Truth Magazine

By Donald P Ames

We are living in an age in which the use of marijuana is becoming recognized as the number one problem facing parents. It has found its way into nearly all the school systems (if you doubt this, you need to take another look). We even have some legislators seeking to pass laws legalizing the use of it. And, the most frequently heard argument in its defense is that it is “no worse than alcohol.” Against this kind of reasoning, and with a lack of information at hand, how do we as parents, teachers, preachers and concerned young people meet this growing problem?

That it is becoming a real problem is evident by the rapid increase in the number of arrests and the amounts seized by the federal authorities. In 1968, they seized 85,715 pounds of marijuana. This figure grew to 782,033 pounds in 1973. Then in 1974, it jumped clear up to 1,291,000 pounds! When you consider that only one pound can intoxicate about 200 people, and that roughly eight pounds reach their destination for every one pound seized, one can begin to realize the seriousness of the situation.

However, when opposing the sale and use of marijuana, we are confronted with various statements issued by former studies concluding that it is only a mildly stimulating intoxicant and not really anything to get upset about. Although we can look at the results and be convinced otherwise, how do you argue against such reports?

Well, there is an answer! I am very pleased to be able to commend a 61-page booklet by Dr. George K. Russell, entitled Marihuana Today. Dr. Russell is the Associate Professor of Biology at Adelphi University in Garden City, New York, and was awarded a doctorate in biology by Harvard in 1963, where he specialized in genetics, biochemistry and cellular physiology. He has done an excellent job in this booklet of not only exposing the harm involved in the use of marijuana, but of listing and exposing the previously mentioned reports as well. He pointed out the grave medical evidence that has been accumulated in recent years (of which the press has had little to say) and notes that “much of what has been said in the 1960’s about the harmlessness of its use (is) obsolete.” And, although dealing with technical material, yet it was written on a level that anyone with a high-school education can easily read and comprehend. It has 53 pages of rich material, plus an eight-page bibliography and is rather shocking, to say the least.

Dr. Russell noted that most of the tests revealed that the effects of marijuana are cumulative and dose-related, and concluded (along with other quoted authorities): “marijuana must be considered a very dangerous drug . . . the most dangerous drug on the market today.” He listed seven basic reasons for so concluding, and provided material in support of each.

(1) The THC from cannabis tends to accumulate in the brain and gonads and other fatty tissues, much like DDT.

(2) It has a tendency, even in moderate usage, to cause massive damage to the entire cellular process, reducing resistance to certain diseases by as much as 41%.

(3) Growing evidence shows that it tends to be stored in the sex glands, and may well produce deformed babies such as the thalidomide babies of the last decade. The marijuana products also can do serious damage to the normal process of sexual maturation in teenage boys undergoing adolescence, can produce impotence, and also enlargement of the male breasts to the point of desiring surgical correction.

(4) Evidence that it produces irreversible brain damage, and because of its easy storage in fatty tissue, the brain is one of the first areas to be affected. In fact, “an individual smoking even one marihuana cigarette a week is never free of the drug.”

(5) That it is actually worse than cigarettes in producing sinusitis, pharyngitis, bronchitis, emphysema and other respiratory diseases. He noted that evidence shows that marijuana can do in one year or less as much damage as it takes smoking twenty years to accomplish.

(6) That it is far more damaging to the lungs than smoking, and that such damage is “pre-cancerous.(Interestingly enough, ABC News on December 2, 1975, reported several new reports out that show a definite relationship between the use of marijuana and cancer susceptibility.)

(7) A deterioration of mental functioning, forms of paranoia, and a lack of motivation and destruction of the will, that lead to more sexual freedom, opens doors to stronger drugs, and a lack of desire to pursue former goals. This also affects one’s concentration, learning, and ability to talk sensibly (coherent thought).

Dr. Russell concludes: “Inexcapably, the time comes when each must ask himself: What kind of person do I want to be? What kind of society do I want to live in?” These questions need to be faced-both by those who may be trying marijuana and those who could be affected by others using it. “Can the use of marihuana, in any amount, ever be reconciled with the clarity of thought, the personal integrity and the strength of will that an individual must have who would play an active role in helping humanity find the way out of its everworsening difficulties?” This is a very sobering question in light of the material presented.

In my opinion, this is one booklet every Christian (elders, oeacons, preachers, teachers, parents and young people) needs to have and read! It is published by the Myrin Institute Inc. For Adult Education, 521 Park Ave., New York, N.Y. 10021, and is available to any who will send the modest fee of only $1.00 (to cover printing and handling costs). You owe it to yourself and others to be informed on this subject! Why not sit down and order a copy today?

Truth Magazine XX: 31, pp. 493-494
August 5, 1976

By Peter McPherson

1) Are We To Continue In Sin That Grace Might Increase? Answer: “‘May it never be!” (Rom. 6:1-2). The very purpose of the sixth chapter of Romans is to explode that wrong notion and to positively teach otherwise. It shows what the gospel of Christ is all about. It is to really change lives and make them “servants of righteousness.” Since, then, the Christian is not to sin even though he is under grace, the fundamental next question has to be . . .

2) What Is Sin? Answer: “Every one who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness” (1 Jn. 3:4). That is clear and plain. Sin is any violation of the law of God whether it be by way of rejection, addition, subtraction or substitution. But the next question now arises. . .

3) Do Christians Never Sin? Answer: “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 Jn. 1:8). Then we all do sin, at least occasionally. But then. . .

4) Are Christians To Sin? Answer: “My little Children, I am writing these things unto you that you sin not”(1 Jn. 2:1a). The gospel of Christ not only offers forgiveness of our sins but also releases power and has incentives for man to actually deal with the practice of sin. “I have written to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one” (1 Jn. 2:14). Read also Romans 8, Colossians 3, Ephesians 1:19; 3:16-21 and especially Titus 2:11-12.

5) Whenever Christians Sin Are Their Sins Simply Overlooked Because They Are “In Christ”? Answer: Writing to Christians Paul informed even them that “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23). “The man whose sin the Lord will not take into account” (Rom. 4:8) is “the man” “whose sins have been covered . . . . . .. whose lawless deeds have been forgiven”(Rom. 4:7). Whenever our sins are “forgiven” (and that will be many times-Mt. 18:22; 6:12) the Lord “remembers (those) sins no more” (Heb. 8:12).

6) What Are Christians To Do ‘If Anyone Sins”? Answer: “If anyone sins” we are instructed to use our “Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 Jn. 2:1). We are to “repent” of sins (Acts 8:22), and “confess our sins” (1 Jn. 1:9) to our Forgiving Father. The blessed result is that “He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” Note that a Christian’s sins forgiven make him cleansed from “all unrighteousness.” Then he is only “righteous” as long as he “sins not” (1 Jn. 2:1). When he sins he is “unrighteous” and “the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor. 6:9). But, thanks be to God, he has access to the cleansing blood and he can be made “righteous” by availing himself of this rich gospel provision.

7) Does Not “Walk In The Light” and “Walk In Darkness” in First John And In the New Testament Merely Describe Two General Life Styles? Answer: It is true that John’s statement that “whosoever is born of God sinneth not” (Jn. 5:18) means habitually. A. T. Roberson says that the “sinneth not” is “lineal present active indicative, ‘does not keep on sinning,’ as he has already shown in 3:4-10.” Further, John had already stated that “If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 Jn. 1:8). In general terms it is true that the world sins and Christians do not. That is why Christians are never referred to as sinners in the New Testament but as saints (sanctified ones. . . people set apart from the “whole world (which) lies in wickedness” 1 Jn. 5:19). Yet the Christian’s single sin is sin and needs to be repented of and taken before the Father in prayer (1 Jn. 1:8-10).

8) Are There Any Gospel Provisions For Forgiveness Apart From A Specific Repentance And Confession Of A Specific Sin? Answer: We know that the Bible teaches us to repent and confess every sin that we are aware of to God. Also we are to even ask God to “forgive us our debts” (Mt. 6:12). That would include “unknown” sins. And further we are to always manifest a prayerful attitude in life i.e. “pray without ceasing” (1 Thess. 5:17). Of course in all of this we are “looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith” (Heb. 12:2).

We know that the gospel of grace includes an ability” clause (Mt. 25:15) as well as it has affixed a “growth” rider (I Pet. 2:2; 2 Pet. 3:18). What does this mean? It means that we can necessarily infer that there is a provision (conditional of course as will be shown) for all of us due to our mental limitations and conditioning. For example, we are all commanded to grow . . . to “add to our faith” the following: Virtue, knowledge, self-control, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and love (2 Pet. 1:5-7). The full-grown Christian in all of these areas would be perfect . . . 100% . Are any of us perfect i.e. 100% ? Rather, we are somewhere between zero and 100 percent in each of them depending on our own abilities and/or time-growth. But if I (and here are some of the human effort conditions) “press” (Phil. 3:14) and I “buffet” (1 Cor. 9:27) and we “apply all diligence” (2 Pet. 1:5) then God treats me with acceptability. I am, like Abraham, walking by faith and thus I am, like he was, continually “justified.” As long as, during my total ability-growing time (my lifetime) I have the attitude of David and plead to God to “cleanse thou me from secret faults” (Ps. 19:12). I am “righteous.” My attitude is that I am still an “unprofitable servant” w1file striving to do “all those things which are commanded” (Lk. 17:10). Even after having “done that which was our duty to do” we need to recognize that we fall short and, like David, scripturally ‘plead the blood’ (Ps. 19:12; 1 Jn. 1:7). In all of this there is no “boasting” (Eph. 2:9) for we are His workmanship” (Eph. 2:10) and be His total plan for us applied personally and humbly accepted it is in this manner that “God . . . is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure” (Phil. 2:12-13). Surely no one will say that they do not need or want such grace benefits as above discussed. It is only by appi ying and accepting all of grace’s provisions that we may be “present(ed) . . . perfect in Christ Jesus” (Col. 1:28).

9) Will False Theology And Doctrinal Error Taught AndlOr Accepted Cause A Christian (A Babe Or Otherwise) To Be Lost? Answer: Jesus said that there would be “blind leaders of the blind” and that “if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Mt. 15:14). Yes, one of the “hard sayings” of the Bible that many do not accept is the fact that a person can honestly “believe a lie” and still be “damned” (2 Thess. 2:11; Jn. 6:60; Gen. 3:4; Mt. 7:23; Lk. 11:52). Sentimentalism, emotionalism, humanism and materialism have all played their part in the positions now being advocated’to restructure the church into a non-doctrinal denomination. But it is exactly at this point where the grace-fellowship-unity advocates and adherents get into deep trouble and come into condemnation. They are setting forth a false theology and are thus on the wrong track aitogether. They will never grow into the truth because they are going into the wrong direction! It is like a Baptist reading Acts 2:38. He will not likely see the truth plainly taught in this verse, namely, that baptism is “for the remission of sins” because he has accepted the false concept and theology on the subject of salvation. He has already been taught and therefore embraced the idea that salvation is by ‘faith alone.’ It is not a matter of growth or ability here but rather of direction and aim. The Catholics have their theology that teaches them that “tradition” of the Church is as important as the teaching of the Bible and therefore they do not arrive at the truth even though some of them might read the Bible. The same is true of the Calvinists, Materialists as well as our institutional brethren of the past and present. With an institutional concept of the church in mind one is blinded to the truth.

Whatever hangups and problems there might be associated with the old restoration ideas, it still has to be the right aim and direction. It is imperative that we be headed back . . . back to the Bible and that our direction be towards the pattern . . . the New Testament pattern. Jn. 17:20-21; 1 Cor. 1:10; Eph. 4:1-6; 1 Pet. 4:11; Gal. 1:6-10; 2 Jn. 9; 1 Cor. 4:6; 1 Cor. 14:37; Jude 3; Rev. 22:18-19 etc.

10) Are Sins Of Ignorance Ignored Or Overlooked By God Under Grace? Answer: Read answer again to No. 8 above. Life has been given to us as a time to prepare for eternity (2 Cor. 5:10-11; Eccl. 12:12). It demands constant change from wrong to right and God’s grace is the guiding light (2 Cor. 4:3-4; Jn. 3:19-21; 8:12). Ignorance due to a failure to know and to grow in God’s will for us is no excuse for sin and in fact is sin itself. The following verses ought to show conclusively that ignorance is not a bliss but rather a curse: Lk. 12:47-48; Acts 3:17; Acts 17:30; Mt. 15:14; Lk. 11:52; Eph. 4:17-19; Rom. 10:1-3. God’s word has been given to “enlighten” men in their sinful ignorance. Again, whatever implications this might have it is not ours to speculate and to announce clemency to the ignorant. Rather, we are to accept what God has said knowing that this is the only way we can know when we are in harmony with His will. So, let us be making the most of (our) time, because the days are evil” (Eph. 5:16).

Truth Magazine XX: 31, pp. 490-492
August 5, 1976

By Jimmy Tuten, Jr.

When we talk about the organization of the church we need to know just what it is that we are talking about. We are not talking about the universal church, for it has no organization. The local church as such is a complete organization within itself. It organizes itself under the head, which is Christ, and is not dependent upon any man, machinery or organization outside of itself to handle its affairs. The Bible teaches that the local church is independently organized (Acts 14:23; Tit. 1:5), independently directed (Acts 20:28) independently charged (Eph. 4:12) and independent in function (Acts 11:27-30). In this arrangement it is completely self-governing and autonomous. The only head it knows is Christ. The only headquarters it will recognize is heaven. The only instructions it will accept are those from the heaven inspired book, the Bible.

The Apostle Paul prophesied that the first major apostasy would begin within the organization of the church. He said, speaking to the Ephesian elders, “also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:30). The same type of instruction is given in 2 Thess. 2:2-4. The apostasy predicted in these passages found their fulfillment when Boniface the Third was crowned first pope in Rome in 606 A.D.

Most apostasies in the church have begun within the organizational level. The ‘missionary society of the last century divided churches across the land.- This apostasy was the result of an effort to remodel the organization of the church from a local arrangement to that of a universal structure. Writing in the Millennial Harbinger in 1831, Alexander Campbell said, “a church can do what an individual disciple cannot, and so can a district of churches do what a single congregation cannot” (italics mine, jt). Writing in the same publication in 1866, W. K. Pendleton said, “we fear that the large conception of the church universal is too little realized by many Christians of the present day. The idea of the church and of the responsibilities and work of the church circle too much within the limits of the local congregation.” One can see a present day application of the principle in William Banowsky’s book, The Mirror of A Movement, p. 273, 313. The problem of apostasy within the organizational structure of the church still exists. It poses as great a problem today as it presented in days gone by.

Scriptural Church Organization

Scriptural church organization begins with the components of the local church. It is illustrated in Phil. 1:1 – “Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons” (emphasis mine, jt). It is the will of God that each congregation of God’s people have a plurality of bishops or elders overseeing them. “And when they had ordained them elders In every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord . (Acts 14:23). Titus 1:5 says, “for this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders In every city, as I had appointed thee.” In addition of the fact that there are to be elders in every church, there are to be deacons who serve as physical servants of the church (1 Tim. 3:8-13). Hence, the saints work and worship with their elders and deacons.

Someone has suggested four possibilities or categories into which churches might fall. Every church falls into one of these categories with reference to local organization.

(1) Scripturally Organized – This takes place when a plurality of men meet the scriptural qualifications for the respective offices and are duly appointed.

(2) Unscripturally Organized – When men who are not scripturally qualified are supposedly put into the respective offices they become manmade officers.

(3) Scripturally Unorganized – This is a congregation that have no men scripturally qualified for the respective offices.

(4) Unscripturally Unorganized – When a plurality of men are qualified for the respective offices but for some reason are not appointed.

Each local organization is autonomous in nature. Webster’s dictionary defines “autonomy” as “independent in government; self-governing; without outside control.” It comes from two words: “auto” meaning self and “nomos” meaning law. Hence the right of self law. Therefore the word means self-law, self-rule or self-governing. This means that each congregation is to govern itself. Look at this from the standpoint of the direct statements limiting the authority of the elders to the flock over which they have been made overseers: “Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof . . .” (1 Pet. 5:2). Again, “take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers . . .” (Acts 20:28). The local organization with its bishops constitutes the largest unit of organization known to the New Testament. As such it is independent and self-governing. In the absence of authority for any other form of local government, we conclude that the law of exclusion forbids any other form of government. As such the local church possesses equality with other local churches (2 Cor. 8:14) and sufficiency in organization to do all that God intends that it do.

Perversions of Local Church Organization

There are perversions of the local church arrangement. Any organization that is larger or smaller than the local church is a perversion. Let us list some organizations that are smaller than the local church: (1) Sunday School organizations which have their presidents and superintendents, which function independently of the church. (2) Various committees within the church that function independently of the church. (3) Bible Classes which perform works in their own name, separate from and independent of the local church. (4) Young people’s organizations are perversions when they function independent of the church. Organizations that are larger than the local church are: Synods, Conferences, Sponsoring churches, Area-wide meetings and Societies, These perversions should not be tolerated by sound thinking brethren.

Conclusion

We can preserve the distinctive church organization by insisting that each church plan its own program, oversee its own work and manage its own affairs. This is the way God arranged it and the way we must have it.

Truth Magazine XX: 31, pp. 489-490
August 5, 1976

By Karl Diestelkamp

Churches throughout the land have received a 17 x 22 inch letter-brochure from the University Avenue church of Christ, Austin, Texas, detailing an expected conflict between it and atheist Mrs. Madalyn Murray O’Hair. Mrs. O’Hair is seeking permission to “teach the Bible at the University from an atheistic point of view or to close down the Bible Chairs at the Austin campus.” This has the University Avenue brethren excited because they sponsor “the church of Christ Bible Chair.” Their letter states:

” . . . in a real sense her success will depend on you . . . The biggest obstacle standing in her way is the University requirement that a Bible Chair must be the agent for a national religious organization. This rule that now disqualifies her would technically disqualify the church of Christ Bible Chair. Because of the biblical principle of congregational autonomy, we have no national convention nor synod, being rather under the direct oversight of the elders of the University Avenue Church of Christ. The church’s Bible Chair, then, may well become the leverage Mrs. O’Hair uses to win her goal.

“To prepare for what might become her point of attack, we are appealing to every congregation of the Lord’s church to participate in the Bible Chair by contributing the funds to teach one student for one semester, which Is $32.50. With this financial participation of churches of Christ we will be able to demonstrate that the Bible Chair is a nationwide project of the Lord’s people” (all emphasis by K. D.).

There you have it, brethren! The success of an atheist depends upon us! We are supposed to feel guilty if we do not help demonstrate that this Bible Chair is a “nation-wide project” of the churches of Christ. They have the audacity to refer to “the biblical principle of congregational autonomy” in one paragraph and then in the next to try to activate the church universal under their sponsorship. Would this make University Avenue church “The Mother Church,” or Headquarters,” to the minds of those who must decide who may and may not operate Bible Chairs on the Austin campus? Do these brethren really believe that Mrs. O’Hair, as blasphemous and obnoxious as she is, is also so stupid as not see through this obvious subterfuge?

Did another alternative not occur to them? What about the possibility of admitting that they violate “the University requirement” and withdraw from the scene? Why give Mrs. O’Hair any opportunity to charge that the University Avenue church violates rules? Some need to be taught again the principles of honest behavior found in 1 Thess. 4:12; Rom. 12:17 and 2 Cor. 8:21.

Over twenty years ago, in the Harper-Tant Debate over the “sponsoring church” arrangement for the Herald of Truth, Brother Tant stated: “Herald of Truth is wrong because it provides an arrangement by which the ‘church universal’ may function through a single agency-the elders of Highland Church.” Defenders of the “sponsoring church” have been reluctant to openly admit that if one church can function partially through a sponsoring church, then all the churches in the world could do so. And, if one church can partially so function, then why not completely, and then the next step would be all of the churches in the world functioning completely under the oversight of one sponsoring eldership. Logic and common sense require that possibility-if the sponsoring church concept is valid to begin with.

Today we have this Austin church making an appeal “to every congregation of the Lord’s church.” Perhaps that phrase betrays some of their problem. That is equivalent to saying, “to every church of the Lord’s church.” It may be that they think the church universal is made tip of autonomous congregations, when, in fact, it is made up of all the saved individuals in the world (Matt. 16:18; Acts 2:41,47; 1 Tim. 3:15).

These Texas brethren are not alone in their mistaken ideas about the nature of the body of Christ. In a paper titled: “Position Paper Concerning The Scriptural Authority For The Campaigns For Christ Being Conducted In The Cincinnati Area,” Oct. 21, 1975, Gaston D. Cogdell writes:

“The model church-that in Jerusalem, which was made up of perhaps 10,000 people (5,000 men alone-Acts 4:4), which it seems reasonable to suppose, was made up of many groups or congregations, even had a common treasury. (Acts 2:44-45; 4:32-37) . . . It would, theeefore, seem to be a necessary inference that the 10,000 or so members of the Jerusalem Chruch met in many groups . . . This would not be different from the situation in Cincinnati, or in most other places, where the Church is comprised of many congregations . . . There is only one true Chruch of Christ in the Cincinnati area . . . many congregations, but only one Chruch. This Church is charged with the solemn responsibility of preaching the Gospel of Christ . . . The Church is the Body of Christ and the various congregations tire integral parts of that universal body, and are obligated to function together as parts of that body (emphasis by K. D.).

Our brother is confused. First he “supposes,” though not giving proof, that the Jerusalem church was made up of many congregations. Then, on the basis of his supposition he concludes that a plurality of local churches had a common treasury. Neither does he understand what constitutes a “necessary inference.” Nothing necessarily infers that even 10,000 people (a man-made estimate) could not have met together in one assembly. I suggest that those interested in crowd size possibilities read McGarvey’s comment on Acts 3:11 when considering Acts 4:4.

If Gaston Cogdell’s thinking is followed to the logical conclusion we could easily have one sponsoring church in the world to oversee all of the contributed funds of all of the churches in the world. Would he deny that every church in the world could send some, or all, of its funds to the same sponsoring church? In describing the “Campaign Committee” composed of “representatives of several congregations to assist in a joint evangelistic endeavor,” this can-of-worms-argument gets even worse when he says, “The elders of the sponsoring church have sole final authority in all matters, and the decisions of the Campaign Committee are all subject to the approval of the over-seeing Eldership, but the Committee itself is not under the authority of the over-seeing Eldership, but the members of the Committee are under the authority of the Elders of the various congregations they represent” (emphasis by K. D.). When the Committee is functioning, who has the oversight? We can only conclude that all of the participating elderships must have the oversight, jointly, of the functioning committee. Here is a plan for activating the church universal-have one church assume the oversight of any, or all, work that is the equal responsibility of local churches and let all other churches become supporting churches sending locally overseen “representatives,” who have no authority, to an advisory committee that has no authority. In this Cincinnati case all of the supporting churches must, admittedly, submit to the “sole final authority” of the sponsoring eldership, in so far as decisions regarding the use of their contributed funds.

The Austin and Cincinnati brethren suffer from the same problem. They do not know what constitutes an autonomous church. They fail to understand that the universal church is composed of all of the saved in the world and has no collective work and no machinery for work and function. Their’s is a denominational concept that has no scriptural support and the words, “it seems reasonable to suppose” and “It would, therefore, seem” are not the same as “thus saith the Lord.” Will the Austin brethren give up their unauthorized project or choose to share the “Bible Chair” arrangement with an atheist? We shall see! In the mean time they will try to portray to the world that this is a “nationwide project” of the churches of Christ and as a by-product get as many contributions of $32.50 as possible from uninformed and gullible brethren. In a “P.S.” on their letter they list among the “important facts” about their Bible Chair that “It is the oldest Bible Chair in our brotherhood.” What does that prove? Being in error as a sponsoring church longer than anyone else is not a virtue. The entire letter contained not one verse of scripture in defense of this project. But, then, of course, there isn’t any – just the desire to continue, regardless!

Truth Magazine XX: 31, pp. 487-488
August 5, 1976