Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
November 15, 1951

"What The Brethren Are Saying"

"I really enjoy reading your paper, although I can't always agree with you on everything. However, you do make me and the other brethren think things out, and that makes us better Christians and better able to meet and help those in error."

— Charles L. Waters, Stockton, California


"I have been mailing and handing out ten copies of "Ancient Landmarks" each month. Last Tuesday I forgot to give one to a "Jehovah's Witness" who had visited me, and as I didn't know her first name, I decided to send it to the only name listed in the phone directory as "Maddox," thinking it might be her. It turned out to be her sister-in-law, a Catholic. She called me on the phone, asking me why I had sent her the paper, and when I had explained, said to me, "I'm a Catholic, and you have no right to be sending me anything like that. I could take this "Ancient Landmarks" to the priest, and he could have you arrested for some of the things in it." I told her he wouldn't dare to do that as we live in a free country. She replied, "From now on you be very, very careful who you send such paper to, as it is dangerous!" This makes me feel like saying, "Wake up, Christians in America! Are we going to let the Pope in Rome take over America?"

— Mrs. Lela Wooldridge, Morris, Illinois


"I wish to commend brother Herschell Patton's article, "A deadly Parallel" (Guardian, September 13) so far as it concerns the main point, and at the same time offer a word of criticism. The criticism relates to the first paragraph.

"Brother Patton begins his article with the statement, "In apostolic days." Then a number of statements follow which relate to "apostolic days." Among these statements is the following, "If orphans became dependent upon the church, then the elders of the church could choose some practical method of caring for them. It might be that they would supplement the mother's support, helping her to keep her home intact; or it might be that it would he practical for different members of the church to take the children into their own homes; or, if there were no homes that were able to take the children in, then the elders of the congregation could make whatever arrangement might be necessary. It might even be expedient to buy or rent a house and employ some Christian couple to take care of the children in that home. If this proved too much of a burden for that congregation to finance, then some other church, or churches, might send money to the elders to assist in that work.

"Brother Patton states, just as if we had all this in approved examples, that this is what was done in apostolic days. He leaves the impression that there is no doubt as to how orphans were cared for in apostolic days. He assumes the very point relative to which there has been much recent discussion, and thus weakens his article."

— Roy Deaver, Vernon, Texas


"I regret to be forced to say these things, but I believe with all my heart that you, Roy Cogdill, and others have been doing the church of the Lord a great hurt in the past years by your opposition to preaching the gospel—except as you decree. Maybe I should not say, but it seems that it all boils down to an opposition to preaching where people do not speak English—since in such places you fellows will not be able to go eventually and hold meetings with good support."

— Roy L. Ruckman, Carter, Oklahoma


Dear Brother Cogdill:

"I think you did a fine job in your last article (September 20 Guardian). You said just the thing needed at this time. They are out to crush the Gospel Guardian. I have taken the Gospel Advocate for a number of years, but from now on my $2.00 can be better used. Of all the editors I have observed through the years, I believe the Advocate's present editor is the weakest she has had."

— Dr. A. T. Harris, Dallas, Texas


Dear Yater:

"I think your judgment was correct in not replying to the R. C. Walker tirade. A reply was unnecessary. Walker does not wield enough influence to hurt anyone. The good brethren from all over the country who were there (at the Florida Christian College lectures) know the falsity of his charges. They will refute him in their own localities. Furthermore, that kind of attack always backfires on the attacker."

— Franklin T. Puckett, Calico Rock, Arkansas


"A fine job is being done with the Guardian, and we appreciate it very much."

— M. C. Cuthbertson, Los Angeles, California


"The Vanderbilt Law Review for the Winter quarter points out that for every one baby in this country to be adopted thirty desirable and worthy families clamor for the child. At a recent gathering in Nashville announcement was made that twins were to be adopted into some family. People were asked to go to the office of the man making the announcement. Twenty people hurried there—and some almost came to blows over who was there first. Seldom does a week go by but that some worthy Christian family comes to me saying, "Could you help us find a child to adopt?" This is the experience of many Christian ministers known to me. No institution can possibly be as desirable place for a child to grow up as in a Christian home. Institutions are at best only a substitute for the real home. Some of the talk about children being "better off" in an institution than in a real Christian home is just Communistic nonsense. If they are better off then we should abolish homes and just operate institutions as the Russians tried to do in some sections a few year ago. Sometimes it becomes difficult for us to keep our perspective when discussing such things. Let us bear in mind that institutions have a place to fill—but that place is not to take the place of a Christian home where a child can have his own father and mother. There is every reason to believe that the adopted child is just as happy and has just as good a chance in life as any other child."

— Geo. DeHoff (Christian Magazine)