A Brief History Of Seventh-day Adventists PDF

Other books by George R. Knight (selected) A.T. Jones: Point Man on Adventism’s Charismattic Frontier The Apocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism The Cross of Christ I Used to Be Perfect (Andrews University Press) If I Were the Devil Joseph Bates: The Real Founder...

Other books by George R. Knight (selected) A.T. Jones: Point Man on Adventism’s Charismattic Frontier The Apocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism The Cross of Christ I Used to Be Perfect (Andrews University Press) If I Were the Devil Joseph Bates: The Real Founder of Seventh-day Adventism Lest WeForget Myths in Adventism Sin and Salvation A User-friendly Guide to the 1888 Message William Miller and the Risk of Adventism (Pacific Press) Books in the Adventist Heritage series A Brief History of Seventh-day Adventists A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs Organizing for Mission and Growth: The Development of Adventist Church Structure Books in the Ellen White series Ellen White’s World Meeting Ellen White Reading Ellen White Walking With Ellen White Books in the Exploring Commentary series Exploring Ecclesiastes and Song of Soloman Exploring Galatians and Ephesians Exploring Hebrews Exploring the Letters of John and Jude Exploring Mark Exploring Romans Exploring Thessalonians A study guide for each of the books in this series is available on www.adventistbookcenter.com. To order, call 1-800-765-6955 or visit us at www.reviewandherald.com for information on other Review and Herald® products. Copyright © 1999, 2004, 2012 by Review and Herald® Publishing Association International copyright secured The author assumes full responsibility for the accuracy of all facts and quotations as cited in this book. Bible texts credited to Phillips are from J. B. Phillips: The New Testament in Modern English, Revised Edition. © J. B. Phillips 1958, 1960, 1972. Used by permission of Macmillan Publishing Co. 15 14 13 12 9 8 7 R&H Cataloging Service Knight, George Raymond A brief history of Seventh-day Adventists. 1. Seventh-day Adventists—History. I. Title. 286.732 ISBN 978-0-8280-1430-4  Contents Chapter 1: Millerite Roots William Miller: The Reluctant Prophet Adventism Takes a Giant Step Forward With Joshua V. Himes Charles Fitch and the “Fall of Babylon” The Passing of the Time The Seventh-Month Movement and the “True Midnight Cry” The “Great Disappointment” For Those Who Would Like to Read More Chapter 2: Era of Doctrinal Development (1844-1848) Redefining the Sanctuary The Gift of Prophecy The Sabbath Conditional Immortality The “Pillar” Doctrines and the Three Angels’ Messages The “Shut Door” Approach to Mission For Those Who Would Like to Read More Chapter 3: Era of Organizational Development (1848-1863) The Sabbatarian Conferences Publishing “the Truth” Early Moves Toward Formal Organization “Sister Betsy” and Support for the Ministry The Final Drive for Church Organization The “Shut Door” Cracks Open a Little For Those Who Would Like to Read More Chapter 4: Era of Institutional and Lifestyle Development (1863-1888) Healthful Living and the Western Health Reform Institute The Struggle for Noncombatancy In Search of Proper Education Advances in Financial Stewardship Ellen White’s Role in the Development of Adventist Lifestyle Missions: Foreign and Not So Foreign Other Important Developments Between 1863 and 1888 For Those Who Would Like to Read More Chapter 5: Era of Revival, Reform, and Expansion (1888-1900) The 1888 General Conference Session The Aftermath of Minneapolis Spiritual Revival and Educational Expansion Worldwide Mission Explosion Mission to Black America The Contribution of Female Ministers in Early Adventism For Those Who Would Like to Read More Chapter 6: Era of Reorganization and Crisis (1900-1910) Denominational Reorganization Tension in the Power Structure The Battle Creek Exodus and New Beginnings A Renewed Mission Emphasis For Those Who Would Like to Read More Chapter 7: Era of Worldwide Growth (1910-1955) The Passing of Ellen White A Period of Crisis and Promise Unparalleled Growth in Adventist Missions The Maturation of Adventism Among African-Americans For Those Who Would Like to Read More Chapter 8: The Challenges and Possibilities of Maturity (1955-) Arriving at Maturity Mission With Conscious Intent Challenges as Adventism Faces the Twenty-first Century Infinite Possibilities For Those Who Would Like to Read More  Dedicated to Richard Scull II, Heather Gambill, Fallon Knight, Melanie Fusté and Roberto Fusté —Grandchildren All  List of Abbreviations A&D Wm. Miller's Apology and Defence Adv. Rev. Adventist Review AH Advent Herald AR Advent Review AS American Sentinel of Religious Liberty CTemp Christian Temperance and Bible Hygiene, by James White and Ellen G. White EGW Ellen G. White 1888 Materials The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials (4 vols.) EW Early Writings, by Ellen G. White GCB General Conference Bulletin JL Josiah Litch JVH Joshua V. Himes JW James White LS Life Sketches of Ellen G. White (1915 ed.) LS (1888) Life Sketches of James and Ellen G. White (1888 ed.) MC Midnight Cry MS Manuscript MW Morning Watch PT Present Truth PUR Pacific Union Recorder RH Review and Herald SDA Seventh-day Adventist SG Spiritual Gifts, by Ellen G. White (4 vols.) SM Selected Messages, by Ellen G. White (3 books) ST Signs of the Times (Millerite) T Testimonies for the Church, by Ellen G. White (9 vols.) WCW William C. White WM William Miller  A Word to the Reader eventh-day Adventists have never viewed themselves as just another S denomination. To the contrary, from their beginning they have understood their movement to be a fulfillment of prophecy. Their role, as they have seen it, has been to preach the unique message of the three angels of Revelation 14:6-12, presenting God’s last appeal to a dying world before Christ returns to “harvest” the earth (verses 14-20). Seventh-day Adventists eventually concluded that they needed to preach their special message “to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people” (verse 6). That belief, coupled with a sense of nearness of the end of earthly time, has impelled them into one of history’s most energetic mission programs. This book is the story of how Adventists came to view themselves as a prophetic people, of their growing awareness of a responsibility to take their unique message to all the world, and of their organizational and institutional development as they sought to fulfill their prophetic mission. The story, of course, is not complete. The mission goes forward even as you read these words. The church and the world still look forward to the great climax of world history at the second coming of Jesus. Thus the history of Adventism stands incomplete. By the end of this volume, you as a reader and I as an author will find ourselves in the flow of Adventist history. This book does not claim to be a “contribution to knowledge.” Rather, it is largely a summary of the high points of Adventist history. In making that summary, however, this volume sets forth the material in a unique organizational format that should prove helpful to its readers as they seek to develop an understanding of the growth of the denomination. I have written A Brief History of Seventh-day Adventists for those who seek a quick overview of Adventism’s development. It will prove useful to church study groups, classroom students, new members, and others interested in the history of the denomination. The book seeks to develop the central lines of Adventist history, with a special interest in the growth of its concept of mission. While it does not seek to avoid significant problems in Adventism’s past and present, it does suggest that our primary focus of concern should be on possibilities rather than problems. As an Adventist historian, I am indebted to those who have gone before me. Most topics treated in this book are covered in more detail elsewhere. I have suggested additional readings for those who wish to pursue special lines of study.  Pacific Press published an earlier version of this volume in 1993 under the title Anticipating the Advent. The present revision represents an overall updating. That is especially true of the final chapter, which treats new issues and revises “old” statistics. Another major change is that I have added in- text references to the original sources for all direct quotations. Because of a lack of space, however, I have omitted the sources for general facts and indirect quotations. It should be noted that A Brief History of Seventh-day Adventists could have done more with the secular and religious contexts in which Adventism arose, but the brevity of the treatment demanded that I keep contextual materials to a minimum. The present book is intended to be the first of a series that highlights Seventh-day Adventist heritage. Other volumes in the series will include studies of the development of Adventist theology, church organization, lifestyle, education, and mission theory. I should also point out that the Adventist Heritage Series is closely related to my series on Ellen White: Meeting Ellen White: A Fresh Look at Her Life, Writings, and Major Themes (1996); Reading Ellen White: How to Understand and Apply Her Writings (1997); Ellen White’s World: A Fascinating Look at the Times in Which She Lived (1998); and Walking With Ellen White: The Human Interest Story (1999). It is my intention that the two series will provide both Adventists and those outside of the Adventist community with an overview of what Seventh-day Adventism “is all about.” Each treatment is intended to be brief but accurate. While I have written each volume with an Adventist readership in mind, they are also aimed at presenting a solid introduction of their respective topics to the larger community. I would like to express my appreciation to Jennifer Kharbteng and Joyce Werner, who entered the “handwriting” of my original manuscript into the computer; to Bonnie Beres, who rekeyed the revised manuscript in its entirety; to Robert W. Olson, Richard W. Schwarz, and Alberto R. Timm, who read the original manuscript and offered suggestions for its improvement; to Gerald Wheeler and Jeannette R. Johnson for shepherding the manuscript through the publication process; and to the administration of Andrews University for providing financial support and time for research and writing. I trust that A Brief History of Seventh-day Adventists will be a blessing to its readers as they seek to learn more about Seventh-day Adventists and their history.  George R. Knight Andrews University Berrien Springs, Michigan A Note on the Third Edition The current edition updates denominational statistics and bibliography. Beyond that, it supplements the text in several places and makes a few factual corrections. Since the publication of the first edition in 1999 I have added two volumes to the Adventist Heritage Series: A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs (2000) and Organizing for Mission and Growth: The Development of Adventist Church Structure (2006). Appreciation is due to Kathleen A. Jones of the General Conference Office of Archives and Statistics for help in arriving ar correct statistical estmates and to Cheryl D. Doss, director of the Institute of World Mission, for suggestions on updating the last chapter. George R. Knight July 12, 2012  CHAPTER 1 Millerite Roots odern Seventh-day Adventism finds its immediate roots in the M Second Advent movement of the early nineteenth century. While many preachers proclaimed the soon coming of Christ in Europe and other parts of the world, the belief made its largest impact in North America. Central to North American Adventist beginnings was a Baptist layman by the name of William Miller (1782-1849). William Miller: The Reluctant Prophet Born into a Christian home, Miller abandoned his religious convictions for deism in the first years of the nineteenth century. Deism (a skeptical belief that rejects Christianity with its miracles and supernatural revelation) argues for a more distant God—one who does not actively participate in earthly affairs. Deistic beliefs became popular in both Europe and North America during the last half of the eighteenth century, but the atrocities and excesses of the French Revolution in the 1790s led many to question human reason as a sufficient basis for civilized living. One result was the widespread abandonment of deism and the return of many people to Christianity during the first two decades of the nineteenth century. In the United States the ensuing revival became known as the Second Great Awakening. Miller was among those who returned to a belief in the Bible during the Awakening. His skepticism lasted through the War of 1812. But in the face of violence and death, he began to reevaluate his personal life and the meaning of life in general. Like many of his generation, he felt impelled to study the Bible, and, also like many, he was converted or reconverted to Christianity as the Second Great Awakening revitalized the American churches. Unlike most of his contemporaries, though, Miller became an especially zealous Bible student. His method of Bible study was to compare scripture with scripture in a methodical manner. “I commenced with Genesis,” Miller wrote, “and read verse by verse, proceeding no faster than the meaning of the several passages should be so unfolded, as to leave me free from embarrassment…. Whenever I found any thing obscure, my practice was to compare it with all collateral passages; and by the help of CRUDEN [’s Bible concordance], I examined all the texts of Scripture in which were found any of the prominent words contained in any obscure portion. Then by letting every word have its proper bearing on the subject of the text, if my view of it harmonized with every collateral passage in the Bible, it ceased to be a difficulty” (A&D 6). For two years (1816-1818) Miller studied his Bible intensively in this way. Finally he came to “the solemn conclusion … that in about twenty-five years from that time [i.e., 1843] all the affairs of our present state would be wound up” and Christ would come (ibid. 12). Miller had reached his conclusion through a study of the prophecies of the book of Daniel, especially Daniel 8:14: “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” Operating on the commonly accepted understanding of Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:5, 6 that a day in prophecy equals a year, Miller calculated that the 2300-day prophecy would conclude in 1843. And, interpreting the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14 as the earth and its cleansing as the last-day purging of the earth by fire, Miller reasoned that Christ would return to the earth at the end of the 2300 days—about 1843. His heart filled with joy. But he was also quite aware that his conclusion that Christ would return at the beginning of the millennium (1,000 years) of Revelation 20 flew in the face of the almost universally accepted theology of his day, which held that Christ would return at the end of the millennium. “I therefore,” he penned, “feared to present it [his conclusion], lest by some possibility I should be in error, and be the means of misleading any” (ibid. 13). Because of his fears, Miller spent another five years (1818-1823) reexamining his Bible and raising every objection he could to his conclusions. As a result he became more sure than ever that Christ would arrive about 1843. So after seven years he began to speak of his beliefs openly to his neighbors. However, he found only a “very few who listened with any interest” (ibid. 15). For nine years (1823-1832) Miller continued to study his Bible. Meanwhile, he came increasingly under the conviction that he needed to share his findings of impending doom. The impression “‘Go and tell the world of their danger’ “continually assailed him. “I did all I could to avoid the conviction that any thing was required of me,” Miller wrote. But he could not escape his conscience (ibid. 15, 16). Miller finally “entered into a solemn covenant with God” that if God opened the way, he would do his duty. Feeling he needed to be more specific, Miller promised God that if he should receive an invitation to speak publicly in any place, he would go and teach about the Lord’s second coming. “Instantly,” he penned, “all my burden was gone; and I rejoiced that I should not probably be thus called upon; for I had never had such an invitation” (ibid. 17). To Miller’s dismay, however, within a half hour of his agreement with God he had his first request to preach on the Second Advent. “I was immediately angry with myself for having made the covenant,” he confessed. “I rebelled at once against the Lord, and determined not to go.” He then stomped out of his house to wrestle with the Lord in prayer, finally submitting after another hour (ibid. 18). His first presentation on the Second Advent led to several conversions. Thereafter Miller had an unending stream of invitations to hold meetings in the churches of various denominations. By the end of the 1830s the reluctant prophet had won several ministers to his view that Christ would come about the year 1843. The most significant of those ministerial converts was Joshua V. Himes of the Christian Connexion. Adventism Takes a Giant Step Forward With Joshua V. Himes The year 1839 found Himes as the influential pastor of the Chardon Street Chapel in Boston. He was not only a prominent pastor but a recognized leader in the interchurch movement to bring about the earthly millennium through broad-based personal and social reform. In November 1839, however, Himes issued an invitation to William Miller to hold a series of meetings in his church. Miller’s Second Advent message transformed the energetic Himes into the foremost publicist of his message —that Christ would return about the year 1843. Sensing the urgency of the message, Himes felt a burden to get the Advent doctrine before the world. He asked Miller why he had not preached in the large cities. Miller replied that he went only where invited. Such a passive approach was too much for the aggressive Himes, who inquired if Miller would go “where doors are opened.” Miller replied in the affirmative. “I then told him,” claimed Himes, that “he might prepare for the campaign; for doors should be opened in every city in the Union, and the warning should go to the ends of the earth! Here I began to ‘help’ Father Miller.” Adventism was never the same after that (S. Bliss, Memoirs of William Miller, pp. 140, 141). In the next four years the activist Himes made Millerism and Adventism household words in North America. Beyond North America, Himes’s ingenuity saw to it that by 1844 the Advent doctrine had received a hearing around the world. He utilized several avenues to fulfill his mission of warning the globe that Christ would come about the year 1843 and that “the hour of his judgment is come” (Rev. 14:7). Perhaps the most important and influential was the printed page. Himes unleashed what historian Nathan Hatch has referred to as “an unprecedented media blitz” (Democratization of American Christianity, p. 142). Not being one to let any grass grow under his feet, within three months of his first invitation to Miller Himes had started publishing the Signs of the Times to get the Advent message before the world. In addition to the Signs, in 1842 Himes began the Midnight Cry in an effort to wake up New York City to the nearness of Christ’s return. He established the Midnight Cry as a two-cent daily newspaper in connection with a Millerite evangelistic campaign being held in the nation’s metropolis. Himes had 10,000 copies printed daily for a number of weeks and either had them sold on the streets by newsboys or given away. At least one copy went to every minister in the state of New York. In 1842 alone he distributed more than 600,000 copies of the Midnight Cry in five months. When the New York campaign closed, the paper became a weekly. Himes’s exploits in periodical publication soon stimulated imitators, and Adventist literature began coming off the press with unprecedented urgency. Beyond periodicals, Himes also guided the publication of a vast array of pamphlets, tracts, and books. Many of them were collected into the Second Advent Library, which people could purchase for under $10 to circulate in local communities. By July 1841 the Adventist publishing program had grown to such an extent that it had to employ Josiah Litch (a Methodist minister) to serve as “general agent” for the Committee of Publication. That arrangement left Himes free to respond to calls for travel and preaching in behalf of Millerite publications. Meanwhile, he was not content with spreading the Advent message through publications alone. A born organizer, the dynamic Himes initiated the first General Conference of Christians Expecting the Advent in October 1840. That Boston “general conference” led to at least 15 more before 1844, along with scores of local Millerite conferences. More important, however, Himes also had a forceful role in developing the Adventist camp meeting. Beginning in the summer of 1842 the Millerites held more than 130 camp meetings before the autumn of 1844. It is estimated that their combined attendance exceeded 500,000 (approximately one out of every 35 Americans). The impact of the camp meetings, however, affected many more than just those attending, since media blitzes accompanied them and they were held in or near large cities. To accommodate the camp meeting crowds in locales where outside meetings were inappropriate and proper buildings were unavailable, Himes pioneered in the use of a tent. With a seating capacity of approximately 4,000, the Millerite tent was apparently the largest of its kind in the United States up through that time. The novelty of the big tent, of course, also attracted listeners. It is reported that in some locations several thousand people, unable to get into the tent, stood listening on the outside. Many parts of the world outside of North America also heard the Millerite message. The Millerite method for worldwide outreach was generally not to send missionaries, but to place their publications on ships bound to various seaports. Thus by the summer of 1842 Himes could write that Millerite publications had been “sent to all the Missionary stations that we know of on the globe” (ST, Aug. 3, 1842). Under his guidance the Advent message made a significant impact in North America and was at least “heard” through the printed word in other parts of the world. That success, however, met with resistance among the churches as the inevitable reaction set in. Charles Fitch and the “Fall of Babylon” The Millerite preaching that Christ would return about the year 1843 directly contradicted the generally accepted Protestant teaching that Christ would come after the millennium. While the pulpits and church buildings of most denominations had been opened to Adventist preachers during the early 1840s, things began to change in 1843. Millerites came under progressively more ridicule and often had to decide between their Advent belief and that of their denominations. Those choosing to retain their faith in the soon return of Christ increasingly found themselves disfellowshipped by their congregations. In other words, as the “year of the end” approached, a confrontation between theologies of the Second Advent flared up. In that context Charles Fitch (a popular Millerite minister of the Congregationalist denomination) preached a sermon on Revelation 18 in the summer of 1843 focusing on the fall of Babylon. “Come out of her, my people” (Rev. 18:2, 4; cf. 14:8) was his message. That sermon, later published in both article and tract form, signaled another shift in Millerite development as the Advent believers progressively came to view themselves as a separate body. Up through the summer of 1843 the Millerites, in harmony with most Protestants, had generally identified the Papacy as the Babylon of Revelation 18:1-5. But, argued Fitch, Babylon is antichrist, and anyone who opposes the personal reign of Jesus Christ over this world is antichrist. Fitch’s definition of the antichrist included all Catholics and Protestants who rejected the teaching of a soon-coming Christ. “To come out of Babylon,” Fitch wrote, “is to be converted to the true scriptural doctrine of the personal coming and kingdom of Christ…. If you are a Christian, come out of Babylon! If you intend to be found a Christian when Christ appears, come out of Babylon, and come out Now!… Come out of Babylon or perish” (Come Out of Her, My People, pp. 18, 19, 24). Thus Fitch provided many Millerite Adventists with a theological rationale for separating into a distinct body before the close of earth’s probation. The call was to leave those churches that had rejected the judgment-hour message. While most Eastern Millerite leaders initially responded coolly to Fitch’s call for separation, the aggressive reaction within the various denominations made it acceptable to many Advent believers as they faced increasing opposition and loss of membership. Himes did not become an advocate of separation until the autumn of 1844, and then only reluctantly. Miller never could bring himself to urge separation, even though the Low Hampton Baptist Church, where he was a member, eventually expelled him. In the end, separation was not a choice but something impelled by the force of events as the world entered the predicted “year of the end.” The Passing of the Time Miller originally had resisted being too specific about the exact time of Christ’s return. His message emphasized “about the year 1843.” But by January 1843 he had come to the conclusion, on the basis of the 2300-day prophecy of Daniel 8:14 and the Jewish calendar, that Christ would return sometime between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844. “PREPARE TO MEET THY GOD,” headlined the Western Midnight Cry of March 8, 1844, as the end of that period approached. But, needless to say, Miller's “year of the end of the world” passed without the return of Christ. Thus the Millerites experienced their first disappointment. A frustrated but deeply sincere William Miller wrote to Himes on March 25, 1844: “I am now seated at my old desk. … Having obtained help of God until the present time, I am still looking for the dear Saviour…. The time, as I have calculated it, is now filled up; and I expect every moment to see the Saviour descend from heaven…. Whether God designs for me to warn the people of this earth any more, or not, I am at a loss to know…. I hope I have cleansed my garments from the blood of souls. I feel that as far as it was in my power, I have freed myself from all guilt in their condemnation” (MC, Apr. 18, 1844).  An equally frustrated Himes editorialized on April 24, 1844: “In the passing by of the Jewish year, our friends and the public… have a right to expect from us some exposition of the position we occupy…. We… fully and frankly admit that all our expected and published time… has passed: the Jewish year … has expired, and the Savior has not been revealed; and we would not disguise the fact at all, that we were mistaken in the precise time of the termination of the prophetic periods.” Yet, Himes significantly added, “We have never been able to find any other time for the termination of the prophetic periods.” He then went on to build hope in his readers by noting that “we are placed in a position, which God foresaw his children would be placed in, at the end of the vision; and for which he made provision, by the prophet Habakkuk.” After all, did not the prophet write: “For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come” (Hab. 2:3). Himes connected that text with Matthew 25:5, which points out that the bridegroom delays before he comes, while those waiting “slumbered and slept.” On the basis of those texts, Himes could say that “we are now prepared to tell the world what we shall do…. We intend to hold fast the integrity of our faith without wavering…. We shall continue to believe God's word, in its literal acceptation: for not one jot or tittle of all that is written therein will fail” (AH, Apr. 24, 1844). Thus the Millerite Adventists entered the “tarrying time.” Their movement had been saved from disintegration by the fact that it had had some imprecision regarding the exact date for the prophetic fulfillment and by the application of Habakkuk's prophecy and other texts to its situation. The Adventists had been disappointed, but the movement went on, albeit with less enthusiasm than before. The Seventh-Month Movement and the “True Midnight Cry” Millerism found a new lease on life at the Exeter, New Hampshire, camp meeting in mid-August 1844. At that convocation, Millerite minister S. S. Snow convincingly demonstrated through a variety of mathematical calculations that the fulfillment of the 2300-day prophecy of Daniel 8:14 would take place in the autumn of 1844. In fact, through extensive study of the ceremonies of the Jewish year, Snow predicted that Daniel's prophecy about the cleansing of the sanctuary would meet its completion on the Jewish Day of Atonement—the tenth day of the seventh month of the Jewish year (see Lev. 23:27).  Snow claimed that he had calculated the exact day for the cleansing, which the Millerites still universally interpreted as the second coming of Christ. That day in 1844, according to Karaite Jewish reckoning, was October 22. Thus Christ would return, Snow said, on October 22, 1844—in about two months. The idea electrified his audience. They left the Exeter meeting to spread their urgent message as quickly and as widely as possible. “Behold,” they proclaimed, “the Bridegroom cometh!” Christ is coming on the tenth day of the seventh month! Time is short; get ready! Get ready! Although Miller, Himes, and other leading Adventists hesitated to fix their hopes on a definite day, the seventh-month enthusiasm spread like fire in stubble among the bulk of the believers. The words of George Storrs give us a feel for the epidemic enthusiasm. In September he wrote, “I take up my pen with feelings such as I never before experienced. Beyond a doubt, in my mind, the tenth day of the seventh month, will witness the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ in the clouds of heaven. We are then within a few days of that event. Awful moment to those who are unprepared—but glorious to those who are ready. I feel that I am making the last appeal that I shall ever make through the press. My heart is full…. Alas! we have all been slumbering and sleeping —both the wise and the foolish; but so our Saviour told us it would be; and ‘thus the Scriptures are fulfilled,’ and it is the last prophecy relating to the events to precede the personal advent of our Lord; now comes the TRUE Midnight Cry. The previous was but the alarm. NOW THE REAL ONE IS SOUNDING: and oh, how solemn the hour” (MC, Oct. 3, 1844). Miller, Himes, and other Millerite leaders eventually capitulated to the forcefulness of Snow's arguments. On October 6, 1844, Miller wrote of his enthusiasm and hopes: “Dear Bro. Himes:—I see a glory in the seventh month which I never saw before…. Thank the Lord, O my soul. Let Brother Snow, Brother Storrs and others be blessed for their instrumentality in opening my eyes. I am almost home, Glory! Glory!! Glory!!! I see that the time is correct…. “My soul is so full I cannot write. I call on you, and all who love his appearing, to thank him for this glorious truth. My doubts, and fears, and darkness, are all gone. I see that we are yet right. God's word is true; and my soul is full of joy…. Oh, how I wish I could shout. But I will shout when the ‘King of kings comes.’ “Methinks I hear you say, ‘Bro. Miller is now a fanatic.’ Very well, call me what you please; I care not; Christ will come in the seventh month, and will bless us all. Oh! glorious hope” (MC, Oct. 12, 1844; italics supplied). On October 16 Himes announced that the Advent Herald (previously Signs of the Times) would cease publication. “As the date of the present number of the Herald is our last day of publication before the tenth day of the seventh month, we shall make no provision for issuing a paper for the week following. … We are shut up to this faith;… Behold, the Bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him!” (AH, Oct. 16, 1844). At this distance we can only imagine the excitement in the Millerite ranks, but we can capture some of it if we ask ourselves, How would I feel if I knew Christ was coming in a few short days? How would I act? How would I order my priorities? In their conviction and exuberance, the believers put their all into a final effort to warn the world of its impending doom. They made no provision for the future—they didn't need to. Some left their crops unharvested, closed their shops, and resigned from their jobs. Jesus was coming. The thought was like honey in the mouth, but unbeknown to them, it would be bitter in the belly (see Rev. 10:8-10). The “Great Disappointment” On October 22 tens of thousands of believers lingered in expectation of the appearance of Jesus in the clouds, while countless others waited in doubt, fearing that the Millerites might be correct. But the day came and went, thus encouraging the scoffers and fearful, but leaving the Millerites in total disarray and discouragement. Their specific claims about the time and their unbounded confidence in the October 22 date served to heighten their disappointment. On October 24 Josiah Litch wrote to Miller: “It is a cloudy and dark day here—the sheep are scattered—and the Lord has not come yet” (JL to WM and JVH, Oct. 24, 1844). Hiram Edson later penned: “Our fondest hopes and expectations were blasted, and such a spirit of weeping came over us as I never experienced before. It seemed that the loss of all earthly friends could have been no comparison. We wept, and wept, till the day dawn” (H. Edson MS). And Washington Morse mused, “That day came and passed, and the darkness of another night closed in upon the world. But with that darkness came a pang of disappointment to the Advent believers that can find a parallel only in the sorrow of the disciples after the crucifixion of their Lord. The passing of the time was a bitter disappointment. True believers had given up all for Christ, and had shared His presence as never before. The love of Jesus filled every soul; and with inexpressible desire they prayed, ‘Come, Lord Jesus, and come quickly;’ but He did not come. And now, to turn again to the cares, perplexities, and dangers of life, in full view of jeering and reviling unbelievers who scoffed as never before, was a terrible trial of faith and patience. When Elder Himes visited Waterbury, Vt., a short time after the passing of the time, and stated that the brethren should prepare for another cold winter, my feelings were almost uncontrollable. I left the place of meeting and wept like a child” (RH, May 7, 1901; italics supplied). We might expect Miller, as founder and titular head of the movement, to be terribly shaken by the experience. On the surface, however, he maintained an upbeat public-relations stance. “Although I have been twice disappointed,” he stated on November 10, 1844, “I am not yet cast down or discouraged. God has been with me in Spirit, and has comforted me. … Although surrounded with enemies and scoffers, yet my mind is perfectly calm, and my hope in the coming of Christ is as strong as ever. I have done only what after years of sober consideration I felt to be my solemn duty…. “Brethren, hold fast; let no man take your crown. I have fixed my mind upon another time, and here I mean to stand until God gives me more light. —And that is To-day, TO-DAY, and TO-DAY, until He comes, and I see Him for whom my soul yearns” (MC, Dec. 5, 1844). In spite of those reassuring words, the bulk of the Millerites probably gave up their Second Advent faith. Meanwhile, those who continued to hope for the soon coming of Christ saw their once fairly harmonious movement dissolve into chaos as different leaders and self-appointed “leaders” put forth conflicting claims and counterclaims regarding the meaning of their experience and the “truth” about the Second Advent. Out of that seething cauldron and shapeless mass of discouragement and confusion would come the Seventh-day Adventist Church. But, of course, no one could have predicted that development in 1844. That story will be the focus of our next two chapters. For Those Who Would Like to Read More Froom, LeRoy Edwin. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1954. Vol. 4, pp. 443-851. Gordon, Paul A. Herald of the Midnight Cry. Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press, 1990. Knight, George R. William Miller and the Rise of Adventism. Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press, 2010. ———. A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs. Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald, 2000. Pp. 38-54. ———, ed. 1844 and the Rise of Sabbatarian Adventism. Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald, 1994. Pp. 1-142. (This volume contains reproductions of most of the documents cited in this chapter.) Land, Gary, ed. Adventism in America: A History, rev. ed. Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1998. Pp. 1-28. Maxwell, C. Mervyn. Tell It to the World: The Story of Seventh-day Adventists. 2nd rev. ed. Mountain View, Calif.: Pacific Press, 1977. Pp. 9-33. Neufeld, Don F., ed. The Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 2nd rev. ed. Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald, 1996. Vol. 2, pp. 73-82. Nichol, Francis D. The Midnight Cry. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1944. Schwarz, Richard W., and Floyd Greenleaf. Light Bearers: A History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press, 2000. Pp. 13-50.  CHAPTER 2 Era of Doctrinal Development (1844-1848) he aftermath of the great disappointment of October 22, 1844, found T Millerite Adventism in a state of utter confusion. The height of their hope had led to the depth of their despair. The mathematical certainty of their faith left them in shock when the expected event failed to take place. It is impossible to get a completely accurate picture of the disappointed Millerites, but it is probable that the majority abandoned their Advent faith and either went back to their previous churches or drifted into secular unbelief. We can roughly view those who maintained their hope in the soon return of Christ as belonging to one of three groups, depending upon their interpretation of what had occurred on October 22. The most easily identifiable group, under the leadership of Joshua V. Himes, rapidly came to believe that nothing had happened on that date. Holding that they had been correct as to the expected event (that is, the second coming of Christ), they concluded that they had been wrong on the time calculation. On November 5, 1844, Himes wrote that “we are now satisfied that the authorities on which we based our calculations cannot be depended upon for definite time.” Although “we are near the end,… we have no knowledge of a fixed date or definite time, but do most fully believe that we should watch and wait for the coming of Christ, as an event that may take place at any hour” (MC, Nov. 7, 1844; italics supplied). Under Himes's leadership this group took steps to organize itself into a distinct Adventist body at Albany, New York, in April 1845. The aging William Miller, under Himes's influence, lent his authority to the Albany movement. One reason for the move to organize was that fanaticism ran rampant throughout the Adventist ranks. Thus we should see the Albany Conference as an attempt at stabilization. That brings us to a second identifiable group of post-Disappointment Adventists—the “spiritualizers.” This sector of Advent ism got its name from the fact that it offered a spiritual interpretation to the event of October 22. The spiritualizers held that both the time and the event had been correct. In other words, Christ had returned on October 22, but it had been a spiritual coming. Fanaticism easily arose among the spiritualizers. Some claimed to be sinless, while others refused to work, since they were in the millennial Sabbath. Still others, following the biblical injunction that they should become as little children, discarded forks and knives and crawled around on their hands and knees. Needless to say, outbreaks of charismatic enthusiasm swept through their midst. A third strain of post-Disappointment Adventism appears among those who claimed that they had been correct on the time but wrong in the expected event. In other words, something did happen on October 22, but it was not the Second Advent. Among them were the future leaders of what would eventually develop into Seventh-day Adventism. To this group it seemed that the majority party under Himes had abandoned the Adventist message by denying the validity of their experience in the 1844 movement. Although originally the smallest of the groups, it came to see itself as the true successor of the once-powerful Millerite movement. Of the three divisions of Millerism discussed above, the third one was the last to gain visibility. Even before it could be defined as a distinct form of Adventism, it had to explain two things: (1) What did happen on October 22, 1844? and (2) What was the sanctuary that needed to be cleansed? Redefining the Sanctuary The first step toward a clearer understanding of the above questions took place on October 23, 1844. On that day Hiram Edson, a Methodist farmer of Port Gibson, New York, became convicted during a session of prayer with fellow believers “that light should be given” and our “disappointment be explained.” Soon thereafter he and a companion set out to encourage their fellow believers. As they crossed a field, Edson reported, “I was stopped about midway” and “heaven seemed open to my view…. I saw distinctly, and clearly, that instead of our High Priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, that he for the first time entered on that day the second apartment of that sanctuary; and that he had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming to this earth.” Edson's mind was also “directed” to Revelation 10, with its account of the little book that was sweet in the mouth but bitter in the stomach. Identifying the Millerites’ experience in preaching on the prophecies of Daniel as the bittersweet experience of Revelation 10, Edson noted that the chapter closed with the command to “prophesy again.” At that point the call of his companion, who had gone on ahead of him, brought Edson's awareness back to his surroundings. When asked what was wrong, Edson replied that “the Lord was answering our morning prayer; by giving light with regard to our disappointment.” Edson's “vision” soon led him into extended Bible study with O.R.L. Crosier and Dr. F. B. Hahn. They concluded, in line with Edson's October 23 experience, that the sanctuary to be cleansed in Daniel 8:14 was not the earth or the church, but the sanctuary in heaven, of which the earthly sanctuary had been a type or copy. Hahn and Edson decided that their discoveries were “just what the scattered remnant needed” to explain the Disappointment and “set the brethren on the right track.” As a result they agreed to share publishing expenses if Crosier would “write out the subject of the sanctuary.” According to Edson, Crosier began to print the findings of their combined study in the Day-Dawn during early 1845 (H. Edson MS). Then, on February 7, 1846, Enoch Jacobs published their findings in the Day-Star Extra under the title “The Law of Moses.” By that time their position had fairly well matured. Through Bible study, Crosier and his colleagues had provided answers to the questions of What happened on October 22, 1844? and What was the sanctuary that needed to be cleansed? We can summarize their most important conclusions, as presented in “The Law of Moses,” as follows: 1. A literal sanctuary exists in heaven. 2. The Hebrew sanctuary system was a complete visual representation of the plan of salvation that was patterned after the heavenly sanctuary. 3. Just as the earthly priests had a two-phase ministry in the wilderness sanctuary, so Christ has a two-phase ministry in the heavenly. The first phase began in the holy place at His ascension, while the second started on October 22, 1844, when Christ moved from the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary to the second. Thus the antitypical or heavenly day of atonement commenced on that date. 4. The first phase of Christ's ministry dealt with forgiveness; the second involves the blotting out of sins and the cleansing of both the sanctuary and individual believers. 5. The cleansing of Daniel 8:14 was a cleansing from sin and therefore accomplished by blood rather than fire. 6. Christ would not return to earth until He completed His second apartment ministry. Thus the combined study of Edson, Crosier, and Hahn confirmed Edson's October 23 “vision.” By intensive study of such books as Hebrews and Leviticus in connection with Daniel 7 through 9 and the book of Revelation, they had arrived at an explanation of both the cleansing and the sanctuary that needed it. They had also begun to understand faintly the command of Revelation 10:11 that the disappointed ones “must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.” However, during the late 1840s, as we shall see, their idea of prophesying to the world involved preaching their newfound truth only to those Millerites who had not yet seen the light on “the cleansing of the sanctuary” and related doctrines. The new understanding of the cleansing of the sanctuary became a primary building block in the development of what would become Seventh- day Adventist theology. Coupled with the belief in the soon return of Christ inherited from Miller, the two-phase heavenly ministry of Christ became a foundational teaching for what grew into a denomination during the next two decades. Before moving away from the cleansing of the sanctuary, we should note that Adventists soon linked this teaching to the idea of the investigative or pre-Advent judgment. Miller, of course, had tied the judgment scene of Daniel 7, the cleansing of the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14, and “the hour of his judgment is come” of Revelation 14:7 to the judgment to take place at the Second Advent. However, as early as 1840 one of Miller's chief lieutenants had taught the necessity of a pre-Advent judgment. In February of that year Methodist preacher Josiah Litch indicated that the judgment must take place before the resurrection. By 1842 Litch had refined his view and pointed out that the divine acts of raising some persons to life while putting others to death at the Second Coming constitute an executive judgment that must of necessity have a preliminary “trial” judgment (Prophetic Expositions, vol. 1, pp. 49- 54). The group evolving into Seventh-day Adventists would later develop that theme. Crosier, while not making the pre-Advent judgment explicit in his February 1846 article, pointed out that the high priest did wear the breast-plate of judgment on the Day of Atonement and that the cleansing of the sanctuary was a purging from sin. It was only a short step beyond that position for Joseph Bates (an ex-sea captain and an active Millerite layman) in 1847, and others as early as 1845, to equate the heavenly day of atonement with a pre-Advent judgment that must of necessity occur before Christ could return to execute the Advent judgment, at which all would then receive their just rewards. Although resisted at first by some (including James White, a young preacher of the Christian Connexion, who had become a forceful advocate of the 1844 message), that teaching became firmly entrenched by the mid-1850s. Thus the developing Seventh-day Adventist theology came to see the cleansing of the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14 as Christ's act of investigative or pre-Advent judgment in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. As a result, when those evolving into Seventh-day Adventists preached the first angel's message (“the hour of his judgment is come” [Rev. 14:7]), they eventually interpreted it as an announcement of the beginning of the pre- Advent judgment on October 22, 1844. So far we have examined the development of two distinctive pillars of what was becoming Seventh-day Adventist theology: (1) the personal, soon- coming, premillennial return of Jesus—a belief inherited from the Millerites; and (2) the two-apartment ministry of Christ, including the pre- Advent judgment—a doctrinal position that believers came to understand as they struggled with the meaning of the cleansing of the sanctuary in Daniel 8:14. Thus while the majority of the Millerite Adventists, under the leadership of Himes, looked back on the time element in their interpretation of the 2300-day prophecy of Daniel 8:14 as an error, the group evolving into Seventh-day Adventism held that the Millerites had been correct on the time, but wrong as to the event to take place on October 22, 1844. After all, they noted, no one had been able to refute Miller's time calculations. But further study made it obvious to them that the Millerites had misinterpreted the symbolism of both the “cleansing” and the “sanctuary.” This small band of struggling believers refused to step off the prophetic platform that had made the Millerite movement such a powerful force. Rather, while building on Miller's and Snow's insights, they made what they believed to be necessary corrections to them. They felt deeply convicted that God had called Miller to enlighten the world with the message of the nearness of the Second Advent. The Gift of Prophecy Intimately related to the prophetic validity of the Millerite message and the correctness of the October 22 date was the call of 17-year-old Ellen Harmon (Ellen White after her marriage in 1846) to the prophetic ministry. Along with most other Millerites, in November 1844 she gave up her faith that anything had happened on October 22. But to her surprise, she later recalled, “while I was praying at the family altar [in December 1844], the Holy Ghost fell upon me.” In vision, when she looked for her fellow Adventists and could not see them, a voice told her to look a little higher. “At this,” she recounted, “I raised my eyes, and saw a straight and narrow path…. On this path the Advent people were traveling to the [heavenly] city, which was at the farther end of the path. They had a bright light set up behind them at the beginning of the path, which an angel told me was the midnight cry.” In this way God confirmed that the October 22 date was a fulfillment of prophecy. “This light,” Ellen Harmon continued, “shone all along the path and gave light for their [the saints’] feet so that they might not stumble. If they kept their eyes fixed on Jesus, who was just before them, leading them to the city, they were safe.” But some, she reported, “rashly denied the light behind them and said that it was not God that had led them out so far.” For them, “the light behind them went out, leaving their feet in perfect darkness,” and they “fell off the path down into the dark and wicked world below” (EW 14, 15). Her first vision tells us a great deal about Ellen Harmon's ministry. First and foremost it points us to her lifelong passion—the soon return of Jesus and God's care for His children. Beyond that, it presents a dual emphasis that runs throughout her 70-year ministry. The first aspect of that emphasis is that something of great importance took place in heaven on October 22, 1844, and that Adventists should never forget their place in prophetic history. Thus she could later write that “we have nothing to fear for the future, except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history.” Adventists, she held, are a prophetic people (LS 196). The second aspect of her dual emphasis was that individuals must keep their eyes focused on Jesus, their Savior. Thus Adventists are not only a distinctively prophetic people; they are also a Christian people. As we shall see in chapter 5, she greatly emphasized this second aspect of her dual focus during the post-1888 period as she sought to get Adventism to bring the two aspects of its belief system into proper perspective. For 70 years (from 1844 through her death in 1915) Ellen White preached God's love, the nearness of Christ's coming, and God's judgment- hour message. At the beginning, of course, she had little authority. Most believers perceived her as just one voice among many. But gradually the members of the developing denomination began to recognize her prophetic message as a communication from God to guide His people through the crisis of the end-times. Not surprisingly, given the charismatic fanaticism evident in some sectors of post-1844 Adventism, she did not want to be God's spokesperson. She was also undoubtedly aware that Millerism, because of some sad experiences, had a deep prejudice against visions and private revelations. In fact, in May 1845 the Albany group went on record as having “no confidence in any new messages, visions, dreams, tongues, miracles, extraordinary gifts, revelations,” and so on (MW, May 5, 1845). It has never been easy to be God's prophet, and that was certainly true in 1844—the very year that Joseph Smith, the Mormon “prophet,” lost his life to a mob in Illinois. But God told Ellen Harmon that He would strengthen her. As time passed, Adventists increasingly felt impressed with the soundness of her message. By applying the biblical tests of a prophet to her life and work, more and more people confirmed their belief in her call. At this juncture we should point out that Ellen Harmon was not God's first or only choice for the prophetic office among Adventists. Early in 1842 William Foy, a Black freedman belonging to the Baptist Church, received a number of visions dealing with the second coming of Christ and the reward of the righteous. Foy preached his messages for some time. Then, shortly before the Great Disappointment, God called a second man, Hazen Foss, to the prophetic office, but he refused to cooperate and lost the gift. Foss later encouraged Ellen Harmon not to make the same mistake. Before moving away from this section on the gift of prophecy, we should note that Ellen White's gift did not play a prominent role in the development of Adventist doctrine. In an 1874 response to critics who claimed that Seventh-day Adventists had received their sanctuary doctrine through the visions of Ellen White, the denomination's leading editor replied: “Hundreds of articles have been written upon the subject. But in no one of these are the visions once referred to as any authority on this subject, or the source from whence any view we hold has been derived…. The appeal is invariably to the Bible, where there is abundant evidence for the views we hold on this subject” (RH, Dec. 22, 1874). The same could be said for each of the great doctrinal positions of Adventism. The primary method used by the pioneers in their doctrinal formation was to study the Bible until a general consensus developed. At that point Ellen White would sometimes receive a vision on a topic already studied, primarily to reaffirm the consensus and to help those who were still out of harmony with the majority to accept the correctness of the group's biblically derived conclusions. Thus we can best view Mrs. White's role in doctrinal development as confirmation rather than initiation. As we shall see in chapter 4, however, she sometimes played a more prominent role in the development of positions in the area of Adventist lifestyle than she did in doctrinal formation. Some early Adventist leaders were quite sensitive to a possible misuse of the gift of prophecy. For example, for years Adventists differed with each other over the exact time to begin and close the Sabbath. After a thorough study of the Bible, a consensus emerged in 1855 that the Sabbath began and ended at sunset. Bates, however, still held out for the 6:00 position. At that point Mrs. White received a vision confirming the sunset-to-sunset view already established through a study of the Bible. That was enough to bring Bates and his colleagues into harmony with the others. Interestingly enough, that vision also changed Ellen White's view on the topic. The question then arose as to why God didn't just settle issues by providing visions in the first place. James White's reply provides us with a crucial understanding of the role of his wife's gift. “It does not appear,” he penned, “to be the desire of the Lord to teach his people by the gifts of the Spirit on the Bible questions until his servants have diligently searched his word…. Let the gifts have their proper place in the church. God has never set them in the very front, and commanded us to look to them to lead us in the path of truth, and the way to Heaven. His word he has magnified. The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are man's lamp to light up his path to the kingdom. Follow that. But if you err from Bible truth, and are in danger of being lost, it may be that God will in the time of his choice correct you, and bring you back to the Bible, and save you” (RH, Feb. 25, 1868; italics supplied). Seventh-day Adventism at its best has been a Bible-oriented movement that accepts the scriptural teaching of the gift of prophecy. However, one of the unfortunate aspects of Adventist history is that some church members have too often abused Ellen White's gift by giving it more prominence than the Bible. Both of the Whites and the other founders of Adventism rejected that nonbiblical position. The gift of prophecy is a blessing to God's church, but true Adventism has always uplifted the primacy of Scripture. The Sabbath Simultaneously with the above doctrinal developments, those Adventists holding to the heavenly sanctuary teaching and the validity of the October 22 date began to gain a fuller understanding of the law of God and the seventh- day Sabbath. The first Adventists to accept the seventh-day Sabbath heard of it from the Seventh Day Baptists, who in the early 1840s had renewed their burden to spread their special insight. One of their members, an aggressive woman named Rachel Oakes, challenged an Adventist preacher belonging to the Methodist Church to keep all of God's commandments. As a result, Pastor Frederick Wheeler began to observe the seventh day in the spring of 1844. About that same time several members of the Washington, New Hampshire, church, where Wheeler often preached, also began worshiping on the biblical Sabbath. Thus the first Sabbathkeeping Adventist congregation came into being before the Great Disappointment. In the summer of 1844 T. M. Preble, a Free Will Baptist preacher who had become a Millerite, also accepted the Sabbath through his contacts with the Washington congregation. Realizing that time was short, neither Wheeler nor Preble felt a burden to make an issue of their newfound Sabbath message. After the Great Disappointment, however, Preble published his Sabbath beliefs in the February 28, 1845, issue of the Hope of Israel. Later that year he again set forth his views in a 12-page pamphlet with the not-so-subtle title Tract, Showing That the Seventh Day Should Be Observed as the Sabbath, Instead of the First Day; “According to the Commandment.” In March of 1845 Preble's writings fell into the hands of Joseph Bates, one of the three primary founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Bates accepted the Sabbath and in August 1846 the ex-sea captain published a tract entitled The Seventh Day Sabbath, a Perpetual Sign. That little volume led James and Ellen Harmon (who married on August 30, 1846) to the seventh-day Sabbath. Years later Ellen White remembered that “in the autumn of 1846 we began to observe the Bible Sabbath, and to teach and defend it” (1T 75). Thus the three founders of Seventh-day Adventism had united on the Sabbath doctrine by the end of 1846. By that time Bates also had shared the Bible's teaching on the Sabbath with Crosier, Hahn, and Edson. All three initially accepted it, but Crosier and Hahn eventually reverted back to Sundaykeeping. Meanwhile, Bates and the Whites had adopted their insights on the heavenly sanctuary. Thus by late 1846 a small group of Adventist believers began to form around the united doctrines of the ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary and the binding nature of the seventh-day Sabbath. From this point on in our discussion we will refer to them as Sabbatarian Adventists. They formed the nucleus of what, in the early 1860s, became the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Bates gave to the seventh-day Sabbath a richness and prophetic meaning that it never could have had among the Seventh Day Baptists. For the Baptists the seventh day was merely the correct day. But with Bates, steeped as he was in a prophetic faith informed by extensive study of the books of Daniel and the Revelation, the seventh-day Sabbath took on an eschatological (end-time) richness that went beyond the realm of Baptist understanding. Through a series of small books Bates interpreted the Sabbath within the framework of Revelation 11-14. Between 1846 and 1849 he made at least three contributions to a prophetic understanding of the Sabbath. First, he began to see connections between the Sabbath and the sanctuary. As he studied the sounding of the seventh trumpet in Revelation 11:15-19 (a passage obviously having to do with the last days), Bates felt himself particularly drawn to verse 19: “And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament.” Bates noted a recent upsurge of writing on the seventh-day Sabbath. Why? When the seventh angel began to sound, he proposed, the second apartment of the temple of God opened in heaven and the ark of the covenant was spiritually revealed and people began to search the Scriptures. The ark of the covenant in the earthly sanctuary, of course, contained the Ten Commandments. Thus, through typological comparison, he concluded that the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary had an ark containing the Decalogue, as did the earthly sanctuary. God's law eventually came to be seen as the basis for the pre-Advent judgment that had been under way since October 22, 1844. On that date the second apartment had opened in heaven, exposing the ark of the covenant and pointing to a renewed emphasis on God's law. Bates's second contribution to the developing understanding of the Sabbath in prophetic history came through his study of the three angels’ messages of Revelation 14. He presented them as sequential. The first two (the hour of God's judgment and the fall of Babylon), he said, the Millerites had preached. But he held that verse 12, “Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God,” began to be fulfilled after October 22, 1844. Thus, he wrote in 1847, a people “have been uniting in companies for the last two years, on the commandments of God” (Seventh-day Sabbath [1847 ed.], p. 59). Bates, of course, did not lose the prophetic forcefulness of Revelation 12:17: “And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep [all] the commandments of God.” That “war,” he held, Revelation 13 described as the beast powers seeking to overcome God's commandment-keeping people, finally issuing the death decree of verse 15. Thus Bates's third contribution to Sabbath theology (in the framework of prophecy) was to develop the end-time concepts of the seal of God and the mark of the beast in the context of allegiance either to God or to the beast. Faithfulness to the biblical Sabbath, he held, would be the outward focal point in the struggle. Conditional Immortality  The final distinctive Adventist doctrine is that of conditional immortality. Most Christians throughout history have believed, following Greek philosophy, that people are born immortal. Thus when their bodies die, their spirits or souls go either to heaven to live with God or to an eternally burning hell. In other words, people have innate immortality. It is impossible for them to really die or cease to exist. Many biblical scholars down through history, looking at the issue through Hebrew rather than Greek eyes, have denied the teaching of innate immortality. One such individual was George Storrs. After three years of intensive Bible study, this Methodist minister concluded in 1840 that human beings do not possess inherent immortality. Immortality, he held, belongs to those who follow Christ, and thus it is conditional. Those who accept Christ by faith will have immortality, while those who reject Him remain mortal and subject to death. That teaching, of course, has direct implications for the fate of the wicked. In short, if the wicked are not immortal, they cannot burn forever. They will be consumed in the fires of hell, and the result will be eternal. Thus Storrs began to preach “annihilationism.” To believe anything else, he held, was to impugn the loving character of God. In 1842 Storrs joined Millerite Adventism and soon developed into one of the movement's leading activists and writers. In the fall of 1844, as we saw earlier, he became one of the foremost advocates of the seventh-month movement. Meanwhile, one of his first ministerial converts was Charles Fitch. “Dear Br. Storrs,” Fitch wrote on January 25, 1844, “as you have long been fighting the Lord's battles alone, on the subject of the state of the dead, and of the final doom of the wicked, I write this to say that I am at last after much thought and prayer, and a full conviction of duty to God, prepared to take my stand by your side” (Charles Fitch to George Storrs, Jan. 25, 1844). The three founders of Seventh-day Adventism—Joseph Bates and James and Ellen White—all accepted the teaching of conditional immortality. To them it not only made biblical sense, but seemed to be necessitated by their theology. After all, a belief in immortal souls already in heaven or hell appeared to do away with the need for the pre- and postmillennial resurrections described in the New Testament. Beyond that, if people already had their reward, why have a pre-Advent judgment or even the Second Advent? Thus conditional immortality formed an integral link in a theology centered on Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary. The “Pillar” Doctrines and the Three Angels’ Messages By early 1848 the Sabbatarian Adventist leaders, through extensive and intensive Bible study, had come to basic agreement on at least five points of doctrine: (1) the personal, visible, premillennial return of Jesus; (2) the cleansing of the sanctuary, with Christ's ministry in the second apartment having begun on October 22, 1844—the beginning of the antitypical day of atonement; (3) the validity of the gift of prophecy, with progressively more of the believers seeing Ellen White's ministry as a modern manifestation of that gift; (4) the obligation to observe the seventh-day Sabbath and the role of the Sabbath in the great end-time conflict prophesied in Revelation 11- 14; and (5) that immortality is not an inherent human quality but something people receive only through faith in Christ. Sabbatarian Adventists, and later Seventh-day Adventists, came to see those five doctrines as “landmark” or “pillar” tenets. Together they set this branch of Adventism off from not only other Millerite bodies, but from other Christians in general. Those five distinctives stood at the heart of developing Sabbatarian Adventism and made them a distinctive people. As such, the seventh-day people highly valued and avidly preached these beliefs. The Sabbatarians, of course, shared many beliefs with other Christians, such as salvation by grace through faith in Jesus’ sacrifice and the efficacy of prayer. But their preaching and teaching focused on their distinctive pillar doctrines. That emphasis grew partly out of the fact that they had to defend those beliefs in their encounters with other Christians, and partly out of their desire to share those teachings with people who did not know them. As we shall see in chapter 5, that one-sided emphasis eventually led to problems in Adventism. Meanwhile, it is important to realize that the five pillar doctrines did not stand alone. They formed a unified doctrinal/prophetic package. At the core of that package were two biblical ideas—the sanctuary and the three angels’ messages. Of the centrality of the sanctuary in Sabbatarian belief, Roswell F. Cottrell wrote in 1863: “We find, not only that the sanctuary in heaven is the grand center of the Christian system, as the earthly was of the typical, but that this subject is the center and citadel of present truth. And since our temple is in heaven, and in that temple, ‘the ark of his testament,’ containing ‘the commandments of God,’ and in the very midst of these commandments, the Sabbath of the Lord, fenced around by nine moral precepts that cannot be overthrown, it is no wonder that the enemies of the Sabbath should, not only strive to abolish the ten commandments, but to demolish the true sanctuary in which they are deposited” (RH, Dec. 15, 1863). Our previous discussion has pointed out the relationship of each of the landmark doctrines to the sanctuary. At this juncture it is important to emphasize both the centrality of the sanctuary in Adventist theology and the fact that that theology is a unified set of beliefs. Thus to challenge one part of the system questions all of it. The second organizing and unifying biblical image for Sabbatarian Adventism's theology was that of the three angels of Revelation 14. Those messages not only tied all of Adventist theology to the sanctuary service with its judgment (and salvation) message, but enabled the Sabbatarians to place themselves in the flow of prophetic history. Beyond that, the three angels’ messages eventually became the prophetic force that spread Seventh-day Adventist missions throughout the world as the church sought to take its unique message “to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people” (Rev. 14:6). But that mission vision was far from the minds of the few struggling Sabbatarian Adventists in the late 1840s. On the other hand, even then they were beginning to catch the prophetic import of the three angels for their work. In 1850 James White published an important article summarizing their conclusions on the topic. He equated the first angel's message (see verses 6, 7) with the Millerite preaching of the Second Advent. For him the time element in “the hour of his judgment is come” was crucial. “The whole Advent host,” he penned, “once believed” that something special would happen about 1843. “The unbelief of those who doubt now,” he continued, “does not prove that we were all mistaken then. The passing of the time, and the perpetual backsliding and unbelief of Adventists has not changed this truth of God into a lie; but it remains truth still.” The second angel (see verse 8), White emphasized, “followed” the first angel. When, in reaction to the preaching of the soon return of Christ, the churches began to shut their doors to the Millerites and disfellowship them, then—under the leadership of Charles Fitch—the second angel sounded with the message of “‘Babylon is fallen…. Come out of her, my people.’” “This prophecy,” White penned, “was exactly fulfilled, and in the right time, and place…. We heard it with our ears, our voices proclaimed it, and our whole being felt its power, and with our eyes we saw its effect, as the oppressed people of God burst the bands that bound them to the various sects, and made their escape from Babylon…. “The second angel's message called us out from the fallen churches where we are now free to think, and act for ourselves in the fear of God. It is an exceedingly interesting fact, that the Sabbath question began to be agitated among second advent believers immediately after they were called out of the churches by the second angel's message. God's work moves in order. The Sabbath truth came up in just the right time to fulfill prophecy.” White saw the message of the third angel (see verses 9-12) as the climax to this prophetic movement. It would be God's last message of mercy to the world just prior to the great harvest of souls at the Second Advent (see verses 15-20). He pointed out that Revelation 13 and 14 and the message of the third angel recognize only two classes of people. One persecutes the saints and receives the mark of the beast, while the other continues to be patient in waiting for Christ to return (in spite of the October 22, 1844, disappointment) and is “KEEPING THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.” “Never did I have such feelings while holding my pen as now,” James White wrote as he moved toward his presentation's emotional climax. “And never did I see and feel the importance of the Sabbath as I do this moment. Surely the Sabbath truth, like the rising sun ascending from the east, has increased in light, in power and in importance until it is the great sealing truth…. “Many stopped at the first angel's message, and others at the second, and many will refuse the third; but a few will ‘follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth,’ and go up and possess the land. Though they have to pass through fire and blood, or witness the ‘time of trouble such as never was,’ they will not yield, and ‘receive the mark of the beast,’ but they will struggle on, and press their holy warfare until they, with the harps of God, strike the note of victory on mount Zion” (PT, April 1850). Truly the Sabbatarian Adventists saw themselves as a movement of prophecy. Because of their convictions they often referred to their movement as the “third angel's message.” The “Shut Door” Approach to Mission While the three angels’ messages of Revelation 14 obviously pointed to worldwide mission, that aspect of the chapter was not at all evident to the early Sabbatarian Adventists. Truth is progressive, and, as is often the case in our personal lives, the Sabbatarians comprehended God's plan for them only one step at a time. In fact, we might best think of the early Sabbatarian Adventists in terms of antimission rather than mission. We can accurately describe their mission theory and practice as a “shut door” on mission outreach.  That concept was not original with the Sabbatarian believers, but had been developed by William Miller, who had likened his message to the “midnight cry” in the parable of the ten virgins (see Matt. 25). That parable states that when the bridegroom (i.e., Christ) comes, the door will be shut, leaving some on the outside. “‘The door was shut,’ “Miller taught in the 1830s and early 1840s, “implies the closing up of the mediatorial kingdom, and finishing the gospel period” (Evidence From Scripture and History [1842 printing], p. 237). After Christ did not return on October 22, 1844, Miller—still expecting Christ's soon appearance in the clouds of heaven— interpreted the shut door as the close of human probation. Thus in December 1844 Miller could write: “We have done our work in warning sinners, and in trying to awake a formal church. God, in his providence has shut the door; we can only stir one another up to be patient; and be diligent to make our calling and election sure. We are now living in the time specified by Malachi iii.18, also Daniel xii.10, Rev. xxii.10-12. In this passage we cannot help but see, that a little while before Christ should come, there would be a separation between the just and unjust…. Never since the days of the apostles, has there been such a division line drawn” (AH, Dec. 11, 1844). Certainly the nasty reactions of scoffing unbelievers and ex-Millerites after the Great Disappointment must have made it seem that the door of probation had indeed shut. In addition, the massive flow of new converts had come to an abrupt halt on October 22. Nearly all Millerites accepted the shut-door teaching right after the Great Disappointment. But that soon changed, since the shut-door teaching was tied to the fulfillment of prophecy on October 22. As a result, when the majority of the Millerites, under Himes's leadership, began to claim that they had been wrong on the time and that nothing had happened on October 22, they also gave up their belief that the door of probation had closed. On the other hand, the Sabbatarian Adventists, including Bates and the Whites, continued to hold to both an October 22 fulfillment of prophecy and the shut-door teaching. Thus the other Millerite Adventists began to refer to them as “the Sabbath and shut-door people”—derogatory terms signifying their doctrinal distinctives. The problem of the shut-door people was that they had inherited from the Millerite movement some error in their shut-door theory that was intimately tied to their misunderstanding of the cleansing of the sanctuary. After all, if the cleansing of the sanctuary was the second coming of Christ, then probation for the wicked would obviously have closed on October 22. Further Bible study, as we noted above, soon led the Sabbatarians to see their error in regard to the cleansing of the sanctuary, but it took them several years to clear up the related shut-door misconception. Meanwhile, sometimes even mistakes lead to good results. So it happened with the shut door. During the shut-door period of Adventist mission development Sabbatarian Adventists believed that the evangelistic outreach of their movement was restricted to those who had accepted the Millerite message of the 1830s and early 1840s. The door of mercy had shut for all others. Thus the shut-door “mistake” provided the small band of Sabbatarian Adventists with ample time to build their own theological foundation. They spent little of their scarce resources on evangelism until they had a message. After sorting out their own theological identity, their next step was to try to convince other Millerites of their doctrinal package and prophetic interpretation. That task took place between 1848 and 1850 (to be covered in the next chapter). The “utility” of the shut-door period, therefore, was that it allowed time for the Sabbatarians to form a doctrinal foundation and develop a membership base. Only after they had completed those tasks were they ready to take the next step in their prophetic mission. For Those Who Would Like to Read More Damsteegt, P. Gerard. Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. (Reprinted by Andrews University Press, Berrien Springs, Mich., 1988.) Douglass, Herbert E. Messenger of the Lord: The Prophetic Ministry of Ellen G. White. Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press, 1998. Froom, LeRoy Edwin. The Conditionalist Faith of Our Fathers. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1965. Vol. 2, pp. 646-740. Holbrook, Frank B., ed. Doctrine of the Sanctuary: A Historical Survey (1845-1863). Silver Spring, Md.: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 1989. Knight, George R. Joseph Bates: The Real Founder of Seventh-day Adventism. Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald, 2004. ————. Meeting Ellen White: A Fresh Look at Her Life, Writings, and Major Themes. Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald, 1996. ————. A Search for Identity. Pp. 55-89. ———. Walking With Ellen White: The Human Interest Story. Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald, 1999. ———, ed. 1844 and the Rise of Sabbatarian Adventism. Pp. 143-190. (This volume contains most of the documents cited in this chapter.) Land, Gary, ed. Adventism in America. Pp. 29-52. Maxwell, C. Mervyn. Tell It to the World. Pp. 40-94. Schwarz, Richard W., and Floyd Greenleaf. Light Bearers. Pp. 51-68. Wheeler, Gerald. James White: Innovator and Overcomer. Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald, 2003. White, Arthur L. Ellen G. White. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1981-1986. Vol. 1, pp. 45-138.  CHAPTER 3 Era of Organizational Development (1848-1863) ooking at the present worldwide Seventh-day Adventist organization, L I find it difficult to believe that most of the earliest Adventists opposed all church organization above the congregational level. George Storrs summed up their position nicely when he warned that “no church can be organized by man's invention but what it becomes Babylon the moment it is organized” (MC, Feb. 15, 1844). Storrs’ logic is not too difficult to grasp. After all, hadn't the organized churches, the very bodies that Fitch and his followers had defined as Babylon, excommunicated the Millerites? Why, the logic ran, should these free people re-create another Babylon? That sentiment was widespread among all Millerite Adventist branches, including the Sabbatarians. In addition, the strong influence exerted by the Christian Connexion—a group that traditionally had resisted church organization above the local level— also strengthened the antiorganization attitude among Adventists. Two of the three Sabbatarian founders—James White and Joseph Bates—had belonged to the Connexion. On the other hand, the third founder—Ellen White—had grown up in the Methodist Episcopal Church. The title of Charles Ferguson's Organizing to Beat the Devil: Methodists and Early America helps us see that Mrs. White, coming from the most efficiently organized Protestant denomination of the day, brought a different perspective to the topic. It took nearly 20 years for the tension over organization to find resolution among the Sabbatarian Adventists. Meanwhile, by 1848, as we saw in chapter 2, the small group of Sabbatarian leaders had agreed on a set of basic doctrines and believed they had a responsibility to share their beliefs with those Adventists still confused about what had taken place in October 1844. The Sabbatarians chose a typically Millerite approach for sharing their beliefs. They organized a series of conferences to discuss the issue. We should regard these semi-informal conferences as the first organizational step in the development of Seventh-day Adventism. The Sabbatarian Conferences The first of the Sabbatarian Conferences convened in the spring of 1848 in Rocky Hill, Connecticut. At least five more met that year, another six in 1849, and 10 in 1850. Joseph Bates and the Whites attended most of them. Although most conferences took place over a weekend, some went from Thursday through Monday. Their purpose, according to James White, was the “uniting [of] the brethren on the great truths connected with the message of the third angel” (RH, May 6, 1852). By 1848 many in New England and western New York had become convinced of the validity of one or more of the Sabbatarian Adventist doctrines, but they lacked a common consensus. James White's report of the first Sabbath conference illustrates both their purpose and some of the dynamics involved. “We had a meeting that evening [Thursday, April 20, 1848] of about fifteen in all,” White wrote. “Friday morning the brethren came in until we numbered about fifty. They were not all fully in the truth. Our meeting that day was very interesting. Bro. Bates presented the commandments in a clear light, and their importance was urged home by powerful testimonies. The word had effect to establish those already in the truth, and to awaken those who were not fully decided” (in 2SG 93; italics supplied). The purpose and dynamics of the conferences came out even more clearly in Ellen White's report of the second one, which met in “Bro. Arnold's barn” in Volney, New York, during August 1848. “There were about thirty-five present,” she penned, “all that could be collected in that part of the State. There were hardly two agreed. Each was strenuous for his views, declaring that they were according to the Bible. All were anxious for an opportunity to advance their sentiments, or to preach to us. They were told that we had not come so great a distance to hear them, but had come to teach them the truth. Bro. Arnold held that the 1000 years of Rev. xx were in the past; and that the 144,000 were those raised at CHRIST'S resurrection…. “These strange differences of opinion rolled a heavy weight upon me, especially as Bro. A[rnold] spoke of the 1000 years being in the past. I knew that he was in error, and great grief pressed my spirits; for it seemed to me that GOD was dishonored. I fainted under the burden. Brethren Bates, Chamberlain, Gurney, Edson, and my husband, prayed for me…. The LORD heard the prayers of his servants, and I revived. The light of Heaven rested upon me. I was soon lost to earthly things. My accompanying angel presented before me some of the errors of those present, and also the truth in contrast with their errors. That these discordant views, which they claimed to be according to the Bible, were only according to their opinion of the Bible, and that their errors must be yielded, and they unite upon the third angel's message. Our meeting ended victoriously. Truth gained the victory” (ibid. 97-99; italics supplied). Note that Bates and the Whites took a strong leadership role early in the conferences. It required forceful, goal-oriented leadership to form a body of believers within the chaotic conditions of post-Disappointment Adventism. Also we should observe that the primary purpose of those meetings was to unite a body of believers in the truths of the third angel's message—a message already studied out and agreed upon by the Sabbatarian leaders. According to James White, by November 1849 the conferences were fulfilling their primary purpose. “By the proclamation of the Sabbath truth in… connection with the Advent movement,” he reported to a Brother Bowles, “God is making known those that are His. In western N.Y. the number of Sabbath keepers is increasing fast. There are more than twice the number now than six months ago. So it is [also] more or less in Maine, Mass., N.H., Vermont, and Conn…. “The scattering time [as a result of the Great Disappointment] we have had; it is in the past, and now the time for the saints to be gathered into the unity of the faith, and be sealed by one holy, uniting truth has come. Yes, Brother, it has come. “It is true that the work moves slowly, but it moves sure, and it gathers strength at every step…. “Our past Advent experience, and present position and future work is marked out in Rev. 14 Chap. as plain as the prophetic pencil could write it. Thank God that we see it…. “I believe that the Sabbath truth is yet to ring through the land, as the Advent never has…. “I am sick of all our Advent papers, and all our Advent editors, poor creatures. Lamps gone out, still trying to light their blind brethren to the kingdom of God.” James added that he had no desire to be like them. “I only ask the precious privilege to feed, if possible[,] my poor brethren—‘the outcasts’” (JW to Brother Bowles, Nov. 8, 1849; italics supplied). Thus from almost their beginning the Sabbatarians saw themselves as a mission-driven people, a people propelled by the imperative of the three angels of Revelation 14. The first step in their mission to the world was to reach out to the confused Millerites during the late 1840s. The Sabbatarian conferences became the initial avenue to accomplish that goal. We should note that while the primary purpose of the Sabbath conferences was to unite the believers in a doctrinal package already studied out, the conferences also provided opportunity to refine those positions as new questions led to further answers in the context of Bible study. Publishing “the Truth” The second step in the development of a Sabbatarian organizational structure lay in the area of publications. Like the Sabbatarian Conferences, the initial publications served to call out, inform, and unite a body of believers on the three angels’ messages from within the scattered ranks of the still confused Millerite Adventists. Also paralleling the conferences was the fact that publications stood at the heart of predisappointment Millerite “organization.” The first publications of the Sabbatarians were occasional tracts that highlighted their newfound truths in the context of Millerism as a prophetic movement. These tracts, or small books, included Bates's The Opening Heavens (1846), The Seventh-day Sabbath, a Perpetual Sign (1846 and significantly revised in 1847), Second Advent Way Marks and High Heaps (1847), and A Seal of the Living God (1849). Beyond Bates's pamphlets was the first joint publishing venture of the Sabbatarian leadership —A Word to the “Little Flock” (1847). The 24- page document encouraged Advent believers to hold on to their 1844 experience as they sought greater light on their future. An Ellen White vision in Dorchester, Massachusetts, during November 1848 stimulated a major transition in Adventist publishing. After coming out of vision, she told James that she had “a message” for him. “You must begin to print a little paper and send it out to the people. Let it be small at first; but as the people read, they will send you means with which to print, and it will be a success from the first. From this small beginning it was shown to me to be like streams of light that went clear round the world” (LS 125; italics supplied). Her prediction of a worldwide publishing program could not have arisen from anything particularly encouraging among the scattered Sabbatarian believers at that time. Humanly speaking, it looked absurd. What could a few penniless preachers backed by about 100 believers possibly accomplish? Certainly we could not imagine a more humble beginning for a publishing venture. In spite of the daunting circumstances, the financially prostrate and homeless James White stepped out in faith to write and print the “little paper.” Looking back at the experience, he later wrote: “We sat down to prepare the matter for that little sheet, and wrote every word of it, our entire library comprising a three-shilling pocket Bible, Cruden's Condensed Concordance, and Walker's old dictionary, minus one of its covers. Destitute of means, our hope of success was in God” (RH, June 17, 1880). Not having much choice, White sought out a non-Adventist printer who printed an eight-page pamphlet for a total stranger and waited for his pay until contributions filtered back from the hoped-for readers. White found such a printer in Charles Pelton of Middletown, Connecticut. The first issue of 1,000 copies of the Present Truth came off the press in July 1849. “When he brought the first number from the printing-office,” Ellen White recalled, “we all bowed around it, asking the Lord, with humble hearts and many tears, to let his blessing rest upon the feeble efforts of his servant. He [James] then directed the paper to all he thought would read it, and carried it to the post office [eight miles distant] in a carpet- bag…. Very soon letters came bringing means to publish the paper, and the good news of many souls embracing the truth” (LS 260). The content of the Present Truth was what the Sabbatarians saw as the message for that time—the Sabbath, the three angels’ messages, and related doctrinal topics. The “little paper” played its part in the “gathering time” of the late 1840s. The publication of the Present Truth, however, was only the first step in the development of Sabbatarian periodicals. The summer of 1850 saw James release the first issue of the Advent Review—a journal that reprinted many of the most important Millerite articles of the early 1840s. The Advent Review sought to impress the scattered Millerites with the forcefulness and truthfulness of the arguments undergirding the 1844 movement. November 1850 witnessed the combining of the Present Truth and the Advent Review into the Second Advent Review and Sabbath Herald. That journal, currently known as the Adventist Review, truly did become a worldwide periodical that encircles the world today “like streams of light.” For many years the Review and Herald (as it was affectionately called) was essentially “the church” for most Sabbatarians. After all, they generally had no church building, denomination, or regular preacher. The periodic arrival of the Review provided the scattered Adventists with news of their church and fellow believers, sermons, and a sense of belonging. As such, its influence and importance in early Adventism is almost impossible to overestimate. The early 1850s saw one other addition to Sabbatarian periodical literature. In 1852 James White began publishing the Youth's Instructor (its modern successor is Insight) for the youth of the church. The Youth's Instructor was the first organized attempt to do something for Sabbatarian young people. In its train soon followed the establishment of Sabbath schools, for which the Instructor published the Bible lessons. The first Sabbath schools began in the 1850s under the leadership of James White, John Byington (who served as the first General Conference president a decade later), and M. G. Kellogg. By the end of the 1850s the Sabbatarian publishing effort had become a major business venture, establishing its own publishing house in Battle Creek, Michigan, in 1855. The problem of ownership of the publishing enterprise eventually pushed the Sabbatarian Adventists toward a more formal and legal organizational structure. Early Moves Toward Formal Organization Because of aggressive outreach through conferences and publications aimed at the large body of searching Millerites, by 1852 the Sabbatarian Adventists were experiencing rapid growth. According to one estimate that seems fairly accurate, their adherents went from about 200 in 1850 to approximately 2,000 in 1852. While that type of growth is a blessing to a religious movement, it brings its own problems. Thus it should come as no surprise to find the leading Sabbatarians and some local congregations concerning themselves with “gospel order” (church organization) in the early 1850s. They faced several problems. First, they had no way to certify clergy. The scattered congregations were at the mercy of any traveling preacher who claimed to be a Sabbatarian minister. Closely connected to that issue was the fact that Sabbatarians had no channels or provision for ordination. As a result, while James White had been ordained as a minister in the Christian Connexion in 1843, it is probable that Joseph Bates never did receive ordination. Second, the believers had no way to distribute funds to ministers. In fact, neither did they have any systematic means to gather funds. As we shall soon see, the crisis of an underpaid and demoralized ministry led to the near collapse of the Sabbatarian movement in 1856. Third, they had no legal organization for holding property. That was not much of a problem in 1850, but by late in the decade it became an issue that they had no choice but to address. Perhaps the first significant discussions among Sabbatarians regarding gospel order took place in 1850 and 1851. At that time the issue was the withdrawing of the hand of fellowship from members who had become mixed up with spiritualism and other unchristian activities. Then, in the early 1850s, we find congregations ordaining deacons for the celebration of the “ordinances of the Lord's house.” That year also witnessed the first formal ordination of men for the gospel ministry. In addition, by 1853 the “leading brethren”—generally Bates and White—were issuing signed identification cards to “traveling brethren” in order to thwart impostors. The year 1853 also saw James and Ellen White open up their siege guns on the topic of gospel order. “The Lord has shown that gospel order has been too much feared and neglected,” Ellen wrote. “Formality should be shunned; but, in so doing, order should not be neglected. There is order in heaven. There was order in the church when Christ was upon the earth…. And now in these last days, while God is bringing His children into the unity of the faith, there is more real need of order than ever before” (EW 97). Underlying her argument seems to be the idea that the church was doing a battle with the highly organized forces of evil. Therefore, the only way to win the conflict was for the church to organize so as not to be outmaneuvered. For that reason Satan was busy seeking to prevent and destroy rational gospel order among the Sabbatarians. December 1853 also found James White firing off a salvo of four articles on church organization in the Review. In the first he hit hard at the antiorganization members in the Sabbatarian group. By seeking to avoid becoming “Babylon” through organization, he charged, they were themselves in a state of “perfect Babylon” or confusion (RH, Dec. 6, 1853). While the Whites had launched their battle for gospel order in 1853, it took another decade to achieve their goal. “Sister Betsy” and Support for the Ministry By the fall