Loading...
Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
Replies to Elder Canright’s Attacks on Seventh-day Adventists - Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    “I HAVE TRIED TO DO WHAT I THOUGHT WAS RIGHT.”

    WE take the words here used as a heading, from Eld. Canright’s closing paragraph in his article published in these columns. One might judge from the remarkable meekness of the Elder’s closing words, that he was considerably reformed and somewhat ashamed of his previous performances, and that the castigation he had received through the EXTRA had brought him back to a more rational and consistent state of mind. We would that we could indulge in such a hope. None would more freely forgive than ourselves, could we see any signs of true repentance. But we have long since learned the difference between a “godly sorrow” which leadeth to true repentance, and a put-on outside appearance of submission and regret because of overmastering circumstances which have placed a person where he could not help himself for the time being. Such may appear to be quite meek till a more favorable opportunity is presented. The Elder evidently had a big tussle with that EXTRA. But he found himself so hedged about on every hand by the truthfulness of its statements, and his feet so entangled with the wicked inconsistencies of his own course, that the best he could do was to write this reply, claiming that we had done him injustice in a few instances, and closing up with some very lamb-like expressions concerning his “desire to be profited” by the “lessons read to him” in the EXTRA, and his sense of his own “weaknesses” which at times “overwhelms” him. Does he really cherish such sentiments? We would that we could believe it.RCASDA 195.2

    But, alas! since these words were written, we find he is out in different parts of the State not only repeating his former statements, but even going further than ever in his desperate efforts to injure S.D. Adventists, and misrepresent us before the public. We are therefore forced to believe that these words of his showing meekness and humiliation are but empty nothings, designed merely for effect, while in his heart he is determined to continue to wage this unjust war upon his former brethren.RCASDA 196.1

    But what about this statement, “I have tried to do what I thought was right”? Well, it is an astonishing one, to say the least. The Elder evidently realizes that his course has been such that no candid man knowing the facts would be likely to think he had done right. He must know that it was not “right”. No wonder that the “consciousness of his weaknesses often overwhelms” him. But this “consciousness,” alas! does not become so firmly fixed that he changes his course. He has since engaged in the same work in a more aggravated style than ever. But we must not forget that all the while, according to his statement, he has “tried to do what he thought was right.” We hardly feel like denying the Elder the slight satisfaction still remaining, in cherishing the bare “thought” that after all he had a little desire left to do right. It would seem cruel to wrench this from him. It would not look well on paper to charge him with being a hypocrite, and we should greatly regret to be obliged to come to such a conclusion, in view of our many former associations. We have long known that much allowance must be made for persons who have fallen into great darkness by a failure to live up to the light they have received, especially when that light has been very great. Light may seem darkness to them, and darkness light. The mind becomes perverted. The Saviour speaks of some who shall “hear, and shall not understand,” and shall see, and yet “shall not perceive.” Their “heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed.” We are not to suppose they realized this themselves.RCASDA 196.2

    The apostle also speaks of a class who “received not the love of the truth.” “They should believe a lie,” and be damned in so doing. When the light in us becomes darkness, how great is that darkness! This is a sentiment we see demonstrated often in this world of changes. Here are principles brought to view which are constantly illustrated. When the light of God’s Spirit is withdrawn from a man, and he plunges along with a desperate spirit of resentment against his former belief and companions, he is not apt to study his motives very carefully. Such may have thought they did right. It is very natural to take complacent views of ourselves. Go into any prison in the land, and ask the inmates about their former conduct, and how many of them do you suppose will be found who did not think they were about as good as most men? When reverence for the law of God is broken down, — that law which Paul declares is “holy, just, and good;” that law which is “spiritual,” and searches the deep things of the heart, — we are left to form our own standard quite largely, and then it is the most natural thing in the world for a man to say, even when under grievous condemnation, if he used the highest standard of rectitude: “I have tried to do what I thought was right.” So we feel bound still, under the necessities of the case, to grant this slight consolation to the Elder.RCASDA 197.1

    But let us notice a few points, and see to what lengths the Elder’s conscience will let him go and still retain this hope that he is doing “right,” that we may measure the present condition of his moral sense.RCASDA 197.2

    1. His treatment of old friends. As stated in the EXTRA, Eld. Canright at the time when he withdrew from us, professed the most pacific intentions. He said at Otsego, Feb.17,1887, before the church, that he thought there was a larger percentage of true Christians among S.D. Adventists than among any other denomination. He expressed the highest appreciation and confidence in many of our leading laborers; said he was perfectly satisfied with the treatment he had received from our people, and that he felt that he had been used in all respects as well as a Christian should. His greatest sorrow was that he felt compelled to part company with us. He despised the course others had taken who had gone out from us, and then opposed and ridiculed us, and he would never do this. He would give himself wholly to revival work. He never would become a bitter assailant of our people. Yet within a few months he began the most bitter warfare upon S.D.Adventists which has ever been waged by any one. He has held us up to ridicule, and made us the laughing-stock of crowds for hours together. In his speeches, time and again he has done his best to cause us to be despised as a set of fanatics, narrow, bigoted, and unworthy of respect.RCASDA 197.3

    Think of it, candid reader. What could be the motives which would prompt you thus to treat old and long tried friends with whom you had labored and prayed, whose hospitality you had enjoyed, professing to love them so much — with whom you had lived in sweet communion as the dearest friends on earth for more than a score of years? After he had come to the point of finally parting company with us, he felt himself forced to say that he had no complaint whatever to make of our treatment of him. We had used him tenderly as a Christian in every sense. Yet he holds us up to ridicule, doing what he knows will wound our feelings most cruelly, when we have never done him an injury. We know he will try to find excuses for such conduct. But we showed in the EXTRA that he had none whatever, and in his reply he finds no fault with the EXTRA on that point.RCASDA 198.1

    Ingratitude is ever considered a base sin. If this is not such, what shall we call it? Yea, is it not a base return for past kindnesses? Think of yourself, dear reader, holding up your long tried and best friends as a body before a congregation, and raising the derisive laugh at their expense night after night! He may say it was their doctrines or some persons among them that he thus treated. Does he not know that in no other way could he wound the feelings of old friends so much as by holding up to ridicule their religious belief or the friends they hold most dear? Does he say it was necessary to show up the iniquity of our doctrine? How about his statement, then, that there was no other church in which there were so many Christians, proportionally, as among S.D.Adventists? He said this himself after he had given up our faith. Is a doctrine very terrible or dangerous which develops more Christians in proportion to numbers than any other? He goes from place to place giving discourses every night for a solid week, every one aimed against his former brethren with whom he has lived in friendship and sympathy for twenty-eight years, ridiculing, defaming, and bringing them into the greatest disrepute, and doing so without a single discourse having been given against him on our part, or any public attack upon him whatever. If this be not a base return for past kindness, what is it? And yet we are bound to accept his statement: “I have tried to do what I thought was right.”RCASDA 198.2

    2. His unchristian course as a minister of the gospel.RCASDA 199.1

    Having shown the ingratitude of Eld. C. according to the plainest principles of common justice, we next notice how this course looks according to the higher code of Christian ethics. He has been a Christian minister for more than twenty years, and of late since he has left our people, he claims to have had special light concerning the gospel. Having discarded the old law, he has been illuminated by the full blaze of the gospel sunlight. We have a right, then, to expect of him a close imitation of Christ, the great Master, whom he claims now to specially serve. Will he inform us where the meek and lowly Man of Calvary ever went from place to place for two dollars a day, and in eight or ten long discourses held up for ridicule the worshipers of the true God, and the followers of Jesus himself. Eld. C.’s former brethren may be poor, perhaps, and unlearned, and possibly very faulty, yet as he himself admits, many of them are true Christians. Did our Saviour ever do this to any class, whether heathen, Samaritans, Pharisees, or Sadducees, to say nothing of his own disciples? He commands all of his followers to do good to those who hate them, and to pray for those who do spitefully use them. He prayed for his enemies who were murdering him, and when reviled, reviled not again; and he requires all to do good for evil. His ministers are required to follow his example more closely than other Christians. Will the Elder find any example for his present course in the lives of the apostles, or any authority for it in any of their writings? If so, let us have the chapter and verse. He knows these things as well as we do. He is perfectly familiar with the many commands of Christ requiring love, meekness, mercy and humility, even toward those who have wronged us, and rebuking scorn, derision, ingratitude, and such a course as he is pursuing. He knows the apostle’s statement, that “if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” An “unchristian” course is one that is contrary to the teachings of Christ. Any candid mind can see that his course in pursuing a Christian people as he has, and holding them up to ridicule, has been utterly contrary to Christ’s life and teachings. And yet we must not be uncharitable, but accept his statement, “I have tried to do what I thought was right.”RCASDA 199.2

    3. His treatment of the dead. The readers of the Extra have not forgotten Eld. Canright’s treatment of Eld. White, the honored pioneer in this religious movement. He characterizes him in the Des Moines Oracle as a tyrant, “domineering over” this people, and claims that whole Conferences sat “for hours like whipped dogs” under his “terrible denunciations,” and that he “quarreled” with all his leading brethren, etc.etc. We knew him as well as he, and know these representations to be grossly unjust, a veritable caricature of a man with some faults and many noble qualities, a devoted, earnest, sacrificing Christian whose life was worn out prematurely by his untiring and unselfish labor in his Master’s cause. He admits Eld. White’s readiness to confess his faults and mistakes, and says he at times made confessions to him, — a sure sign of an earnest purpose to do right. They were fast friends for many years. Eld. White indeed showed often a special interest in, and kindness toward, him, and treated him as an own son. At the time of his death, we are sure he felt kindly toward Eld. Canright. Yet Eld. C. does not hesitate to take up his old friend who sleeps in death, and parade before the world and hosts who never knew him, a grossly exaggerated statement of his faults and a most unjust view of his character. In the world around us, whose standard of propriety is far too low, there is a general acknowledgment that the memory of the dead, who cannot defend themselves, should be respected. What shall we say, then, of a Christian minister, whom the Bible commands to speak evil of no man, when he, because of a change of religious views, proceeds remorselessly to break the cerements of the tomb, and drag before the public an old friend five years dead, and parade though the public prints to exulting enemies, grossly unjust statements concerning his character? Eld. White was highly respected by leading citizens where he was best known. His biography was published among others in the list of prominent citizens of the State of Michigan, as a man worthy of honor, for energy, breadth of mind, and Christian philanthropy. But it is left for one who for years ate at his table, associated with him in the most familiar manner as a personal friend, a brother in Christian fellowship, to now drag his supposed faults before a cold world, and denounce him as tyrannical, a quarrelsome, domineering man worthy of little respect. But the Elder says, “I have tried to do what I thought was right,” and we are, of course, bound to believe him.RCASDA 200.1

    3. His treatment of Mrs. White. For a full description of Eld. Canright’s course toward her, we refer the reader to the article in the former EXTRA, where it is presented at length. In his reply herein published, he makes no complaint of injustice in this particular in the EXTRA. In that article, it will be seen that at one time when it will suit his purpose, he presents her as being “as good a woman as he knew.” “Her piety was unquestioned.” “She was a kind-hearted woman, philanthropic, charitable, and gentle in her life, and ever evinced a love for humanity.” And “she was doubtless honest in supposing she had revelations,” etc., and much more of this complimentary talk. But when he chose to take the other side of the question, he denounced her as acting a hypocritical part, talking “as smooth as oil” before the public, but making statements to her own people that were “shamefully false;” and declared that her course was so wicked that it ought to “shut her out of every pulpit in the land;” that she rules her “people with a rod of iron,” and “condemns everybody who rejects her testimonies.” He compares her work with that of Joseph Smith, Joanna Southcott, and Ann Lee, giving them the preference in point of ability or excellence, and in their proof of inspiration, and really sets the Mormons, Shakers, and followers of Southcott far in advance of the S.D. Adventists. In thus doing, a man of his parts, if he stopped to reflect a moment, must see that he utterly contradicts his own statements made over and over, as we clearly showed in the EXTRA, and proved them to be utterly unreliable.RCASDA 201.1

    We here inquire, What cause has he for thus treating Mrs. White? What injury has she done him? How has she provoked his wrath, and where did she do him any wrong? He has never informed us. No, he has not even given us a hint of anything of the kind. Why, then, should he feel called upon to parade her name through column after column of the public prints, when, according to his own statements since he became a Baptist minister, she was “as good a woman as he knew,” “her piety was unquestioned,” she was “kind-hearted,” “philanthropic,” and “ever evinced a love for humanity.” These were his own statements at Otsego, Mich., before a public congregation in the Baptist church where he was pastor. From that day to this, to the best of our knowledge, Mrs. White has never referred to him in print or in public speaking. She has used him well, has been like a mother to him in the past, and only a year or two before he began this raid upon her, he was very glad to have her make a home at his house through a series of meetings; and when they parted last, they did so as warm friends. And now he can hold her up to ridicule, excite the derisive laugh, and sneeringly speak of her as the “prophetess” before a public congregation or in print. Is this a consistent course for a Christian minister to take toward a lady, as “good a woman as he knew”? Is this politeness? Is this being “courteous” to all, as the Bible commands him? Is this doing as he would be done by? Should a minister of Jesus Christ repay kindness with bitterness and public denunciation, simply because he has changed his religious views? Such conduct seems to the writer to be not only unchristian but utterly ungentlemanly. Yet the Elder assures us he has all the while “tried to do what he thought was right,” and it would not be courteous to question his word.RCASDA 201.2

    4. His untruthful representations of our positions. Eld. Canright, two or three weeks since, had a very triumphant(?) meeting near Bushnell, Mich., during which he “exposed” S.D. Adventism in eight solid discourses, at the rate of two dollars per day and some extra collections thrown in, much to the satisfaction of many who wish us ill, but without any damage to ourselves. Eld. I.D. Van Horn was present a portion of the time, and replied to his attacks. He makes the following statements:—RCASDA 202.1

    St. Charles, Mich., Feb. 6, 1888.
    Having recently had the opportunity of hearing Eld. Canright in his raid against his former brethren, the S.D. Adventists, I can truthfully say that he often uses unfair and dishonorable means to carry his points, to prejudice the people against us. This is seen in his gross misrepresentations of points of our faith which he must surely know by his long experience with our people. I will give one instance: He stated plainly, before a crowded house, “that S.D. Adventists have believed and taught that Sunday is the mark of the beast, and that all who have kept Sunday and who are now keeping it, have had, and now have the mark of the beast. Their prophetess, Mrs. White, says so in ‘Vol. IV., Great Controversy,’ page 281. She says: ‘The keeping of the counterfeit Sabbath is the reception of the mark.’”

    Taking this sentence out from its connection, and using it in the manner he did, is a direct falsehood against Sr. White, and against the whole body of S.D. Adventists. Any one taking the pains to read the whole paragraph in which this sentence is found, must arrive at this conclusion.RCASDA 203.1

    I.D. Van Horn.

    Eld. Van Horn is well known as one of the most candid and careful of men in his statements. Eld. Canright himself indorsed him before that public congregation as an “honest man and a Christian;” besides, a crowd of people heard him at the time. We must express our astonishment that Eld. C. should make such statements as these, and we can account for it only by the fact that he is evidently driven on and controlled by a spirit which makes him utterly reckless. Lest the reader will think this a harsh statement, we will present a few facts. We quote a few statements from our standard works, which have been long in print, to show the position of our people on this subject:—RCASDA 203.2

    It will be said again, Then all Sunday-keepers have the mark of the beast; then all the good of past ages who kept this day had the mark of the beast; then Luther, Whitefield, the Wesleys, and all who have done a good and noble work of reformation had the mark of the beast; then all the blessings that have been poured upon the reformed churches have been poured upon those who had the mark of the beast. We answer, No! And we are sorry to say that some professedly religious teachers, though many times corrected, persist in misrepresenting us on this point. We have never so held; we have never so taught. Our premises lead to no such conclusions. Give ear: The mark and worship of the beast are enforced by the two-horned beast. The receiving of the mark of the beast is a specific act which the two-horned beast is to cause to be done. The third message of Revelation 14 is a warning mercifully sent out in advance, to prepare the people for the coming danger. There can therefore be no worship of the beast, nor reception of his mark, such as is contemplated in the prophecy, till it is enforced by the two-horned beast. — Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation, pp. 602, 603.RCASDA 203.3

    Much more of the same kind follows. Again:—RCASDA 204.1

    We know the objection which will here immediately fly to the lips of an opponent. He will say, Then all Sunday-keepers past or present, however eminent as servants of God, have had or now have the mark of the beast. And we quickly answer, Not one. Why? — Because they have not kept it, and are not keeping it, with the issue before them presented in the prophecy. They have supposed they were keeping the fourth commandment according to the will of God.” — Synopsis of Present Truth, p.59.RCASDA 204.2

    Much more to the same intent might be taken from this work, and also from the “Marvel of Nations,” pp.184, 185. These are all standard works with which Eld. C. was well acquainted. He has known these were the positions of our people for a quarter of a century. And having been with him in tent labor four different tent seasons, I personally know that he taught the same thing, and did not teach that the honest Christians of the past had the mark of the beast. He ever argued against that idea with all his might. How, then, dare he make such statements?RCASDA 204.3

    But he must not fail, of course, to give Mrs. White a thrust, so he says:—RCASDA 204.4

    Their prophetess, Mrs. White, says so in “Vol.IV., The Great Controversy, 281. She says: “The keeping of the counterfeit Sabbath is the reception of the mark.”RCASDA 204.5

    To show how the Elder longs to “do what he thinks is right,” we will quote verbatim from Mrs. White, on the page he cites and the connection on p.282:—RCASDA 204.6

    That institution [the Sabbath] which points to God as the Creator, is a sign of his rightful authority over the beings he has made. The change of the Sabbath is the sign, or mark, of the authority of the Romish Church. Those who, understanding the claims of the fourth commandment, choose to observe the false in place of the true Sabbath, are thereby paying homage to that power by which alone it is commanded. The change in the fourth commandment is the change pointed out in the prophecy, and the keeping of the counterfeit Sabbath is the reception of the mark. But Christians of past generations observed the first day, supposing that they were keeping the Bible Sabbath, and there are in the churches of to-day many who honestly believe that Sunday is the Sabbath of divine appointment. None of these have received the mark of the beast. There are true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion. The test upon the question does not come until Sunday observance is enforced by law, and the world is enlightened concerning the obligation of the true Sabbath. Not until the issue is thus plainly set before the people, and they are brought to choose between the commandments of God and the commandments of men, will those who continue in transgression receive the mark of the beast.RCASDA 204.7

    My candid reader, what do you think of the conscientiousness of the man with these words before him, who can say emphatically before a public congregation, “S.D.Adventists have believed and taught that Sunday is the mark of the beast, and that all who have kept Sunday, and who are now keeping it, have had and now have the mark of the beast. Their prophetess, Mrs. White, says so in ‘Vol.IV., The Great Controversy, 281;?RCASDA 205.1

    We know he must have read this very language; for he quotes a sentence out of its connection, which he could not have done had he not read it. What can you make of that but a willful perversion of the truth, a square falsehood? We are astonished beyond measure that a man who has known for more than twenty years what S.D.Adventists have taught on this subject, should dare to say what he does! We can make some allowance for one not acquainted with the facts, but not for him. He knows better.RCASDA 205.2

    But I suppose we must again return to his oft-quoted statement: “I have tried to do what I thought was right.” Poor man! He must have “tried” and grievously failed. He is so driven to desperation by that spirit of hatred that he cannot control himself. Such progress has he made in one short year, under his new and improved religion.RCASDA 205.3

    We now draw this article to its close. We pity Eld. Canright, and wish to fling no unkind epithets at him. We have tried to weigh the condition of his present moral sense, and, alas! it seems to have woefully deteriorated. So we should expect of a man who casts aside the law of God, and runs the race he has. He will doubtless go on trying to “do what he thinks is right,” and we expect to find in him the bitterest of opponents. Holy Writ informs us that there are “blind leaders of the blind,” and those who “believe a lie.” But the end they reach in either case is not desirable. We would gladly help such, but we know not how. When forced, as in this case, to consider the crooked, slippery ways of opposers of the truth, we must for the truth’s sake and the cause of God speak plain, and strip off the covering of deception, and expose the hiding-place of iniquity. We dislike, however, to have to do this work, and much prefer to preach the truth of God and labor for the salvation of precious souls.RCASDA 205.4

    G.I.B.

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents