Adventist Laymen's Foundation Manuscript
Theological Writings by Elder William H. Grotheer
THE HOLY FLESH MOVEMENT
1899 - 1901
William H. Grotheer
April 1973
*All Rights Reserved*
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface
-- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1
I
The Loom of the Fabric
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -8
II
Emotional Extravaganza
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -13
III
The Confrontation
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18
IV
Threads of the Fabric
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -27
V
The By-Paths - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -35
VI
Lessons and Sidelights
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 43
APPENDIX A – Biographical Sketches 50 B – Was the Doctrine of the Incarnation a Real Issue
in the “Holy Flesh” Movement?
53
C – Compiler’s Notes in Selected
Messages, bk 11, p. 31
57
D – The Letter in Question
65
-1-
PREFACE
While serving as
pastor of the Marion, Indiana, District or the Seventh- day Adventist
Church, the writer had occasion to visit with the late Jesse E. Dunn,
who at the time was residing near Rockford, Indiana. The course of the
Conversation turned to the book – Questions on Doctrine 1
which had just been published.
A discussion of certain controversial concepts including the
section on the incarnation of Christ led to the observation by Dunn that
a similar teaching had been advocated by the leaders of the Holy Flesh
Movement in Indiana. This
sparked the research which resulted in this present manuscript.
Jesse Dunn, who
was the Book Agent [now known as the Publishing department Secretary]
for the Conference at that time, volunteered to help reconstruct the
story of what happened. He,
himself, wrote to, and placed the writer in contact with individuals who
could supply information as to the activities and teachings of the
ministers involved in the Holy Flesh Movement. Before his death, he gave
the writer the complete file of his own correspondence during the time
of the initial research.
Later when this
writer was head of the Bible Department of Madison College, a student
who was interested in research was assigned this subject for further
investigation. Circumstances did not permit the student to finalize ahis
findings; however, the material gathered has been incorporated into the
over-all picture which is given in this manuscript.
While attending
Andrews University, following the closing of Madison College, the writer
chose this subject as the topic of his thesis for this course – Research
in Theology. This manuscript
is a revision and modification of that
-2-
research paper.
A debt of
gratitude is due Dr. E.K. Vande Vere, who at the time was Chairman of
the History Department of Andrews University, for the reports which he
supplied from the Review and Herald concerning the work in the
Indian Conference which paralleled the letters, statements, and
pamphlets which had been gathered by the writer involving the Holy Flesh
Movement. A copy of this
research paper was sent to Dr. Vande Vere after it was completed in
absentia. He replied:
Yesterday, I read the paper with care.
It seems to me that you have wrung every bit of material possible
from your sources. It’s too bad that the whole episode not have been
written in 1905. Hence as matters stand, it is quite likely that no one
else will ever shed more light on the affair than you have.
I hope a copy of your paper will always be available at the White
Estate or in the White Library - - for those who in the future might be
interested enough to read.
Somehow I wonder if it was not the kind hand of Providence that guided
you into this topic. I’m
sure that reviewing this history of extremism has done something for you
and for all of us.2
The writer is
grateful to Elder Arthur L. White of the Ellen G. White Estate for
checking either for verification or repudiation in the records extant in
the Document File, certain statements which came from the memory of the
sincere and honest folk who willingly sought to help the writer
reconstruct the picture of what took place in those emotion filled years
during the rise and demise of the Holy Flesh Movement. A couple of years
later in an exchange of correspondence concerning the subject, Elder
White wrote: - “You have probed the subject of the holy flesh movement
more deeply than any one else I know”3
It must be
remembered that the basis for the statements presented apart from the
published and written records of the period come from the memories of
those attempting to recall events that took place at least fifty years
before.
-3-
It must also be
kept in mind that the statements made as to what occurred are
conditioned by the emotional involvements of the person making the
statements.
The Movement was short lived, covering a period of about two or three
years (1899 – 1901), and therefore, published or written material from
that period relative to the Movement is scarce and difficult to find.
One of its major teachings was not fully developed in the minds
of its advocates at the time it was cut short, so that a full picture of
what might have happened will never be known.
Ellen G. White in a forthright testimony which ended officially
the whole affair declared:
If those who speak so freely of perfection in the flesh, could see
things in the true light, they would recoil with horror from their
presumptuous ideas. In showing the fallacy of their assumptions in
regard to holy flesh, the Lord is seeking to prevent men and women from
putting on His words a construction which leads to pollution of body,
soul, and spirit. Let this phase of doctrine be carried a little
further, and it will lead to the claim that its advocates can not sin;
that since they have holy flesh, their actions are all holy. What a door
of temptation would thus be opened!4
We may yet see
the gull results of such a development, or the opposite extreme, in the
Church. In the same testimony the servant of the Lord warned:
Many such
movements will arise at this time, when the Lord’s work should stand
elevated, pure, unadulterated with superstition and fables. We need to
be on our guard, to maintain a close connection with Christ, that we be
not deceived by Satan’s devices. 5
The primary
assumption upon which the teachings of the Holy Flesh Movement was based
concerned the doctrine of the Incarnation as understood and taught by
the advocates of the Movement. The major objective of this research
manuscript will be to show the underlying controversy that developed
over this primary assumption, and the lesson that this experience should
teach the Church inasmuch as the same concept relative to the
Incarnation of Christ has again been
-4-
introduced into
the Church during these last two decades.
___________________________ 1
Seventh-day
Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine, Review & Herald Publishing
Association, (Washington D.C.), 1957 2
Dr. E.K. Vands Vere, Letter to William H. Grotheer from Andrews
University, Barrien Springs, Michigan, undated 3
Arthur L. White, Letter to William H. Grotheer from Takoma Park,
Washington D.C., dated December 13, 1968.
4
Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, bk. ii, p.32
5
Ibid,. p. 35
-5-
I
THE LOOM OF THE FABRIC
The 19th Century was drawing to a
close. An air of expectancy and concern pervaded the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. Elder A.F. Ballenger was proclaiming at worker’s
meetings, and at camp meetings, that the time had come to receive the
Holy Spirit. In writing of these meetings, and relating what he had
said, Ballenger stated – “You and I can afford to resist unto blood,
striving against sin; but we cannot afford to sin. It is too late
to sin in thought, word or action; for it is time to receive the Holy
Ghost in all of His fulness, - time to receive the seal of God.” 1
In another report of his camp meeting
experiences, Ballenger wrote:
The loudest cry of the loud cry is due today. To the careful observer,
there are signs that show its presence near . . .
At the Indiana meeting, between thirty and forty people from the city
arose for prayer. As I stood there that Sunday afternoon, and called the
people of the world and the other churches to repentance, and saw them
forced to their feet by the power of God, I thought, What power will be
manifested when God’s people are clean!
When I am conscious that I am not clean, I cannot preach with power,
neither can I preach with “unwonted power” when I know that my people
are not clean. Cleanse the Seventh-day Adventist Church of all
uncleanness, and I will promise the loudest cry of the loud cry the same
day. 2
Attending these worker’s meetings and camp meetings
in the Indiana Conference was a forty-three year old man by the
name of S.S. Davis.
He had been licensed to preach by the conference in 1893, 3
and was ordained two years later in 1895. 4
Following his ordination, Elder Davis was asked to go to
Evansville, Indiana, to establish the work there. In 1898, an unsigned
item appeared in the “Indiana News Notes” of the Review, noting
that a mission had been established
-6-
in Evansville. It was in need of
help and that such items as clothing an provisions of food would be
appreciated. It had been named the Helping Hand Mission and was located
at 914 Main St. Bible studies were being conducted in addition to the
regular services at the Mission. 5
Under the dateline of August 15, 1898, a report was given by S.S. Davis
of the work in Evansville. It read:
Sabbath and Sunday, August 13, 14, were eventful days in the history of
the work in this place. In the Sabbath meeting the Spirit was present to
impress hearts, and nine persons requested baptism. Among them was a
Baptist minister of considerable prominence, who himself baptized
twenty-eight converts to the Baptist faith at one time not long ago. We
secured the use of the baptistery in the First Baptist church. And at
three o’clock Sunday we administered baptism. Sunday night our meeting
was well attended. The subject was “The Baptism of the Holy Ghost,” and
the Spirit was poured out in a large measure. It seemed that we were
filled to the utmost of our capacity to receive. We have reached the
time of the message, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost,” and we are actually
having Pentecostal times and apostolic experiences. The message is
rising, and grand and awful times are upon us. This message will close
with power and great glory; and if it is the will of the Lord, I want to
live to see it triumph. 6
The relationship between the doctrinal emphasis of Davis and the
messages of Ballenger is attested in a biographical sketch written by
Davis’ daughter. She recalled:
He [Davis] attended a conference worker’s meeting in ’97 or ’98 where a
special inspirational message was given by Elder Ballenger… The
Laodicean message and a song written by Elder Ballenger and his sister,
entitled, “Receive Ye the Holy Ghost,” were stressed. I never heard of
Elder Ballenger again, but his messages had inspired all the
Indiana Conference workers. 7
It is interesting to observe that while Davis was sent to Evansville in
1895, it was not until 1898 – after listening to Ballenger at a worker’s
meeting that he began to tell of the “power” connected with his
ministry.
Jesse E. Dunn relates an experience he had with Elder Davis, when Davis
was serving as head of the Helping Hand Mission in Evansville, Indiana.
A co-
-7-
ordinated program for evangelism involving welfare ministry through the
Mission and interest created by colporteur work was begun by Davis.
Since Dunn was the State Agent, he was asked to go to Evansville to
assist in the initiation of the plan. The idea was to secure as many
three-months club subscriptions to the Signs of the Times as
possible. Then Davis in the public meetings would refer to the Signs
in his sermons, and this way it was hoped to encourage home study of the
truth along with the public presentation. 8
After accomplishing the initial objective, Dunn left to care for the
Book work in other parts of the State, bue returned as soon as possible
to appraise this approach to evangelism. In the meantime, Elder S.S.
Davis had come in contact with a group of Pentecostal people. He said to
Dunn, upon the latter’s return to Evansville- “Brother Dunn, they have
the ‘spirit’; and we have the truth; and if we had the ‘spirit’ as they
have, with the truth we could do things.” 9
The interest of S.S. Davis in the outpouring of the Holy Spirit is
understandable in the light of what had and what was taking place in the
Church during the last decade of the 19th Century. At the
1888 General Conference Session, the message of righteousness had been
presented by Elders Waggoner and Jones. 10 In 1892, the servant
of the Lord had written:
The time of test is just before us, for the loud cry of the third angel
has already begun in the revelation of the righteousness of Christ, the
sin-pardoning Redeemer. This is the beginning of the light of the angel
whose glory shall fill the whole earth. 11
It was understood by the Church that the expressions, “loud cry”, and
the “light of the angel whose glory shall fill the whole earth”, were
synonymous with the concept of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the
Latter Rain.
Five years latter came the memorable 1893 General Conference Session.
-8-
(This was the yar that Davis was granted a license to preach.) Of the
1893 Session, L.H. Christian has written:
It was really at the General Conference Session in 1893 that light on
justification by faith seemed to gain its greatest victory, and it was
the though that it is the righteous life of Christ here on earth that is
imputed to us by faith which brought great blessing. 12
But still the fulness of the Holy Spirit was not realized. Then in 1898,
Professor E. A. Sutherland commented on what he had seen of the
manifestations of the power of the Holy Spirit at the Illinois and
Indiana camp meetings noting that the church was on the verge of the
reception of the Latter Rain. He then alluded to the 1893 Session of the
General Conference in these words:
The latter rain would have come in 1893 if our people had moved out
in all the truth. In the year
1898 there is no line of truth, so far as I know,
that has not been accepted. We
shall see the manifestations that the Lord
has spoken of, that will take
place just before the latter rain. 13
The year 1898 also marked a change in the administration of the Indiana
Conference. Due to the failing health of his wife, it was necessary for
Elder W.B. White to resign and move to Arizona. 14
Until another conference president could enter upon his duties,
Elder I.D. Van Horn assumed oversight of the work in Indiana. 15
At the Spring Council in Battle
Creek, March 10 to April 3,
it was voted to ask Elder R. S. Donnell of the Upper Columbia Conference
to “take the presidency of the Indiana Conference.” 14
This he accepted, arriving in Indiana about the middle of the
year.
In 1899, a camp meeting and conference session was held at Alexandria,
Indiana. Elder Donnell was confirmed in the presidency by election. In a
report of this meeting, Elder A.J. Breed, Superintendent of District
#3,* com-
*Prior to 1901, several conferences were grouped together as a District
with a Superintendent appointed by the General Conference. Indiana was
in District #3.
-9-
mented that “there were some features of the meeting that I was sorry to
see; but before it closed, a victory was gained, and these were
overcome.” 16 What
these features were is not defined in the report.
In December of 1899, Elder
S.S. Davis began his work as Conference Revivalist. This appointment and
date could be considered the beginning of what came to be called the
Holy Flesh Movement. A report of the results of this work appeared in
the Review several months later. It read:
EVANSVILLE, ELNORA, SALEM, LINTON, FARMERSBURG, TERRE HOUTE, BOGGSTOWN.
– The first of December, in company with Brother Joseph Crary., and his
wife, and Brother John Hickey, and his wife, I started on my work among
the churches. As a rule, we found the churches in a cold, backslidden
condition, and in many places much divided and torn and scattered by the
enemy; but generally they were dissatisfied with their condition, and
desired a better experience. The Lord laid it on my heart to preach the
Laodicean message. He gave power to the word, and I never before saw
such manifestations of the power of God in repentance as I have been
permitted to witness in the pace mentioned above. In all these places
shouts of victory made the churches ring. Perfect union and love
prevail. Sixty-seven persons were added to the believers. Praise the
Lord for His goodness to the children of men. 17
During this time a worker’s meeting was held in the church at
Indianapolis. The Revival Team proclaimed “vigorously” their message of
holiness to the assembled workers. Elder Donnell opposed the
presentation in a public service, outlining what he considered to be the
truth on holiness and sanctification. The doctrinal division, and the
emotional extravaganza accompanying the presentations by the Revival
Team caused a division among the workers, and perplexity among the laity
of the local church who attended and took part in the meetings. As a
result, Donnell is quoted as saying- “I am not going to have any such
gang as Davis’s, Hickeys and Crary’s going over this conference
preaching any such doctrine.” 18
Commenting further on this experience the same source has
written:
-10-
R.S. Donnell at first was bitterly opposed to the Holy Flesh Movement,
which originated with three laymen- Davis, Hickey, Crary. However, he
called them to his office to straighten them out. At the conclusion of
their conference, he made a complete about face and became practically
the leader of the movement. 19
With this turn of events, the Holy Flesh Movement moved toward its
zenith. The camp meetings of 1900 would be a revelation of the workings
and the teachings of the men who were weaving the fabric” of the
doctrine of holy flesh.
At the 1899 Session of the Conference, it was voted to hold several camp
meetings in the State during 1900, making them evangelistic in nature. A
conference session was to be held the following winter in Indianapolis.
20 However, in
counsel with the General Conference President and the District
Superintendent., it was thought best to alter this arraignment, and have
the conference session in connection with the last camp meeting during
1900. Three meetings were scheduled – Sullivan, from July 19-29; La
Fayette, from August 16-26; and Muncies, from September 13-23. 21
Another four day meeting on th fairgrounds at Kendellville, made
four in all for the year, 1900. 20
In sending out a notice of these camp meetings, Elder Donnell wrote an
article stressing the purpose and need for these meetings. He stated:
These meetings are all announced as local meetings, and it is the desire
of the committee to conduct them in harmony with the instruction given
in a Special Testimony dated Feb. 26, 1900; that is, to present our
faith and its reasons to the people, and to carry on revival work from
the beginning to the end of the meeting. This will make these
camp-meetings of special interest to our own people, and also to those
not of our faith; for while doctrinal subjects will be presented with
earnestness, the real object to be attained is the conversion of every
soul.
In the first-page article of the Review of February 27, 1900, we read
this pointed statement: “The Lord calls upon His people in 1900 to be
converted. The Lord can not purify the soul until the entire begin is
surrendered to the working of the Holy Spirit.” 21
-11-
In a summary of the camp meetings held during 1900, Elder R.S. Donnell
wrote about the meetings in Sullivan, Muncie, and Kendallville, but
omitted any direct reference to the meeting in La Fayette. Of these
meetings, he stated, “The manifestation of the Spirit of God was marked
at all these meetings, but not so fully at Muncie as at the others.”
Follow-up work was being continued at both Sullivan and Muncie. Donnell
concluded his report by declaring – “The Laodicean message, which is the
message for the church to-day, … is being preached in the Conference, in
connection with other points of the faith. 20
The influence of S.S. Davis was strong in the conference. Not only was
he made a member of the conference committee at the Session in 1900, but
one of his associates – J.A. Crary – became a trustee of the legal
Association. J.H. Hickey, the other associate was licensed to preach,
and Hickey’s wife, Julia received a missionary license. 22
These last two members of Davis’ revival team remained in Muncie after
the camp meeting, along with U.S. Anderson another licentiate, to care
for the interest created. The follow-up work was under the direction of
Elder P.G. Stanley, who himself was a member of the conference
committee. Of this work, he had written to Donnell “that the power of
God is wondrously manifest in the presentation of truth, and in the
acceptance of it by the people.” A Sabbath school of fifty members had
been organized, and several had accepted the faith. 20
Certain key expressions were used by the leadership in Indiana: - “the
Laodicean message,” “the reception of the Holy Spirit”. They also
referred to the message they were preaching as the “cleansing message”23
borrowed from the emphasis that Ballenger placed on the necessity of a
cleansed church before the Holy Spirt could be received. 2
These concepts in themselves were based in the Bible, and the
Inspired Testimonies. In Fact, Donnell refers to one specific
-12-
reference 20 from the very year – 1900 – where the servant of the Lord
stated:-
“The Laodicean message must be proclaimed with power; for not it is
especially applicable.” 24 The error resulted from men taking
truth, perverting it, and mingling with it their own theories and
interpretations, thus weaving a “fabric” – to borrow Sister White’s
figure of speech – in which there was “not a thread of truth.” 18
___________________________________________
1 A.F. Ballenger, “Camp Meeting Notes,” Review and Herald,
October 18, 1898, p. 671. Emphasis his.
2 Ibid., November 8, 1898, p. 720
3 Review and Herald, September 3, 1893, p. 573
4 Ibid., August 20, 1895, p. 536
5 Ibid., April 26, 1898, p. 272
6 Ibid., August 23, 1898, p. 543
7 Viola Davis Hopper, An undated statement recalling events in the life
of her father, S.S. Davis. Emphasis hers.
8 Jesse E. Dunn, Signed statement recalling events that took place in
connection with the “holy Flesh” Movement. The statement is in the files
of the writer.
9 Ibid.
10 Davis accepted the Advent Message in 1886. He colporterured in
Western Nebraska from 1887 to 1892. Davis’ daughter, Mrs Viola Hopper,
states that her father attended the 1888 General Conference Session. See
Footnote #7
11 Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, November 22, 1892
12 L.H. Christian, The Fruitage of Spiritual Gifts, p. 241
13 E.A. Sutherland, “Illinois and Indiana Camp Meetings,” Review and
Herald, September 27, 1898, p.622
14 Review and Herald, April 19, 1898, p. 255
15 Ibid., April 26, 1898, p. 274
16 A.J. Breed, “The Indiana Camp-Meeting”, Review and Herald,
August 29, 1899, p. 561
17 Review and Herald, April 10, 1900, p. 237
18 G.A. Roberts, Statement date, June 11, 1923, White Estate D.F. #190.
19 G.A. Roberts, Letter to Wm. H. Grotheer dated at Covina, Calif.,
January 23, 1973.
20 R.S. Donnel “Indiana”, Review and Herald, October 23, 1900, p.
686-687.
21 Ibid., July 10, 1900, p,446
22 General Conference Bulletin, 4th Quarter, 1900, p.
207
23 S.N. Haskell, Letter to Ellen G. White dated at Battle Creek,
Michigan, September 25, 1900.
24 Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, September 25, 1900
-13-
II
EMOTIONAL EXTRAVAGANZA
From the very first report signed by S.S. Davis, telling of his work in
Evansville, there was the overtone of religious excitement. He wrote
that in presenting the subject – “The Baptism of the Holy Spirit” – “the
Spirit was poured out in a large measure” and that they were “actually
having Pentecostal times and apostolic experiences.” 1
In telling of the work of the Revival team which he led, Davis
stated that in all the places where they had been, “shouts of victory
made the churches ring.” 2
How these meetings were conducted is given in an eyewitness account to
be found in the document file of the Ellen G. White Estate. It reads:
The followers of this doctrine would gather in the cleared basement of
the church, and a large number of them would dance in a large circles,
shouting and lifting up their hands. The children would be placed upon
boxes or barrels, and they too would shout and lift up their hands. In
their church services, they would preach and shout and pray until
someone in the congregation would fall unconscious from his seat. One or
two men would be walking up and down the aisles watching for just
this demonstration and would lay hold of the person who had fallen,
literally dragging him up the aisles and placing him on the rostrum.
Then a number, perhaps a dozen, would gather about the prostrate form,
someone shouting, some singing, and some praying, all at the same time.
Finally the individual would
revive, and he was then counted among the faithful who had passed
through the Garden. 3
After the conference president, R.S. Donnell, embraced the teachings of
S.S. Davis, he called the workers together in Indianapolis and announced
that they would remain in study and prayer until the Holy Spirit came
upon them as it did on the disciples at Pentecost. How long they
remained together could not be recalled, but it must have been for a
period of time, for Jesse E. Dunn tells how relieved and delighted he
was, when a day was finally set for the
-14-
meeting to be concluded.” 4
The camp meetings during the year 1900 were marked in a decided manner
with the emotional extravaganza that gripped the movement. At the
Sullivan meeting (July 19 – 29), Donnell’s step-daughter, Nellie, who
was married to a Salvation Army Captain, named Fuller, was present. She
was accomplished in the use of the tambourine. During this meeting she
was asked by her father to lead the music by the use of her tambourine.
In commenting on the musical instruments and type of music used at the
camp meetings, Haskell wrote – “They are as much trained in their
musical line as any Salvation Army Choir that you ever heard. In fact,
their revival effort is simply a complete copy of the Salvation Army
method.” 5
Dunn has testified to the advertising techniques connected with the
second camping held near La Fayette (August 16-26). To advertise these
meetings, trams of the city’s Electric Lines were chartered. The
musicians filled the cars and played their instruments loudly while they
traversed the entire trolley system. 4 Alad, only eleven years of age,
attended this camp meeting with his parents. Years latter he recalled
some things about this camp meeting that remained as vivid memories of
the experience. He wrote:
The first thing I noticed that seemed strange to me was a lady leading
the music playing a tambourine. They also had a band helping with the
music. Then the altar calls, people would get do enthused over these
calls that some would collapse at the altar. These affairs just about
took all the ideas I ever had of becoming an Adventist out of me. In
fact, I did not become an Adventist until about ten years later. One
thing that was done for advertising was to load several street cars with
the band, choir, and workers, and tour the city. The cars [were] all
decorated with banners and emblems. 6
The Muncie camp meeting (September 13-23) was attended by Elder A.J.
Breed and Elder and Sister S.N. Haskell. During the meeting, Sister
Haskell
-15-
wrote two letters describing what was taking place. One was sent to Miss
Sara McInterfer, and other was addressed to Sister White. In the first
letter, Hetty Haskel stated:
They have a big drum, two tambourines, a big bass fiddle, two small
fiddles, a flute and two cornets, and an organ and a few voices.
They have “Garden of Spices” as a song book and play dance tunes to
scared words. They have never used our own hymn books except when Elder
Breed, or Haskell speak, then they open and close with a hymn from our
book, but all the other songs are from the other book. They shout
“Amens” and “Praise the Lord,” “Glory to God”, just like a Salvation
Army service. It is distressing to one’s soul. The doctrines preached
correspond to the rest. The poor sheep are truly
confused.
7
In the second letter, Sister Haskell described the Sabbath service. Of
this she wrote:
Last Sabbath they (Indiana ministers) took the early meeting also the
11:00 o’clock hour, and called them front to the altar as they call the
little fence they have around the pulpit. The poor sheep came flocking
up until they were on the ground three rows deep. The ministers kept up
their shouting and, shall I call it yelling. They invited Elder H. and
Elder Breed to come down to the altar and help. They went down, and
Elder Breed got down and tried to talk to some, but he felt so out of
place he got up on his feet and stood and looked on. Elder H. Left the
tent and went to our own tent. Finally they had a season of prayer, then
they got up and
began shouting, “Praise the Lord,” “Glory” etc., falling on one
another’s neck and kissing and shaking hands, keeping their music going
with the noise, until many of them looked almost crazy. 8
Burton Wade, a laymember from Denver, Indiana, was present at this camp
meeting. He has also recalled the nature of the services conducted. In a
letter, he wrote:
They worked themselves up to a high pitch of excitement by the use of
musical instruments, such as: trumpets, flutes, stringed instruments,
tambourines, and organ and a big bass drum. They shouted and sang their
lively songs with the aid of musical instruments until they became
really hysterical. Many times I saw them, after these morning meetings,
as they came to the dining tent fairly shaking as though they had the
palsy. 9
The conference president
testified to an unwonted power which accompanied
-16-
his preaching during these various meetings. G.A. Roberts told of an
occasion when R.S. Donnell, while preaching, held out his hands over the
congregation and his arms became fixed and rigid. After the meeting,
Donnell told Roberts that “he could feel great power course down his
arms passing through his fingers to the congregation.” 3
During the development of the “holy Flesh” Movement, Ellen G. White was
in Australia. She did not return to America until the month that the
climatic camp meeting was held in Muncie. Upon her return, she received
three letters telling of this camp meeting. Hetty Haskell wrote one from
the camp grounds, as noted above, and Elder Haskell wrote two after
returning to Battle Creek. At the end of one of his letters, Haskell
expressed his faith by stating - "I have no doubt, however, that the
Lord will open up the whole scene before you; and for the sake of the
poor sheep in Indiana, I pray God that you may have a Testimony to send
to them." 5
To these letters, Sister White replied on
October 10, 1900 from St. Helena, California, and stated that in January
of that year she had received a revelation from the Lord that "erroneous
theories and methods would be brought into our campmeetings, and that
the history of the past would be repeated." 10 In
this letter a clear line of demarcation is drawn between the evidences
of the work of the Holy Spirit and the Satanic delusion which "works
amid the din and confusion" of music which is perverted into a
"carnival". Its effect is "like the poison sting of the serpent." 10
She charged that the motivation of this emotional extravaganza was "the
itching desire to originate something new" which results in "strange
doctrines and largely destroys the influence of those who would be a
power for good if they held firm the beginning of their confidence
-17-
in the truth the Lord had given them." 11
In fact, those who became involved in this movement "were carried away
by a spiritualistic delusion." 12
______________________________
1
See page 6, Footnote #6
-18-
III
THE CONFRONTATION
Six months
following the exchange of correspondence between the Haskells and Sister
White, the epochal 1901 General Conference convened in Battle Creek,
Michigan, from April 2nd to the 23rd. Ellen G. White crossed the
continent to bear her testimony to the assembled brethren urging them
todo what the Lord had indicated should have been done ten years
earlier. 1 She called for "a reorganization," declaring, "We
want to begin at the foundation, and to build upon a different
principle." 2 The business resulting from this call for
re-organization became the dominant issue before the delegates.
Other issues -
doctrinal issues - were being discussed among the workers. What had ,
happened and what was happening in Indiana could not be contained among
just the workers in that conference. Indiana was too close to Battle
Creek.Elder A. J. Breed had given a full report to Elder G. A. Irwin,
the president of the General Conference. 3 The leadership
in Indiana had become defensive in their attitude at the Muncie camp
meeting. They indicated that Elders Breed and Haskell had come to stir
up controversy, and this Muncie camp meeting had become "the Minn.
[Minneapolis] Conference over again, and it would have to be
discussed." 4 This discussion reached into the 1901
General Conference Session.
The evening of April 16, Dr. E. J. Waggoner
was scheduled to preach at 7 p. m. He chose as his text - a key text of
the advocates of the Holy Flesh doctrine, - Hebrews 10:4-10 - "A body
hast thou prepared me." 5 After reading the Scripture,
Waggoner indicated that a question had been given him to answer. It
read:
"Was that holy thing which was
born of the virgin Mary born in sinful
-19-
flesh, and did that flesh have the same evil tendencies to contend with
that ours does?" 6
Dr. Waggoner told the delegates
that in the very question itself was the idea of the Catholic dogma of
the Immaculate Conception. Then he stated:
We need to settle, every one of us, whether we are out of the church of
Rome or not. There are a great many that have got the marks yet...
Do you not see
that the idea that the flesh of Jesus was not like ours (because we know
ours is sinful) necessarily involves the idea of the immaculate
conception of the virgin Mary? Mind you, in Him was no sin, but the
mystery of God manifest in the flesh, ... is the perfect manifestation
of the life of God in its spotless purity in the midst of sinful
flesh. 7
That there would
be no question as to what he was talking about, and speaking
concerning, he
plainly stated - "the idea of sinless flesh [in] mankind is the
deification of
the devil." 8 Then he commented:
The flesh will be opposed to the Spirit of God so long as we have it,
but when the time comes that mortality is swallowed up of life then the
conflict will cease. Then we shall no longer have to fight against the
flesh, but that sinless life which we laid hold of by faith and which
was manifest in our sinful bodies, will then by simple faith be
continued throughout all eternity in a sinless body. That is to say,
when God has given this witness to the world of His power to save to the
uttermost, to save sinful beings, and to live a perfect life in sinful
flesh, then He will remove the disabilities and give us better
circumstances in which to live. 9
Dr. Waggoner
concluded his sermon by warning - "We must not be presumptuous. We can
never get so much of the life of God that we can dispense with it, and
live
by ourselves
alone. Now and in all eternity we do live only by the faith of the Son
of God." 10
The next day -
Wednesday, April 17 at the early morning meeting, Dr. J. Harvey Kellogg
took considerable time explaining the health reform message and the
medical missionary work. Criticisms about the sanitarium and its work
were answered. This matter was discussed "among fully three hundred of
the brethren"
-20-
who were present. 11
At the close of this service, Ellen G. White
arose and presented her testimony concerning the Movement in Indiana.
She said:
Instruction has
been given me in regard to the late experience of brethren in Indiana
and the teaching they have given to the churches. Through this
experience and teaching the enemy has been working to lead souls astray.
The teaching
given in regard to what is termed "holy flesh" is an error. All may now
obtain holy hearts, but it is not correct to claim in this life to have
holy flesh. The apostle Paul declares, "I know that in me [that is, in
my flesh] dwelleth no good thing."
Rom. 7:17. To
those who have tried so hard to obtain by faith so called holy flesh, I
would say, You cannot obtain it. Not a soul of you has holy flesh now.
No human being on the earth has holy flesh. It is an impossibility....
The Scriptures
teach us to seek for the sanctification to God of body, soul, and
spirit. In this work we are to be laborers together with God. Much may
be done to restore the moral image of God in man, to improve the
physical, mental, and moral capabilities. Great changes can be made in
the physical system by obeying the laws of God and bringing into the
body nothing that defiles. And while we can not claim perfection of the
flesh, we may have Christian perfection of the soul. Through the
sacrifice made in our behalf, sins may be perfectly forgiven. Our
dependence is not in what man can do; it is in what God can do for man
through Christ. When we surrender ourselves wholly to God, and fully
believe, the blood of Christ cleanses from all sin. The conscience can
be freed from condemnation.
Through faith in
His blood, all may be made perfect in Christ Jesus. Thank God we are not
dealing with impossibilities. We may claim sanctification. We may enjoy
the favor of God. We are not to be anxious about what Christ and God
think of us, but what God thinks of Christ, our Substitute. Ye are
accepted in the Beloved. The Lord shows, to the repenting, believing
one, that Christ accepts the surrender of
the soul, to be
molded and fashioned after His own likeness...
When human
beings receive holy flesh, they will not remain on the earth, but will
be taken to heaven. While sin is perfectly forgiven in this life, its
results are not wholly removed. It is at His coming that Christ is to
"change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto His glorious
body." Phil. 3:21. When Christ shall come with a great sound of a
trumpet, and shall call the dead from their prison house, then the
saints will receive holy flesh...
Those who meet
Christ in peace at His coming must in this life walk before Him in
humility, meekness, and lowliness of mind. It becomes
-21-
every
human being to walk modestly and circumspectly before God, in harmony
with the great testing truths He has given to the world. But the late
experience of brethren in Indiana has not been in accordance with the
Lord's instruction. I have not during this Conference held conversation
with any one in regard to this matter,
but the Lord has
given me a definite testimony that a strange work is being done in
Indiana, the results of which are not after His order. This phase of
religious enthusiasm is a dangerous delusion. The sentiments and
exercises are not prompted by the Holy Spirit. They have led to very sad
results....
Brethren from
Indiana, the word of the Lord to you and to all who are misled by your
influence is: "Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines.
For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace."
When Christ is
enshrined in our hearts, we have reached the position which God desires
us to occupy. The example and lessons of Christ are to be our study: for
in Christ dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. In Him are hid
all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. Looking unto Jesus, the
author and the finisher of our faith, we are to move onward and upward.
And who can describe the benefits
of appreciating
Him who is invisible? "We all, with open face beholding as in a glass
the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to
glory, - from character to character, - even as by
the Spirit of the Lord." 2 Cor.
3:18.
We need to
contemplate Christ and become assimilated to His image through the
transforming power of the Holy Spirit. This is our only safeguard
against being entangled in Satan's delusive snares. 12
Reaction
followed swiftly. The next day, April 18, Elder R. S. Donnell, the
Indiana Conference President, gave his confession concerning his
involvement in the Movement. He confessed:
I feel unworthy
to stand before this large assembly of my brethren this morning. Very
early in life I was taught to reverence and to love the word of God; and
when reading in it how God used to talk to His people, correcting their
wrongs, and guiding them in all their ways, when a mere boy I used to
say: "Why don't we have a prophet? Why doesn't God talk to us now as He
used to do?"
When I found
this people, I was more than glad to know that there was a prophet among
them, and from the first I have been a firm believer in, and a warm
advocate of, the Testimonies and the Spirit of prophecy. It has been
suggested to me at times in the past, that the test on this point of
faith comes when the Testimony comes directly to us. As nearly all of
you know, in the Testimony of yes-
-22-
terday morning
the test came to me. But, brethren, I can thank God this morning that my
faith in the Spirit of prophecy remains unshaken. God has spoken. He
says I was wrong, and I answer, God is right, and I am wrong. Yea, let
God be true, and every man a liar. I am very, very sorry that I have
done that which would mar the cause of God, and lead anyone in the wrong
way. I have asked God to forgive me, and I know that He has done it. As
delegates and representatives of the cause of God in the earth, I now
ask you to forgive me for my sins, and I ask your prayers for strength
and wisdom to walk aright in the future. It is my determination by the
help of God, to join glad hands with you in the kingdom of God. 13
Just before the
adjournment of the 22nd Meeting of the Conference the same
day, Elder S. S.
Davis asked to speak to the delegates before returning to In-
diana that
afternoon. 14 He stated:
On account of
some matters at home, I shall be compelled to go to my home this
afternoon. Perhaps most of you know, if not all, heard what the
Testimony had to say about the work in Indiana; and with shamefacedness
I have to face this congregation and say today that I had a part in that
work, and, in fact, I was among the first in it. I thought for a while
that I would be the last out of it. But I praise God now that the
victory is won, and inasmuch as the Lord has spoken and said that the
work was wrong, I agree with the Lord today. The work was wrong.
Inasmuch as the Lord has said that the men who were at the head of that
work were led in the wrong direction, I agree with the Lord that
something led me in the wrong direction.
Brethren, while
there are a great many things connected with this that I do not know how
much I am guilty of, I do not want to excuse myself at all. I am just
willing that this congregation and this people can just charge me with
all the blame of what was done in Indiana; and when we get up in the
Judgment, God will settle it all; and when the work of the third angel's
message triumphs, I expect by the grace of God to triumph with it. When
you stand on the sea of glass, I hope to stand there and help you in
singing the songs of Moses. 15
On April 19, at the 24th Meeting of the Session, the chairman, G. A. Irwin announced that Brethren Miller, Chew and Stanley felt that they would like to make a statement before the delegates of the Conference. The first to speak was A.L. Miller, who said:
-23-
I would like to
state before the brethren and sisters assembled that what I have to say
is in reference to the Testimony that was given concerning Indiana. As I
for one have been connected with the work there, I felt that I should
state to you how I have received the message from God. I am a firm
believer in the Testimonies, and when the Lord speaks, I say, "Amen." I
heartily receive the reproof given, and in the fear of God will endeavor
to walk in harmony with His will, and meet you all in the kingdom of
heaven. 16
Following this testimony, P. G. Stanley
confessed:
One of the most
honorable things that a man can do when he is overtaken in a fault or
has sinned, is to confess it. Confess it to Jesus, and let Him bury it
in the depths of the sea. This is God's plan and God's way of getting
out of sin. It is the right way, it is a legitimate and Biblical way,
and this is the way that I propose to adopt. I praise the Lord for the
Testimony that He gave us. The happiest days of my life at this meeting
have been since the Testimony came. The Lord has spoken, and I have
heard, and I believe every word of it, and I assure you, brethren and
sisters, that while Satan caught me in his trap this time, by the help
of the Lord I will never be caught in it again, and so I take my stand
with you today upon the principles of truth as taught by this people. 17
Brother A. L. Chew joined his brethren by
stating:
I, too am glad
for this opportunity to express myself in regard to the reproof that has
been given us, as I am one that had a very prominent part in this
movement, and when the Testimony was given, I do not think there was any
one who was more ready to receive it than myself, because I could see
that God was in it; and that God was taking away nothing but that which
was error, and was leaving me all the truth. While my heart was sad to
think that I had been doing things that the Lord did not want me to do,
yet I do thank the Lord that He came and corrected me and let me know
it. I can say to my brethren that I heartily accept the Testimony, and
by the Grace of God I expect to profit by it, and in the future try to
stand in the principles of God's truth, the commandments of God and the
faith of Jesus. 18
When these
brethren had completed their testimonies, Elder F. M. Roberts, who was
not a member of the committee, yet who was convicted of the part he had
played in the Movement, came forward and joined the members of the
conference committee in their confessions. He said:
I belong to this same company that has been
speaking to you, and I
-24-
want to add my
testimony along this line with them. While I did not belong to the
Conference Committee, I stood by the Committee, and believed what we
were teaching was the truth. When I do anything, I do it with all my
might. That has been my way of doing ever since I can remember anything
of myself. When I quit anything, I quit it just as hard. When the Lord
spoke to me the other morning, I prayed to Him that I might hear His
voice, and I thank the Lord that I did. I love my Heavenly Father
because He loves me; and the fact that He chastens me proves that He
still loves me. I am glad that we are not called upon to forsake truth,
but to forsake error, and I feel like saying, as did Samuel, "Speak,
Lord; for thy servant heareth." I am a firm believer in the Testimonies.
I have studied them for years and years, and no small thing will shake
me loose from them. The Spirit of prophecy has been the salvation of
this people. It has kept us together all these years, and our adherence
to the principles taught in them will keep us together to the end. I
have confessed my sin to God and the aged men whose counsel I once
refused, and now I ask any before me, today whom I have injured in any
way to forgive me. I am going through with you to the Kingdom of God. 19
At the General
Conference Session, all the officers and members of the Indiana
Conference committee tendered their resignations. Since this was a
local matter, rather than a General Conference problem, word was
conveyed to the constituency of Indiana and a conference session was
convened in Indianapolis, May 3-5, for the purpose of electing new
officers. Elders A. G. Daniells, W. W. Prescott, A. T. Jones, P. T.
Magan, and W. C. White attended this conference business meeting. Also
Ellen G. White who was returning to the West Coast joined the brethren
in Indianapolis, and remained with them till Sunday noon. 20
In reporting
this meeting, A. T. Jones wrote:
The principles
and spirit that had characterized the course of the General Conference
just closed were continued in this general meeting and conference in
Indiana. Everything was done openly, with all the people present.
Everything was stated candidly, and made plain to all, that all the
people might know all that was done, and should themselves be the
principals in the doing of it. Since they, the
people of the
Indiana Conference, are the Indiana Conference, what was to be done in
this conference, as of the Indiana Conference, must be done by the
people. Therefore, it was essential that everything should be plainly
stated and thoroughly known by the people who were to do what must be
done. 21
-25-
On Sunday
afternoon the final business meeting was held and the report of the
nominating committee was accepted. Ira J. Hankins was elected president,
and P. G. Stanley, Enoch Swartz, J. H. Crandall, and R. 0. Ross, M. D.,
were designated as members of the Executive Committee. 22
It will be noted that only Elder P. G. Stanley was carried over from the
previous administration. 23
One of the first
acts of the new committee was to care for the pastorate of the
Indianapolis church since this headquarters church had been deeply
involved in the "Holy Flesh" exercises. 5
Elder Arthur W. Bartlett was invited to serve in this capacity. An
interesting feature of this decision was the fact that Bartlett himself
"was recovered from a heresy very akin to the holy flesh idea in 1878-79
due to the ministration of the Whites on the Indiana camp grounds at
that time. In short, Bartlett had been reclaimed from this kind of view
by the Whites and now apparently was considered to be the most
appropriate worker in the conference to handle the delicate situation
following 1901." 24
Both Davis and
Donnell were relieved of their ministerial responsibilities. Davis
retired to his home in Elnora, Indiana, and Donnell also went there to
live for a few years. In 1905, Elder Donnell was called to serve the
church in Raleigh, Tennessee, near Memphis. Of all the men involved in
the "Holy Flesh" Movement, only S. S. Davis never returned to the
ministry of the church.
_____________________________
1
Ellen G. white, General Conference Bulletin, 1901, p. 23
September 25, 1900 (1), p. 5
-26-
4
Hetty H. Haskell, Letter to Ellen G. White dated at Muncie, Indiana,
September 22, 1900.
ment File #190.
Bulletin,
p. 403.
father-in-law, and he was desirous of being at his wife's side during
her
sorrow. This was affirmed in a letter by Joseph M. Davis to the writer
dated
at Portland, Oregon, June 19, 1965.
1901, pp. 316-317
Springs, Michigan, April 8, 1963. See also "Bogus Sanctification", Review
and Herald, June 6, 1878.
-27-
IV
THREADS OF THE FABRIC
During the
special session in Indianapolis, Ellen G. White bore a decided testimony
to the delegates of the conference concerning the experience through
which they had just passed. At the close of her discourse she said
–"When I am gone from here, none are to pick up any points of this
doctrine and call it truth. There is not a thread of truth in the whole
fabric." 1
Before
considering some of the threads of the fabric, we need to look first a t
the fabric as a whole. The objective of the message as given by the
ministers of Indiana was to get "the people ready for translation." The
advocates of this message called it the "cleansing message." 2 One
minister of the conference who opposed the leadership, referred to the
teachings as "the theory of sinless flesh", or "the sinless flesh
doctrine." 3 It was finally dubbed the "Holy
Flesh" Movement, which term was used by the servant of the Lord in her
testimony regarding this Movement at the 1901 General Conference
Session.
It must be
clearly understood before analyzing the threads of the fabric, that
those who advocated this teaching were not referring to the physical
nature of man, when the term, "sinless flesh," was used. Donnell in an
essay on "The Nature of Christ and Man" stated that' "man's fallen
Physical [sic] nature is not redeemed in this life. Provision has been
made for its health, and cleansing from sin, but deterioration in size,
and in strength, is not to be restored until in the earth made new, when
the redeemed will go forth and grow up as calves of the stall." 4
To these men of Indiana, “mind" and "nature" were synonyms and
represented the fallen inheritance of man received as the result of the
Fall. In the same essay, Donnell wrote: "The work in this life is the
-28-
restoring to man
his spiritual nature, which is the cleansing from sin. And what is
comprehended in that work? It is taking the mind or nature which Adam
received in the fall, which is the mind of Satan, out of humanity, and
the restoring back to man that nature which Adam had before he fell,
with added power to do right." 5 To these men, "sinful
flesh" meant the nature of Adam since the fall, while "sinless flesh",
or "holy flesh" meant the nature of Adam before he fell. In teaching
this doctrine, they went a step further and stated that if an individual
sinned through yielding from within, it was evidence that his fallen
nature had not been eradicated. Donnell wrote:
When Adam and
Eve sinned, they were conformed to the nature of Satan. That nature was
begotten to every son and daughter of Adam, and they don't have to be
tempted in order to cause them to sin. They are born sinners, and they
sin by nature. It is those who have accepted the plan of salvation, by
repentance toward God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, that they
might once more become sons of God, who are tempted to sin. Satan is
striving to get them to fall as he did Adam…
Temptation is
that by which we are tested as to whether there is still lust in our
hearts, for the 14th verse [James 1] says: "But every man is tempted
when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed." That is when we
yield to temptation there is still lust in our hearts. 6
To the advocates
of this doctrine, a truly converted man - a cleansed man no longer had
the fallen nature of Adam. This experience - a prerequisite for
translation - was obtained by coming to the "altar" and going through
"Gethsemane" with their Lord. When this experience was realized, it
meant they had received "translation faith" and would never die. 7
Elder S. G.
Huntington who opposed this movement wrote in reply:
Accompanying the
sinless flesh doctrine is another we will now consider, viz., that at
conversion the desires, inclinations, and propensities of the flesh, and
the hereditary tendencies are all taken away; that the warfare with
the flesh ceases and that
-29-
from thenceforth
our temptations are all from without – none coming from within. The work
that is accredited to cleansing and conversion is the work of
sanctification, which is a progressive work, the work of a lifetime. At
conversion our sins are forgiven, we are freed from the curse of the
law, the righteousness of Christ is imparted to us and we stand
justified before God. But the work of redemption in us is then only
fairly begun; we are only babes in Christ, and need to be purged and
tried, and to grow up to the stature of men and women in Christ
Jesus. 8
In support of
his position, Huntington quoted from a tract issued in 1894, which
stated:
The Christian is
to realize that he is not his own, but that he has been bought with a
price. His strongest temptations will come from within; for he must
battle against the inclinations of the natural heart. 9
Underlying this
doctrine of "sinless flesh", there was a basic-thread of
error, and it concerned the
doctrine of the Incarnation of Christ - the nature of that humanity
Christ assumed when He became the Son of man. Immediately
fol- lowing the 1888 General
Conference Session, letters came to Sister White "affirming that Christ
could not have had the same nature as man, for if He had, He would have
fallen under similar temptations." 10 On this
point Sister White wrote in 1892, these words Christ’s overcoming and
obedience is that of a true human being. In our conclusions we make many
mistakes because of our erroneous views of the human nature of our Lord.
When we give to His human nature a power that it is not possible for man
to have in his conflicts with Satan, we destroy the completeness of His
humanity. 11
This was the
mistake that the leadership of the Holy Flesh Movement made –they held
erroneous views of the human nature Christ assumed in becoming a man.
Donnell wrote,
after quoting James 1:13:
Now we know why Christ did not
sin while He was here on earth. It was because He was God, and James has
told us that God cannot be tempted with evil. Then He was not in sinful
flesh, neither did He have sinful tendencies in Him. 12
-30-
This position,
he then applied to the experience of those who would be translated by
stating:
Christ,
according to the Apostle James, could not be tempted, or persuaded to
sin, because being the Son of God He had no lust in Him, and God the
Father said, "In Him I am well pleased." Then you ask: Does God want to
make God's [sic] out of us? Yes that is just what He wants to do. He
wants us to become God's [sic] so that we cannot be tempted to sin. In
the 82nd Psalm, and the 6th verse, He says, "I have said, ye are God's,
and all you are the Children, of the Most High" [sic]. The next verse
says; "But ye shall die like men." And why? Because they will not become
God's [sic] so that they can quit
sinning. "Whoever is born of God, doth not commit sin." I John 3:9. The
144,000 must attain in this life unto this high estate of perfection in
character, as the sons of God, and the daughters of the Almighty, for
they do not go through the grave, to leave their imperfections there.
Like Christ they must become so related to God that they cannot be even
tempted to sin. 13
Donnell
explained just what he understood this "Godlike experience" to mean.
He stated in the
same essay:
By His life on
earth, He [Jesus] showed what humanity will do when filled with the
divine mind. Then every member of the human race, who will renounce
Satan, and his works, and will permit Christ to clothe Himself with his
humanity, in that act, becomes a member of the family of heaven. That is
just what it will be, if we will let the divine mind come into us. It
will be divinity clothed with humanity, and that is just what Christ
was. And thus clothed He did no sin. 14
What did the
advocates of the "Holy Flesh" doctrine actually believe in regard to the
humanity of the Son of God? Haskell in a letter to Ellen G. White told
of his contention with them over this point of doctrine. He wrote when
we stated that we believed that Christ was born in fallen humanity, they
would represent us as believing that Christ sinned, notwithstanding the
fact that we would state our position so clearly that it would seem as
though no one could misunderstand us.
Their point of
theology in this particular respect seems to be this: They believe that
Christ took Adam's nature before he fell; so He took humanity as it was
in the garden of Eden, and thus humanity was holy, and this is the
humanity which Christ had; and now, they say, the particular time has
come for us to become holy in that sense, and then we will have
"translation faith" and never die. 15
-31-
The advocates of
the sinless flesh doctrine were careful to emphasize that in His
humanity Christ bore the physical likeness of a man; but that the body
He accepted had been redeemed from its fallen spiritual nature. Donnell
stated:
He took a body
which showed by its deteriorated condition, that the effects of sin was
shown by it, but His life proved that there was no sin in it. It was a
body which the Father had prepared for Him. Heb. 10:5. Christ's body
represented a body redeemed from its fallen spiritual nature, but not
from its fallen, or deteriorated physical nature. It was a body redeemed
from sin, and with that body Christ clothed His divinity. 16
Along with the
text in Hebrews 10:5 - "A body hast thou prepared me" – the Scripture,
"Hebrews 2: 7-14, was used to prove that Christ was born with flesh like
'my brethren' and 'the church' would have after they passed through the
garden experience," in other words, converted and cleansed. 1 This
was a point strongly emphasized. Huntington in replying to this point
quoted Desire of Ages, page 638, that Christ "is the Son of man,
and thus a brother to every son and daughter of Adam."
Then he commented:
Notice, His
brethren are every child of Adam - sinners, men and woman under the law,
and not simply the spiritual seed of Abraham alone. Now if the spiritual
seed of Abraham and the sanctified ones only are those referred to, and
they being redeemed and no longer under the law, and Jesus was made like
unto them, then it would become evident that Jesus was not made under
the law at all. 17
This is exactly
what the men leading the Movement in Indiana believed, that Christ was
exempt from the law of heredity that effects every other child of Adam.
In 1903, the president who succeeded Donnell, Elder Ira J. Hankins,
wrote to S. S. Davis in Elnora, asking him some questions concerning his
beliefs. On question asked - "Is every child born into this world
naturally inclined to evil even before it is old enough to discern
between good and evil? To this question, Davis replied - "Yes, unless
preserved from the law of heredity in conception
-32-
by the power of
the Holy Ghost." 18
Huntington also
warned the Indiana leadership that in advocating the doc-
trine of
"sinless flesh", they were following papal error. He wrote:
In adopting the
theory of sinless flesh, though its advocates have ever been loath to
admit it, they are nevertheless, unconsciously led into the papal error
of the Immaculate Conception and other heresies of the Catholic church.
The theory of
sinless flesh is
pre-eminently papal - the foundation upon which the Catholic church
stands. Remove this, and the whole structure of the Papacy, as a
religion, falls to the ground. The expression, "sinless flesh", is
nowhere found in the Bible: then why adopt such an expression... The
record says that Christ was "made in the likeness of sinful flesh,"(Rom.
8:3) "Of the seed of David," (Rom. 1:3) "Of the seed of Abraham"(Heb.
2:16). Then let us believe
that it was just that way without trying to spiritualize these plain
declarations to suit a perverted fancy, and by so doing entangle
ourselves in an inextricable web of inconsistencies. 19
Sister White had
declared plainly that no one was to pick up any of the points of this
doctrine and call it truth, for there was not a thread of truth in the
whole fabric. But sadly - the underlying doctrine of the "Holy Flesh"
Movement - their teaching in regard to the Incarnation of Christ has
been taken up again and preached as truth by various leaders of the
Seventh-day Adventist church. Note carefully the three questionable
concepts in regard to the Incarnation held by the "Holy Flesh" advocates
in Indiana:
1) "Christ
took Adam's nature before he fell." 15
In 1952, F. D. Nichol, then editor of the Review
& Herald, wrote:
Adventists
believe that Christ, the "last Adam," possessed, on His human side, a
nature like that of the "first man Adam," a nature free of any defiling
taint of sin, but capable of responding to sin, and that that nature was
handicapped by the debilitating effects of four thousand years of sin's
inroads on man's body and nervous system and environment. 20
-33-
In 1956, R.
Allan Anderson, editor of the Ministry magazine, and Secretary of
the Ministerial Department of the General Conference declared:
Christ did
indeed partake of our nature, our human nature with all
its physical limitations, but not of our carnal nature with all
its lustful corruptions. When He entered the human family it was after
the race had been greatly weakened by degeneracy. For thousands of years
mankind had been physically deteriorating. Compared with Adam and his
immediate posterity, humanity, when God appeared in human flesh, was
stunted in stature, longevity, and vitality. 21
In 1957, the
same minister of the church wrote again in his official
capacity these
words:
When the
incarnate God broke into human history and became one with the race, it
is our understanding that He possessed the sinlessness of the nature
with which Adam was created in Eden. 22
In the same
year, the book - Questions on Doctrine - was released which
stated:
Although born in the flesh, He was
nevertheless God, and was exempt from the inherited passions and
pollutions that corrupt the natural descendants of Adam. He was "without
sin," not only in His outward conduct, but in His very nature. 23
In 1971, Dr.
Leroy Edwin Froom in his book, Movement of Destiny, which was
approved officially by Elders Robert H. Pierson, and Neal C. Wilson,
wrote that in an interchange of correspondence with a Dr. E. Schuyler
English, editor of Our Hope, an Evangelical publication, English
had contended:
He [Christ] was
perfect in His humanity, but He was none the less God, and His
conception in His incarnation was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit so
that He did not partake of the fallen sinful nature of other men. 24
To this, Froom
placed the postscript - "That, we in turn assured him, is precisely what
we [the Seventh-day Adventist Church] likewise believe." 25
If the E. J.
Waggoner of 1901 could this day pick up the book, Movement of Destiny,
and read what Froom has written, would he not again say - "We need
-34-
to settle, every
one of us, whether we are out of the church of Rome or not.
There are a
great many that have got the marks yet." 26.
-35-
V
THE BY-PATHS
Christ came to
this world to be the "pattern-man," 1 ' "the great Exemplar," 2
"He came not to
our world to give the obedience of a lesser God to a greater, but
as a man to obey
God's Holy Law, and in this way He is our example." 3 To
follow this example is "the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." 4
"Higher than the highest human thought can reach is God's ideal for His
children. Godliness –godlike- ness - is the goal to be reached." 5
The attainment of this goal is to realize perfection.
In the
beginning, man was created in the image of God. "The moral faculties and
the physical powers possessed by man" were received from his Creator.
"All was a sinless transcript of Himself. God endowed man with holy
attributes and placed him in a garden made expressly for him." 6
Man's nature had no "bias toward evil," 7 neither did it
possess an "enmity" against sin. 8 Adam and Eve were
created free moral agents in the strictest sense. It was theirs to
choose. While God "did not see fit to place them beyond the power of
disobedience," 9 He limited by the very nature which they
possessed through creation the means by which temptation could come to
them. Adam could be tempted only from without, not from within.
"He stood in the strength of his perfection before God. All the organs
and faculties of his being were equally developed, and harmoniously
balanced." 10 But in the decision to sin, all was
changed. This change has be-
come the
inheritance of all the sons and daughters of Adam. "The results of
eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is manifest in every
man's experience. There is in his nature a bent to evil, a force which,
unaided, he cannot resist." 11 But "the plan of
redemption contemplates our com-
-36-
plete recovery
from the power of Satan. Christ always separates the contrite soul from
sin. He came to destroy the works of the devil, and He has made
provision that the Holy. Spirit shall be imparted to every repentant
soul, to keep him from sinning." 12 This is
the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. This is perfection.
The question
between the men of Indiana was not the matter of whether the gospel
could preserve men from sin, or whether the power of the Holy Spirit was
sufficient to keep a human being from sinning. The question that
separated them
was the nature of the humanity
which Christ assumed in becoming the Son of man,
and its
application to the life of a believer.
The leaders of
the "Holy Flesh" Movement taught that Christ took the nature of Adam
before the Fall; that Christ was a stranger to the fallen nature of man,
except in its physical characteristics. He appeared as a man, yet was
fully God, and therefore, Satan did not overcome Him by temptations from
without, and not having assumed man's sinful nature, He could not be
tempted from within. How was such a life to be related to the present
Christian experience?
To this question
the men of Indiana addressed themselves by reasoning that since man had
received because of the Fall a sinful nature with inclinations and
weaknesses, the only way, was for these to be eradicated. So they taught
that a man must pass through "the Gethsemane" experience, and by so
doing he would receive a nature like Christ had in His humanity - the
unfallen nature of Adam.
This was the
by-path to the right from the narrow way walked by Christ. This same
bypath was followed with variations by Brinsmead in his doctrine of
perfection. In one of his first publications, he wrote:
While it is true
that the Christian is married to Christ at conversion, the union is not
fully accomplished until the judgment. When
-37-
his faith
reaches to the last supreme act of the atonement, he will be fully
united ("married") to divinity for eternity. Then he will be as sinless
in the flesh as Christ was sinless in the flesh. 13
In a diagram he presented an equation:
Christ's Divine Nature + Fallen Nature received at birth = Perfect,
sinless life without bent to sin. As for man the equation read:
Man's Fallen Nature + Divine Nature received by complete rebirth at
final atonement = Perfect, sinless life without bent to sin. 13
It must be noted, in order for the record to
be kept straight, that at this time (1959), Brinsmead taught the
historic Adventist position on the Incarnation. He wrote in the same
book:
Man could not
keep the law (cease sinning) because of his fallen nature. God answered
the need by sending His own son to live in the same nature as fallen
humanity. For this reason Christ partook of human nature as it was since
sin entered. 14
Again:
Notwithstanding
the fact that Christ appeared on earth possessing the fallen nature of
man, He lived a victorious life, and offered to God on our behalf the
sacrifice of the spotless life. Divinity came to dwell in humanity, yet
did not in the least particular participate in its sin. This is the
mystery of the incarnation. It was our fallen flesh that was lost
through its utter impotency to keep the law of God. It was our fallen
flesh that was in need of power to live in harmony with the divine will.
But Christ, coming to dwell in our fallen flesh, kept perfectly the law
of God. Thus
Jesus condemned
sin in the flesh - in our flesh. 15
This position on
the Incarnation is incompatible with the doctrine of perfection which he
had set forth, which was a replay of the "holy flesh" teaching - the
eradication of the fallen nature of man. Instead of changing his
teaching in regard to perfection to conform with the historic Adventist
teaching on the Incarnation, he changed the base to fit the
superstructure. By 1968, Brinsmead was teaching in regard to the
incarnation this concept:
"Christ
became one flesh with us, ..."
-38-
Yet Christ was
not born in sin. His human nature was not sinful at birth as is that of
other infants. His birth was decidedly different than that of any other
children, for He was born of the Holy Spirit. Therefore His human nature
was not severed from God;
neither did Satan implant in His
mind the spirit of disobedience. When the divine Spirit came to dwell in
a temple of human flesh, a new human spirit was created. Through His
supernatural birth He escaped from participation in man's Satanic
inheritance. There was no trace of sin in His human nature. One point
about the humanity of Christ should be made clear. It was the Holy
Spirit, and only the Holy Spirit, that created the unique sinlessness of
the human nature of Christ. 16 a
With this
change, Brinsmead's original equation in regard to Christ would now
read: Christ's Divine Nature + Human Nature free from the fallen
inheritance = Perfect, sinless life without bent to sin. Thus for man to
obtain such a nature, there would have to be the eradication of the
fallen inheritance. The Holy Flesh advocates said this could be done by
going through what they termed "the Gethsemane" experience. Brinsmead
taught that it was by being "married" to divinity at the final
atonement. This teaching, held for ten years, Brinsmead now admits was
error. B
With the
admission of error in the area of "perfection" Brinsmead has not altered
the change he made in his position on the Incarnation. A "Confidential
Preliminary Draft for Restricted Group" written by "R.D.B." states:
_________________________
a -- Compare
this with the "Holy Flesh" teaching in regard to the humanity of our
Lord: "When Adam and Eve sinned, they were conformed to the nature of
Satan. That nature was begotten to every son and daughter of Adam...."
(p. 28, Footnote #6) "He [Christ] took a body which showed by its
deteriorated condition, that the effects of sin was shown by it, but His
life proved that there was no sin in it. It was a body which the Father
had prepared for Him. Heb. 10:5.
Christ's body represented a body redeemed from its fallen
spiritual nature, but not from its fallen, or deteriorated physical
nature. It was a body redeemed from sin, and with that body Christ
clothed His divinity." (p. 31, Footnote #16)
b –
“Many of the arguments surrounding the Awakening finally settled around
the
-39-
Consider the
vast difference of being conceived in sin by natural human generation
and being conceived by the Holy Ghost in a supernatural generation. Our
humanity was generated from a sinful source: His was from a sinless
source. Some may reason: The Holy Spirit created Christ's divine nature
and Mary created Christ's human nature. But this is fallacious
reasoning. Christ's divine nature was not, could not be created. He was
Himself the uncreated, eternal Word, One in substance and essence with
God the Father. Look carefully at the Scriptural declarations and it
will be seen that the Holy Spirit generated Christ's human nature in the
womb of the Virgin Mary. We grant that Mary was a sinner by nature, and
that a sinful nature could be transmitted by one human parent as by two.
But the other fact to consider is that the human nature of Christ was
divinely conceived and overshadowed by the Holy Spirit in the womb of
Mary. The Holy Spirit is holiness
personified. He "prepared" (Heb. 10:5) and
sanctified the human nature which was taken in union with divinity in
the person of Christ. So the angel referred to Christ's humanity as
"that holy thing" – something that could never be said of our human
nature. 17 y
There is another bypath to the left, based on
the same doctrine of the matter of the perfecting of the saints. Our
critics felt that this was our most vulnerable point. The more
vigorously this area was attacked, the more vigorously we defended it.
Consequently, not only those opposed to the Awakening, but even those
who espoused it, inevitably gravitated to regard this matter of the
how, what and when of perfection as the summon
bonum of the awakening. Be that as it may, this writer is persuaded
that our understanding of the perfecting of the saints through the final
atonement has not been altogether sound." (R. D. Brinsmead, A Review
of the Awakening Message, Part I, p. 2, May, 1972)
y -- Compare
the thoughts herein expressed with Appendix D of An Interpretive
History of the Doctrine of the Incarnation as Taught by the Seventh-day
Adventist
Church,
which quotes from unpublished manuscripts by Dr. Leroy Froom. Note the
following
sentences on pp. 104-105: "Jesus' human nature originated miraculously
in the humanity
of His virgin mother by the creative power of the Holy Spirit." "It is
contended by some, being herself sinful, [Mary] would inevitably convey
the taint of her corruption to Jesus - for sinful tendencies could as
verily be conveyed by one parent as definitely as from two." "We press
the point: It is a mistaken
notion to think that Christ received His Deity from a Divine Parent and
His humanity from a human parent." "Christ was Himself Eternal Deity –
the Eternal Word and Son." "The body of Jesus was 'prepared' (Heb. 10:5)
by the Third Person of the Godhead, Who brought to pass the 'mystery' of
God 'manifest in the flesh' (I Tim. 3:16)." "And the Third Person of the
Godhead is, of course, Holiness personified." (The common source of this
teaching is Dr. William G. T. Shedd's Dogmatic Theology. See Ministry,
December, 1957 - "The Theanthropic
Nature of
Christ", p. 11 ff.)
-40-
incarnation as
taught by the "Holy Flesh" men of Indiana. Since it is taught that
Christ took the nature of Adam prior to the Fall, those who reject the
by-path to the right taken by the "Holy Flesh" advocates, now teach that
man can never reach the example set by Christ until the change which
takes place at the Second Coming of Christ removes from man the fallen
nature received through Adam. d
Thus the gospel is made to center in what has been done by God in
Christ. We are told that all we have to do is acknowledge it, and by an
assent called faith, resign ourselves to live under the "indulgence" of
God, with no hope of "stopping the history of sin" in our present life's
conduct. In other words, when this vile body with its inherited
tendencies toward sin, and the cultivated sins of our experience is
changed at the Second Advent, then we shall demonstrate before
the universe that the Law of God can be kept.
The true gospel
is not to be found in a by-path to the right, nor in a bypath to the
left, but is to be found "in the middle of the right side of the road."
The deviations to the right and to the left challenges the basis upon
which Adventism rests. The very objective of the Third Angel's Message
is called into question - "the manifestation of the sons of God," 18
those steadfast saints
______________________________
d -- For
a full explanation of this position see tract - "Is Perfection
Possible?"
by Dr. Edward
Heppenstall, or the same presentation in Signs of the Times,
Dec.,
1963. This
position is now declared to be "correct" by Brinsmead. See A Review
of the Awakening
Message,
Part I, p. 5, May, 1972. Compared with brochure, Is
Perfection
Possible? versus How Is Perfection Possible?, published by
Dr. Fred
Metz, January
1964. A paragraph of explanation in the introductory letter by
"Dr
Heppenstall's basic contention seems to be this:
Since man has an evil nature, full of propensities and
inclinations to sin, and since as he contends, gospel does not make
provision for the eradication of this evil nature, complete perfection
of character is not possible in this life. Mr. Brinsmead’s basic
contention seems to be this:
Since, as he contends, the gospel does make provision for the
eradication of all man's sinful propensities and inclinations, complete
perfection of char acter in this life is not just a possibility, but a
positive necessity for the remnant church" (p. 2)
-41-
"that keep the
commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." 19
It is truth that
the "gospel of God" is what God has done for us in Jesus, "which was
made of the seed of David according to the flesh." 20
If this were clearly understood - His incarnation - then the life which
He laid down in the flesh, but now takes up again to give to all who
believe, would be better comprehended. For in the resurrection, He
became "the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness,"
to give grace "unto the obedience of faith." (eiV upakohn pistewV). 21 This
then is the "gospel of Christ" - "the power of God unto salvation to
everyone that believeth.... For therein [in the lives of those that
believe] is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith." 22
What does it mean - "from faith to faith?" "The righteousness of
Christ is revealed from faith to faith; that is from your present faith
to an increased understanding of faith which works by love and purifies
the soul." 23
Because we are unwilling to come face to face with the facts of the
Incarnation, [It will ever be true that we shall not be able to
understand the how of its mystery] we invent devious by-paths in regard
to the victory over sin which it is God's purpose for us to experience.
"The Lord Jesus came to our world, not to reveal what a God could do,
but what a man could do, through faith in God's power to help in
every emergency." Because of this - "The Lord now demands that
every son and daughter of Adam, through faith in Jesus Christ, serve Him
in human nature we now have... Jesus, the world's Redeemer,
could only keep the commandments of God in the same way that
humanity can keep them." 3
Paul stated the
pure gospel of Christ in these words - "I am crucified with Christ:
nevertheless, I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the
life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son
of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me." 24
"Christ came to be our example, and to
-42-
make known to us
that we may be partakers of the divine nature... Christ, by His own
example, made it evident that man may stand in integrity. Men may
have power to resist evil - a power that neither earth, nor death, nor
hell can master; a power that will place them where they may overcome as
Christ overcame. Divinity and humanity may be combined in them." 25
____________________________
-43-
VI
LESSONS AND SIDELIGHTS
The "Holy Flesh"
Movement did not take place in a corner as far as the Indiana Conference
was concerned. The entire conference committee and the majority of the
working staff became involved. Jesse Dunn, State Agent at the time,
recalled that by the time of the Muncie Camp Meeting in 1900, the
Conference President, the Executive Committee, and the entire
ministerial staff except five, two ordained ministers, and three
licentiates, were involved. 1 This is no insignificant fact, when
one realizes that even in 1900, the conference had a working staff of
thirteen ordained ministers and fifteen licentiates. 2
Here is a lesson
that should speak volumes to us today. A whole conference - its
leadership and committee - can be wrong, deadly wrong! But more than
that, the leadership of the whole church can depart from God, and place
their approval on error and heresy. "God and heaven alone are
infallible." 3 Christ never placed an infallible pope or
committee at the head of His church. He, alone, was to be its head, and
the Holy Spirit, His vicegerent. Neither is the church as a corporate
body infallible. That which involves humanity is prone to error and
apostasy. Therefore, the Scriptures warn - "Put not your trust in
princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no salvation." 4
To place our
spiritual welfare in the hands of men results in a false
experience. The servant of the Lord warned:
This message is
spoken to our churches in every place. In the false experience that
has been coming in, a decided influence is at work to exalt human
agencies, and to lead some to depend on human judgment, and to follow
the control of human minds. This influence is diverting the mind from
God. God forbid that any such experience should deepen and grow in our
ranks as seventh-day Adventists. Our petitions are to reach higher than
erring
-44-
man - to God. 5
Another
interesting sidelight of this Indiana movement and closely connected
with the previous lesson cited is revealed in the confession of Elder F.
M. Roberts. He stated before the delegates at the 1901 General
Conference Session: "While I did not belong to the Conference Committee, I
stood with the committee and believed that what we were teaching was
the truth." 6 This is blind loyalty. This is misplaced
loyalty. This is a violation of the first commandment which declares -
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." 7 What a different
picture might have been painted in Indiana if the counsel of the servant
of the Lord in 1896 had been followed. She wrote:
We are living in
times full of importance to each one. Light is shining in clear, steady
rays around us. If this light is rightly received and appreciated, it
will be a blessing to us and to others; but if we trust in our
wisdom and strength, or in the wisdom and strength of our fellow men,
it will be turned into a poison. In the struggle for eternal life,
we can not lean upon one another. The bread of life must be eaten by
each one. Individually we must partake of it, that soul, body, and mind
may be revived and strengthened by its transforming power, thus becoming
assimilated to the mind and character of Jesus Christ. God must be made
first and last and best in everything. 8 For men, ministers of
the gospel, called of God to be His mouthpieces, to surrender their
responsibility to know for themselves what is truth, and to go along
with a committee is treasonable. But today the leadership of the church
demands of every man on the payroll, one thing above all else - "loyalty
to the hierarchy." Every worker is considered a member of "the team"
with the conference president and/or the committee calling "the play".
One writer has stated it well, when she wrote:
As
totalitarianism increases - in a school, or a country, or a church - the
use of the word, loyalty, increases. A strange and frightening word. The
mob's word. The gang's word. A word people shout in unison - while honor
and responsibility and integrity are
-45-
words an
individual can speak, and act out. How does one measure the quality of a
man's relationship with a large entity such as a church or school or
government? It is an interesting fact, and one many of us have observed
all our lives, that people demand loyalty of us only when they are doing
something to us (or somebody else) of which we don't approve and cannot
wholeheartedly participate in, and which weakens our love and
admiration. Let's admit it: loyalty is a verbal switch-blade used
by little and big bosses to force us quickly to accept a questionable
situation which our intelligence and conscience should reject. 9
Over and beyond
Robert's confession of blindly following the conference committee was a
more tragic confession. He declared - "I am a firm believer in the
Testimonies. I have studied them for years..." 5 Yet he failed
to discern between truth and error. We may give mental assent to what
the Lord has said, and even read widely in the inspired Testimonies, yet
in Laodicean blindness to organization, we may not only commit error
ourselves but lead the church of God into grievous mistakes in doctrine
and practice. This tragic situation results because we have failed in
two vital sectors of our personal experience. One, that which we have
read and studied does not become sufficiently a part of our lives so
that we can detect error even in high places. Two, we are not willing to
accept "the cross", and stand up and be counted in opposition to that
which is clearly proven to be the basest apostasy and heresy. Many of
the ministers of the church, from the General Conference President on
down, are willing to let other men do their thinking for them, excusing
themselves that they are insufficiently schooled to understand some of
the very basic principles involved in theological questions. Yet in the
pious platitudes they write and utter, it is evident that they have read
the Testimonies for years.
How appropos is
the counsel of the Lord's servant. She wrote:
Would that every
minister might realize the sacredness of his office and the holiness of
his work, and show the courage that
-46-
Elijah showed!
As divinely appointed messengers, ministers are in a position of awful
responsibility. They are to "reprove, rebuke, exhort with all
long-suffering." In Christ's stead they are to labor as stewards of the
mysteries of heaven, encouraging the obedient and warning the
disobedient. With them worldly policy is to have no weight. Never
are they to swerve from the path in which Jesus has bidden them walk.
They are to go forward in faith, remembering that they are surrounded by
a cloud of witnesses. They are not to speak their own words, but words
which One greater than the potentates of earth has bidden them speak.
Their message is to be, "Thus saith the Lord." God calls for men like
Elijah, Nathan, and John the Baptist, - men who will bear His message
with faithfulness, regardless of the consequences; men who will
speak the truth bravely, though it call for the sacrifice of all they
have. 10
In Indiana, in
the time of the "Holy Flesh" crisis, there were men, a few, who did
sacrifice all that they had. One such was Elder 0. S. Hadley. In a
report of the Indiana Conference, he is listed as a member of the
Executive Committee. 11 At the time of the 1899 conference
session, he was removed from the Executive Committee and made a
"trustee" of the Conference Association. From the report, it would
appear that he was serving as pastor of the Indianapolis church at the
time. 12 But in the 1900 conference session report,
he is not only removed as a trustee of the association, but he is
replaced by one of the members of the Davis’s revival team - J. A.
Crary. Further, he is no longer listed among the ministers of the
conference, and another minister who openly advocated the "holy flesh"
doctrine - A. L. Miller - is listed at the Indianapolis address, which
was Hadley's in the 1899 report. 13 We are
told by an eyewitness of the scenes in Indianapolis, what happened to
Elder 0. S. Hadley. This observer wrote - "Elder 0. S. Hadley opposed
this doctrine openly, and taught that it was fanaticism. Because of his
attitude, his credentials were taken from him." 14 Such tactics
reveal the power behind a cause or a movement. "Compelling power is
found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are
not of this order." 15 "Any man, be he minister or
laymen, who seeks to compel or con-
-47-
trol the reason
of any other man, becomes an agent of Satan, to do his work, and in the
sight of the heavenly universe bears the mark of Cain." 16 What
a revelation this should be to our own insights as to what is taking
place today. To what extent this same procedure which was used in the
Holy Flesh Movement has been used today to force acceptance of the
publications of the books, Questions on Doctrine, and Movement
of Destiny, only eternity will reveal. That it has been done can be
documented; and in these actions it has been revealed to all who are
willing to read and see, what power now possesses men in high places of
church responsibility. When the "power and presence" of God are lacking
in the church, it is supplied by human enactments, programs and
projects. 17 Not being motivated by the Holy
Spirit, human rule and control are substituted. This warning was
specifically given:
Organizations,
institutions, unless kept by the power of God, will work under Satan's
dictation to bring men under the control of men; and fraud and guile
will bear the semblance of zeal for truth and the advancement of the
kingdom of God. Whatever in our practice is not as open as day, belongs
to the methods of the prince of evil. His methods are practiced even
among Seventh-day Adventists, who claim to have advanced truth. 18
The leadership
of the Indiana Conference were not without warning as to the course they
were following. At the Camp Meeting in 1899 at Alexandria, just as the
"Holy Flesh" Movement was getting under way, Elder A. J. Breed reported
some features that he did not
consider proper, but commented that these "were overcome."19 Then
at the Muncie Camp Meeting, both Elders Haskell and Breed endeavored to
show the error in the teaching and conduct of the ministers and leaders
involved. But the leadership of Indiana retaliated and took the position
that Elders Haskell and Breed had come down from Battle Creek to stir up
controversy. Elder Donnell claimed that "it was the Minnesota Conference
over again," 20 inferring that the men of
Indiana were preaching the genuine message
-48-
of righteousness
by faith, and the brethren from Battle Creek were in opposition as had
occurred at Minneapolis in 1888. It was at the Muncie Camp Meeting that
the conference session was held, and from the report, Elder Hadley was
replaced on the Conference Association, and removed from his
responsibilities in the conference. When warnings are received by men in
authority, and rejected, they start down the track toward Romanism,
which not only imperils their own souls, but which also introduces false
principles into the work, thus corrupting the church. How carefully we
have been warned on this point. It is written:
If men resist
the warnings the Lord sends them, they become even leaders in evil
practices; such men assume to exercise the prerogatives of God, - they
presume to do that which God Himself will not do in seeking to control
the minds of men. Thus they follow in the track of Romanism. They
introduce their own methods and
plans, and
through their misconceptions of God they weaken the faith of others in
the truth, and bring in false principles that work like leaven to taint
and corrupt institutions and churches.
Anything that
lowers man's conception of righteousness and equity and impartial
judgment, any device or precept that brings God's human agents under the
control of human minds, impairs their faith in God, and separates the
soul from Him.
God will not
vindicate any device whereby man shall in the slightest degree rule or
oppress his fellow-man. As soon as a man begins to make an iron rule for
other men, he dishonors God and imperils his own soul and the souls of
his brethren. 21
When one surveys some of the lessons to be learned from the sidelights
of the Holy Flesh" Movement, he is led to exclaim, "How true 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.'" 22
_______________________
1 Jesse
E. Dunn, Signed statement recalling events that took place in connection
with the "Holy Flesh" Movement. The statement is in the files of the
writer.
-49-
-50-
APPENDIX – A
Biographical Sketches
S. S. Davis
S. S. Davis was
born in 1855 in Bartholomew County, near Columbus, Indiana. His mother
was an "old time" Methodist, while his father was a Baptist. His father
served in the Civil War and was incarcerated in the infamous
Andersonville prison. Soon after his release due to the ravages of
prison life, he died leaving the care of his wife and four younger
children to his eldest son, S. S., who was at the time only thirteen.
This experience cut short Davis’s formal education. Making use of the
opportunities available and wisely applying himself, he became "a
self-educated man." He was early active in religious affairs serving as
a teacher and Sunday school superintendent in a nearby community church.
Soon after his
marriage, he and his bride attended a tent meeting held near Duggar,
Indiana in 1886. As a result of these meetings, they accepted the Truth.
From 1887 - 1892, Davis colporteur-ed in western Nebraska, while staking
out a claim to one hundred and sixty acres of land. He sold The Great
Controversy and Bible Readings for the Home Circle. He also
studied these books for himself during these years. Due to drouth and
his mother's final illness, he returned to Indiana in 1893. 1
At the 21st
Annual Session of the Indiana Conference held in Indianapolis, August
8-13, 1893, Davis was granted a license to preach. 2
Part of his work during this time was in Perry County, where he
pioneered the preaching of the Third Angel's Message. 3
At the 1895 Camp-Meeting held in Anderson, Indiana, he was ordained. 4
Following his ordination, he was sent to Evansville to establish
the work there. This he did. In
1899, he was asked to head up a team of workers
-51-
for
revivalism in the Conference. His influence grew until in 1900 at the
Muncie Camp Meeting, he was made a member of the Executive Committee. 5
In 1901 at the
General Conference Session held in Battle Creek, Michigan, Ellen G.
White read the Testimony regarding the work in Indiana. As a result the
entire conference staff and committee tendered their resignations. On
May 3-5, a special constituency meeting was held in Indianapolis which
altered the entire face of the conference administration. 6 After
the change-over, Davis retired to his home in Elnora, Indiana. He
engaged in farming on rented land near the town till 1910, when he moved
to Lyons, Indiana, where he continued to farm.
The beginning of
the end of the association of S. S. Davis with the Seventh-day Adventist
church came during the final months of his stay in Elnora. Two
ministers, one of whom had been ordained with him in 1895, held some
meetings in the church and stayed in the Davis home. Sometime following
the meetings, a general church meeting was called, and the church was
disbanded. When it was reorganized, S. S. Davis' name was omitted from
the record. Sister Davis, and the oldest son, Arlie, elected to join
their husband and father. 7
In 1920, the
Davis family moved to Nebraska, where on September 26, 1926, S. S. Davis
was ordained a minister of the General Baptist church. 8 He
died two years later in 1928, at
the age of 73, and is buried in Gordon, Nebraska.
R. S. Donnell
Robert Sloan
Donnell was born in Belfast, Ireland, February 7, 1844. His parents
moved to St. Louis, Missouri, where they both died of cholera when he
was still an infant. Placed in an orphan's home, he later was adopted by
a Presbyterian family by the name of Donnell. 9 No
knowledge is available as to
-52-
when he became a
Seventh-day Adventist. He was, however, in charge of the Upper Columbia
Conference prior to his coming to Indiana as president. 10
Following the events of 1901 in Indiana, he went to Elnora and lived for
several years with the Davis family.
In 1905, Elder
Donnell returned to the ministry of the church and accepted the
pastorate of the Raleigh, Tennessee church near Memphis. Both his wife
and step daughter, Nellie, preceded him in death, and were buried in a
cemetery near Memphis. In 1928, a group of self-supporting workers from
Madison felt impressed to start a Health Food program in Memphis, and
went there on faith alone, without means. A contact was made with Elder
Donnell who was retired and subsisting on sustentation. He had just sold
his home reserving only two rooms and a kitchenette. The funds that he
had placed in savings were drawn from the bank and placed at the
disposal of the group of self-supporting workers.
Later when
because of failing health, he was unable to care for himself, one couple
of the group who went to Memphis to establish the Health Food work,
Brother and Sister Paul C. Dysinger, took him into their home till his
death. 11
He died th 1937,
and was buried in a little cemetery near Old Fountain Head
school, now
Highland Academy.
_______________________________
1 The facts in
the foregoing paragraphs were gleaned from brief life
2 sketches
provided for the writer by the daughter, Viola, and a son, Joseph
3 M. Davis.
4 Review and
Herald, September 5, 1893, p. 573
6 Ibid.,
August 20, 1895, p. 536
-53-
9
Review
and Herald, December 30, 1937, "Appointments and Notices".
Kentucky,
February 22, 1965
APPENDIX - B
Was the Doctrine
of the Incarnation a
Real Issue in
the "Holy Flesh" Movement?
In studying the
Testimony that Sister White read at the General Conference Session in
1901 concerning the Movement in Indiana, 1 the absence of any
mention of the doctrine of the Incarnation is noted. The question is
raised that if she made no mention of it, why should the doctrine even
be considered in a research study of this particular experience in our
church's history? The answer is simply that contemporary data indicates
that this doctrine was a major point of conflict between the men who
advocated the doctrine of "holy flesh", and those who opposed it.
In 1903, Elder
1. J. Hankins, then president of the Indiana Conference, wrote to S. S.
Davis at Elnora asking him eight questions in regard to his belief. Four
of the eight questions concerned the doctrine of the Incarnation. The
questions and answers are as follows:
QUESTION NUMBER FOUR
"Please state in
a few words your views on the nature of Christ?"
ANSWER. -
Luke 1:35 "that holy thing."
QUESTION NUMBER FIVE
"Did Christ's
flesh have in it any weakness or natural tendency to sin as the result
of the fall?"
ANSWER. -
Testimony No. 2 the last three words on page 201, and continued on page
202 says, "was our brother in infirmities, but not possessing like
passions." That is all on that point that I care to say.
QUESTION NUMBER SIX
-54-
"Was Mary the
mother of Jesus like all other women, sinful?"
ANSWER. -
I could not say how full of sin she was but I suppose that she had her
share, perhaps not as bad as some, and maybe more than some as there are
degrees in heredity and depravity, and there is no evidence that she had
an immaculate conception.
QUESTION NUMBER SEVEN
"Is every child
born into the world naturally inclined to evil, even before it is old
enough to discern between good and evil?"
ANSWER. -
Yes, unless preserved from the law of heredity in conception by the
power of the Holy Ghost. See Ps. 51:5 Shapen in sin, also Eph. 2:3 "by
nature children of wrath." 2
The only extant
material written by a minister of the Indiana Conference
against the "Holy Flesh" Movement
is a tract primarily on the subject of the Incarnation and its
application to the life of a Christian. Elder S. G. Huntington's
conclusion indicated the emphasis of the whole tract. It reads:
Now, since we
have been studying the humanity of Christ, let none think that we would
detract from or forget His divinity. Although Jesus "the
sinbearer endured the wrath of divine justice, and for our sakes became
SIN ITSELF," [D. of A. p. 907,] yet, through His implicit faith
in His Father, He was fortified so that His divine nature overwhelmingly
triumphed over His sinful nature and hereditary tendencies. Thus from
the cradle to Calvary, His days of trial and probation, He lived a pure,
holy, and sinless life. Thus He met the demands of a broken law, and
became "the end of the law for righteousness to every one that
believeth."
Now just as God
in Christ, 4,000 years this side of Creation, lived a perfect, spotless
life in sinful flesh, so through faith in Him, He will cleanse us from
all our unrighteousness, impart to us His
own righteousness, take up His abode in our hearts, and live the
same kind of a life in our sinful flesh six thousand years this side of
Creation. Then we can truly say, "as He is [in character] so are we in
this world." I John 4:17. 3
Another primary
source is an essay written by R. S. Donnell at Memphis following the
experience in Indiana, entitled, "The Nature of Christ and Man." This
document has been quoted at length in the manuscript itself. 4
Due
consideration should be given to the fact that three of the strongest
statements from the pen of Ellen G. White on the nature of the humanity
that Christ assumed in the Incarnation are dated in 1900, and in 1901.
Just at the
-55-
time of the
Indiana camp meetings in 1900, there appeared in the Review and
Herald this
statement:
Christ did in
reality unite the offending nature of man with His own sinless nature,
because by this act of condescension He would be enabled to pour out His
blessings in behalf of the fallen race. Thus He has made it possible for
us to partake of His nature. 5
Then in the Youth's
Instructor of the same year is the strongest statement ever
made by the
servant of the Lord on the subject. It read:
Think of
Christ's humiliation. He took upon Himself fallen, suffering human
nature, degraded and defiled by sin. He took our sorrows, bearing our
grief and shame. He endured all the temptations wherewith man is beset.
He united humanity with divinity: a divine spirit dwelt in a temple of
flesh. He united Himself with the temple. "The Word was made flesh, and
dwelt among us," because by so doing He could associate with the sinful,
sorrowing sons and daughters of Adam. 6
The following year, 1901, a manuscript
bearing the number 141 stated:
In Christ were
united the divine and the human - the Creator and the creature. The
nature of God, whose law had been transgressed, and the nature of Adam,
the transgressor, meet in Jesus - the Son of God, and the Son of man. 7
This particular
statement was taken from a manuscript written previously, dated
as Ms. 16,
October 1, 1890, which was evidently a sermon delivered at Lynn,
Massachusetts.
It has not been determined to whom or under what circumstances
the 1901
manuscript was written. It is interesting to note, however, that this
strong statement
in regard to Christ's incarnation was introduced again at this
particular date
- 1901.
From my own
experience there is an interesting episode which took place in 1958.
When I was talking to Brother Jesse Dunn who had been State Agent in
Indiana during the period of the "Holy Flesh" agitation, we discussed
the subject of the Incarnation as taught in the book, Questions on
Doctrine. It was this that triggered Brother Dunn's memory in regard
to a similar teaching
-56-
of the "Holy
Flesh" advocates. Such an association would not have taken place
had not the
doctrine of the Incarnation been a major issue in the Indiana Movement.
This experience led to the initial research which forms the basis of
this manuscript.
Why then did
Ellen G. White not mention this particular doctrine in her presentation
in 1901 which ended the fanatical movement in Indiana? She did not need
to do so. The presentation of the truth in regard to the humanity our
Lord assumed in the incarnation and its relationship to the "holy flesh"
doctrine had been presented the evening before by Elder E. J. Waggoner.
8 All she needed to say was -
Brethren from
Indiana, the word of the Lord to you and to all who are misled by your
influence is: "Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines.
For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace." 9
In another
manuscript, she recalls the experience in Indiana, and emphasizes the
fact that more than one doctrine was involved. She wrote:
During the
General Conference of 1901, instruction was given me in regard to the
experience of some of the brethren in Indiana, and regarding the doctrines they
had been teaching in the churches. I was shown that through this
experience and the doctrines taught, the enemy has been working
to lead souls astray. 10
_____________________________
l
Ellen G. White, General Conference Bulletin, 1901, pp. 419-422
-57-
APPENDIX – C
Compiler's Note in Selected
Messages, bk. ii, p. 31
In January,
1968, the editor of the Review wrote a series of editorials on
the subject, "The Church and Heresy". In the second editorial, he wrote:
In 1900 a
fanatical teaching was started in Indiana, termed the doctrine of holy
flesh. Advocates of this heresy taught that during Christ's agony in
Gethsemane He obtained holy flesh comparable to that possessed by Adam
before his fall. They declared that followers of Christ must obtain this
same kind of experience in order to be prepared for translation. 1
After reading
this statement, I wrote a letter to the editor which said in part:
It would appear
that you gathered your concept from a paper written by Elder G. A.
Roberts dated June 11, 1923 (D F 190). But if you read carefully what he
wrote, he didn't say what you wrote...
Since beginning
this letter, I have puzzled over how you could read the material by
Elder G. A. Roberts as you did. So I decided to look one more place to
see where you might have obtained the concept you stated. And so I found
in Selected Messages, bk. ii, p. 31, the source of your
statement. It is in the note by the compilers. I am sorry that they are
wrong, and I am sorry that as an editor you did not do more original
research than you seem to have done. This does leave a shadow over other
things written also. In positions of responsibility we must
double check our
material. I also know that in the press of the work load, our human
weakness gets the best of us at times. 2
In his reply, he
defended the White Estate, and questioned my scholarship in the
matter. 3 So
on February 18, 1968, 1 wrote:
Your letter of
the 14th in before me. Inasmuch as you infer that my scholarship in
regard to the Holy Flesh Movement is open to question rather than your
source, please give me the authority for your statement in the Review,
January 25, 1968... If you say, The Compiler's Note, then since you are
a trustee of the White Estate, will you give me the primary source of
this reference that you rely upon. 4
In answering this request, the editor wrote:
As support for my statement, I might present
a letter written by Burton Wade who attended the camp meeting held in
Muncie, Indiana,
-58-
in September of
1900. At this camp meeting he witnessed firsthand the fanatical
excitement and activities of the holy flesh group. In a letter dated
January 12, 1962, addressed to Elder Arthur White he says that those who
espoused this heresy "believed that, when Christ suffered in Gethsemane,
he obtained 'Holy Flesh' such as Adam had in the beginning before the
fall, and they maintained that everyone who hoped to be translated would
also have to obtain 'Holy Flesh'."
This position is
a bit at variance with those of G. A. Roberts and S. N. Haskell, but how
do we know which of these men was capable of making a definitive
theological statement? 5
This reply
raises two very important questions. The Burton Wade letter,
and the relative weight to assign
sources on the teaching of the "Holy Flesh" Movement relative to the
doctrine of the Incarnation. Before considering the Burton Wade letter
as a source for either the editor's statement in the Review, or
the Compiler's Note in Selected Messages, bk. ii, let us note the
relative theological background of each of the men who have made a
statement in regard to the teaching of the Incarnation by the "Holy
Flesh" advocates.
Elder S. N.
Haskell was a well known writer and scholar in the Adventist church. He
was cited as an example by Sister White as among those who were capable
of making pronouncements of truth in 1888. 6
He was also a participant in the 1900 Muncie, Indiana camp meeting. He
had discussed face to face with the leading men of the "Holy Flesh"
Movement their doctrinal concepts. Within two days following his return
to Battle Creek, he wrote Sister White this analysis:
When we stated
that we believed that Christ was born in fallen humanity, they would
represent us as believing that Christ sinned, notwithstanding the fact
that we would state our position so clearly that it would seem as though
no one could misunderstand us.
Their point of
theology in this particular respect seems to be this: They believe that
Christ took Adam's nature before he fell; so He took humanity as it was
in the garden of Eden, and thus humanity was holy, and this was the
humanity which Christ had; ... 7
-59-
Elder G. A.
Roberts, who later served as President of the Inter-American Division
(1936 - 1941), was an eyewitness of the events that took place
during the time, especially at
Indianapolis. He was also a close friend of R. S. Donnell. In June,
1923, - a lapse of twenty three years from the events, he wrote his
observations. On the doctrine in question, he stated:
It was taught
that Jesus had holy flesh, and that those who followed Him through this
garden experience would likewise have holy flesh; that the text, "A body
hast thou prepared Me," showed that Christ had a specially prepared holy
body. The Scripture, Hebrews 2:7-14, was used to prove that Christ was
born with flesh like "my brethren" and "the church" would have after
they had passed through the garden experience. 8
Burton Wade was
a laymember from Denver, Indiana [Jesse Dunn, State Agent at the time,
also resided there, and Dunn understood the doctrine as taught by the
"Holy Flesh" advocates in harmony with Haskell and Roberts.] and who in
1900 attended the Muncie camp meeting. He was 24 years of age at that
time. When he wrote the letter in 1962, he was a man of 86 years,
looking back 62 years upon the experience. It should not be hard to
answer the question as to which of these men was capable of making "a
definitive theological question." and what weight should be assigned to
the statements of each.
Next a far more
important question - the relationship of the Burton Wade letter to the
Compiler's Note in Selected Messages, bk. ii, p. 31. When I
replied to Elder Wood's letter dated March 13, 1 stated:
There is no
doubt from your correspondence that you obtained your editorial comment
from the Compiler's Note in Selected Messages, bk., ii, p. 31. By
now appealing to Wade's letter for your support you raise a far more
serious question. The book was copyrighted in 1958; the Wade letter was
dated 1962. It was written because of meetings "recently" hold by Elder
Arthur White at EMC. This word could
not be construed to antedate the publishing date of the book. What then
in the source of the Compiler's Note? Or worse yet, perish the thought,
were the first two paragraphs of the Wade letter, "planted" to give
substantiation to the basic error in the Compiler's Note? Unless other
proof can be offered to the source
-60-
of the note,
this last idea needs to be investigated further, for it would then have
validity. 9
Ten days later I
wrote directly to Elder Arthur White for an explanation of the note.
Then on April 14, 1968, 1 wrote about another matter, and reminded him
that the letter written March 25, had not been answered, and that I
wished verification of the note in Selected Messages, bk. ii. To
these two letters, Elder D. A. Delafield, Associate Secretary of the
Ellen G. White Estate, replied:
I am sure that
in his exceedingly busy program Elder White means to get around to
provide for you a satisfactory response to your question concerning the
origin of the idea that "the teachers of the Holy Flesh taught that
Christ as a result of the Gethsemane experience received holy flesh."
Perhaps Brother White can put his fingers upon the primary source on
which this observation was based.
Knowing Elder
White the way I do, I am sure that he has sound basis for the ideas as
he expressed them in the Compiler's Note. The statement made by G. A.
Roberts, "The Holy Flesh Fanaticism," on June 11, 1923, is I think
interesting. Roberts was an eyewitness observer of the Indiana
fanaticism in 1900, and knew Pastor Donnell personally and conversed
with him about this whole situation. It would be inconceivable that
Roberts did not learn from Donnell what Davis and others were teaching,
which Donnell himself later accepted.
Roberts observes
that "the essential feature of the doctrine was that when Jesus passed
through the Garden of Gethsemane, He had an experience which all must
have who follow Him. It was taught that Jesus had holy flesh, and that
those who followed Him through this garden experience would likewise
have holy flesh; that the text, 'A body hast thou prepared Me,' showed
that Christ had a specially prepared holy body."
While it may
seem that the above quotation would support the view that Christ had
holy flesh throughout life, it could also be construed to mean "that
when Jesus passed through the Garden of Gethsemane, He had an experience
which all must have who follow Him. It was taught that Jesus had holy
flesh, and that those who followed Him through this garden experience
would likewise have holy flesh." 10
To this letter, I replied:
Thank you for your letter of April 17, and
the reference to the testimony of G. A. Roberts.
-61-
You quote for me
a section of his observation of the teachings of the Holy Flesh
advocates in relationship to the Gethsemane experience, and conclude
that this could be interpreted to mean what Elder White wrote in the
Compiler's Note as found in Selected Messages, bk. ii, p. 31.
I would grant
this, except that in not all that G. A. Roberts wrote. The very next
sentence following the ones quoted make the suggested conclusion an
absolute impossibility. I shall requote for you, your quotes, and place
the next sentence in italics. Here are the G. A. Roberts comments in
full:
The essential
feature of the doctrine was that when Jesus passed through the Garden of
Gethsemane, He had an experience which all must have who follow Him. It
was taught that Jesus had holy flesh, and that those who followed Him
through the garden experience would likewise have holy flesh; that the
text, "A body hast thou prepared Me," showed that Christ had a specially
prepared holy body. The Scripture, Hebrews 2:7-14, was used to prove
that Christ was born with flesh like "my brethren" and "the church"
would have after they had passed through the garden experience.
The full context
of the Roberts statement coincides perfectly with the Haskell report of
the Indiana experience which indicates that the Holy Flesh men taught
that Jesus accepted the nature of Adam before the fall. 11
Finally, after
receiving no further reply, I decided to write up the whole incident in
a thought paper for "Watchman, What of the Night?", and title it"A
Credibility Gap". Before publishing the same, I sent a copy to Elder
Arthur White, and asked for his comments. To this, I received a five
page reply. He said in part:
I wrote the
note. At the time I wrote it I believed that it correctly represented
the facts. As it was submitted to the Board of Trustees of the Ellen G.
White Estate for their consideration it was assumed by the Board that
the facts had been correctly presented. Busy as the men are they could
hardly be expected to do research on this point in a little known and
seemingly not too important area. When the editor of the Review and
Herald ten years later had occasion to just mention the Holy Flesh
Movement, he referred to this note and assumed that it correctly
presented the facts in the case.
If the facts are
not correctly presented, I am responsible, and if I erred, I did so
ignorantly. Taking into account the use to which the information was to
be put it was a matter of little importance...
-62-
Except as there
may be lessons in the experience for us today, it is not a matter of
great interest or consequence to the church now...
As I prepared
this note, I turned to the G. A. Roberts statement in our document
files, and accepted my understanding of his explanation of the basis for
the movement...
Now as I
prepared the note it seemed clear to me that the Roberts' statement
taught that Jesus, when He passed through the garden "had an
experience." This experience is not defined. It was taught that "those
who followed Him through this garden experience would likewise have holy
flesh." Without thorough, painstaking research (which seemed uncalled
for in this case) in an attempt to prepare a brief historical note, I
concluded from the Roberts presentation that if the followers of Jesus
gained holy flesh by passing through the garden experience, and Jesus
Himself "had an experience in the garden all must have, who follow Him,"
did not the garden experience give Jesus the type of holy flesh that was
being discussed? If this was not so, what was the "experience" Jesus had
in the Garden? At the time I prepared the note, that which followed in
the Roberts statement appeared to be confusing and irrelevant. I did not
have before me in a way to make any impression, the Haskell statement in
our letter file which you later studied very carefully and which is now
in our Document File.
I can almost see
you lifting your pen to write:
"If the
secretary of the White Estate exercises so little care in assembling
data as this present situation seems to illustrate, how are we to know
that in which we can place dependence?"...
Now back to the
matter in question. From the full Roberts statement which I have just
reread I am not sure just what he attempted to convey as to what the
garden experience did for Christ. Elder Haskell saw it differently than
I have reported, and from your research you feel that the Haskell
position is the more accurate one. The Wade testimony is interesting. I
felt it was corroborative. It is not conclusive because of the time
lapse, yet he is not too far from what the Roberts statement seemed on
the surface to say. one is led to say, "So what?"
As far as I am
concerned, I shall restudy the whole matter, as I can find time to do
so, and if I am convinced that the note does not correctly represent the
facts, I shall request the Board of Trustees of the Ellen G. White
Estate to approve a rewording which we will ask the publishers to place
in the next printing of the book. 12
So what? The
explanatory paragraph remains unchanged though Selected Messages,
bk. ii, has been reprinted since this letter was written by Elder White.
-63-
There can be no
doubt that the Compiler's Note was based primarily on a misreading of
the Roberts statement. But this leaves the Wade letter still
unexplained. A comparison between the Note in Selected Messages,
bk. ii, and the Wade letter is most interesting:
The question
still remains - Did Brother Wade copy the Compiler's Note with
variations of sentence structure and wording, or was the Wade letter
dictated to substantiate the Compiler's Note? Why is the matter of any
importance anyway? Why can't we say - "So what?" - and forget the whole
affair? Because of what was taking place in our ranks at the time the
first edition of Selected Messages, bk. ii, was published. We can
only conjecture what might have been if the Compiler's Note had been
written in harmony with the testimony of S. N. Haskell and G. A. Roberts
rightly read. It was in 1956-1957, that the editor of the Ministry,
R. Allan Anderson, wrote his editorials on the humanity of Christ which
stated the same position that Haskell and Roberts said the "Holy Flesh"
men taught. 13 Then in 1957, the same basic doctrine was
similarly stated in the book, Questions on Doctrine. If the
Compiler's Note had been in accord with the source material - even the
Roberts letter correctly read - would this not have dealt a severe blow
to the deviation from basic Adventist doctrine that was developing in
the church which finally culminated in the book, Movement
-64-
of Destiny?
But now it is only what might have been! "So what?"
_______________________
1 Kenneth
H. Wood, Review and Herald, January 25, 1968, p. 12
-65-
APPENDIX – D
The Letter In Question
C 0 P Y
515 College Avenue
Elder Arthur White
Dear Brother White:
While you were
here at Emmanuel Missionary College recently, giving your talks on the
Spirit of Prophecy, you referred to the fanatical movement which took
place in Indiana, known as the "Doctrine of Holy Flesh." This movement
reached its height in 1900 when the conference president and most of the
workers were carried away by this fanatical teaching.
They believed
that, when Christ suffered in Gethsemane, he obtained "Holy Flesh" such
as Adam had in the beginning before the fall, and they maintained that
everyone who hoped to be translated would also have to obtain "Holy
Flesh. "
I thought you
would be interested to know that I attended the camp meeting in
September of 1900, which was held at Muncie, where I witnessed firsthand
the fanatical excitement and activities of these people. There were
numerous groups of people scattered all over the campground engaged in
arguing and, when these fanatics conducted the services in the large
pavilion, they worked themselves up to a high pitch of excitement by the
use of musical instruments, such as: trumpets, flutes, stringed
instruments, tambourines, an organ, and a big bass drum. They shouted
and sang their lively songs with the aid of musical instruments until
they became really hysterical. Many times I saw them, after these
morning meetings, as they came to the dining tent fairly shaking as
though they had palsy.
Elders S. N.
Haskell and A. J. Breed were at the camp meeting to meet this
fanaticism, and when they went onto the platform to conduct services,
they announced the songs from Hymns and Tunes, and they preached the
real Adventist message. Members of the fanatical group who were present
at these services plainly showed their disapproval and almost sneered at
times. This fanaticism spread throughout the conference and caused
division in many of the churches, but there were some who stood firm and
were not carried away with the false doctrine. Our little home church at
Denver stood firm and not one of its members was carried away with this
deception.
Very sincerely
yours,
|
||||