Book: Clarence Creager Crisler, Organization: Its Character, Purpose, Place, and Development in the Seventh-day Adventist Church (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1938). HTML, PDF.
Highlighted text was quoted by C. C. Crisler in Organization, pp. 35.
Note: The Watchman editorial referred to in this chapter was entitled “Our Present Condition,” not “Our Present Position.” “Our Present Position” was the title of James White’s editorial in the December 1850 issue of the Review.
[p. 33]
Chapter 3: An Object Lesson
The early advent believers who accepted the three angels’ messages and the Sabbath truth, were coming into the unity of the faith at the very time when those Adventists who refused to accept these doctrines, became confused and disorganized. The following paragraphs from Early Writings, written in 1850, portray the conditions prevailing at that time:
“God’s people are coming into the unity of the faith. Those who observe the Sabbath of the Bible are united in their views of Bible truth. But those who oppose the Sabbath among the advent people are disunited, and strangely divided. One comes forward in opposition to the Sabbath, and declares it to be thus and so, and at the conclusion calls it settled. But as his effort does not put the question to rest, and as the Sabbath cause progresses, and the children of the Lord still embrace it, another comes forward to overthrow it. But in presenting his views to get around the Sabbath, he entirely tears down the arguments of him who made the first effort against the truth, and presents a theory as opposite to his as to ours. So with the third and the fourth; but none of them will have it as it stands in the word of God: ‘The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.’ ”—Early Writings, pp. 68, 69, new edition.
“At Oswego, New York, September 7, 1850, … I was pointed to those who claim to be Adventists, but who [p. 34] reject the present truth, and saw that they were crumbling, and that the hand of the Lord was in their midst to divide and scatter them.”—Id., p. 69.
Commenting on the conditions existing among the advent believers who refused to accept the Sabbath truth, James White wrote in December, 1850:
“In 1843 … the message was proclaimed everywhere, and everywhere felt. Then its proclaimers were perfectly united in faith, in feeling, and in their course of action. Now those who profess to be still giving the same message, are very much limited in their sphere of action. … And what makes their case look really ‘wretched and miserable,’ is the fact that the work of many of them, for months past, has been to ‘bite and devour one another.’ They are, therefore, being ‘consumed one of another.’ ”—Review and Herald, Vol. 1, No. 2, December, 1850.
The inability of the opposers of the Sabbath truth to unite on some commonly accepted basis of belief, was freely acknowledged in their own publications. For example. among those who, after the passing of the time, refused to walk in the light shining upon the sanctuary question, the Sabbath, and the three angels’ messages of Revelation 14, were some who afterward supported a paper, the Second Advent Watchman, published in Hartford, Connecticut, and edited by W. S. Campbell and J. Turner.* In the issues for June 2 and 9, 1852, the leading editorial, headed, “Our Present Position,” is a remarkable admission of the weakness that existed among them. It is necessary to quote only a few paragraphs of this editorial to reveal the prevailing confusion:
[*The Joseph Turner (“J. T.”) mentioned in Life Sketches, pp. 213-229 (1880 edition).]
[p. 35]
“Our Present Position
“Having been occupied in preaching, now mostly for more than two months past, … we have had an opportunity of looking over the field, and are somewhat prepared to speak as to the state of things among that portion of the advent brethren with which we are identified. …
“It is a very important matter to hold to present truth; but it is not to be held or presented in such a way as to cast off and reject those who do not see with us, on that account. We are satisfied this has been the case with us too much, altogether; and we have not only reaped the fruits of it, in having driven off many from us and kept many from coming, but this has been one great cause of great dissensions among ourselves; and still the cause operates—still the result follows. We see the sad fruits in the dwindling interest, in very many instances: the cause manifestly sinking, and growing less and less. In such cases, generally, the great effort is upon opinions and views which are most earnestly contended for, each of which, in turn, [it is thought] is a new and important truth, and so is most strenuously advocated, but which is very likely to prevent the preaching of the gospel fully, at least, with a practical effect. The result has been bad—the church has languished; sinners have not been awakened; there has been but little building up and spiritual improvement. …
“We have failed to urge the necessity of the Spirit of God in the awakening and conversion of sinners, and the upbuilding and consolation of believers. … It appears that, in failing to do this, we have had many less converted and added to us; and, as a people, in many instances, have been shriveling and dying. …
[p. 36]
“Again, there is talebearing, and strife as the consequence, for ‘where there is no tattler, the strife ceaseth.’ …
“Who will deny that we are speaking of things which exist? and how can the church prosper while cursed with such things? …
“Connected with this, we find the angry criminations and bickerings which exist among the brethren, in the ministry and out of it. The state of feeling resulting from the division of the body, has been unfavorable to deep piety. An influence prevails upon either party which cannot be good and saving in its effect, and which we very much regret. It is painful to contemplate it. It is time we thought less of our party feelings and interests, and more of the coming and kingdom of Christ, with the necessary preparation for it. …
“Finally, we would point to the fact that many are too tenacious for their own particular views, not for themselves, perhaps, but for the good of others; and if every one has a doctrine which he wishes to enforce, and will insist that each other member shall see as he does, then the whole body must suffer. Union is soon destroyed. Where one set of opinions is held up continually and earnestly, the effect will be bad upon the minds of others; and they, in turn, will immediately feel the same spirit. Soon fellowship will be withdrawn, and then those who had taken sweet counsel and united in the house of God, will be separated. This is precisely the condition which has obtained; and so it ever will be, till we learn to do better, and allow that a man is a Christian and a brother, who may differ from us in respect to questions, upon the decision of which, we know well enough, our salvation does not depend. …
[p. 37]
“What want of charity we behold, often all on account of difference in some views, mere opinions of our own. May God have mercy upon the flock, and save it from the dissolution and destruction so imminent.”—The Second Advent Watchman, Hartford, Conn., Vol. IV, Nos. 18, 19 (June 2 and 9, 1852), pp. 140, 148.
[p. 38]