IN DEFENSE OF THE FAITH
The
Truth About Seventh-day Adventists
A
REPLY TO CANRIGHT
by
William
H. Branson
16. MR. CANRIGHTS REMARKABLE
ADMISSION
ON page 49 of
Seventh-day Adventism Renounced, Mr. Canright makes a strange admission
of insincerity.
He tells of the time
when he was still a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and when
he
temporarily dropped out
of ministerial work and went onto a farm. After spending two years on
the farm,
he attended a camp.
meeting and made the confession referred to by us in chapter l. Of this
experience he
says:
In the fall of 1884,
Elder Butler, my old friend, and now at the head of the advent work,
made a great
effort to get ride
reconciled and back at work again. He wrote me several times, to which I
made no answer.
Finally he telegraphed
me, and paid my fare to a camp meeting. Here I met old friends and
associations,
tried to see things as
favorable as possible, heard explanations, etc., etc., till at last I
yielded
again. I was sick of an
undecided position. I thought I could do some good here anyway; all my
friends
were here; I believed
much of the doctrine still, and I might go to ruin if I left them, etc.
Now I resolved to
swallow all my doubts,
believe the whole thing anyway, and stay with them for better or for
worse. So I
made a strong
confession, of which I was ashamed before it was cold.
Seventh-day Adventism
Renounced.
The confession to which
he refers is the one made at the time when he had a wonderful experience
with
God, to which we
referred in chapter 1. In it he declared: I am fully satisfied that
my own salvation and
my usefulness in saving
others depends upon my being connected with this people and this
work. He tells
of a reconversion,
the most remarkable change that I ever experienced all my life.
Now, in his book, he
informs us that he was ashamed of this confession before it was cold.
And yet, after it
was cold, and after the
meeting at which it was made was adjourned, he published it in the
church paper!
Ashamed 'of it, and yet
publishes it! What would such an admission be called if made in court,
and what
standing as a witness
could one have after making such a statement?
Nor is this the worst.
In relating his experience at the time of making this confession, he
declared that the
Holy Spirit was working
upon his heart. Said he: I never felt such a change before, not even
when first
converted, nor when I
embraced the message, nor at any other time. I believe it was directly
from heaven the
work of the Spirit of
God.- Review and Herald, Oct. 7, 1884.
And yet he was
ashamed of this confession before it was cold. Think of it!
A clergyman has a
remarkable experience,
publicly attributes it to the work of the Spirit of God, and then almost
immediately
is ashamed of this
public utterance because it is insincere. What shall this be called?
How, then, shall a man
who has thus made a mockery of the work of the Holy Spirit come forth in
two or three years'
time as a Moses to lead the people of God out of darkness and deliver
them from a
yoke of bondage?
Is he not of those against whom Isaiah warned the church, saying: Woe
unto them
that call evil good,
and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that
put bitter for
sweet, and sweet for
bitter ! Isaiah 5:20.
THE TRINITY
In chapter 1, page 25,
paragraph 2 of his work, he professes to enumerate the doctrines of the
Seventh-day
Adventist Church that
differ from those held by other evangelical churches. His very first
statement of
these differences is,
They reject the doctrine of the Trinity. Had Mr. Canright said
that when he was
among them there were
some Seventh day Adventists who did not believe the doctrine of the
Trinity, it
might have been
difficult to challenge his statement. But his sweeping indictment,
involving, as it does, the
whole denomination, is
not true today, nor was it true when made. And this Mr. Canright well
knew, for in
an article which he
published in the Review and Herald, the Seventh-day Adventist Church
paper, under
date of April 12, 1877,
he himself had said:
Do we not all agree
that in the providence of God, special light is now being given upon the
subjects of
the second advent near,
the kingdom, the new earth, the sleep of the dead, the destruction of
the wicked, the
doctrine of the
Trinity, the law of God, God's holy Sabbath, etc.? All Seventh day
Adventists will agree in
these things.
For many years our
theological schools have taught the doctrine of the Trinity very
definitely, and for
almost as many years it
has appeared incidentally in some of our denominational books. For
example, we
quote this from page
671 of The Desire of Ages, by Mrs. E. G. White, printed in 1898:
Sin could be
resisted and overcome only through the mighty agency of the third person
of the Godhead,
who would come with no
modified energy, but in the fullness of divine power. It is the Spirit
that makes
effectual what has been
wrought out by the world's Redeemer.
In the statement of
belief found in the' Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual, which sets
forth the official
discipline and
doctrinal position of the denomination, is found this statement on the
subject of the Trinity:
That the Godhead, or
Trinity, consists of the Eternal Father, a personal spiritual Being,
omnipotent,
omnipresent,
omniscient, infinite in wisdom and love; the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son
of the Eternal Father,
through whom all things
were created and through whom the salvation of the. redeemed hosts will
be
accomplished; the Holy
Spirit, the third person of the Godhead, the great regenerating power in
the work of
redemption. - Page
180.
Doubtless there were
those of a different opinion when Mr. Canright was an Adventist, as
there may be
such individuals even
today, but a denial of the doctrine of the Trinity cannot be justly
charged against
Seventh-day Adventists
as a body, and never could, for in their earlier history the issue was
not raised, and
when later on it was
raised, it was decided, not by official vote, but by common consent, in
favour of the
Bible doctrine of three
persons in the Godhead-the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
A BROOD OF ERRORS AND HERESIES
Another deliberate
effort to confuse the issue and to create a false impression regarding
the belief of
Seventh day Adventists
is found on pages 74 and 75 of Mr. Canright's book. We quote him as
follows:
'What do Adventists
believe? Go ask what language was spoken by the people after the Lord
confused their
tongues at Babel. . . .
Such a brood of errors and heresies as has resulted from Adventism,
cannot be found
in the history of the
church before. Time setting, visions, miracles, fanatics, false
prophets, sleep of the
dead, annihilation of
the wicked, non resurrection of the wicked, future probation,
restoration, community
of goods, denial of the
divinity of Christ, no devil, no baptism, no organization, etc., etc.
Gracious! And
these are the people
sent with a 'message' to warn the church!
Of course, the
inference here is that Seventh-day Adventists hold and teach these
doctrines. It is Seventhday
Adventism that Mr.
Canright is professedly writing against. True, he here uses only the
terms
Adventists and
Adventism but he leaves the reader to believe that he is speaking of the
system of doctrine
which he renounced.
Now, there are in existence a number of religious bodies which use the
word
Adventist or Adventists
as a part of their denominational name, and he here proceeds to throw
all these
Adventist bodies into
one group, and then begins to enumerate doctrines supposedly held by
them, leaving
the reader to draw the
conclusion that these are the doctrines held by Seventh-day Adventists.
It is just as if
we should set out to
write a book against the faith of the Missionary Baptists, and then
charge to that
church all the beliefs,
good or bad, of the many other branches of the Baptists.
Seventh-day Adventists
hold little in common with other churches who use the term Adventist in
their
denominational name.
What these others may believe is their own concern, and the name they go
by is no
doubt of their own
choosing. Whether some of them believe in the non resurrection of the
wicked, future
probation. . . .
community of goods, denial of the divinity of Christ, no devil, no
baptism, we do not know,
but we do know, and Mr.
Canright knew when he wrote these words, that Seventh-day Adventists do
not
believe these things.
Not one of these doctrines was ever held by the Seventh-day Adventist
Church. But
Seventh-day Adventists
do believe in visions when these visions are from the Lord, and they
also believe in
the miracles recorded
in the Bible. To cast aside the miracles of Jesus Christ is to reject
His divinity, and to
refuse the instruction
God has given through visions, is to reject a very considerable portion
of the Sacred
Scriptures. As to the
views of the Seventh-day Adventists regarding the sleep of the dead and
the final
annihilation of the
wicked, the reader is referred to the chapter in this book dealing with
these subjects.
These facts were, of
course, well known to Mr. Canright, but in an effort to confuse the
minds of his
readers he apparently
gathered together all the errors he could think of, charged them against
the
Adventists as a
group, and left the reader to infer that these things were held and
taught by the
denomination under
review, i.e., the Seventh-day Adventists. We ask our readers to ponder
this for a
moment, and then decide
whether it is straightforward and honest.
MEN WHO HAVE LEFT THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS
On pages 61-64 of his
book Mr. Canright tries to make out a case against Seventh-day
Adventists
because some have left
their ranks. He counts up forty-seven who were once connected with the
denominational work of
the Seventh-day Adventists, and who, at the time of writing his book,
were no
longer with that
denomination. The clear inference is that a movement could not be of God
and at the same
time lose so many men.
Now let us 'notice this
point: The first company of Sabbath keeping Adventists came into
existence in 1844-45.
Mr. Canright left the church in 1887. This was forty three years after
the work began.
At that time he managed
to count up forty-seven persons who had had some connection with the
work of
the church, but who, he
claims, had renounced the faith and severed themselves from the church.
Think of
it! Forty-seven leave
the church work in forty-three years!! About one a year, on the average.
Still, Mr.
Canright tells us on
page 26 of his book that at the time he left the church the Seventh-day
Adventists still
had 26,112 members and
400 ministers, even after the forty-seven workers had gone away.
Does the fact that a
few persons, who have been more or less prominent in the church, leave
that
communion and make
other connections, prove that church to be untrue? We think not. If so,
the work and
teachings of our Lord
would be discounted, for there were a number of apostasies from the
ranks of His
followers. Of one such
experience it is stated that from that time many of His disciples
went back, and
walked no more with
Him. John 6:66. It was a question as to what even the twelve apostles
would decide
to do, for Jesus turned
and said unto them, Will you also go away? Verse 67. If every
disciple of Jesus
had gone away from Him,
that fact would in no way have affected the truthfulness of His
teaching.
Truth is not dependent
upon the following -it may have, nor the ability of those who may once
have accepted it. The
fact that Judas had a devil and still remained among the disciples, did
not in any way
affect the truthfulness
of Christ's doctrines, any more than did the departure from, Him of
others who also
were not in harmony
with His work. Of those who left the faith in Christ's day, John says:
They went out
from us, but they were
not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have
continued with us:
but they went out, that
they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 1 John
2:19.
So we say of those of
whom Mr. Canright speaks as having left the Seventh-day Adventist
Church. The fact is
that a number of them did not go out willingly, but were disfellowshiped because their
lives were not in
harmony with the high standards of the church. It might be of interest
to the reader to
know Mr. Canright's own
evaluation of these persons, as he stated it in writing just a short
while before he
left the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. Concerning one of them he wrote:
''The next thing I
heard was that the church [which he joined after he left the Seventh-day
Adventist
Church] had expelled
him for bad conduct. He was turned out of the church and silenced as a
preacher. -
Review and Herald, May
24, 1877.
Of others among his
list of forty-seven he had written while he himself was still a
Seventh-day Adventist:
I know many of the
persons who have left us, and I know them to be hard cases. That party
[the
organization to which
some of them had gone] may whitewash them and defend them as long as
they
choose, but these are
the facts. -Ibid.
He then proceeds to
tell of the misconduct of some who for this reason were disfellowshiped, and then
later, when he writes a
book against Seventh-day Adventists, he holds up the fact that these
persons had left
the Seventh-day
Adventists as evidence that the work of this church was crumbling and
that their leading
men were all leaving
the sinking ship. Mr. Canright says that forty seven had left us. But
let it be clearly
understood that these
forty seven were not the pillars of the church. Since that time many
thousands of
others have come into
the church to fill up the ranks, and instead of 400 preachers, as at the
time of Mr.
Canright's leaving,
there are now 10,850 evangelical laborers and as many other workers
giving their full
time to various other
lines of the work of the church, in practically every land of earth.
IT LEADS TO INFIDELITY
One of the most serious
charges made against Seventh day Adventism by Mr. Canright is, It
leads to
infidelity. Seventh
day Adventism Renounced, p. 64.
Surely this is a most
astonishing charge! Seventh-day Adventists believe in a personal God, in
the deity of
Jesus Christ, and in
the deity and work of the Holy Spirit. They believe in a literal
creation; in the vicarious
atonement made by
Christ on Calvary; in the Second Advent of our Lord; and in a literal
heaven and hell,
but not in eternal
torment. They believe that the Bible is the very word of God, given to
men by inspiration
of the Spirit; that it
constitutes a perfect rule of conduct for man. Seventh-day Adventists
are the
Fundamentalists of the
Fundamentalists. And yet Mr. Canright, knowing these facts, boldly
asserted-to his
readers that
Seventh-day Adventism leads to infidelity! Such a charge is manifestly
absurd.
To buttress his
argument on this point, Mr. Canright mentions some who had left the
Seventh-day
Adventist Church, and
relates how they had made shipwreck of their faith. Thus he tells us on
pages 62 and
63 of his book that one
brother became a Universalist, while two others became Spiritualists.
Two persons
joined the Age-to Come
party, one became a noted blasphemer, another a libertine, etc., etc.
And this, he
says, proves that
Seventh day Adventism leads to infidelity! Does it? Or does it,
perchance, prove that
those who renounce
Seventh-day Adventism turn away from the light into darkness, and thus
drift away
from God?
Infidels and
Seventh-day Adventists have nothing in common. If a member should turn
toward
infidelity, it would
lead speedily to his separation from the church, as the teachings of the
church are
diametrically opposed
to infidelity. The two cannot walk together, because they are not
agreed. Mr.
Canright's statement,
therefore, is untrue and misleading. It is just the reverse of the fact.
Seventh-day
Adventism is a
safeguard against infidelity, and anyone ardently believing the
doctrines of this church is
entirely safe from this
grossest of all errors.
LACK OF SCHOLARSHIP
One of the charges made
by Mr. Canright against the Seventh-day Adventists is on the point of
their lack of
scholarship. They are
all an ignorant lot, therefore how can their doctrine be true? Note his
words:
Mrs. White received
no school education, except a few weeks when a child. She ... was wholly
illiterate,
not knowing the
simplest rules of grammar. Not one of the leading men in that work ever
graduated from
college or university,
and many are illiterate as Mrs. White herself.- Seventh-day Adventism
Renounced,
p. 35.
This affords a fair
sample of the exaggeration so common in Mr. Canright's books. Webster
defines
illiterate as
unlettered; ignorant of letters or books, . . . unable to read.
Now to say that Mrs. White was
wholly illiterate
is equivalent to saying that she was unable even to read. But Mrs. White
could not only
read, but she could
read well, as the many thousands who heard her read the Scriptures can
testify. And not
only did Mrs. White
read well, but she read rather widely and very intelligently, as her
writings bear
witness.
As to the illiteracy of
the leading men among Seventh day Adventists, the charge breaks down
before the undeniable
facts which Mr. Canright himself admits.
On page 63 of his book
he talks about their college professors, and speaks of their
colleges in
Battle Creek and
California and of academies in the East. On page 64 he speaks of their
physicians, naming
a number of them, and
of the sanitariums which they were conducting.
Think of it! An
organization made up of illiterate people, who do not know the simplest
rules of
grammar, carrying on
full fledged colleges, its members acting as college presidents and
professors, and
receiving recognition
in many lands! Think of physicians who have never been to college,
registering under
the laws of various
States and being licensed to practice medicine! Surely this statement is
utterly
ridiculous.
Seventh-day Adventists
have developed an efficient system of denominational education. They
have a chain of
colleges, junior colleges, academies, and primary schools that reaches
around the earth.
Their students now
number 150,000. A Grade A medical college is operated in California,
whose credits
are recognized in most
of the countries of the world. A graduate theological seminary was
established in
Washington, D.C., in
1934. Graduates from these institutions of learning are to be found in
every land,
where they are serving
as ministers, teachers, and physicians. Surely it is strange that such
an efficient
educational system
should be established on a foundation of such profound ignorance!
But Seventh-day
Adventists do not rely upon their scholarship. The theology of a church
should
never be tested by the
number of college credits which its ministers can muster. The truths of
God are
established on a far
more solid foundation than human learning. When Mr. Canright was naming
some of
the so-called unlearned
Seventh-day Adventist leaders, he might, had he thought to do so, have
added to his
list such men as Peter,
James, John, Matthew, and others whom Jesus chose as His disciples and
to whom
He committed the
affairs of His church. He might have mentioned John the Baptist. One of
the charges
brought against Jesus
Himself was that He was unlearned. In every age there have been those
who have
trusted in the
multitude of their mighty men. (See Hosea 10:13.)
Put not your trust
in princes, said David,
(nor in the son of man,
in whom. there is no salvation
Note-On our desk, as
these pages are being prepared for the printer, lies a copy of the New
Testament in Chasu, one
of the native languages of Africa. This volume, neatly printed and
strongly bound,
bears on its title page
the imprint of the British and Foreign Bible Society, 1922. The
translation was made
by a Seventh-day
Adventist missionary, who prepared also a grammar of the Chasu language,
a work listed
today by a Paris firm
specializing in Oriental and other tongues.
It is the only grammar
of the Chasu language. Uneducated men do not make Bible translations in
harmony with the rules
and regulations for translators given out by the British and Foreign
Bible Society;
they do not reduce
native languages to writing, nor standardize languages by the creation
of grammars.-
Book EDITORS.
[margin].... Happy is he that hath the God of Jacob for his help, whose
hope is in the Lord
his God. Psalms
1463-5.
The great apostle to
the Gentiles also earnestly warned the church against the danger of
trusting to
worldly wisdom, when he
wrote to the Corinthians:
Because the
foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is
stronger than men.
For ye see your
calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many
mighty, not many
noble, are called: but
God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise;
and God hath
chosen the weak things
of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of
the world,
and things which are
despised, bath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to
nought things
that are: that no flesh
should glory in His presence. But of Him are you in Christ Jesus, who of
God is made
unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: that, according as it
is written, He
that
glorieth, let him
glory in the Lord. 1 Corinthians 1:25-31.
Scholarship, therefore,
is no' safe test of theology. The doctrines of a church are not to be
tested by
the learning or
ignorance of its membership or ministry. A Thus says the Lord is
the only safe foundation
for our faith, and the
Word of God is so plain 'that a wayfaring man, though a fool, need not
err therein.
(See Isaiah 35:8.)
This must not be
understood, however, as granting, even for the sake of argument, that Seventh day
Adventists are a
company of ignoramuses, or that their ministers come behind those of
other Protestant
denominations in sound
Christian scholarship, for such is not the case.
Jesus never attended
the rabbinical schools of His day, yet the testimony of the most learned
of
His time was that
never man spake like this man.
WORK AMONG THE HEATHEN
Of the work of
Seventh-day Adventists, Mr. Canright says:
They have missions
in many of the large cities and in foreign lands; but they are wholly
proselyting
agencies. They do not
work among the heathen, nor for the destitute and fallen. Seventh-day
Adventism
Renounced, p. 31.
And again we read:
Their 'missions,' of
which they boast so much, Are not to convert the heathen of the foreign
lands, nor the
drunkards, wretched and
degraded, of our cities, but to proselyte or work among people already
in fair
circumstances.' - Ibid.
p. 83.
As stated in chapter I
of this volume, Seventh-day Adventists believe that they have a message
to bear to all
the peoples of earth,
Christian and pagan, Jew and Gentile, civilized and uncivilized. Said
the prophet Joel,
Blow you the trumpet
in Zion, and sound an alarm in My holy mountain: let all the inhabitants
of the land
tremble: for the day of
the Lord comes, for it is nigh at hand. Joel 2:1. They preach the
message to all who
will hear.
But to suggest that
this preaching is addressed only to church members, either at home or
abroad, is a gross
misrepresentation. The
writer spent a number of years as a missionary leader in Africa, and
therefore can
speak from firsthand
knowledge. He knows personally that in the Dark Continent the vast
majority of the
many thousands of
converts to the Seventh-day Adventist faith have been won from the most
primitive
tribes; often our
missionaries have gone where others had never been before them; they
have established
hospitals, schools, and
chapels, and have civilized and Christianized natives who hitherto had
had no
knowledge whatsoever of
God.
Seventh-day Adventist
mission stations are to be found far away from the centers of
civilization, out where
the darkness of
heathenism has reigned supreme for generations. The writer has
personally had the
privilege of preaching
in many a heathen village the first gospel sermon the villagers had ever
heard. And
what is true of the
work of Seventh-day Adventists in Africa is true of their work in the
cannibal islands of
the South Seas, in
India, in Borneo, in China, and in fact in every, heathen land.
Seventh-day Adventists.
probably have more
missions operating today amid heathen surroundings than any other single
Protestant
church in the world.
What, then, becomes of
the statement that they do not work for the heathen? It is untrue, just
as are most of
Mr. Canright's other
statements regarding the faith and work of Seventh-day Adventists.
A SYSTEM OF POPERY
Again Mr. Canright
says:
Seventh-day
Adventism is a system of popery-one-man power. - Ibid., p. 81.
This is one of the most
amazing charges made by Mr. Canright against the Seventh-day Adventist
Church.
Of course anyone who
has the slightest knowledge of the character of the Seventh-day
Adventist
organization knows that
this statement is as far from the truth as the south pole is from the
north. A system
of popery is exactly
what Seventh day Adventism is not. It is the antithesis of popery. In a
system of popery
the people take their
orders from the head. The pope's word is law. In Seventh-day Adventism
the head
takes orders from the
people and from committees of control. Their word is law. The head
cannot alter their
decisions.
For instance, in each
State or provincial conference, the people choose a president, who holds
office for two years.
But he is not made a lord over God's heritage. He is the chairman of a
committee of
control. This committee
is chosen by the people. The people make their own plans for the conduct
of the
work within their
territory, while together in conference session. They delegate to the
president and this
executive committee the
authority to carry out these plans and make them effective.
The conference
president is the ranking officer of the conference committee. The
committee
usually consists of
from seven to fifteen men, all chosen by the people. They have no
authority to change
anything that was done
in conference assembled. If they feel that a change should be made in
any important
plan or policy, they
must wait until the next conference session or call a special session.
At the session they
can lay their proposals
before the people, but the people can accept or reject them at will. No
one has any
power of coercion.
Every two years the term of office of the president and members of the
executive
committee expires. They
may be re-elected or they may not. It depends entirely upon how they
have
performed their work
whether they have given satisfaction. They have no life lease on these
positions. They
cannot continue
themselves in office.
The General Conference
organization embraces all local, union, and division conferences. It has
a
president, four general
vice presidents, an additional vice-president for each great continental
division, a
secretary, six
associate secretaries, a treasurer, a sub treasurer, four assistant
treasurers, and a secretary treasurer
for each continental
division. If these officials constituted the entire board of control of
the
general affairs of the
denomination, it would even then be far from a system of popery, for
this group alone
would constitute a
board of some forty men.
But as a matter of
fact, these men are only servants of a large committee of control known
as the
General Conference
Committee. This committee consists of some two hundred members, and
holds council
meetings in the spring
and autumn of each year, to consider policies and plans for the
prosecution of the
denominational work
throughout the world. Other meetings of easily available members of this
committee
are held frequently
throughout the year, but these minority meetings have no authority to
alter any general
policy adopted by the
full committee at its regular councils, when representatives from the
world field are
present.
In a system of popery
the head of the church has power to set aside decisions of councils with
which he is not in
agreement. Note the following statement from a Catholic authority:
He [the Pope] is not
subject to them [the canons of the church], because he is competent to
modify or to
annul them when he
holds this to be best for the church. - The Catholic Encyclopedia,
vol. 12, art. Pope,
p. 268.
But the president of
the Seventh-day Adventist General Conference, who is the highest
official in the
church, cannot set
aside any council action. The decisions of the councils govern. He
cannot change a jot or
tittle of them. He may
recommend changes in policy at the next meeting, but he has no means of
enforcing
such recommendations,
except by debate and personal influence, based on the confidence the
council may
have in his leadership.
He cannot spend $100 of the denomination's funds for any purpose
whatsoever, be it
ever so worthy, without
authorization of the General Conference Committee. Neither can the
General
Conference treasurer do
so. The president does not take a trip into any part of the field
without committee
action. He writes no
official letters to his under officers in an effort to enforce his
individual opinion; his
correspondence must
represent the will of the committee. He issues no fiats and hands down
no personal
decisions. He is a
servant of the General Conference Committee, and he and the committee
serve the
people.
The General Conference
president, his assistant officers, and many members of the committee
hold office for four
years. They are elected at a quadrennial session of the General
Conference, which is
usually attended by
about six hundred official delegates representing the church in every
land, and by some
six to ten thousand non
official visitors. This great and thoroughly representative gathering
chooses Whom
so ever they will for
the leadership of the church for the ensuing term. The former officials
have no further
claim on the offices
they have held. Their term has expired. They lay down the burden. If
perchance the
conference should so
desire, these same individuals may be re-elected to office for another
four years.
But this decision rests
entirely with the delegates. They are the people's representatives. This
large
body of representatives
is acknowledged by all Seventh-day Adventist churches and organizations
as the
highest administrative
authority among them. A one-man power? No! It is exactly the opposite.
In Seventh day
Adventism the church
officers serve the people instead of the people serving their officials.
From the foregoing
review it must already be evident to the candid reader that Mr. Canright
certainly handles the
truth lightly, and that his book is filled with misstatements and
misrepresentations.
Much more could be
said, but enough has been presented to reveal fully the unreliability of
Mr. Canright's
books. And if his
statements are thus unreliable, then surely he is not a safe guide to
those who are
earnestly inquiring for
truth.
|