THE TWO BODIES by James White

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Aug 16, 1877

THE TWO BODIES.

By James White

Under this caption we gave an article in the REVIEW for October 12, 1876, relative to “the relation which the S. D. Baptists and the S. D. Adventists sustain to each other.” From that article we copy the following paragraph, which contains our statement in substance upon the point, made before the S. D. Baptist General Conference at Walworth, Wis., on the evening of September 27, 1876:—

“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.”

It will be seen that we, in our article in the REVIEW, from which we take the foregoing paragraph, did fulfill all that we pledged to the S. D. Baptist General Conference. In a few weeks after returning from the S. D. B. Conference, we went to California, where we remained until May, since which time our labors have been confined to Battle Creek. And during all the time since our very pleasant visit to the S. D. Baptists we had known nothing of the movements of our people in Minnesota only what was reported in the REVIEW, neither had we heard a word of complaint from Elder James Bailey of the S. D. Baptists, or from any of his brethren, until we saw in the Sabbath Recorder, the organ of the S. D. Baptists, that to which Elder Curtis calls attention in another column.

Under these circumstances we greatly deplore the rashness of Elder Bailey and his brethren of the North-western Association. According to the statement of Elder Curtis, real grounds of complaint from our S. D. Baptist brethren have not existed. But admitting that our brethren in Minnesota have not acted fully up to our view of the matter expressed at the S. D. B. General Conference, Elder Bailey and his brethren should have appealed to us in the matter before publishing our name and our people to the world in so prejudicial a manner. If Elder Bailey did not hold us responsible for the action of our people in their relations to the S. D. Baptists in Minnesota, why publish us to the world? If he did hold us responsible, why did he not communicate with us in the matter before acting with the North-western Association in rashly passing sentence in the case, and giving our name, and that of our people, to the world in a manner calculated to excite bitter prejudice?

For more than twenty years we have urged our people to treat the S. D. Baptists with great respect. We stood with Elder Andrews in the first Address from our General Conference to theirs, in 1868, which brought about relations enjoyed since that time by both bodies. We deeply regretted the havoc made in some of the S. D. Baptist churches in Pennsylvania, more than twenty years since, by men who do not now stand with us. For while that work weakened the S. D. Baptists, it brought but very little strength to our cause.

In some localities there now exist both S. D. Adventist and S. D. Baptist churches. We cannot advise our brethren to give up the ground. We exhort them to respect the S. D. Baptist brethren, and seek to be in peace with them. We cannot shut our doors against the S. D. Baptists. And if under convictions of duty they wish to change church relations, we cannot refuse to receive them.

But we do recommend that our preachers choose other localities for labor to raise up churches besides those where the S. D. Baptists have churches, and we have none. In most cases, the same amount of labor that would convert ten S. D. Baptists, and make them S. D. Adventists, would convert as many from the Roman Sunday and from the infidel world to all the doctrines of the S. D. Adventists.

And with all respect to our S. D. Baptist brethren, we pen the honest convictions of our own mind that the best timber to build up our cause is that hewn from the forest, upon which there has been no theological lining and hewing. S. D. Adventists could hardly be tempered down to the moderation of S. D. Baptists, and it would be equally difficult for the S. D. Baptists to come under the inspiration of the advent faith, and keep pace with the vigilant movements of our people. Both bodies have been called into existence in the direct providence of God, and both have places to fill. The wide harvest field is before them, and each should labor to bring numerical strength to themselves without weakening the other. J. W.