From Our Readers

Catholic Reform I thought your article on religious history (August 22, 1989) was generally well-​written. However, I believe you’ve made a grave error in your blanket acquittal of Martin Luther from “Catholic anti-​Semitism.” Martin Luther produced quite a bit of hateful rhetoric against those of the Jewish race, calling them “a depraved and damned people” and even “devils.”

E. W., United States

The article focused on the corrupt practices of the Catholic Church, not the failings of Protestant reformers. Luther originally opposed Catholic anti-​Semitism. However, the German book “Die Juden und Martin Luther​—Martin Luther und die Juden,” (The Jews and Martin Luther—​Martin Luther and the Jews), by Heinz Kremers, explains: “At first Martin Luther was friendly toward the Jews, since he expected that they would convert to Christianity once the pure gospel was preached to them. When this hope went unfulfilled, he became a vehement enemy of the Jews.”​—ED.

Satanism I was shocked by the cover of the October 22, 1989, issue! I’ve always found the magazines to be so upbuilding. But this issue shocks and confuses me. Isn’t it wrong to have Satanic symbols in one’s home in any form?

P. W., United States

The subject of Satanism is indeed shocking. Nevertheless, we feel obliged to warn readers of ‘Satan’s designs,’ and at times this involves presenting subjects some might find offensive. (2 Corinthians 2:11) However, neither the text nor the illustrations​—including the depiction of Satanic symbols—​were presented in a way that either promoted Satanism or aroused curiosity in it. Rather, they served to help readers, including young ones, to abhor and avoid Satanic practices.​—ED.

I read with horror and amazement your report on Satanism, and I appreciate your bringing this vile sin to the attention of your readers. I have seen no evidence of Satanism in my area, but I will, nevertheless, keep alert for its possible appearance.

M. V. H., M.D., United States

Head Lice As a school nurse, dealing with the subject of head lice on a regular basis, I would agree with most of your article. (August 22, 1989) Unfortunately, you suggest shaving the head as a more effective way of treating a child. I personally would see shaving a child’s head to rid it of lice as dramatic and unnecessary. I also do not recommend the use of kerosene on the scalp. It is toxic and flammable, and surely hundreds of cases of head lice are better than one burnt child.

C. M., England

We appreciate these comments. “Awake!” does not recommend medical treatments. But since our journal is circulated worldwide and is read by people that may not have access to modern treatments, we merely reported on home remedies that some have claimed were successful in treating lice infestation. Modern medical authorities, though, do not recommend shearing off lice-​infested hair, viewing this as psychologically damaging and unnecessary. Cutting the hair is recommended only when the hair is excessively long or in such matted condition that combing it is impossible. Furthermore, medical authorities today do not recommend that kerosene be applied to the scalp. For example, Professor David Taplin of the University of Miami School of Medicine told “Awake!” that he viewed this practice as archaic.​—ED.