Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
June 16, 1960

News And Views

(Charles A. Holt, Box 80, Florence, Alabama)

Notes On Various Matters

The Light of Truth is a new paper which recently came to my attention. It is a neat, four-page monthly "published by members of the Lord's church at Guthrie, Illinois, with the assistance of Christians at Cullom and Rantoul, Illinois. Publication is under the oversight of the Guthrie elders, C. F. McPherson and Guy Moore." I have seen one No. 4 of Volume I, and I judge it will deal mainly with first principles. I would like to have all back issues and receive it regularly — I presume it is free. Address: Box 255, Gibson City, Illinois ... From The Perk-Up, bulletin of Westside church in Phoenix, Arizona I lift the following: You Missed Me. A colored man took a vicious swing at a German in World War One with his trusty razor. The German said, "Hah! You missed." The _______ replied, "You just shake dat hed and see." ... Well, there is a point in it somewhere . . . I like this wise observation from someone: "Men do not reject the Bible because it contradicts itself — but because it contradicts them."....... From the North Star, March, 1960, the publication of North Central Christian College in Rochester, Michigan, I lift this note: "On To Victory NCCC. With the advent of the basketball season, NCCC was not to be out done. The churches of Christ in the Detroit area, having already organized a team league, invited NCCC to participate." There are more churches "playing ball" today than there are preaching the gospel' The Shield, a fine monthly publication for members of the church, has a number of excellent tracts available. They were written by a number of different preachers and cover a wide range of subjects, The two I have seen are very good and neatly printed. Quantity prices. Address: 8859 Venice Blvd., Los Angeles 34, Calif . . . . Once more let me urge that we all order tracts books, VBS material and all other literature from those who are standing for the truth. The Gospel Guardian Company can furnish you with almost any book, Bible or literature you may need. This kind of support means a lot in assuring this publication; and thru the years it had not even had this kind of support as it should have. Give them a try on your book and literature needs . . . Carol Lumpkin has moved from Glenwood to Weiner, Arkansas. Joe Pruitt and his family (wife and two small girls) plan to leave August 31 for Bergen, Norway where they will live and labor. Joe is still trying to raise the balance of his regular support and travel fund. He has about half of each definitely promised. Joe is a good, sound, solid preacher. He is worthy of support and I would urge churches to give attention to his need. Why should a good man, who is willing to go preach in a strange land, have to go to such lengths and trouble to raise the necessary support? Yes, I am aware of the fact that most churches are fairly well "loaded" with work, but surely there is always room for more. Do we really believe in supporting men who will go preach the gospel? .... Bro. G. A. Corbett, an elder of the Jordan, Ontario, Canada church, writes concerning the possibility of securing some financial help toward supporting a preacher in Huntsville, Ontario. The Jordan church is to help all they can. At least $50 per week more is needed. This is a good field and it would be an excellent thing if some church would support a man in that place. Contact Corbett, address above, if interested .... The remainder of this column will be filled with some articles taken from various bulletins. I think they feature some worthy points and I urge you to read each one carefully.

"The Dangers Of ..."

Once more we are invited to hear Bro. O. C. Lambert speak on the subject "The dangers of a Catholic president." This is nothing new as Brother Lambert has become somewhat of a "specialist" in this field. For some years he has gone over the country speaking on this and related subjects. We would agree that any preacher should warn the people of the ever-present dangers of Catholicism I wonder, however, if it is right and proper for a preacher to become a "specialist" in any particular phase of preaching. Why "specialize" on the dangers of Catholicism while ignoring the dangers which are so apparent in other "isms?" Why are we never invited to hear Bro. Lambert, speak on such subjects as "The dangers in the sponsoring church method of evangelism and benevolence;" or "The dangers of brotherhood-wide elders," etc.?

If you have wondered about this same thing we just might be in a position to give you some help. While filling an engagement with the church in east Long Beach recently Bro. Jady Copeland, the local preacher, inquired of Bro. Lambert as to his feeling concerning the "issues" before the church and was informed by Bro. Lambert that "he could not afford to become involved in controversy because of his present work." Bro. Lambert seems to be completely unaware of the fact that he is in the very center of "controversy" so far as Catholics are concerned. He seems, also, to be unaware of the fact that the encroachment of "institutionalism" in so many churches today is but a repetition of that movement which resulted in the "Catholicism" which he is so belligerently fighting. Is any so blind that they cannot see the ultimate end of the present "social gospel" concept and the "sponsoring church" set up can be nothing but a diocesan system of religion? And that is what 'Catholicism' is.

There is one thing which Bro. Lambert is evidently aware of and that is, if he opposes the present day movement in the churches he will not be invited by those churches to do any speaking for them, and if he endorses, publicly, their stand he will be cut off by the loyal brethren. Such seems to be self-evident.

We hold no animosity toward Bro. Lambert but we find it hard to be anything but ashamed of any preacher who will not decide himself on any issue at any time...We have far too many "namby-pamby" preachers among us who will not take a stand, We need to take note of Paul's example, "I have not shunned to declare unto you ALL the counsel of God." (Acts 20:27). "His watchman are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber." (Isa. 56:10).

Wright Randolph, The Messenger, Montebello, California. A TRANQUILIZER, PLEASE My soul is disturbed and my anger is aroused as I look upon a grave injustice done to a brother. My anger moves me to say some sharp things when I see a false teacher draw away disciples after him. I cannot keep calm when I behold brethren worshipping a strange god in some lodge. It is becoming harder to maintain a "sweet disposition" when I preach on such subjects as dancing and nakedness. My face has begun to draw just a little when I preach on innovations that are destroying the church. I find it difficult to smile and to be jovial when speaking on divorce and remarriage. In recent years I have allowed myself to be so disturbed that I have called names from the pulpit on Sunday morning when we had visitors from other churches. I have exposed sin among the members in the very presence of alien sinners who have attended our services. I have written articles against some of my brethren for the whole world to read. A few weeks ago, I rebuked a man for mistreating his wife. I just couldn't take a neutral stand on the church-sponsored-projects and the church-supported-colleges. I said some things about them that caused some members to transfer membership to other churches that supported such from the treasury. My anger even flashed when I heard of a preacher writing hot-checks and flirting with some of his flock. It seems that I just can't be quiet and passive on corruptions and spiritual departures from the faith.

I have been told that my influence has been damaged in many of the churches today and that a number of them are talking about me. My meetings are not as numerous as they used to be and the ones I conduct are usually with small churches. I just can't afford to preach like the Lord and his apostles among the modern churches of today. What kind of tranquilizer does the popular preacher take to get along?

— Wilson M. Coon, The Perk-Up, Phoenix, Arizona.

What Price Is Foolishness?

What some will pay for a moment's reckless folly is recorded again and again in the Book of Ages. Do you think these got their money's worth?

1. Adam and Eve, for one bit of luscious fruit when they were not even hungry, brought sin, suffering, shame and death upon themselves and the human race. (Gem 3).

2. Lot's wife, revealing her longing for the things that pertain to earth, took one look back at Sodom and became a pillar of salt. (Cen. 19).

3. Esau. to satisfy one day's fleshly appetite, lightly esteemed his birthright, and forfeited his right to be an ancestor of Christ. (Gen. 25).

4. Achan, for a garment of gold he could not wear. and for silver and gold he could not spend, paid with all his possessions, his family and his life. (Joshua 7).

5. Samson, for the caress of a hypocritical woman, lost his will. his strength, his liberty, his eyes, and finally his life. (Judges 16).

6. David, to enjoy another man's wife, hands to posterity a tale of his life with adultery, shame, and tears boldly written across its face.

7. Ahab, coveting another's little vineyard, permitted his wife to have its owner killed, claimed it for his own and heard his funeral preached in these words. "In the place where the dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick they blood, even thine." (I Kings 2).

8. Judas, for thirty pieces of silver, which he could not find occasion or conscience to use, took his own life in shame and despair. (Matt. 27).

9. Demas, loving the transient world more than a permanent future, forsook Paul and provoked the wrath of heaven. (2 Tim. 4:10).

These examples could be multiplied, but they are sufficient just here. Could these have called back their days after learning their lessons how different would have been the history of the world. When we consider the price which must be paid for sin, we must conclude that it is not worth it. Surely we do not suppose ourselves smart enough to out-smart God and get by with sinning and not pay for it. Passionate desire may temporarily blind us to the payment that must be made, but it does not blot out payment any more than closing the eyes will blot out the sun.

Editor's Note: I have no idea who wrote this excellent article nor from what source I got it. Sorry.

"Brother And Mrs."

There is a common practice among members of the church in this part of the country of calling the preacher "Brother" and his wife Mrs. Even denominational preachers are sometimes "Brothered." Most, in not all of us, would reject the use of such religious titles as Father, Rabbi, Reverend or Doctor (although some are pretty free with the use of the last). While the word "brother" denotes a relationship in Christ, it can be used as a title of distinction.

To illustrate this, the May 12 Gospel Advocate has a full page spread with pictures from the celebration of the Advocate's 105th birthday. In listing the many guests shown in the pictures we have presented in this fashion: "Mrs. Rex A. and Brother Turner", then "Mrs. Athens Clay Pullias and Brother Pullias." Every time a wife and husband are mentioned, she is presented as "Mrs." and the husband as "Brother." Now maybe we are not as well informed on etiquette and grammar as we should be, but it appears to us that if the husband it to be "brothered" his wife should be "sistered." If we are only using the word to denote relationship, then consistency demands that the relationship of the wife who is also in Christ should be indicated. If she is just to be presented as Mrs., then why not "Mr." the husband? Why emphasize his relationship and not hers? We certainly are not opposed to calling fellow Christians brother or sister; in fact we rather like the practice. But to use the term as employed in the Advocate and by a host of brethren in this area is to make the term a title elevating the preacher above the rest.

As to the practice of calling sectarian preachers "brother", it needs to be observed that there is no proper ground for so doing. If we use the term as a title, we have misused it; if we use it to denote relationship, we have misused it since we have no spiritual relationship with them. This whole business is nothing more than a little sectarianism which has rubbed off on some years ago and has been perpetuated by a generation which has accented it without question and which has not been sufficiently taught. Remember, brethren sound faith and sound speech go hand in hand. — Connie W. Adams, Newbern, Tenn.