Mailbag | WORLD
Logo
Sound journalism, grounded in facts and Biblical truth | Donate

Mailbag

Letters from our readers for the January 2025 issue


Mailbag
You have {{ remainingArticles }} free {{ counterWords }} remaining. You've read all of your free articles.

Full access isn’t far.

We can’t release more of our sound journalism without a subscription, but we can make it easy for you to come aboard.

Get started for as low as $3.99 per month.

Current WORLD subscribers can log in to access content. Just go to "SIGN IN" at the top right.

LET'S GO

Already a member? Sign in.

The words we choose

Thank you, Andrée Seu Peterson, for thinking about “The words we choose.” Her column is an informative and meaningful analysis of the theory and practice of swearing. It’s revealing, if perhaps gentle. I was surprised that she included only one Scripture reference, perhaps due to an assumption that many WORLD readers would already be familiar with and understand others that she could have cited. When I searched the files for similar articles, I found that I had accumulated more references than I thought. The differences among various cultures and ages are interesting, and certainly I agree that hearing less swearing makes for more pleasant listening and conversation.

Here is another rationale or advantage for advocates of less swearing to consider. Swearing is inefficient and does not increase understanding or communication. Much of my 50-year working career involved writing and public speaking, often on technical subjects. I experienced a common dislike from senior corporate, military, and civilian officials for unnecessary verbiage that wasted their time. In simple words, shorter was better. Swearing wastes time. (I’ll take an occasional short outburst as the exception.) Especially in a male-dominated situation, it often stimulates a contest to see who can out-swear the previous speaker. That isn’t conversation. It wastes a lot of time. And it’s often beyond distasteful.

One way to cut down on swearing is to curtail the use of adjectives and adverbs modifying adjectives. Oh, I may sometimes say it was very high versus just high, but that doesn’t convey useful information, e.g., how high is very high? When I began my working career, the Just Plain English movement was blossoming. It continues in various forms and websites and for good reasons. It’s effective. It’s accurate. It’s concise. I offer another single Scripture reference, “Let your ‘yes’ mean ‘yes,’ and your ‘no’ mean ‘no’” (Matthew 5:37). Learning to do that helps us choose our words more carefully. It saves writing and reading time. It also steers us away from the distasteful aspects of swearing.
     Wyett H. Colclasure II / Salem, Ill.

Excellent column on foul language. As a wise man told me many years ago, “People curse when they’ve run out of ideas,” and as the great personality Steve Allen once said, “Once you swear, what do you do for an encore?”
     George Harris / Thousand Oaks, Calif.

Many familiar voices are no longer heard in WORLD. Yes, change is a needed part of life. But please, do not allow Andrée Seu Peterson to slip away. The boldness and beauty of her writing is incredibly rare.
     Jay Grant / Laguna Beach, Calif.

Beans, bullets, and band-aids

Great article by Kim Henderson. It’s certainly reasonable to take precautions against emergencies. No amount of preparation, however, can provide security for an indefinite amount of time. Eventually you’ll run out of the “beans, bullets, and Band-Aids,” as well as medication, water, batteries, and sources of protein. For believers, there’s a clear spiritual parallel that our works are never good enough (Isaiah 64:6; Ephesians 2:8-10) and that our “prepping” should be based in faith, not in fear.
     Nathan P. Shive / Macungie Pa.

Yes, many think that we must “conserve” and “store up” provisions for some coming catastrophe. The sadness is God-fearing Christians have been caught up in this wave of preservation from people who don’t believe God’s perfect promises. There is, of course, a reasonable amount of preparedness for us as believers; we “trust” that God has our best interest at heart. He has never failed me in my 80-plus years of being in His hand.
     Fred Coffin / Salem, N.J.

Thank you for the insightful article on prepping. My parents and grandparents went through immigration, World War I, the Depression, and World War II. These were all “hunger years.” They baked bread, canned, made soups, shared with those in need, and participated in church. As a missionary having visited Cuba, Venezuela, and Haiti, I’ve seen citizens make do with the provisions of the land, hard work, a helping hand, and prayer. Prepping used to be called home economics in school. It need not be apocalyptic or cultish. It’s a regular way of survival for most people in the world.
     Cornelius (Neal) Hegeman / Anniston, Ala.

What is the 4B movement?

I would like to say how distressing this movement truly is but also how honest these women are. Why would young American women abstain from or abandon sexual relationships with men and be “single by choice”? The main reason is because many (most, unfortunately) men view pornography on a daily basis. Women are being held to a fake standard set by fictional programming that society at large says is “harmless” and even “helpful.” I would have liked it if Bekah McCallum would have mentioned the dangers of pornography and the overwhelming use of it among men both young and old.
     Caleb M. Cunningham / Bonners Ferry, Idaho

Quotables and cartoons

I read Sen. Roger Wicker’s quote and immediately thought, “Pete is only going to quit drinking alcohol if he gets confirmed?” Apparently, the fact that he is being accused of “unruly behavior” by co-workers isn’t enough to get him to quit whether or not he is confirmed? That’s a character flaw in itself.
     Connie Fleming / Mentor, Ohio

The item on Pete Hegseth included an accusation by “anonymous former co-workers.” Any time I read “anonymous sources” I know an accusation is likely not true and ignore it. It is disappointing that WORLD lowered its standards by using this item. The accusation was soundly denied by all of Hegseth’s co-workers at Fox News. I am sorry to see it used in WORLD. I thought you knew better.
     Carole OHare / Wheaton Ill.

“Oh, that’s a lie!” I screamed in my head, while viewing the cartoon by Michael Ramirez. The cartoon shows a chemist saying, “There is no conclusive evidence that U.S. water fluoridation causes a lower IQ.” Then another chemist implies that such concerns must be a conspiracy theory. However, the conclusive scientific evidence proves otherwise! The Fluoride Action Network (FAN) recently won its lawsuit against the EPA proving IQ damage in children from fluoride, similar to the effect of lead.
     Paula Oas / Laurel, Md.

Reviving liturgy

I couldn’t help but notice a common theme among three pieces in the January issue: “Reviving liturgy” by Nick Eicher, the review by Todd Vician of Pastor Erwin Lutzer’s new book The Eclipse of God, and Bekah McCallum’s “Pilgrimage to Rome.” In different ways, each piece reflects the hollowed-out state of our American “evangelical” church and its drift away from the gospel.

Missing from these, especially McCallum’s piece, is any reference to the enclave of the confessional Lutheran churches. These churches remain committed to Scriptural inerrancy and maintain a liturgy in essential continuity with that of the apostolic and early patristic church—yet they are fiercely loyal to the needed reforms of 16th- (and 21st-) century Catholicism. This band of stalwarts deserves mention from your writers.
     Stephen Bennett / Flossmoor, Ill.

Burma’s slow burn

Antonio Graceffo’s article is excellent! His extensive research into the background of events in Burma is impressive, and his interaction with the people in their present situation brings his story to life. The endurance of the Karenni believers is very moving. God will surely bless their faithfulness.
     Richard Nazarenus / Newberry Springs, Calif.

Speaking civilly

While I advocate civility, I have also witnessed in numerous states the reality that elected Democrats may say they’re pro-life but will bow at the altar of abortion and will promote access to the slaughter of the unborn.
     Thomas D. Gross / Aurora, Colo.

Anthony Holland says that pro-choice people value life, but “our priority is a personal choice.” He wrongly states that “abortion does end a potential life.” Medical science has shown that human life begins at conception, so abortion ends a developing human life.
     Don Wilkinson / East Berlin, Pa.

Send your letters and comments to:

editor@wng.org

WORLD Mailbag
PO Box 20002
Asheville, NC 28802

COMMENT BELOW

Please wait while we load the latest comments...

Comments