ELD. CANRIGHT’S REPLY

Otsego, Mich., Dec.27, 1887.
EDITORS OF THE REVIEW AND HERALD:—
Brethren: Your EXTRA relating to myself has been read. Of course, things appear to me very different from what they do to you. I would like to point out many things which to me seem clearly erroneous; but I know you would not publish them if I did. Many of your statements with regard to me are not correct; in some cases only half the truth is told, and in others facts are omitted which would give a very different coloring to the matter. Still, from my long acquaintance with you, I cannot believe that you would knowingly make a false statement when convinced that it is wrong. Hence I ask you to correct two or three of the gravest ones, concerning which I can readily furnish the evidence. It was only a few weeks ago, that you felt greatly grieved with the editor of the Advocate because he would not, as you claimed, correct an offensive statement concerning your people. So I will now expect you to be willing to do me justice in this matter.

On page 2 of the EXTRA, Eld. Butler says:—RCASDA 180.1

A little previous to the time of our camp-meeting [at Grand Rapids] Eld. Canright came to the city and visited most of the newspaper offices, to obtain the privilege of inserting articles in the city papers against us.RCASDA 180.2

Then it is stated that, handbills were scattered by my agents (page 87) upon the grounds, etc. Neither statement is true. Two weeks before the camp-meeting, by urgent request I went to Grand Rapids, and met one of the men from the Democrat office at Dr. Veenboer’s office. He said that the editors wished me to write a half dozen articles on the other side, as they had published so much from the Adventists that their readers did not like it. I agreed on six articles, for which Dr. Veenboer paid me. I came home the same day, and was not there again till after the camp-meeting. Dr. V., without asking me, had some of the articles struck off and distributed on the grounds, which I should not have done. I did not visit a single newspaper office, nor ask any one to print anything for me. Here is the doctor’s own statement:—RCASDA 180.3

“Grand Rapids, Dec.27,1887.RCASDA 180.4

“REV. D. M. CANRIGHT, Otsego, Mich.
“Dear Elder: I received an EXTRA of the REVIEW AND HERALD, dated Nov. 22, 1887, in which Geo. I. Butler makes statements so utterly false that I wish you would call on him to retract and repair your injury done by his slander:—

A little previous to the time of our camp-meeting, Eld. Canright came to the city [Grand Rapids], and visited most of the newspaper offices, to obtain the privilege of inserting articles in the city papers against us, etc.RCASDA 181.1

“Now, all the work of opposition, ‘visiting newspapers,’ ‘distributing handbills at the West Michigan Fair,’ ‘scattering thousands of copies’ of ‘Mrs. White, the prophetess,’ at the camp-ground, was done without the knowledge or consent of Mr. Canright, except that I made arrangement once for a newspaper man to meet the Elder at my office, where arrangements were made to publish a half dozen articles on Seventh-day Adventism, by Eld. Canright. These articles were written by him at the urgent request of half a dozen of our ministers and some laymen. They were used by me and some of these men for the good of the cause of truth against the unbiblical doctrines of Adventism, at the Fair and camp-grounds, and in our daily papers.RCASDA 181.2

MELLE VEENBOER.”

This is enough on that point.RCASDA 181.3

On page 15 is a statement from Bro. Butler, concerning my ordination, which is untrue and very unjust, both to myself and to the church with which I united. He accuses me of putting a padlock upon my mouth on the subject of the soul, insinuating that I sold my conscience and my liberty for a place in the church. Bro. T. M. Shanafelt, of Three Rivers, secretary of the Michigan Baptist State convention, was secretary of the council, and heard all that was said. Here is his testimony:—RCASDA 181.4

“My attention has been called to a copy of the ADVENT REVIEW AND HERALD EXTRA, dated Nov. 22, 1887. This EXTRA seems to be devoted exclusively to replies to Rev. D. M. Canright, now pastor of the Baptist church in Otsego, Mich., but formerly a Seventh-day Advent minister. Mr. Canright was ordained at Otsego, after a thorough and satisfactory examination by a large council which met at the call of the Otsego Baptist church, March 19, 1887. The undersigned was secretary of the council.RCASDA 181.5

“In the copy of the REVIEW AND HERALD referred to, in the article entitled ‘O Consistency!’ the following reference is made to Mr. Canright and the council that ordained him:—RCASDA 181.6

We are also informed that in his examination before the council of Baptist ministers just before his re-ordination at Otsego last spring, when those points of faith involving the soul question came up, the Elder was meekly modest in his statements, and “wanted time” further to examine the subject before he felt inclined to state his positions. And also that he was accorded a private examination by the council of divines on this question, the proceedings and result of which we have never been able to learn.RCASDA 181.7

“Neither of the above statements is true. The ‘soul question’ was not discussed, and Mr. Canright was not accorded a private examination on that question nor any other. Such a proceeding, which is contrary to Baptist usage and custom, was not suggested nor thought of by Mr. Canright or any of the large number of ministers and laymen who composed the council.RCASDA 182.1

“T. M. SHANAFELT.”

Three Rivers, Mich., Dec.23, 1887.”RCASDA 182.2

This states the truth exactly. Eld. Butler was misinformed on this point, as on many others. Simply one question was asked with regard to the dead, I think, or the resurrection, that was all. My Baptist brethren have accorded me the fullest freedom in preaching the Word of God as I understand it, and I have done so with all the freedom which I ever enjoyed among the Adventists, or could wish anywhere. If you think I am afraid to speak my mind on the soul question, give me two columns in the REVIEW, and you shall have it plainly.RCASDA 182.3

Once more: On page 98 Bro. Smith accuses me of duplicity in writing differently for different papers. Does he find a line in one contradicting what I wrote in another? — No, only as he construes it so. But he says I dare not send to the Methodist Advocate a certain sentence on the abolition of the decalogue which I published in the Oracle, to the editor of the Advocate, and he wrote me, “Your article on Colossians 2 is very fine,” and offered to publish it. Lack of space was all that prevented its publication entire. Abridged, it was published as article No. 11.RCASDA 182.4

I believe you will have the fairness to correct these statements, which are calculated to injure my reputation as an honest man. I will try to profit by the lessons you read me in the EXTRA. I freely own myself to be a poor, erring mortal, liable to make sad mistakes, even when I try to do my best. The consciousness of my weaknesses often overwhelms me with discouragement, but I know I have tried to do what I thought was right. I try to show the same mercy and consideration for others which I hope for myself at the Judgement. I am not conscious of any hard feelings toward my former brethren, though I am well convinced that their doctrine is an error.RCASDA 182.5

D. M. CANRIGHT.