Letters    

OF "THE ANGELUS"

Dear S. H.                                                                                                     August 28, 1991

     ...I was saddened to see you have cancelled The Angelus. In your previous letter, you said only "Trusting I have not offended you; our aim is to edify one another" but not a word about cancellation. Seventeen years ago, I was moved by the painting of a farmer and his wife praying in an open field. I wanted our paper to be informative, inspirational, and evangelistic, and to move people to pray. This has not changed. I did not inquire into the religion of the painter then, and I do not intend to change our format now. It is a marvel to me how one can confess their desire is that Christ be glorified, and admit "There is so much that glorifies the Lord in your papers," but to discontinue a free paper because she does not approve of the title.

Dear E. V.                                                                                                      October 7, 1991

     I received your September letter, and note that if I rename our paper, you would be glad to receive it. Have you never read the 16th chapter of Romans, and of the saints in the early church who were praised albeit they had heathen names? There is Narcissus, Phlegon, Hermes, Nereus, Olympas, Jason, and others. To their own Master they stood. God was able to make them stand. They were not excommunicated on account of their names. Therefore, we will change the name of our publication when God changes their names. Seventeen years ago, I was moved by a painting by Millet of a farmer and his wife praying in a field. The name of that painting, and which is depicted on each edition of our paper, is "The Angelus." I desired then that our paper would be a bell calling the people of God to pray. That desire has not changed. I would like to send you part III of the series on the Jews, and to keep you on our mailing list, but I will not send it without your permission.

ON INTELLIGENCE, AND THE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT (IQ) TEST

 Dear C. S.                                                                                                     August 30, 1994

     ...There are great limitations on the usefulness of IQ Test results. For instance, I qualify for "Mensa." Their test evaluated me as a "genius," but this neither makes me a good man, nor an honorable man. Take, for example, the Rhodes scholar on Pennsylvania Avenue: oh, that we had one who was not so "qualified" to lead this country!

     Purported intelligence is not the answer to social ills, or to political dreams; and a man's grade point average does not determine his worth—and, neither does a high IQ score. To accept IQ testing as the standard to determine a person's worth is fatalism. Does God have any role to play in all of this? Can God use one who is not overly taxed with a high IQ?

     As for Craniometrics and Psychometrics, if a person uses only about 10 percent of his brain potential, what difference does it make what shape or size the brain mass, or the cranial cavity?

      It is a myth foisted by many evolutionists upon an unsuspecting public that the greater the size of the brain, the greater the intelligence. Hence the protruding foreheads of advanced life forms in science-fiction movies. Dante, who wrote The Divine Comedy: Il Purgatorio, Il Paradisio, and Il Inferno, is called the "Father of the Modern Italian Language", yet he had the smallest brain of any adult male on record (Dr. Stewart Custer, professor at Bob Jones University, Greenville, South Carolina).

Contents

Previous Next