Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 6
July 29, 1954
NUMBER 12, PAGE 10-11a

"Harper's Hysteria And Hallucinations"

Roy E. Cogdill

Brother Tant and Brother Adams have sought very patiently, and diligently to persuade Brother Harper to discuss the "Herald of Truth" from a scriptural viewpoint for several months. Brother Harper has promised to write on the theme of "What is Wrong with the Missionary Society" and all that any of us have seen from him yet has been the deluge of articles he has submitted in which he seems to be concerned more with himself and what he has done than he is with whether or not the ground he occupies is scriptural. He seems to be the victim of some kind of hysteria or hallucinations.

Some three years ago last February when I was in Abilene for a session or two of the lectures at the College, Brother Harper walked right in front of me at the entrance of the auditorium and when he glanced up at me, he quickly turned away without speaking. It disturbed me considerably and I wondered what was wrong since I had known him rather well for a number of years. A friend told me that Brother Harper had the idea that I had entered into a collusion with Cleon Lyles to try to ruin him through the Guardian. Where he ever got such an idea as that was beyond me. He and Brother Lyles were having difficulty at that time. Several articles had been published in the Guardian that were written by Brother Lyles and perhaps that was the basis of his idea. He seemed to think that the articles were directed at him and that I had agreed to furnish Brother Lyles the medium in the Guardian to fight him. Nothing was further than that from the truth. Most of the articles published from Brother Lyles were taken from his local Church bulletin. Brother Harper seems to enjoy thinking that he is being persecuted. He is much like an old maid that I used to know who enjoyed bad health so much she was in constant fear that she would get well.

There are several things in a recently published article from Brother Harper which he calls "For the Record" that should be noticed and since some of them involve this writer, I suppose I may be pardoned for giving some attention to them. I am in no way dissatisfied with the splendid writing that has been done on the subject of the "Herald of Truth" by Brethren, Tant, Adams and others. Their arguments have not been noticed much less met by Brother Harper and the "Herald of Truth boys". The attempt to answer by Brother Harper has not even involved an investigation of scriptural grounds or any effort at Bible arguments. If Brother Harper has any to make, it is high time that he left himself and his whimpering about being persecuted out of his writing and devoted himself to it. If he thinks that he can establish that his position is scriptural by ranting about someone being inconsistent or changing positions, he is thinking wrongly and failing to take into account the good sense and straight thinking of his readers. Maybe a few "Advocate" readers can be fooled into a sense of security by such sophistry but "Guardian" readers have learned long since that the cry of "change and inconsistency" does not justify anything. Were we to be willing to fight the thing out on that plane, Harper would be near the bottom of the lot when the thing wound up for sure. He drew the "Banner" into his Harding College fight on "premillennialism" and then ran out and left it on Brother Wallace's hands as every one knows who read the editorial in the Banner written by Brother Wallace at that time. He has pretty well proved by his own writing that he has been on both sides of every fence or at least had people thinking so until they found him out. His "For the Record" is pretty definite evidence that he gets his facts so mixed up that his conclusions could not be straight. The article would better be entitled "Off the Record".

Brother Harper's Mis-Statements

Brother Harper is a very considerate man. He shunned the using of personal names in his article but he refers to this writer as the "owner" of the Guardian. No one would ever guess to whom he refers in that veiled statement. If he is putting on a cloak of fairness and consideration, he had better have left his "Off the Record" article out of the "Advocate" where for several years Editor Goodpasture has refused to print anything from anyone controverting or replying to anything written by one of "The Advocate Boys". He won't even correct his own misrepresentations. These brethren that manifest such an attitude and run for their "Advocate Shelter" don't need to demonstrate their piety and fairness as if it were their crowning virtue. Such is plain subterfuge. Brother Harper, you won't hurt my feeling when you call my name if you have anything to say about me, only be sure that what you say is the truth. You weren't careful about that in your "Off the Record" article.

The Music Hall Meeting"

I have thought and still think that there is a vast deal of difference between a congregation undertaking in its own city a work for which it feels responsible and obligated and allowing others to help it do that work and that same congregation promoting a program of work for the whole brotherhood for which it is no more responsible than any other congregation and expecting all the churches to finance that work for it, a work that it could not bear and would not undertake of itself alone, and then electing themselves to oversee such a "Brotherhood program" for the Church universal. If there were no more difference than the size of the thing it would be much more dangerous because of its size. It has proven so difficult though to show the difference that I think I see in that to some of the brethren who seem determined to justify themselves in forgetting the New Testament pattern of the independence and equality of New Testament congregations that I have long ago surrendered the ground and henceforth will hold no more such meetings lest I lead my brethren into sin. Now if Brother Harper and the Herald of Truth and the Advocate boys will be that considerate of the peace and harmony of the Church of the Lord, we will resolve our differences and difficulties into nothing over night. What about it, Brother Harper? Are you willing to give up the Herald of Truth in order that we may stand together in the fight for truth and righteousness or will you take the attitude of the digressives 75 years ago and tell us that we must either put up with all of your brotherhood promotions or get out?

While we are on the Music Hall Meetings though let us keep the "record" straight. The Norhill Church set out to hold that meeting, by itself because an Adventist had been preaching error in the Music Hall all the winter. That congregation had the money in the treasury to pay the entire bill and was willing to do so. We did not promote something bigger than we could carry out. If we made a mistake it was in departing from our first intention and allowing the other congregations to have any part in it.

The congregation that refused to have a part in the meeting did not just choose to stay out — they made a fight against the meeting and gave as their reason that they could not fellowship the preacher that had been chosen because of dishonesty on his part. That was the thing that was "so assailed" and when Brother Harper or anyone else leaves the impression that they were assailed because they chose not to contribute to the meeting, they misrepresent the facts in the case. He has read carelessly and does not know what he is talking about or he is careless with the truth.

The Harper Radio Program

I never knew that Fourth and State handled the radio funds when Brother Harper had his program in Little Rock. In fact the only criticism that I heard of that radio program at any time at Fourth and State was that Brother Harper received all the mail, handled the money, and never gave an accounting for it to Fourth and State. That may be altogether untrue but that is what I heard about it and on that ground it was criticized.

Highland And The Indians

Brother Wallace can speak for himself and has done so in the article already republished about his endorsement of the work of Brother James White among the Indians in Wisconsin. I have a letter in my possession from brother G. G. Henry at San Antonio, Texas, the "special treasurer" to whom Brother Harper refers in which he definitely states that he would not have any part in such again. Now if we can get Brother Harper to straighten out as the rest of us have on these matters, we will really be making progress. I think he should repent.

Sixth And Izard In Little Rock

What Brother Harper's motive is for referring to the present radio program at Little Rock, I do not know. I do know that he was being severely criticized by good men in this congregation when I was holding meetings there. He was accused by the present preacher, Brother Cleon Lyles, and some of the elders of this church of meddling in its affairs after leaving that work, and it appears that he is anxious to stir up something still. I have good friends in this congregation and others that were there but all of them know that I do not endorse any "institutional" set up of any kind much less the present radio arrangement in the "Little Rock Area" in which the various congregations have drawn up and signed through their elders articles of agreement turning the supervision and conduct of their radio program over to the Sixth and Izard congregation, thus forming them an association. If Brother Harper would investigate he would know that such an arrangement was made since the last meeting I held there and that the meeting I was invited to return for next year was cancelled — by them probably because they knew I would preach against such an arrangement as well as some other things they were doing. He is again talking about something that he knows nothing about or he is careless with the truth when he infers that I endorsed such a radio program. I preached against "educational societies," "evangelistic societies", and "benevolent societies" at Little Rock and preached the "All-Sufficiency of the Church" just like I preach on such themes everywhere I go with circumstances making the only distinctions as to emphasis on such matters. I can send Brother Harper the sermon outline of the sermon I preached at my last meeting at Sixth and Izard on "The All Sufficiency of God's Plan" made out on Sam Peck Hotel Stationery if he doubts my doing it. I understand that he and Brother Lyles have resolved at least some of their differences personally and I am glad to hear it, at least they are on social terms now.

Highland's Radio Program

Will Brother Harper affirm now this proposition: It is scripturally right for Highland Ave. Church in Abilene to promote, plan and supervise a work which is larger than they can carry out and which therefore must be supported by many churches? If he will, he will be able to debate himself for he is in print denying that proposition. Would he even affirm that everything he has ever advocated and practiced is scriptural and right? I doubt if he would affirm that everything he has preached is the truth. Brother Harper, have you ever been wrong about anything? If you have when you found yourself on the side of error did you change or are you still wrong? Since you like to write about yourself, why not give us an Off the Record article on your own inconsistencies and changes?