RESPONSE FROM READERS

For several years I felt that the Church of Christ was dwelling on unimportant, mechanical matters to the exclusion of more important spiritual things. Unfortunately, in my reaction I dwelt on my own unimportant matters and was as uncharitable to those in the Church of Christ as I thought they were to Catholics. The Restoration Review has shown me that love is compatible with differences of opinion and even differences of doctrine. It has also helped me to gain a greater perspective of what His church is all about.—Pennsylvania

May I suggest you change the name of your journal from Restoration Review to “Critics Review.” Of all mortals a critic is the silliest for inuring himself to examine all things, whether they are of consequence or not. He never looks upon anything but with the design of passing sentence upon it, by means of which he is never a companion but always a censor.—Illinois

I am heartened by the influence you and other spokesmen are exerting on the brotherhood of believers, causing them to awaken and reexamine and reevaluate some of our traditional beliefs which have kept us shackled for so many years to some of the most narrow and arrogant attitudes known to any.—Oregon

The tradition bound, self-righteous souls, like myself, are seeing the light all across the country.—Ohio

To a certain extent over the months I have come to feel much as you do about the church for which I have preached now for over fifteen years.—Nevada

What a marvelous piece of work your last issue was! Especially the article on “Great Religions.” This is a subject that has long concerned me, perhaps because my narrow raising clashed with my common sense in interpreting what God’s attitude must be toward the fellow who could not help where he was born.—Texas

I must confess that I read the first issue (for me) with mixed emotions and maybe that is the trouble right there. I mean I read it with emotion rather than with cool logic. I am not about to say that I agreed with everything you wrote, or even with the way it was written, but neither was I looking for a place to pick a quarrel. All of my brethren are entitled to a hearing, as I hope I too am entitled.—Canada

In the September issue one reader from Georgia said in effect that he was fearful of stating his mind for he was “dependent on the above letterhead for a living.” This was my problem for a long time. Now I depend on God, to whom I said I gave myself. It is a wonderful feeling to be free in Christ. I highly recommend it to the brethren of any persuasion or party.—California

(An indirect message by way of a letter to someone else) Tell Leroy Garrett that intellectualism, while having certain benefits, is a poor substitute for one’s yielding to and being filled with the Spirit of the Living God.—California

I can’t say that I agree with all that you publish, but neither can I say that for any other publication. I do find it refreshing and stimulating to read something beside the party line for a change.—Florida

It is encouraging to read a publication which is so forthright and edited by one still identified with the Church of Christ Church. . . I am more and more perturbed by the growing division between the educated and less educated.—New Mexico.

Let me say I enjoy the magazine and support your stand for the oneness of those in Christ. In Britain the Churches have been sadly divided in recent years over the use of individual cups by Churches associated with ‘Herald of Truth’ group. For this reason I find it refreshing to read of the attempts in the U. S. to unite the Church rather than divide it.—Scotland

We have really used our copies of Restoration Review. (My husband) teaches the Sunday morning high school seniors class, and he takes many of the ideas presented in Restoration Review and throws them out for these kids to chew on. He has a very lively, unorthodox class!—Texas