a way out to save his face. He sees a chance to do it by demanding that every church of Christ in Fort Worth must sign an endorsement of the debate. In his frantic search for a way out - are two or three churches of Christ in Fort Worth, and a few of the preachers, going to help him? It is not necessary for every church to sign the endorsement, but shame on those congregations who refuse to do so under such circumstances as these-- and upon the preachers who have influenced them not to do so. Their action will go on record and will rise up to witness against them in the days to come.
V. Concerning Conditions Of Debate
It has been the universal expression from all concerned that in the event this debate should materialize there must be a guarantee of orderly procedure. No one has forgotten the unfair advantages taken by Mr. Norris in his own auditorium, under his own dictatorship, in 1934. The public knows about the "doors" and the admission charges. The audiences witnessed Mr. Norris' arbitrary rule of the sessions, accepting no rules and regarding none. Nor have any of us forgotten Mr. Norris' threat, when in his outburst of anger and in white rage, he bellowed that he had one hundred armed men planted there ready for action at his call. He thought it would scare us - but it didn't. Nor have we forgotten the scheming and trickery in reference to the stenographers, his public pledge to supply us with a full and complete copy of the transcript of the debate for corrections and approval, and his subsequent refusal absolutely to do so. It was Mr. Norris himself who prevented the publication of the debate, his libelous oral and printed falsehoods to the contrary notwithstanding. The evidence is abundant that J. Frank Norris never intended to permit the publication of the Fort Worth debate as it was delivered. We have in our possession the documents and letters showing that the very offers which he says in his book were declined were actually not declined at all. Those letters were all answered, his offers accepted, and he paid no attention to them. His offers were made to print in his book, not to be answered and accepted by us-- and his disgraceful book was on the press being printed all the time that he pretended to be negotiating with us.
Therefore, everybody will be interested in the kind of a contract and agreement which should be entered into in the event of another debate. No one could expect us to trust J. Frank Norris. That he must be made a party to a legal contract, if and when he comes through on his challenges this time; goes without saying. I am willing for all the people, including the Baptists, to see the sort of a contract that I am willing to enter. In fact, the following contract already bears my signature, sealed by a notary, and is waiting for the notarized signature of J. Frank Norris. If he does not sign it, everybody will know why - including the Baptists.
THE CONTRACT THE STATE OF TEXAS, COUNTY OF DALLAS.
Know All Men By These Presents: Whereas,
Foy E. Wallace, Jr., of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and J. Frank Norris of Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas, do not agree as to the teachings of the Holy Bible on the propositions hereinafter stated, and WHEREAS, they have mutually agreed to meet for a discussion of said propositions: the said Foy E. Wallace, Jr., representing the Church of Christ and J. Frank Norris representing the First Baptist. Church of Fort Worth, Texas, and the Fundamentalist Baptist, and;
WHEREAS, before said discussion is held, it is mutually desired, that the method of holding said discussion and the place of holding said discussion and the manner of publication and sale of said discussion be mutually agreed upon, prior to the time and place of said discussion; the time and place to be mutually agreed upon later.
Now, Therefore, Know All Men By These Presents
1. Propositions: That the proposition for said discussion and debate shall be the same propositions debated by said Foy E. Wallace, Jr. and said J. Frank Norris in the Norris-Wallace Debate which was held in the auditorium of the First Baptist Church, Fort Worth, Texas, November 4, 5, 6, 1934; said propositions are as follows:
Proposition No. 1.
The Bible teaches that Baptism, to the penitent believer, is essential to his salvation from past or alien sins. Wallace affirms; and Norris denies.
Proposition No. 2.
The Bible teaches that a Child of God, one who has been saved by the blood of Christ, can so sin as to be finally lost.
Wallace affirms; and Norris denies. PROPOSITION NO. 3
The Bible teaches that Jews, as a nation, will return to Palestine when Christ returns to the earth and then will be converted to Christ.
Norris affirms; and Wallace denies.
Proposition No. 4.
The Bible teaches that Christ will establish a literal throne in Jerusalem, and will reign over the whole earth for a period of one thousand years.
Norris affirms; and Wallace denies.
2.Place Of Debate
It is mutually agreed that the place of said discussion shall be in a public auditorium which shall be neutral in said debate; control of said auditorium and the admission to said discussion to be open and free to the public, and the doors open for the public and the audience under the control of the moderators, as hereinafter stipulated.
3. Moderators
It is mutually agreed that the debate shall be presided over and conducted by three moderators; one moderator shall be chosen by Foy E. Wallace, Jr., and one by J. Frank Norris, and the two moderators shall elect a third moderator, who shall preside at all meetings. The third moderator selected shall be neutral as to side, and shall be a man of honorable, unquestioned fairness and integrity. This moderator shall have complete authority over the order and decorum throughout said discussions, both as to the speakers and to the audience. He shall have authority to suspend the debate or a participant if either participant shall conduct himself in a way or manner unbecoming or ungentlemanly. The moderators' decision shall be final in all questions of conduct of said debate, as herein provided.
4. Speeches
It is mutually agreed that there shall be two sessions on each proposition. At each session, each speaker shall be allowed two forty-five minute speeches alternately, and if he does not use the forty-five minutes in his opening discussion he shall nevertheless be allowed only forty-five minutes for his concluding speech of said session. In other words, each speech by each party shall be limited to forty-five minutes, which time must be used at the time designated or he forfeits the time not used.
5. Stenographic Report Of Debate
It is mutually agreed that this complete debate and the complete speeches of each debater shall be taken by dictaphone, if available, or by responsible firm of stenographic reporters, and if that is not available, then by three recognized court reporters; one to be selected by Foy E. Wallace, Jr., one by J. Frank Norris, and the two reporters shall select a third reporter, who together shall make all arrangements for a complete, accurate record of the debate, from beginning to end, and shall see to, supervise and actually take down and transcribe and type the complete discussions and proceedings of said debate from beginning to end.
6. Revision And Corrections
It is mutually agreed that after the debate and all discussions and procedure have been completely transcribed, and each party thereto, Foy E. Wallace, Jr., and J. Frank Norris, shall be furnished the complete discussion of both sides fully transcribed, and each party shall be allowed a reasonable time, not exceeding sixty days, to make any corrections or changes of wording, citations, or authorities, and such other changes as to completely and accurately cover said discussions. It is further provided, that after each party has been furnished a complete transcribed report of said discussions, and after the speeches have been put in printer's type, each side shall be allowed to review the proofs in said form before the printing and publication of the debate. No new material shall be added to the transcribed discussions and no material changes made of original transcription, except as herein provided. It is further provided, that all references by the speakers to quotations, citations and authorities, shall be definite and specific, and only such definite, specific citations and quotations shall be incorporated into the transcription.
7. It is further provided that after each party has been furnished a complete transcription of the debate, if he fails or refuses, within sixty days to make his corrections, then and in that event, said transcription shall be taken as correct and shall be published in the form as transcribed by the reporters, and the reporters shall certify as to the correctness of said discussions as transcribed.
8. Publication Of Discussions
It is mutually agreed that the publication of this debate shall be placed in the hands of a neutral, responsible publisher, and the debate shall be published in accordance with the provisions of this contract. The moderators are hereby specially vested with the authority to make all necessary arrangements for the publication of the finished, transcribed debate with said publisher, and said debate shall be sold at publisher's cost, without profit to either Foy E. Wallace, Jr., or J. Frank Norris
9. It is further especially agreed and understood, that if either party to this contract, fails or refuses to cooperate and carry out unconditionally the terms, covenants and conditions of this contract after said debate, then the moderators are hereby vested with full and complete authority to carry out the terms of this contract for the party failing or refusing for any reason to co-operate in the transcribing, publication and circulation of said discussions.
10. It is further especially agreed and understood that this discussion being solely for the purpose of obtaining a wide circulation of the complete arguments and speeches of each party hereto on the propositions herein stated, it is agreed that said debate shall be published at cost and sold at publisher's cost without profit to either party hereto, and the moderators are instructed to obtain as reasonable a price from the publisher of these discussions as possible, and said debate when published must be sold by said publisher to all persons, firms or corporations desiring to purchase same at the publisher's cost.
This contract is made in original and four copies and each is hereby declared to be an original for all legal purposes.
WITNESS the hand of Foy E. Wallace, Jr. at Temple, Texas, this 16th day of May, A. D., 1944.
Foy E. Wallace, Jr.
WITNESS the hand of J. Frank Norris at ........... ..., Texas, this .......... day of ................ A. D. 1944. (Unsigned)
The State Of Texas, County Of Bell.
BEFORE ME, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, on this day personally appeared Foy E. Wallace, Jr., known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the 16th day of May, A. D. 1944.
(Seal)
Averlene Murphy,
Notary Public in and for Bell County, Texas.
The State Of Texas, County Of
BEFORE ME, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, on this day personally appeared J. Frank Norris, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same for the purposes and consideration therein expressed.
GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE this the .......... day of .................... A. D. 1944. (Unsigned) Notary Public in and for ................... County, Texas.
* * * *
Under the foregoing contract the moderators will have the power to specify the particular rules of order to govern the debate, whether Hedges Rules Of Logic or Roberts Rules Of Order, or other recognized rules of debate that any man who has any intention of conducting himself honorably and properly would be entirely willing to accept. I have signed the contract. Mr. Norris has not done so, though it has been presented to him. He prefers to talk around instead of writing his name down on the dotted lines.
Vi. "Why There Will Be No Debate"
The above heading is found in a recent issue of the Norris publication. Running true to form Norris is publishing letters addressed to "All The Pastors Of The Church Of Christ, Fort Worth, Texas" but does not publish the replies to his letters. He says in his paper: "The time has long passed for a reply and no answer has come." But the facts are that his letter was answered. What happened to the answer? Believe it or not, the answer to his letter was refused by Mr. Norris. The answer was sent to him in registered mail with return receipt. It came back to the Fort Worth preachers marked "REFUSED." Norris refused the answer to his letter and put in his paper: "The time has long passed for a reply and no answer has come." Mr. Bogard says Norris exaggerates, but there is a word in our language with fewer syllables that spells what he does! The envelope bearing the mark "REFUSED" is being held for use at the proper time and in the proper way.
When Norris was writing those letters back in 1934-35 making what he called certain "offers" he did not make them to be accepted, and did not wait to see if they would be accepted. He simply printed his letters to us in his book, ignoring the answers, and put beneath the printed letters that they were "declined." He wrote the letters for his book - not for acceptance, and knew all of the time that he would ignore any answer to them. Precisely the same thing is being done in this instance. He is writing his letters for publication purposes, prints them in his paper, refuses the answer, and lets the Baptists think that his "offers" are "declined." The perfidy of such conduct on the part of a leader of a religious movement is unspeakable. It can be explained only on the ground that he believes the Baptist doctrine of hereditary total depravity and the impossibility of apostasy.
No one will deny the fact that there are circumstances under which a man may very properly "refuse" a letter or communication, and turn it back. But certainly not when he has sent a letter to the responding parties demanding an answer. Norris did that; and when the answer came to his own letter, he "refused" it, but said in his paper that "the time has long passed for a reply and no answer has come." But the answer did come. A photograph of that letter, with the envelope marked "Refused," will be interesting.
After publishing the above falsehood Norris then inserts a paragraph in his paper under the heading "Why There Will Be No Debate." The reason is, he says, that certain "laymen" in the churches of Christ in Fort Worth have told him that they do not want a debate! It is expected that there would be a few such "laymen" in Fort Worth or any other city. But does that dispose of the challenges of J. Frank Norris? Not on his life! Fifteen churches of Christ in Fort Worth, in due order and proper process, have accepted his challenges over the signatures of the entire eldership of those churches, together with the signatures of their preachers. But what some "laymen" have "told" Norris privately is put up against the signed statements of the elders and the preachers of fifteen churches! Any "laymen" in the churches of Christ in Fort Worth or elsewhere, who would say the things that Norris claims they said, or in any way collaborate with him, would not be respected by a single loyal member of a church of Christ anywhere. If such there be, they will in time be known to all men by their presents. But I wouldn't take Norris' word on that matter, nor on any other matter. Even Mr. Bogard says in his paper that Norris is a great "exaggerator" and does not always tell the truth. And I still say that "exaggerating" is not the word for what Norris does.
But suppose none of the churches in Fort Worth should accept the Norris challenges for debate-- does that dispose of his challenge? It does not. The Dallas churches have accepted his challenge unanimously. Remember, he cancelled the other one in Dallas. Then, there is Oklahoma City. We are waiting for him there-- and ready to give him what he is asking for. If he insists that the debate must be held in Fort Worth-- why? Surely, not merely because that is where he lives-- for Oklahoma City is where I live, and I could as reasonably refuse to debate him anywhere else. It's a poor rule that would not work both ways. The truth of the matter is that J. Frank Norris will not debate anywhere with anyone unless and until he has all the advantage, sole and complete control of the debate and the premises where it is held, full control of the stenographers, exclusive possession of the manuscripts, and personal "charge" of everything else including the doors and "admission fees." When he sees that he cannot do so; that he must accept equal terms and conditions, and place himself under the binding rules of honorable debate and decent decorum, he will not debate with anybody. That is why there will be no debate, if none is to be, J. Frank Norris does not want an honorable debate. All he wants is an opportunity to bully the preachers, browbeat the churches, and deceive the Baptist boys who are "sitting at his feet" in his so-called seminary. Some seminary it is! The Norris theological cemetery would be a better name for it, for the boys who go there.
We shall keep before the public one thing, namely, that J. Frank Norris can have one, two or three debates, as he chooses - in Dallas, Fort Worth, and Oklahoma City, either or all, as he chooses. And if he will not debate on his own challenge in Fort Worth, a challenge that has been accepted by fifteen recognized churches of Christ in that city, then I hereby challenge J. Frank Norris to meet me in debate in Oklahoma City under the terms and conditions of the contract which has been submitted to him and which is published herein. I am authorized to make this challenge, and I hereby do so, and shall henceforth keep him and the public reminded of it.
The statements appearing in the Norris publication as to "why there will be no debate" are sheer subterfuge. They can only mean that J. Frank Norris backed out of his own challenges. Something happened that he did not expect. His bluffs have boomeranged. He will get out of it the best way that he can-- but the fact will remain that he backed out. This has been a desperate effort on his part to stage a come-back in Fort Worth and regain a part of the personal prestige he lost ten years ago. But he has failed. He will only lose more, if he has any left to lose. His bold challenges have been exposed as bluff and bluster. His day has declined. His sun has set.
Vii. The Facts About The 1934 Debate
There have been ten years of misrepresentation by Norris of the "Norris-Wallace Debate." During the time the efforts were being made to bring out a complete and correct publication of the debate, I was in the hospital with a major operation-- but all the time endeavoring to prevent the travesty that appeared under the misnomer of "The Norris-Wallace Debate." At that time I had no paper, and no personal medium. The facts concerning the matter were sent to the other papers, The Gospel Advocate and The Firm Foundation, but for reasons of their own they did not see fit to let the brethren know those facts. I did not think these papers owed anything to me personally, but some mighty good brethren did think that they owed it to the Cause that I had defended to let the facts be known. Nevertheless it was not done.
The situation is different today. I do have a medium a very effective one. The Bible Banner has a large circulation and covers the church throughout the nation and Canada. I propose now to bring out a Special Edition of the Bible Banner, in which I shall publish photostatic copies of documents relating to the 1934 debate; the facts concerning the court action; the petition presented; the court's decision; Norris' failure to comply--and the fraud that was perpetrated in the publication of the thing that bears the label of "The Norris-Wallace Debate." I propose to publish the letters showing that the "offers" which Norris says were "declined" were not declined, but answered. I propose to show that his offer was accepted, and that I postponed a meeting in a distant state in order to go to the appointed place at the appointed time, to receive and review the transcript of the debate according to Norris' "offer." I went. Neither Norris nor any of his men appeared. We contacted them, and they would not come. I waited a week and went home. Norris had his book on the press all the time and said that we "declined" his offer. Bogard says Norris exaggerates. I think it's something else.
I propose to show that the thing Norris did publish is not even his own speeches as delivered, but matter written up in manuscript before and after the debate. I propose to point out that my speeches were never taken down in full, as delivered, and that Norris never intended to publish anything kin to the real Norris-Wallace Debate. I propose to show that he left out of the thing he published some of the most embarrassing things that happened to him, and that he misrepresented the statements which he claims to be quotations from my addresses.
In order to make this exposure effective, I ask that brethren all over the nation order a supply of this Special Number in advance, to distribute among the people in places where the Norris propaganda is still being sown. I have had requests from one side of the country to the other for the facts in this matter, but cannot answer such requests by correspondence. Brethren and churches in sections and communities where harm has been done by the falsehoods of Norris and his henchmen are asked to order by dozen, fifty and hundred lots, this Special Issue of the Bible Banner. There will not be any other matter in this number.
We are ready to engage J. Frank Norris in public debate, in answer to his challenges, in Oklahoma City, in Dallas, and in Fort Worth. He can have one or all of them, as he may choose, and I will not cancel a single one of them as he did the Dallas engagement.
I now call on my brethren and my friends to help me make these facts known to the wide world. I have every confidence that you will respond.
Faithfully and fervently yours, Foy E. Wallace, Jr.