p. 134 | REMARKS by Editor

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Sep 24, 1861

REMARKS.

By Editor

We have waited for Bro. Waggoner to present the form of organization of churches, and church officers, in an address through the REVIEW. The delay is partly occasioned by Bro. W. losing his baggage from the stage, containing his portfolio, writings, references, &c. We hope the subject will soon be presented. We think, however, that in our larger churches, where so many officers are needed, there should be a local elder and two deacons. In our smallest churches one deacon may be all that is necessary.

Bro. I. is doubtless correct in his postscript. His and others' silence, and their hesitancy to act have left the cause to suffer. This is well illustrated in the following which we take from the report of the business proceedings of the Battle Creek conference, held October 1, 1860, REVIEW Vol. xvi, No. 23.

"Resolved, That we call ourselves Seventh-day Adventists."

"After a somewhat lengthy discussion, the question was called for, and the resolution adopted, Bro. Butler dissenting, and Brn. Lawrence, Sperry, Andrews and Ingraham not voting."

It was this that stung our spirit nearly one year since, and the arrow has been festering ever since. We knew the influence of these brethren holding back would be dreadful on the cause. Bro. Butler and Phelps have been strengthened to secede, and others have felt justified in holding back.

Bro. Andrews was all right on the organization question as early as January, 1860, when he revised his work on the three messages. This we learned by conversation with him on the subject at that time. Bro. Ingraham wrote to us from St. Charles, Minn., June 25th, 1861, as follows:—

"The loss of our tent wall has given me much trouble, but good may come out of it yet. I have ascertained that it was shipped from La Crosse on board the steamer Northern Belle. I searched the clerk's books, and found that the Northern Belle was responsible. I went to see a lawyer to see what I could do about it. He wanted to know who the tent belonged to. I told him, to the church in Wisconsin and Ill-

nois. He then wanted to know if we were an organized church and recognized by law as such. I told him we were not. This being the case, he said everything was doubtful. We shall have to depend on the honesty of the captain. I suppose, he says, he will do the right thing.

"I do believe the Lord is not pleased with our letting our business go at loose ends as in the past. As our numbers increase, business will increase, and the first we know we shall be in perfect confusion in our business matters. We shall yet see the necessity of doing business lawfully. If the church had been recognized by law, I should have tied the Northern Belle to the dock until the thing was adjusted. This I think would have been right, for the captain tried every way to get away from justice."

Feeling that the cause needed a decided testimony from Bro. I., we took the responsibility to urge him to come to the Conference, and then made an appeal to the Conference to raise means to pay his and others' expenses, which was liberally done. But judge of our feelings as important decisions were made without the vote of several brethren, as shown by the above extract from Conference report. We have since deeply regretted that we did not there leave the publishing department, at least till our preachers were ready to frankly defend and help carry forward what they believed relative to organization.

As to the form of organizing churches we have felt that we had nothing to say until our preachers were united that organization was necessary. And we suggest that the brethren wait till the ministers are all united upon the subject.—ED.