General Conference Proceedings
G. A. Irwin in the chair. After the opening song, prayer was offered by A. J. Breed. G. Dail presented a further partial report from the committee on plans and finance, as follows:— Partial Report of Committee on Plans
Whereas, Agitation for Sunday legislation is rapidly increasing in the United States and in Canada; and,— Whereas, The general annual collection of funds for the prosecution of religious liberty work has heretofore been exclusively for the use of the Religious Liberty Department of the General Conference; therefore,— 15. We recommend, That there be an equal division of the funds to the General, union, and local conferences in these fields. Discussion of Resolutions
On motion to adopt by considering and voting upon each item separately, the partial report of the committee on plans was brought up for discussion. Resolution 8 (on general and field missionary agents) was read and adopted without discussion. Resolution 9 was read, as follows:— ELIMINATING COMMERCIAL WORK
Whereas, The blessing of the Lord has rested upon the efforts of our publishing houses to eliminate commercial work; and,— Whereas, Their progress in this direction has met with the approval of our people, and has brought improved conditions both in the publishing houses and in the field; therefore,— 9. Resolved, That we approve of these steps, and that we support our publishing houses loyally in carrying them out. A. J. Breed: I would like to tell the Conference how much I appreciate this resolution. About fifteen years ago, when the president of the publishing association was making his report in General Conference, he suggested that he hoped to see the time when our publishing houses would all confine their time and attention to our own work, and eliminate commercial work entirely. During his report I prepared a resolution to this effect and presented it to the committee on resolutions, and it was brought before the body. I was never sat down on so hard in my life as I was at that time, and had it not been for Elder Irwin, who came to my assistance, I would have had a worse time than I did; but I lived through it, and to-day I am glad that so many hundreds of our people can be engaged in our own work, and that our publishing houses have eliminated commercial work. The resolution was adopted unanimously by a rising vote. Resolution 10 was read, as follows:— IMPROVEMENT OF LITERATURE
Whereas, Thorough attention should be given to the revision and improvement of our standard literature; and,— Whereas, This will be an undertaking which will involve much labor; therefore,— 10. We recommend, That this work be provided for as follows:— (a) That a book editor be appointed by the General Conference Committee, who shall be an officer of the Publishing Department and devote as much time to this work as its needs require. (b) That the publishing houses in the United States each be advised to appoint a book editor, who shall be a member of the respective literature committees of these houses. (c) That the book editor of the general department secure co-operation between the literature committees of the several publishing houses in accomplishing this work. F. F. Byington: I would like to ask, in regard to section b, what is meant by the appointment of a book editor, if this member shall be selected from the literature committees already existing, or whether the appointment as book editor shall make him such. I. H. Evans: It is understood that this man shall be a member of the literature committee, and if he is not a member when he is appointed, then the General Conference Committee, which makes up these committees, will appoint him such. W. J. Fitzgerald (England): I would like to inquire just how much is meant by the “publishing houses in the United States,” whether it recognizes the three principal houses or whether it would include the smaller ones. I. H. Evans: My understanding is that it takes in the Review and Herald, the Pacific Press, the Southern Publishing House, and the International Publishing Association; I think these are all that are recognized as leading publishing houses. W. H. Thurston: I would ask why this is confined to the United States. Why would not it take in the publishing houses in Europe and Australia? E. R. Palmer: It was thought it would not be operative if extended to other countries, because these countries have their own publishing institutions, and must publish and create literature on the basis of local conditions and local interests, and it would be better for their work to revise their own books from their point of view. E. W. Farnsworth: How extensive would be the power of the book editor? Would he simply attend to the grammatical errors and the style, or would he make practically a new book out of it? W. C. White: I understand that a servant is to do that which he is instructed and employed to do; and if he does not do it satisfactorily, his employer gives him proper instruction. This man, who would be employed by the General Conference, would work under the direction of the General Conference Committee, principally through the Publishing Department. He would naturally do those things which he was asked to do, and his work would be submitted to the members who direct his labor, for approval. It would be impossible for this congregation to instruct a book editor as to how far he should go in literary criticism or in criticism of theology, but the members who stand close to him would need to give him instruction, and his work would be, I understand, advisory, and would be as directed by the General Conference Committee, but not in any sense to control or direct the work of any publishing house. His work would come to the publishing houses as suggestive and advisory; then each publishing house,10through its own committee, would decide what it should do, in the fear of God, in providing good literature. W. M. Healey: I notice in the first preamble an answer to the question. “Thorough attention should be given to the revision and improvement of our standard literature.” It is not simply regarding new literature, but, according to the preamble, will apply to what is already in existence, or what has been published in the past. That is, it would refer to the 300 books or more which are already published. J. O. Corliss: Will the author of a production appear in the matter at all, or will he be consulted in the revision of his book, or will the General Conference Committee control it, with his name still continuing on it? W. C. White: It is customary for authors to present their manuscripts for criticism, and after criticism they go back for revision. I have known a book to go back to the author three times, and after the third time it has become a very popular book. Of course there are differences of opinion between authors and committees as to standards of punctuation, grammar, rhetoric, etc., but in cases where vital questions are at stake, and the book committee and author can not agree, the matter is usually acted upon by the board of directors of the house that is responsible for the work. And if these can not agree, the book has to wait until an agreement can be made. On motion of M. C. Wilcox, seconded by E. T. Russell, the words “an officer” in sub-division a, were changed to read “a member.” On motion of I. H. Evans the words “of the General Conference” were inserted after the words “Publishing Department.” C. S. Longacre: I would like to know how this committee would proceed to revise the book of an author who is now deceased. E. R. Palmer: Any work of that kind would have to be done in perfect co-operation with whoever has control or ownership of the book of the deceased author. Any changes that were made would have to be properly noted. By suggestion of W. M. Healey, and by common consent, the words “or shall thereby become” were inserted after “who shall be,” in section a. The resolution as amended was adopted, the amended section reading as follows:— (a) That a book editor be appointed by the General Conference Committee, who shall be, or shall thereby become, a member of the Publishing Department of the General Conference, and devote as much time to this work as its needs require. Resolution 11 was read, as follows:— IMPORTANCE OF LITERATURE COMMITTEES
11. Resolved, That we give information to all our people concerning the careful, painstaking work of the literature committees in our publishing houses in preparing new literature, and that we discourage the practise of private individuals bringing out literature on their personal judgment and responsibility. S. N. Haskell: I do not know whether I should read some Scripture first, or not. I wish to speak on general principles. There is danger of our circumscribing the freedom of individuals in getting out something to meet a certain issue. I am not speaking because of any fear for myself. Lest any should think thus, I will say a few words about the paper that I am publishing, the Bible Training School. This paper was not started by the action of one individual. There was an action of a committee. There were present two members of the General Conference Committee, one president of a union conference, a committee of a large union conference. Others also were present, and there was a unanimous vote that such a paper be started. I remember that somewhere there is a testimony which says that the truth shall fall like the leaves of autumn. We are also told that issues will come up,—and they are now coming up almost constantly in different parts of the world. Now, shall individuals who are in a crisis not be at liberty to issue something to meet that issue? or must their writings be first submitted to this general committee, and wait for its action and co-operation? I do not believe that we have printing offices enough to-day to issue all the literature that will necessarily be issued before the Lord comes. We do not want to put any bands about the work of the third angel's message that will be the cause of circumscribing it, so that it can not go as God would have it go. We have not as yet realized the extent of our work. God will have it go forward, even if he should have to raise up men and women that are outside of our regular organized work to carry it forward. Geo. I. Butler: We have been working in this cause for forty, fifty, or sixty years. We have had our doctrines brought out through the agency of men whom God has raised up, some of whom have been specified in the Testimonies as men specially chosen of God to carry on important work. Our system of truth has been quite well understood, and our books have contained these doctrines in a most remarkable and faithful degree. I think we have been very fortunate as a people in having men to write out our doctrines in our books, which have been adopted by the denomination, men who were eminently qualified for that purpose. Now I would like to know how far this new plan is to reach out in those things. In every great work which has been started among mankind, in religious work, as in apostolic times, the leaders have had the doctrines of the gospel clearly in their minds; but, as expressed in J. N. Andrews's “History of the Sabbath,” after the old generation passed away, others came up and remodeled the cause. Now the question that we may be called upon to confront as a people, is whether this plan contemplates changing any of our old doctrines that have stood in our books for a long time. I would like to know whether there are any such possibilities connected with it. C. H. Jones: I think we all recognize the force of Brother Haskell's remarks, when he states that special issues are likely to arise in various parts of our field, which must be met immediately. If we had one central committee, perhaps located in Washington, it might take some time to get manuscripts out to meet the issue; but I think we all understand that we have four leading publishing houses in this country, located in different parts of the country,—one located on the Pacific Coast, one in the central, one in the Southern States, and one here. These are denominational publishing houses, and can be reached from the different parts of the field at short notice. There is a publishing committee or a literature committee connected with each one of these houses. That committee has the examination of manuscripts. If any individual wanted to get out something to meet a special issue, it would take only a short time to present it to the publishing house, and get its criticism and approval, and have it published by one of our regular publishing houses. I do not understand by that that any individual liberty or rights are to be curtailed in any way. If the manuscript is presented to the houses, and it meets with their approval, it can be published; if it does not meet with approval, of course the individual would then have the right to publish it if he wanted to, but could not use the machinery of the denomination in circulating it. Is it not right and just that there should be some control of matters in this way? We have seen some instances already whereby literature has gone out that we can not approve of. It seems to me the way our publishing houses are now organized and controlled, and located in various parts of the field, that it is only right and proper that the literature to be circulated by this denomination should pass through these houses, and go out in the usual way. W. C. White: There are those who have gone out from us because they were not of us. They claimed to be of us in the matter of getting their views before the people, and still they are not of us in the matter of criticizing and condemning and bringing railing accusation against those who were formerly their brethren. These men work industriously to get their reading-matter into the hands of our people, and they use all manner of means to do it. I could show, from my files at home (I have a bundle that would fill a hat), literature and lengthy letters that have come, originally from one source, but which, through a method of manipulation, have been rained in upon us from dozens of sources. These we do not have time to read; and I am willing that all should know this. But there are hundreds of our people in the field who are uninstructed, and they receive this literature, and see quotations from the Bible; they know that is good. They see lengthy quotations from the Testimonies; they think perhaps that is good. They see condemnation of very well-known evils; they think that is good. And then with it there is a railing accusation against the men whom the people have appointed to carry God's message to the ends of the earth, that undermines faith, that weakens confidence, that makes the hands heavy; and many a worker who has been helping forward this message, helping to send it to the ends of the earth, stops and hesitates because of these railing accusations. Now another line. There are men who have been teachers, preachers, and workers in this cause, who, for various reasons, have felt that they were called upon to present an extended literature from their own minds,—not in harmony11with the teaching of their brethren, not in harmony with what we teach in our schools, and what our ministers preach in the pulpit, and not in harmony with what has been sent out from our publishing houses. Perhaps they have submitted their manuscripts and these manuscripts have been examined, and the verdict is given that, while they contain some truth, there are many things that are imaginary, visionary, not in accordance with our general platform of faith and belief. We believe that it is not profitable for the publishing houses to print this matter. But those who have prepared it believe that it is truth that the people need. They get it printed; perhaps they induce one of our houses to print it, and use the fact that it has come from one of our factories; and individuals go from church to church and from camp-meeting to camp-meeting selling their own productions. Is this profitable? Has not the time come when, as a people, it is time for us to give a word of caution and counsel in this matter? I. H. Evans: I would like to offer one additional reason why a resolution like this seems necessary. Here in the United States and in Europe we are in close touch with each other and with headquarters. Out in the great mission fields they are far remote from headquarters. Missionaries sent out there often become enthusiastic, and have great faith that they can produce much better literature than has been produced, and are very anxious to try their hand at that thing. Therefore they get to work; and write up a tract or a leaflet very hastily, and without taking advice or counsel they are very anxious to have it printed and circulated. I believe it will be far safer for our brethren in mission fields to have counsel of our General Conference as to the literature that shall be printed, rather than to make it open, and leave everybody free to do as they please. H. W. Cottrell: I would like to inquire what the object is in the first part of this resolution. Does it in reality imply that our people are not informed as to the care that is taken by our publishing houses? I think our people know just as well as any of us know that our editors take pains in preparing matter that is published in the papers and tracts. I can't think all our people are ignorant of these facts. If they are ignorant, I think there is need of this; and if they are not, I see no need at all for the first part, and we might get directly to the thought in the last part. H. J. Edmed (South Africa): I think perhaps sometimes our brethren on this side of the ocean forget the world-wide nature and extent of our work. Speaking from experience, I would say it does seem proper that there should be steps taken to teach and impress upon our people the fact that care is taken in the matter of what is produced in our publishing work. I hope our men will continue to look out upon the great field and consider the little children of this denomination who do not have the experience of your publishing work that you have here. They do not see your publishing houses, and sometimes they are wonderfully bewildered by the contradictions that are published. C. F. McVagh: I move that this resolution be referred back to the committee on plans and finance. C. H. Edwards: I am heartily in favor of the sentiments expressed by Brother W. C. White and the other brethren, but it seems to me we should have the resolution express just what we mean. But as it is, it leaves the way open for different people to interpret and define what they believe it to be, and we will have confusion and friction. So, it seems to me, that it ought to go back to the committee, that it may bring in something that says exactly what is meant, and then we will have it as it ought to be. I second Brother McVagh's motion to refer Resolution 11 back to the Committee on Plans and Finance. Resolution 12 (on Sabbath-school Home Department) was read and passed without discussion. Resolution 13 (on Sabbath School Worker) was read and adopted without amendment. Resolution 14 was read as follows:— Whereas, We are debtors to the millions of all nationalities in the large cities, to give them the advent message as quickly as possible, and experience has shown that the sale of literature, house-to-house visiting, and Bible studies are effective methods of labor; therefore,— 14. Resolved, That we lay broad plans for the organization of city work, which will include the sale of periodicals and books, the distribution of tracts and leaflets, visiting and Bible studies in the homes, and the training of local church-members and students from our schools to become efficient helpers to those regularly appointed to this work. G. B. Starr: The resolution is good; and yet I wish that in some way emphasis might be placed on the thought that in connection with our evangelistic efforts in cities, we must make use of consecrated men and women of mature years who can hold Bible readings in the homes of the people. In our former experience in this line of work, we have found it well to have two Bible workers, on the average, to co-operate with every minister laboring in a city mission. In articles from the pen of Mrs. E. G. White, and published in the REVIEW AND HERALD, late in 1907 and early in 1908, our attention is repeatedly called to the value of “house-to-house work in the homes of the people,” and we are exhorted to be vigilant in following up by personal labor a spirit of inquiry. “The plan of holding Bible readings in connection with public efforts, is a heaven-born idea. Would that our force of Bible workers, both men and women, might be greatly increased. Christ, in all his earthly ministry, associated many helpers with him; and he is our example.” Elder Starr referred to the expense involved in the successful conduct of city missions, and cited results demonstrating that this expense is returned to the Conference treasury over and over again, through the constant stream of tithes and offerings coming from large constituencies raised up in these cities where conferences have been to considerable expense in opening up the work. Dr. R. M. Clarke: If there is any place where nurses can do effective work, it is in connection with city missions in our large centers of population, and if wise provision were made for consecrated medical missionaries to unite with our evangelists and Bible workers in city missions, it would go far toward solving some questions now confronting our medical department. I would therefore suggest that Resolution 14 be amended so as to read,—“and the training of local church-members and students from our schools and sanitariums to become efficient helpers,” etc. By common consent, the words, “and sanitariums” were included in the resolution. The question was called, and Resolution 14 was adopted by vote of the Conference. The Conference adjourned. Benediction by G. I. Butler.