Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 5
November 5, 1953
NUMBER 26, PAGE 4

Correcting A Mistake

Editorial

When I became editor of the Gospel Guardian nearly five years ago. I determined to the very best of my ability and judgment to be scrupulously fair in all the paper's. dealings with my brethren. One policy which I adopted was to give space always to sincere and honorable brethren for full, open, and brotherly discussions of those issues on which they might differ. I believe that it is only by such frank exchanges that the truth can be protected, and the purity of the gospel be "guarded" and preserved from encroachments of error.

A second policy which I adopted was to keep the columns of the paper open at all times to brethren who have been named in the paper (especially if named in an unfavorable light) that they might set forth in their own words and in their own way what they believe and teach on questions under discussion.

I realize that the paper is laid open to some abuse in both of these policies. Advantage can be taken of them by cranks and crack-pots. That is where an editor must use judgment and discretion. He must keep the paper free and open, and yet not let it become the instrument for any personal vendetta or pointless wrangle over trivialities. I have used the best judgment of which I was capable in handling material sent in, and if uncertain in any particular case, have tried to "lean over backward" in being fair and generous with space to those who feel they have been put in an unfavorable light before our readers.

Two years ago some references were made in a couple of articles in the Gospel Guardian to Brother G. L. Mann of Fayette, Alabama, which questioned his convictions and his teaching on the question of "Easter" observance. Brother Mann was not given the space he sought in the Gospel Guardian to offer explanation for circumstances which had been used to put him in this unfavorable light. That he was not given the space was a clear deviation and departure from the established policy I had sought to maintain. I attempt no explanation or excuse for this action, for really there is none to be offered. It was simply a mistake. That is the shortest and simplest way I know to say it. I hope I never reach the point where I'm either afraid or ashamed to acknowledge a mistake when one has been made.

In a somewhat belated effort to correct this matter insofar as possible, I have asked Brother Mann if he would be willing to set forth his true convictions on the matter of Easter observance in a brief article. He replied that he had no disposition or desire to re-hash the points of the original controversy; but that he has never hesitated at any time to state his true convictions on any subject, and that he would be glad to comply with my request. The following excellent article, therefore was sent in. It will speak for itself, and I commend it to your careful reading.

— F. Y. T.