"Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of truth." — (Psalm 60:4)
"Lift ye up a banner upon the high mountain, exalt the voice unto them." — (Isaiah 13:2)
Devoted To The Defense Of The Church Against All Errors And Innovations
Vol.IV No.III Pg.2-4
October 1941

The Lamentations Of C. B. F. Young, Ph. D.


The preachers of the brotherhood are again served to circular letters—this time from "C. B. F. Young, Ph. D.," of New York City. First of all, he wants everybody to know that he is "a Ph. D." so he puts its on his envelope, and prints it on his stationery. Perhaps, readers may want to know more about him than his own circulars tell.

Who is C. B. F. Young, Ph. D.? In addition to being "a far cry from a chemist"-an electrometallurgist—he was "the president" of the New Christian Leader Corporation. He was, and apparently yet is, Clinton Davidson's right hand man. He helped with all his might and main to sponsor and promote the Davidson movement, the Davidson paper, and the Davidson cause. That just about nearly explains who he is.

What is ailing C. B. F. Young, Ph. D.? The same thing that is ailing all of them. He would have his circular list to think that it is the editor's "past actions" that have upset him so. Can you imagine why a man big (?) enough to be a Ph. D. away up in "Noo Yawk" should become so suddenly interested in the Banner editor's affairs? The fact that the source of his interest is "Clinton Davidson's files" answers that question.

What is C. B. F. Young, Ph. D. doing? He is using the same old Davidson scheme of trying to make a sucker list out of the preacher's list (and every other list he can get, I presume) to convey his mingled emotions, animosities, and lamentations to all the preachers and, incidentally, to tell them how hard he worked to earn his Ph. D. and what a good Christian he is.

Since the C. B. F. Y. Ph. D. circular's weeping and, wailing is over what was said about him in the Bible Banner some month's ago, perhaps it is well that the readers should see the articles. So here they are:

The Christian Leader Folds Up

The Firm Foundation of December in, carries an announcement, that Brother G. H. P. Showalter has acquired the Christian Leader and in so doing assumes full responsibility for what it will be until it is merged with the Gospel Proclaimer as contemplated, with the February issue of that paper. Brother Showalter says: "I crave the goodwill, confidence and support of all who read and love the paper and love the whole truth of God." Brother Showalter has all of that from me. We who are of the Great West have had in G. H. P. Showalter during the past generation an almost unbounded and unlimited confidence, and the brethren all over this broad area accented his leadership almost unanimously, through the Firm Foundation, in the fight that he made in earlier days against all forms of error and digression. While some of us have thought that the Firm Foundation has not been as militant and outspoken against the menace of the Davidson movement, promoted by the Leader, as the importance of it demanded, yet the positions of the Firm Foundation and the integrity of its editor on any question never have been questioned. Whether the Christian Leader is merged with the Gospel Proclaimer or is issued as a separate periodical by the Firm Foundation under Brother Showalter's management, we wish for Brother Showalter the comfort and consolation of doing the cause of Christ a service by taking over this added burden, for there will be no, financial gain in it to him. We believe that Brother Showalter's loyalty to the truth will be the safeguard against the former false policies and promotions of the Leader.

It is not untimely to say here that "two years ago the Christian Leader passed into the hands of a new management" in the person of Clinton Davidson. It became his instrument, medium and tool to accomplish the invasion of the church with his schemes. He is said to have made the boast that he would have 50,000 subscribers, 30,000 in the South around Nashville, Tennessee. But after two years his dreams of conquest have come to an ignominious end.

But some phases of the Davidson campaign apparently have not ended. C. B. F. Young, of New York, sometimes called "Doctor C. B. F. Young" (he is a chemist), appears to have succeeded him in the campaign of calumny, which Davidson waged against certain of us who opposed him. In the Bible Banner sometime back I quoted John T. Lewis as saying that "Doctor" Young had made a statement over long distance telephone from New York to Birmingham that he had "enough information" on the editor of the Bible Banner in Nashville to ruin him "if" he would tell it. The readers will remember that we promptly invited Doc Young to come right down to Nashville while I was there in a meeting and tell it. He did not do so. He would not do so. He could not do so. But we have heard from him. First he says that he did not make the statement over the telephone, but he did make it through another medium to the same party. He wants Bro. Lewis to correct the mistake. A slight mistake it is, involving only the medium of the statement. But that does not help C. B. F. Young any, for what did he do? Well, he goes to Birmingham and carries with him Clinton Davidson's "files" containing "information" on the editor of the Bible Banner and shows these "files" privately to certain parties whom he would love to turn against the Bible Banner and its editor! So the campaign of calumny continues. They would not fight in their paper, but they will fight behind it! The "Doctor" (?) would not come to Nashville upon my invitation and show me his files—but he will peddle Clinton Davidson's files around and show them to others. Of course, he does not have to show me the files, I know all that is in them and I know that it is not any old creditors in Nashville that they care about. They would never have taken the pains to get a report on me had it not been for the fact that I debated Premillennialism with Neal & Boll, Norris & Tingley, and exposed the spirit of the Davidson movement. Nor do they care primarily any thing about the relations between me and the church in California (which have always been good and only good)—it is my opposition to their diabolical schemes that has made them mad and brought down their vengeance upon my head.

So Doctor C. B. F. Young takes up where Clinton Davidson left off with the campaign of calumny.

The obligations that were so unfortunately made through several exceedingly hazardous and trying years between 1929 and 1934 in Nashville, Tennessee, were paid several years ago. My creditors never did cut up half as much as some who were never my creditors. They, my former creditors, are satisfied—but Clinton Davidson and Doctor Clarence are not satisfied.

All financial affairs between me and the elders of the Central Church of Christ, in Los Angeles, were understood and agreed upon in business manner before I ever left there in 1930 to become editor of the Gospel Advocate, and the details were worked out accordingly, during the strenuous task of building up the church and erecting a $75,000 edifice in Los Angeles, and in trying to see it through after I left. They were satisfied. But Doctor Clarence and Clinton Copyright are not satisfied.

Even in the matter of getting a disagreement adjusted between the Gospel Guardian and the firm that printed it, these meddlers have shown their hand. Property rights were involved in this settlement. An adjustment was due. One of the elders of the church in Oklahoma City, a business man, who knew all the details, assisted me. The matter was settled out of court and amicably, and the adjusted account was paid in full, exactly as I had agreed to do in the beginning. But the attorney assisting us said that it was apparent that an outside party was urging this concern to get a judgment against me and that apparently someone had offered to buy the judgment in order to induce this concern to file the suit. Can anybody imagine who it was that wanted to bold a judgment against me? But this matter was honorably adjusted, and this concern gave me a written statement that the matter was settled justly and satisfactorily. They are satisfied. But Clarence and Clinton are not satisfied! So it is with everything they think they have against me. While all parties concerned are satisfied and have been for several years, Davidson, Young et. al., who are not concerned, are not satisfied. Like "Brother Crawford's wife," they are very unhappy!

If the New York chemist, who appears to be so pious. insists on peddling the Clinton Davidson "files" around among the brethren, I propose to have a photostatic copy made of the documents in my possession bearing on these matters and print them in the Bible Banner showing the original statements and signatures, to put these scandalmongers where they belong—in the corner. I could put them in jail, if that were my way of fighting. I have in my possession, and have had for ten years, the positive evidence to refute their charges, every one, in detail. Some of my friends have urged me to print them all—but I have not wanted to enter into a discussion of my character which with me is not a debatable question.

C. B. F. Young says that Clinton Davidson denies threatening to sue us. Is that so? Well, ask J. W. Akin if he understood the letter he received as a threat. Ask J. E. Williams if he understood the letter he received as a threat. Ask George W. Birchfield if he took the letter he received as a threat. Ask Austin Taylor if he interpreted the letter he received as a threat. Ask Leon B. McQuiddy why he met me in Memphis, Tennessee, to inform me that Davidson had said that he would sue me, and to talk the Bible Banner situation over. Brother McQuiddy thought he meant to do it, and withdrew from the proposed organization of the Bible Banner Company, leaving it up to me. The difference between him and me was that he was scared and I was not. Davidson ought to repent and apologize for such conduct instead of denying it, thus adding another sin to what he has already done.

This has been the spirit of these men who were so much in favor of promoting a sweet-spirited journal—the New Christian Leader. We hope that Brother Showalter, now that he has acquired the Leader, will not give them the medium through which to feed us sugar in his paper and throw acid in our eyes out of it.

In "taking over this increased labor and responsibility with a determination to make the Christian Leader of just as much help to each individual Christian as possible" we wish Brother Showalter the highest success, in such a cause, and proffer our assistance and encouragement as it serves that end, with 'the hope that the added burden and responsibility may not add to his accumulating years.-F. E. W., Bible Banner, Dec. 1940.

The Doctors That Are Among Us

Doctor C. B. F. Young, of New York, erstwhile president of the defunct Davidson Christian Leader, demurs that the Bible Banner has minimized his calling by referring to him as a chemist. "You err," he says, "I am an electrometallurgist, a far cry from a chemist." Now don't ask me how to pronounce it—just name it and take it. He also tells me in detail how he became a Ph. D. I heard C. R. Nichol say one time that he had never seen a Ph. D. that had good sense. I think I know now what he meant.

The Doctor complains that I have addressed him only through the Bible Banner, to which he does not subscribe, and that he therefore did not see the suggestion that he might come down to Nashville, Tennessee, while I was there last fall, with the "information" from that place that would "ruin" me, "if" he would tell it. But he saw the previous issue of the Bible Banner, which referred to his telephone conversation from New York to Birmingham, in time to demand an immediate correction. And he saw the next issue in time to inform us immediately that the correction had not been made. As for addressing him, and them, only through the Bible Banner, that is the only way I aim to address them, so he had better subscribe for it and quit borrowing it from someone else like he has been doing.

He proposes now that I come to some distant point to meet him. But I have nothing to see the Doctor about. He is the one who peddled Davidson's files down to Birmingham as an extension agent of Davidson's campaign of calumny. I merely informed him when I would be in Nashville where he said he had information that would "ruin" me, and told him to bring it down. Now he wants me to get some brethren together, go somewhere, and make a convention out of it. That was not the proposition, and besides I wouldn't go that far to see the Doctor about anything. However, since he went all the way from New York to Birmingham to tell John T. Lewis that he could ruin me in Nashville. I thought that he might just stop off there while I was in town and proceed.

Finally, the Doctor suggests that I publish in the Bible Banner his extra long, rambling letter. There are two reasons why I am not disposed to do so. First, he does not hesitate to say that he believes everything he has been told; I am certainly under no obligation to furnish a medium to any man who at the outset calls me a thief and a crook. Second, the Doctor recently went on record that he is conscientiously opposed to that kind of journalism. He thinks it is a sin to engage in controversies through the papers. Now he wants to help me run the kind of a paper that he helped start the Christian Leader to stop. If he should do this thing now, by his own confessions he would be violating his conscience, and if I should furnish him the medium to do it, I would be guilty of causing a weak brother to stumble, a thing I am commanded in the New Testament not to do.

It does occur to me that the New York electrometallurgist is going considerably out of his way to put himself to a lot of trouble about something that does not concern him. These brethren have been unable to meet the issues and have therefore had to resort to something else.

-F. E. W., Bible Banner, Feb. 1941.

Brother Ph. D. complains that I "refused" to "meet him face to face." Now, just who's afraid of the big, bad wolf? Well, why don't I come up to see him sometime? Be cause, firstly, he is nobody's Mae West and, secondly, I have nothing to see him about and, thirdly, if he has anything to see me about that concerns him, let him do the coming, he knows where I live, and nobody is holding him. But I am under no sort of an obligation to trip over the country to hold either private or public conferences with these character-assassinators whose whole effort has been to destroy the men who has stood for the truth against error on these issues.

Another complaint of Brother Ph. D. Young is that I accused him of "peddling." Of course, that would reflect on the dignity of a Ph. D. "far cry from a chemist" in New York. He says Webster's definition of "peddler" is one who goes from house to house dispensing in small quantities. And he has not done that! But Webster also defines peddling as trifling, trickery, piddling, petty and insignificant. So according to Webster he is about to be a trifling, peddling, petty peddler. I think most any of the definitions will describe what the New Yorker is doing now, but inasmuch as he demurs, we are willing to take his own definition and since he has quit dispensing his warps in small quantities and is canvassing the whole brotherhood, he is no longer a peddler, but a jobber! As for my use of the word "calumny," I knew what it meant when I used it without being a Ph. D. and have nothing to retract. But he says he is not taking up where Davidson left off. He has acquired his "files," so maybe he is just taking up where Davidson started. He showed them to John T. Lewis—but he has not circulated what Jno. T. Lewis told him. I happen to know that he told him plenty.

Again, the usual exception is taken on premillennialism. He insists that he is no premillennialist. Well, just who is these days? The ones that are won't admit it. We have heard that before. To hear them talk there is not a premillennialist among them—yet they are helping the premillennialists with all their influence and money. Davidson is not a premillennialist, he says, but he always goes to the R. H. Boll-E. L. Jorgenson church in Louisville, Kentucky. Thinking that he had, better make an argument against premillennialism, too, Ph. D. calls it "fantastic." That's quite a nice name for it—doubtless rather pleasing to those who teach it—but I have a better name for it. It is an out-and-out false doctrine, destructive of the gospel of Christ and the church of Christ. As well call Mormonism, Adventism, Russellism, or Spiritualism, "fantastic."

Another exception taken by our high degree complainant is that my reference to those who "appear so pious" impugns his righteousness, and violates the Sermon On The Mount—but in the next breath he says that this is "not the first time that Brother Wallace has willfully misrepresented" things. Note that he says "willfully," and yet he objects to language that impugns his own pious motives! The same chapter that mentions the "the mote and the beam," to which the brother of high degree refers, has something in pretty close connection to say about judging not that you be not judged. Was he trying to be a Christian when he let that one slip, or was he "throwing acid"?

It has been noteworthy and notorious that these super-pious brethren can be as ugly as anybody. They would not publish what Ph. D. Young has circulated in their once glorious but now defunct Christian Leader, but they demand that we publish it. The foreground of their premises is alluring but when one looks at their background it spoils the scenery. Yes, "sugar in one hand and acid in the other" is exactly what they carry regardless of the pious protest. Nobody expects them to admit it. But people who think will always look with doubt on the man who talks about how much he prays and how hard he is trying to be a Christian. Watch him and see.

Among the other greater or lesser sins of the editor is that of referring to the brother's letter as "long" and "rambling." Since he has mailed it out to everybody, I am willing to let them be the judge. Does it read like the composition of a Ph. D? Someone said in a jocular vein that Ph. D. means Phenomenally Dumb, but the present case gives me the feeling that the author may not have been joking. And since this one resents anything like a wise-crack or a joke, if he insists we will let him take it seriously.

Preachers—It has been nearly a year since the date of C. B. F. Y's. letter. Why has he waited nearly a year to stereotype it and mail it out over the brotherhood? Is it be cause the campaign against the Banner and the editor is lagging and threatens to bog down? Just review the succession of circulars from first to last and see if this one does not form a link in the chain of strategy in this campaign of calumny.

1. There was first of all the circular from Philadelphia signed by "A Christian Young." Now, let's see, that sounds familiar-A. Christian Young-C. B. F. Young-and he emphasizes what a good "Christian" he is. And their line of chatter, as well as object of attack, is similar-Philadelphia is not far from New York, with New Jersey between, and that circular had several references to New York. Though not impossible it would be strange that two different individuals by the name of Young would be trying to do the same thing at so near the same time, or that an anonymous writer should accidentally take the non de plume of the man who later attempts the same thing. It does look suspicious-doesn't it? This was the beginning of the Circular Campaign.

2. Then came Clinton Davidson's survey of the preachers, the build-up for the New Christian Leader, questionnaires, and the organization of the Davidson movement to crush the present papers and take over all enterprises in the church, papers, schools, preachers and churches.

3. During all of this period, at certain timed intervals other anonymous documents appeared under various plumes non de plumes, or no plumes at all, from St. Louis Chicago, Atlanta, dealing in vitriolic attacks on character in the lowest and vilest sort of personalities. Besides all of that, a volume of personal correspondence went out from Clinton Davidson to preachers, enough of which fell into my own hands to give me an accurate picture of what was going on. Why all of this? There is but one answer: The cause they promoted required it. That is how they fight. Their paper was too ethical to print it—but they were not too conscientious to circulate it through underground channels.

4. Even the "National Unity Meetings" took on the same character, and the promoters of it were caught red-handed in an organized scheme, with malice aforethought, to destroy the reputation of the Banner's editor. Here is where Witty, promoter of the magic movement for union with the Christian Church, showed his hand. He joined hands with Davidson in a base confidential scheme to "expose' 'the editor. Why? "Because," he said, of the fight we have made against the Davidson-Witty-Murch movements. Now, that is the truth-they let it out once. Therein is the motive for it all. They care nothing about the "past actions" nor the present actions of the editor of the Bible Banner as such—they are after him because the Bible Banner has smashed every advance they have made on the church. By the Grace of Almighty God, we shall continue to do so.

5. The New Christian Leader folded up and Clinton Davidson went into retreat, or recluse, but he is still operating and will continue to operate. His methods and money are easily identified, and his agents cannot cover up their tracks, in their guerilla warfare.

There has been plenty of money and influence back of the fight that has been made to destroy the Bible Banner. Though Clinton Davidson is now out of the public picture, he is still in the fight. He is waging it through others and he will do that on and on. Preacher lists, and leader lists, and paper lists, will continue to be worked, and the preachers and the brethren may continue to expect such things through the mail, some signed, some unsigned, but all of one intent—the total destruction of the opposition to their diabolical plans and schemes by any means fair or foul.

Thus it all links up, and as the President of the United States said in Collier's, "the fight goes on"—if they must have it so, very well, that is our dish, except we cannot and will not descend to their levels to serve it. Our fight has been on issues, for issues, and therefore for the church. Let them fight as they will -- they have not passed, and they shall not pass!—F. E. W.