The Campaign Of Calumny
There is nothing new about it. It is the same old campaign of calumny. If it breaks out in a new place it comes from the same old source. It began with the discussions which were held with Boll, Neal, and Norris. Defeated on the issues, they swore vengeance in personal destruction even when Norris sought palliation for utter defeat in personal retaliation these false brethren fed him on slander and slime. There they met on common ground.
Then came the Clinton Davidson movement and anonymous letters. Because the Bible Banner stood squarely in the way of this sinister movement its promoters vowed to destroy its editor. His movement died but his bitter hatred lives and flows through other channels.
Next up was the Murch-Witty National Unity Meeting notion-a carefully devised scheme to take over the church. The Bible Banner opposed the schemes of Witty and Murch on the same principle precisely that it opposed the schemes of Clinton Davidson. Stung by defeat, Davidson was seeking revenge and saw an opportunity to enlist the assistance of Claude F. Witty. The following letter reveals the Davidson-Witty calumnious coalition. It was written by Brother F. L. Rowe as a "confidential" letter to the editors of the ChristIan Leader. But as it was sent as a form letter, it could hardly be maintained that it is confidential. Read it and see the spirit and the persons back of the campaign being waged.
Confidential Letter To Leader Editors
January 8, 1941. Dear Brother: About three weeks ago, Brother Davidson called up from New Jersey about 8:30, but I let Sister Bauer answer the phone as I have a little difficulty sometimes in hearing clearly. The substance of his conversation was that if I would go after Foy E. Wallace and expose him in every way that I could and in every way that would be proven to me that such a work on my part would be financed by a brother in Detroit. My answer to him was I would have no part in any such an affair and that so far as I am concerned I am out of all that. I had Sister Lena tell him that I was starting a new paper and wanted to keep it clean. So much for that.
Then this week, Monday, Claud F. Witty came to Cincinnati and called on me and talked to me privately about lending my name of influence to a paper for a few months at least whose purpose would be to expose Foy E. Wallace because of his bitter attacks up on Witty and others. I told Brother Witty I could not lend my name to any such a proposition and I suggested that he get some small, town printer get the paper out for them and that they mail it themselves. I told him I was through with all that manner of contention among brethren. I asked him why he came to me. His answer was, he wanted my name and reputation. I told him he would have to find someone else that I would be no party to it.
Fraternally, F. L. Rowe.
No comment is necessary to point out the evident purpose of what is being done. Regardless of who is doing what or whether they have an understanding or not, they are one in aim, and intent. Here they meet on common ground "of one accord and of one mind"—to destroy whom they hate.
The amazing thing is that the men back of this thing are the promoters of "unity meetings" and appear as love embodied and piety personified.
Even G. C. Brewer descended to the level of contributing an article to the editor of the paper which is now their tool. He revealed his own mental level. He could not "sanction" what they did—but he "rejoiceth in their iniquity."
Brother Brewer admits that he distributed a bundle of papers containing what he said was indecent. He did it to get even with Foy Wallace because of his "unchristian" treatment of G. C. Brewer. In doing it he aided in smearing the church in Oklahoma City, and has lost the respect of some fine people whose favor he might have held.
As for M. C. Franklin's article, it is a fine sample of a man doing what he condemns. He should read Rom. 2:1. Besides his inconsistency some things he said are wholly untrue.
As for John O'Dowd, his article can be viewed only as a smokescreen to cover up his own guilty connection with the valley paper and the valley affair. In the role of a dove of peace John O'Dowd is a misfit. He can roar but he cannot coo. As a peacemaker, he has "the voice of Jacob but the skin of Esau."
The denominations will unite to oppose their common foe—the church. It is in the same spirit that these men, some of whom have little or no use for each other, have met on common ground to oppose the Bible Banner by any means or measures necessary, fair or foul-mostly foul. That Brother Showalter has allowed these men to use the Firm Foundation to smear the Bible Banner contrary to his previously affirmed attitude, is, indeed, an enigma to me, but I shall not attribute to him any ulterior motives. It is my firm conviction that the public in general, and the readers of the Bible Banner in particular, can and will see the influences back of this campaign of calumny. It cannot be disguised.
Concerning the personal attacks that are being made, the Bible Banner has no reply to make. Our battle has been fought on issues and attitudes that affect those issues. We have not attacked the personal character of any man in all these controversies. We shall continue to leave that type of "journalism" to those who oppose us. It is significant that we have refused to even quote the bad language of articles that have been referred to, and attention has been called to the fact that the Franklin article in the Firm Foundation did quote the language it condemned and passed it on to thousands of others. The person of this editor is nothing, and his personal fortunes are nothing. Do unto him what they will; it does not matter. But as long as he lives he will continue the fight on error "while the heathen rage and the people imagine vain things." We shall continue to stand by the issues involved in this controversy. And on these issues— they shall not pass!— Foy E. Wallace, Jr.