Replies to Elder Canright’s Attacks on Seventh-day Adventists

52/58

ELD. BUTLER’S WRONG STATEMENT. — NO.2

I AM next charged with doing Eld. Canright and the Baptist Church great injustice by some statements made concerning his ordination. He says my statements are “untrue” and “very unjust.” He says I accused him of putting a “padlock upon his mouth” on the “subject of the soul,” and that he “sold his conscience and his liberty for a place in the church.” Well, such charges do seem rather hard on such a consistent, conscientious man as Eld. Canright has proved himself to be, surely. He calls upon one of his good brethren in the Baptist ministry to help him out, and relieve him from the odium of my “unjust” charges. So the Rev. T. M. Shanafelt, secretary of the council which examined Eld. C. before his ordination, comes gallantly to the rescue, and declares two of my statements “untrue.” “The soul question was not discussed” at all, he would have us believe, at the time of Eld. Canright’s ordination. He had no “private examination” of any kind. This is wholly “contrary to Baptist usage and custom,” he good secretary tells us. The Elder himself also kindly assures us that he has the most delightful liberty among his new associations in the Baptist Church, “to preach the word of God as he understands it.” His “Baptist brethren have accorded him the fullest freedom in preaching.” He assures us that when he was examined before being ordained, little or nothing was said on the soul question. “Simply one question was asked with regard to the dead” or “the resurrection; that was all.” The Elder wants us to understand he has no “padlock on his mouth,” as Eld. Butler has wickedly insinuated. He has the most perfect freedom to speak and teach what he pleases, “all he could wish anywhere.” He says if we do n’t believe it, and think he “is afraid to speak his mind on the soul question,” to give him “two columns in the REVIEW, and we shall have it plainly.” RCASDA 187.1

Surely, what more could we ask in the premises, and how consistent and suitable everything has been all the while between the Elder and the good old Baptist Church on this soul question. It seems almost a pity to try to exonerate myself in the least from the “injustice” I have committed in insinuating anything about that “padlock” on the Elder’s mouth, when everything is so serene and perfectly candid and fair in this new, loving fraternal relationship between the and Elder and the good church of his choice, on the “soul question.” But we all know human nature will do its best to absolve itself from blame, even if it has a poor chance. So we must made an effort:— RCASDA 188.1

1. It will be noticed by the reader, in the extract Mr. Shanafelt quotes from me in the EXTRA, that I made no claim of knowing anything personally about the proceedings of the council examining Eld. Canright before his ordination, not being present. I only stated that I was “informed.” This is true. I was so informed. RCASDA 188.2

2. I intimated in the article in the EXTRA, entitled “O Consistency!” that the relationship on the soul question, between Eld. Canright, an ordained Baptist minister, and the church with which he was connected, was a very anomalous one, to say the least. RCASDA 188.3

3. I stated that he had been a man of very pronounced views on the question of the immortality of the soul and kindred topics, for many years, having been intensely opposed to the view that man by nature is immortal, and also to the doctrine of eternal torment. RCASDA 189.1

4. I further stated that the Baptist Church, as everybody knows, held both of these views very strenuously in their creed; indeed, that the orthodox churches with whom Eld. Canright now affiliates regarded a belief in these doctrines as more important than many others they held, and denounced the views which the Elder had always advocated on this subject, as the most dangerous “infidelity.” RCASDA 189.2

5. That so far as I had learned, the Elder had never intimated in a single instance, publicly or privately, that he had changed his former opinions a particle on this subject. But on the contrary, considering the fact that he so bitterly opposed S. D. Adventists on the Sabbath, the law, the prophecies, and most other points of faith, but never did on the question of the soul and kindred subjects, we were authorized to believe he still held the views he always had on this point. RCASDA 189.3

6. That it was a most inconsistent position for a church to employ a man as pastor over a congregation, to teach what it regarded as a great error, or refrain from teaching what it considered important truth, there being scarcely any question in the whole realm of Bible doctrine made more prominent or important than that relating to man’s future. It is directly involved in the plan of salvation, and has an important bearing on the government of God; and Eld. Canright has ever taught that many of the most erroneous doctrines existing grow out of this one of the immortality of the soul. RCASDA 189.4

7. In view of the ominous silence of both parties on this question, and the Elder’s marked reticence concerning it, while we know he always used to have so much to say upon it, we intimated that he had a “padlock on his mouth,” on the soul question, the expression only implying that something remarkable had choked his utterance. He thinks this very unjust. RCASDA 189.5

But what does he say to relieve himself or his church from this aspersion upon the propriety of their present relation? Why does he call in Eld. Shanafelt to state that certain remarks which I gave simply as second-hand information were incorrect? that he did not have a “private investigation,” and was not asked concerning to soul question? This question was entirely ignored. There seems to have been a beautiful and harmonious understanding on this subject, and never a word said. There was such a sweet and perfect union of spirit on this interesting occasion when the Elder was to be ordained as a Baptist minister, that such little matters of theology as to whether countless myriads of men, women, and children were to be tortured to all eternity, or not, were not worth considering for a moment. It mattered not whether the soul was immortal or not, in the minds of this large council of reverend D. D’s. No matter what the Elder thought about it, — whether he believed men go to heaven at death, or that man had no more soul than a brute. Such little matters were not worth asking a question about, if he was only to be made a Baptist minister. What is theology any way, and what does it amount to? And why should they ask him any questions at all, or hold any council over him? Wasn’t the fact that he had left the poor, deluded “Advents” enough evidence any way to show he was all right? Truly the Baptists are a large-hearted people, and believe in great freedom, when they can take a minister so readily and so fully on trust, who has been under the corrupting influences and the “fanaticism” of this despised people for twenty-eight years, and never ask him a question upon the most important doctrines of their faith. It doesn’t seem to be of much importance any way what a man believes or teaches, if he is only to join the church. RCASDA 189.6

Now in all seriousness, we say it is very hard for us to believe this matter was left in any such loose way as the two Elders would have us believe. It does n’t look sensible. All the facts seem to us to point rather to this conclusion, that there was a perfect understanding beforehand between Eld. Canright and some of these good Baptist divines, and that he was to keep mum on this subject. Very likely this was not made apparent on the surface. Such understandings are not usually blown out upon the world with a trumpet. They are more apt to occur in some very quiet, retired way. I have no idea that this understanding was reached in that public examination. Hardly; those doctors of divinity would not have been likely to leave their pleasant homes to come to Otsego, at large expense and inconvenience, until this matter was all well understood, And here is where the “padlock” question comes in. What evidence has Eld. Canright given us that he speaks his mind freely on this soul question? Why, forsooth, he will furnish the REVIEW, if we will open our pages, two solid columns of matter on this subject. Generous soul! In the first place, he knows we would not open our pages to him any way, so he is perfectly safe in making the statement. In the second place, we are in no need of enlightenment on the question, if he holds his old views. We are all sound on that subject. But to give him a chance to show his sincerity and the “fullest freedom” to speak “the word of God as he understands it,” let him speak his sentiments in his own church, where they need it so badly. Let him enlighten the Baptists on the horrible nature of eternal torment, publish it in their papers, etc., and see how much this “fullest freedom” amounts to. RCASDA 190.1

Let the reader carefully peruse his present article, and tell us of a single hint, the remotest intimation in the whole article, as to what his views are on this subject. If this doesn’t indicate the tightest kind of “padlock” on the Elder’s mouth yet, then we are unable to judge. We dare the Elder to publish his views on that subject in any way that will tend to influence Baptist opinion; that is, if he still holds to his former opinions. We think it very probable he will, after long meditation, come out on the other side, and be an immortal-soulist. He has placed himself in a false position, and made such radical changes, that we are fully prepared for this. It will be no great matter to turn one more somersault for one who has proved himself so agile heretofore. Poor, poor man! what a pitiable spectacle his course for the last year presents! From our souls we pity him. He may call it “injustice,” “misrepresentation,” or what he will, he cannot conceal the fact that the attitude he has taken, and that of his church concerning the soul question, is anything but a proper one. RCASDA 191.1

“O Consistency, thou art a jewel,” applied to this matter, we know cuts close. But it is the truth in the case which furnishes the edge to make it cut. The effort to get rid of the force of what I said in the EXTRA, by calling attention to supposed errors in what I gave as information furnished by another, does not change the actual status. To all intents and purposes, the Elder’s mouth has been “padlocked” on the soul question for a year past, to the very best of our knowledge. And the greediness with which these popular churches take up men for ministers who have been tainted so long with gross error, “fanaticism,” “infidelity,” as they claim Adventism to be, is most illuminating. It shows right on the face of it that they don’t really believe that this doctrine injures people, corrupts their morals, or keeps them from being Christians. Their course shows unmistakably that they would be wonderfully glad to get all of us, if they could. RCASDA 191.2

GEO. I. BUTLER