p. 11 | Editorial by Editor

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jun 30, 1910

Editorial

By Editor

Choosing the Name.— As the cause of the third angel’s message spread forth, and believers and churches multiplied, and associated effort began more and more to be required for the conduct of the work, it was increasingly apparent that a uniform denominational name was needed by which this specific body of believers could be intelligently referred to or described. Some had opposed the choosing of a name, but there was practical unanimity reached in the conference held at Battle Creek in 1860.

THE REVIEW of October 23 reports the action taken. After much discussion, Brother Stephen Belden remarked that going without a name was “like publishing books without titles, or sending out a paper without a heading.” Then Elder James White spoke a word for those who had at first felt opposed to having a denominational name:—

He had been in the same position once. In times past, when we were comparatively few, he did not see the necessity of any such step. But now large bodies of intelligent brethren are being raised up, and without some regulation of this kind will be thrown into confusion. He then gave a review of the past, mentioning the opposition which had been manifested by some all the way along, first against publishing a paper, then against issuing pamphlets, then against having an office, then against the sale of publications, then against church order, then against having a power press. It had been hard to bring the minds of some of the brethren to the necessity of these things; but they had all been essential to the prosperity of the cause.

It was then voted that a name should be chosen. The report continues:—

Having voted to adopt a name, the discussion now turned on what that name should be. The name Church of God was proposed, and zealously advocated by some. It was objected that that name was already in use by some denominations, and on this account, was indefinite, besides having to the world an appearance of presumption. Brother White remarked that the name taken should be one which would be the least objectionable to the world at large. The name Seventh-day Adventists was proposed as a simple name, and one expressive of our faith and position.

After some further discussion, it was,— Resolved, That we call ourselves Seventh-day Adventists,— and the name was recommended to the churches, as expressive of the faith and mission of the body of believers. And all the subsequent history has furnished ample evidence that the brethren made a wise decision.