THE TWO BODIES by James White

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 12, 1876

THE TWO BODIES.

By James White

THE RELATION WHICH THE S. D. BAPTISTS AND THE S. D. ADVENTISTS SUSTAIN TO EACH OTHER.

On the broad platform of the divine law, and redemption from its transgression through the death and mediation of the divine Son, both the Seventh-day Baptists and the Seventh-day Adventists stand in general agreement. Here are the great tests of the Christian life, and a fitness for Heaven; and besides these there are no others.

The principal difference between the two bodies is the immortality question. The S. D. Adventists hold the divinity of Christ so nearly with the trinitarian, that we apprehend no trial here. And as the practical application of the subject of the Gifts of the Spirit to our people and to our work is better understood by our S. D. Baptist brethren, they manifest less concern for us on this account.

But the views which both bodies entertain respecting free investigation and the right to personal opinion forbid any restriction whatever to be laid upon each other in the proper advocacy of the sentiments in which both cannot at present agree. We recommend, however, that there be no controversy between the two bodies. The differences between us are of such a nature, and we have in common so broad a field of labor with those who differ with us respecting the fundamentals, upon which hangs the destiny of a world lying in wickedness, that Seventh-day Adventists and Seventh-day Baptists cannot afford a controversy on doctrines which neither regard as tests of Christian character.

Both bodies have a specific work to do. God bless them both in all their efforts for its accomplishment. The field is a wide one. And we further recommend that Seventh-day Adventists in their aggressive work avoid laboring to build up Seventh-day Adventist churches where Seventh-day Baptist churches are already established. If ministers or members from the Seventh-day Baptists regard it their duty to come with us, under the impression that they can serve the cause of God better, we shall give them a place with us. But we see no reasons why there should be any effort put forth on the part of our people to weaken the hands of our Seventh-day Baptist brethren in order to add to our numbers from those who were before us in revering the ancient Sabbath of the Lord.

If it please our Seventh-day Baptist brethren, let the interchange of courtesies in the appointment of delegates be continued, and be conducted in a manner to secure mutual benefit. The visits of the worthy delegates from the Seventh-day Baptists, Pres. Allen, Elders Wardner, Burdick, Rogers, Hull, and Prof. Whitford, have done our people good. And if the delegates from our people to that body, Elders Andrews, Smith, Cartwright, and others, have failed to do that people good, it has been from want of ability and a knowledge how to work out that good which was in their hearts to do.

What God in his wise providence has marked out for these two bodies in their future labors and destiny, the future alone can unfold. But whatever that may be, it seems a certainty to us to-day, while looking with faith and hope toward that untried future, and cherishing a filial love for those whose history of loyalty to High Heaven stretches across long centuries, that no good can result to either from controversy and proselyting, and no harm can come to either from those courtesies and labors of love calculated to build each other up on our common faith.

We do not say that we have seen the proper relation between the two bodies as clearly and joyfully as we do to-day; neither do we wish to be held responsible for what some of our people have done, or may do, not in harmony with the foregoing. But that our settled convictions on the subject for more than five years may be understood, we quote from our report of the Clear Lake (Wis.) camp-meeting, which appeared in REVIEW AND HERALD for July 4, 1871:—

“At the close of the Sabbath morning service, we were cordially greeted by many who reported themselves Seventh-day Baptists, who gave our hand the very next thing to it, if not the real Advent shake. Among these was Prof. Cornwall, of the Albion, Wis., S. D. Baptist Academy, who invited us to speak to the citizens of his place. Nothing could have given us greater pleasure than to have responded to this, and similar courtesies by speaking freely to this people upon the great fundamentals of our common faith—the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus Christ; but hoarseness, fatigue, and the labors of the Minnesota Camp-meeting the next week, compelled us to pass on without even calling on any of our S. D. Baptist friends.”

“Here we may, by divine grace, enjoy a strong union; and while Seventh-day Adventists may prize very highly, and tenaciously hold, their views upon the immortality question, and may cherish as important to the glory of God and their own prosperity, their definite views of the manifestation of spiritual gifts, they will agree that it will be much better to seek for that union that may be enjoyed upon the broad fundamentals of our faith, than to sacrifice that union in urging upon the Seventh-day Baptists sentiments peculiar to Adventists.”

We are happy to say here that a full statement of our views and feelings, outlined in this article, was given by the writer before the recent General Conference of the S. D. Baptists, which apparently met with a full approval from that body. It is with great pleasure that we look back to the happy hours spent with that good people, and only regret that we could remain no longer with them. J. W.