Without church organization, without appointed responsible leaders, without a creed, the rather loose-knit church was growing more and more unwieldy. Ministers and laymen who had met in Battle Creek in late September, 1860, in response to an invitation signed by four leading brethren and couched in the form of an announcement, set about to form a legal organization to hold the assets and manage the affairs of the publishing work. Out of the meeting came plans for a publishing association--but it could not organize legally until the legislature of the State of Michigan had formulated laws under which they could incorporate. Organizing the publishing work called for the choice of the name Seventh-day Adventists. The action of choosing a name set the field buzzing with the cry that the church was going into Babylon.
On May 3, 1861, the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association was incorporated in harmony with laws newly formulated by the Michigan legislature, and on May 23, in Battle Creek, bylaws governing the operation of the corporation were adopted. Officers for the association were chosen as follows: President, James White Vice President, G. W. Amadon Secretary, E. S. Walker Treasurer, Uriah Smith Auditor, J. N. Loughborough
James White was elected editor of the Review and Herald, and G. W. Amadon, editor of the Youth's Instructor.--The Review and Herald, May 28, 1861.
At the conference in Battle Creek, April 26-29, 1861, the need of a new and more adequate building to house the publishing interests was discussed, and initial steps were taken to provide it and get the building under way. Before the meeting closed, attention turned to "a more complete organization of the church." James White pleaded with his brethren in the ministry "to take hold of this work." J. H. Waggoner said that even before he came to the conference he had "resolved so to do." A motion made by Moses Hull called upon the ministers present to prepare an address to the church on the subject of church organization (Ibid., April 30, 1861).
Little wonder that in her letter to Lucinda Hall, Ellen White had occasion for rejoicing. There was another point discussed and an action taken at this conference worthy of notice--a point quite apropos in the light of the speedy acquisition and wholehearted acceptance of a minister who proved to be given to levity:
Whereas, In our opinion, remarks calculated to excite mirthfulness tend to grieve the Holy Spirit from our midst, and thus deprive us of the guidance of heaven in our deliberations, therefore
Resolved, That we consider it a breach of order to indulge in such remarks, and we request the chairman to call to order any who may use them.
And whereas, In view of the solemn time in which we are living, the holy, solemn message we profess, the importance of using "sound speech" and "words that shall administer grace to the hearers," and in view of the fact that God's Word condemns in the most unequivocal terms the use of trifling thoughts and words, even declaring that for "every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment," therefore
Resolved, 1. That this conference assembled, both preachers and lay members, covenant together to put away from us, whether in preaching or in social relations, all lightness and trifling. 2. That we recommend to our brethren scattered abroad to pursue a similar course, and rid themselves of this blighting sin which drives the Spirit of God from the hearts of His people.--Ibid.
The accomplishments of this conference might be noted as step two in the struggle for full church organization. Many expressed words of appreciation, such as, "I am thankful for what I have seen and heard and felt during this meeting."--Ibid.
Uriah Smith, quite free from emotion, in his report of the conference, declared:
God's signal blessing rested down, and at times the house resounded with shouts of praise and thanksgiving. The efforts that were made for freedom, for a bursting of the fetters with which the enemy would fain bind God's people, and for a consolidation of union between hearts which he had long been trying to estrange from each other, together with their results, were indeed encouraging.--Ibid.
But what brought particular joy to Smith, and in fact to everyone else, was expressed thus:
But most of all had we occasion to rejoice that freedom of spirit seemed to be returning to Brother White, and that he was enabled to testify that hope was again beginning to beam on his pathway. This was occasioned by the work which he saw being done for his brethren; and the happy change in him will be fully effected when the work necessary to be done by and for them is fully accomplished.--Ibid.
Coming back to the spirit of the conference, Smith declared:
The business meetings were characterized by promptness of action, and the utmost unanimity of sentiment, no dissenting vote being offered on a single question. The same Spirit that reigned through the other exercises of the conference seemed to pervade these meetings also, as may be seen by some of the resolutions offered. If the results and influence of this meeting do not prove as beneficial as those of any heretofore held in this place, our experience thus far has failed to qualify us to judge in this respect.--Ibid.
Unfortunately, when reports of the conference were given in detail in the Review, not all saw it that way, as we shall soon note.
The Conference Address on Organizing Churches
An important address on the organization of churches was drawn up by a committee of nine--the ministers who attended the conference--and was written by J. H. Waggoner. It reviewed briefly the history of the church, particularly the holding of "general conferences" here and there with no attempt at equalized representation or to keep minutes of decisions reached. It called for the organization of churches dealt with, for "purity of the membership," and for members to carry with them proper papers when moving to a new location. It specified that there must be papers certifying to the qualifications of those who ministered. The address closed:
Our object in this is to call your attention to the necessity of a more thorough organization, and invite your cooperation in the effort to effect it. We have seen with deep regret the distrust with which reforms of this kind are viewed, and trust it is for want of understanding the necessities of the case. We have examined it with carefulness and prayer, and hope and pray that you will examine it in the same manner, and believe that you will arrive at the same conclusion.--Ibid., June 11, 1861
This hope, however, proved to be in vain. While there was unanimity at the conference in Battle Creek, this was not true in the field generally.
With repairs being made on their home, with the laying of plans for the new publishing house, with planning for a trip east to secure moral support for organization and for funds badly needed by the publishing association, James White, as reported by Ellen to Mary Loughborough, was "too busy to know whether he is sick or well" (Letter 6, 1861). He was yet to discover the extent of the negative feelings in the field, particularly in New York State and Ohio.
The Eight-Week Eastern Tour
James and Ellen White started on their eastern tour Tuesday, July 23. They spent Tuesday night with friends in Jackson, Michigan, and the next morning were on their way to Eagle Harbor, New York, where Moses Hull was leading out in tent meetings. A phrase in Hull's report of the meetings gives a hint of the erosion, in certain areas, of confidence in those leading the church. He wrote: "Sister White's testimonies were very pointed, and seemed to remove prejudice which existed against her and her visions."--The Review and Herald, September 3, 1861. As resistance to organization deepened, and criticism of James White for his attempts to lead the church into organization proliferated, Ellen White and the visions came under attack, first covertly and then openly. Church order and spiritual gifts were closely linked together, as was seen as the eastern tour progressed.
Vision at Roosevelt, New York
From Eagle Harbor the Whites made their way to Rochester and then to Roosevelt, New York. A conference was to be held in the house of worship there over the weekend of August 3 and 4. This was a difficult meeting. White reported that on Sabbath afternoon light began to break through, especially in a season of special prayer "for the afflicted and desponding among us, and for the return of the Holy Spirit to us as a people." He reported:
We had been assembled seven hours without taking food, and the interest of the occasion was such that no one appeared to be faint or weary. God heard the united prayers of His afflicted people, and His Spirit came down upon them. Mrs. White shared largely in this blessed refreshing, and was soon in vision, in which she had messages of comfort for the desponding and afflicted, and of correction for the wayward and erring.--Ibid., August 20, 1861
In the vision she was shown, among other things, "in regard to church order, and the struggle of our nation, and its effect upon the cause" (Ibid., August 27, 1861). As they moved through the State and saw what was happening, James White was "stung with the thought that the balance of influence is either against, or silent upon, the subject of organization" (Ibid., September 3, 1861). He wrote:
We seem to be wading through the influence of a stupid uncertainty upon the subject of organization. This is as might be expected from the circumstances connected with the introduction of the subject among us. Soon after we merely hinted at it about eighteen months since, an article appeared in the Review from one of the corresponding editors [R. F. Cottrell] well calculated to arouse the fears of many that Brother White was in favor of something dreadful.
We were then in Iowa where we could not give an explanation of our mere suggestions, and have a plain statement go out in the same number of the Review. The poison took almost everywhere. When we completed our western tour and found time, we reviewed the subject, and set forth some of the necessities of organization. But only a portion of the brethren could then be reached. The cause suffered dreadfully.
But if those who took the wrong side of the question had owned up when they saw the error and weakness of their position, if all who were convinced of the necessity of organization had spoken out freely, victory would have [been] turned, and the poison of antiorganization would have been at once removed. But our ministers were generally silent. Some exerted a strong influence against organization, while the influence of others fell indirectly through their silence into the wrong scale with dreadful weight, and many of our brethren, especially in the East, stood in doubt.
The brethren in Pennsylvania voted down organization, and the cause in Ohio has been dreadfully shaken. It has suffered everywhere. If such ministers of experience as Brethren Ingraham, Andrews, and Wheeler could have spoken on the subject decidedly and in season, much might have been saved that has probably gone to ruin. There is everywhere someone to hold back. They have no valid reasons for so doing; still they hold back.--Ibid., August 27, 1861
White then referred to the conference in Roosevelt. After a two-hour discussion on organization at which objections were removed, he called for a standing vote favoring organization. Pioneer worker Frederick Wheeler kept his seat. James White was devastated. He wrote, "A dreadful feeling of discouragement came over us that we have not yet been able to shake off," and he asked, "What can we expect of the people when the ministers stand thus?" Only ten weeks before, Wheeler had written White that the members in New York State were "beginning to feel the necessity of more union, and a more perfect consecration to God and His cause" (Ibid., June 11, 1861).
As James White bemoaned the situation, he pointed out that three years back as he dwelt on the subject of unity in the church he could point with pleasure to Seventh-day Adventists as being far advanced in "scriptural unity." But now no one could deny that "instead of our being a united people, growing stronger, we are in many places but little better than broken fragments, still scattering and growing weaker."--Ibid., August 27, 1861. Thinking of what this trip into the East revealed, he wrote:
A few years since we could report success and additions to the ranks at every appointment on our eastern and western tours. Now these conference meetings are scenes of wearing labor to hold together and strengthen what remains. Some who have been expecting a time of shaking are in doubt whether it has commenced. May the Lord save us from a worse shaking than the present.--Ibid.
The next week, September 3, White declared:
We are done moving out in any enterprise connected with the cause until system can lie at the bottom of all our operations. Mrs. White and self have interested ourselves in behalf of the poor; but in the absence of systematic arrangements among us much care has come upon us, and at least three fourths of those whom we have been instrumental in helping became our enemies.
Now let others who choose push the battle in confusion, but we are making all preparations for a safe retreat till the army of Sabbathkeepers be organized, and the rebels against organization be purged out.--Ibid., September 3, 1861
The Battle Creek Church Sets the Pace in Organizing
Though in August and September several companies of believers entered into some form of organization, it was left to the Battle Creek church to lead out again in well-defined steps in this direction. The annual meeting of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association was called for Friday, October 4. This would bring together quite a group of Michigan ministers and laymen, and J. N. Loughborough, E. S. Walker, and George Amadon saw this as an opportunity to further the interests of church order, carrying it to a third step, the organizing of local churches. In connection with the constituency meeting, they suggested meetings over the weekend at which attention could be given to "a more perfect organization of the church" (Ibid., September 24, 1861).
So after the Sabbath, October 5, a meeting was held, with Joseph Bates serving as chairman and Uriah Smith as secretary. The minutes of this vital meeting read in part:
The first business presented was the organization of churches. Brother Loughborough said: I consider it proper and necessary to consider here the organization of churches, as the subject has been agitated among us, especially for the last six months; and in order to bring the matter before the meeting, I move that we consider the proper manner of organizing churches. Seconded by Brother White. Carried. Brother White then presented the following resolution:
Resolved, That this conference recommend the following church covenant: We, the undersigned, hereby associate ourselves together as a church, taking the name Seventh-day Adventists, covenanting to keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus Christ. Seconded by Brother Hull. Adopted.--Ibid., October 8, 1861
But the vote was not full, and White stated that he hoped that a matter of such importance would not be passed without some discussion. On this suggestion, Loughborough, by a motion, opened the way for a reconsideration of the matter. This led to the question whether White's proposal was not a creed--and a creed they would not tolerate. Hull felt that it was not a creed or articles of faith, but merely a pledge to do one thing: "Keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." James White then led into a discussion of the involvements in the light of the fears sustained by some. Here is his statement:
If there is no one to raise any objections to this step, I have almost a mind to raise some myself, so that the subject may be discussed. Circumstances have driven me to an examination of this subject somewhat, and it is a very clear one to my mind; but perhaps it might be objected to on this ground: it will look like patterning after the churches around us; and what will be the influence? I would like to hear remarks on this point. It will certainly be doing like those around us; and certain individuals will say that we are following after Babylon; and this may be an objection in their minds.--Ibid.
Loughborough suggested that if this was so, they were patterning after the other churches by building meetinghouses. He stated, "We call the churches Babylon not because they covenant together to obey God." He referred to an article he had written for the Review in which he declared:
The first step of apostasy is to get up a creed, telling us what we shall believe. The second is to make that creed a test of fellowship. The third is to try members by that creed. The fourth to denounce as heretics those who do not believe that creed. And fifth, to commence persecution against such.
I plead that we are not patterning after the churches in any unwarrantable sense in the step proposed.-- Ibid.
Cornell could not see that adopting such a covenant was patterning after the churches. Then James White made a rather comprehensive and significant statement:
A Creed and the Spirit of Prophecy
I am convinced; not by what the brethren have said, for I was convinced before. I wish to say a word now in favor of the resolution. I prefer that the brethren should be uniform in this thing. This would tend to unity in the church. Let us set a right example here, and let it go out from this meeting. This is one reason why I would vote for this covenant.
On the subject of creeds, I agree with Brother Loughborough. I never weighed the points which he has presented, as I have since I began to examine the subject myself. In Ephesians 4:11-13, we read, "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets," et cetera. Here we have the gifts of the church presented.
Now I take the ground that creeds stand in a direct opposition to the gifts. Let us suppose a case: We get up a creed, stating just what we shall believe on this point and the other, and just what we shall do in reference to this thing and that, and say that we will believe the gifts, too.
But suppose the Lord, through the gifts, should give us some new light that did not harmonize with our creed; then, if we remain true to the gifts, it knocks our creed all over at once. Making a creed is setting the stakes, and barring up the way to all future advancement. God put the gifts into the church for a good and great object; but men who have got up their churches, have shut up the way or have marked out a course for the Almighty. They say virtually that the Lord must not do anything further than what has been marked out in the creed.
A creed and the gifts thus stand in direct opposition to each other. Now what is our position as a people? The Bible is our creed. We reject everything in the form of a human creed. We take the Bible and the gifts of the Spirit; embracing the faith that thus the Lord will teach us from time to time. And in this we take a position against the formation of a creed. We are not taking one step, in what we are doing, toward becoming Babylon.--Ibid. (Italics supplied.)
Some discussion followed about statements in writing and covenants. Then the far-reaching action was taken--that of adopting the wording proposed. Before the meeting ended they adopted the covenant by which members would join the church:
We, the undersigned, hereby associate ourselves together as a church, taking the name Seventh-day Adventists, covenanting to keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus Christ....
The question was called for, and unanimously carried.--Ibid.
The third step in church organization had been taken.
The matter of procedure in organizing churches was referred to the ministers present who were charged with holding a "Bible class" on the subject and were to write an address to the brethren, to be published in the Review.
The Formation of the Michigan Conference
James White then suggested another proposition:
Resolved, That we recommend to the churches in the State of Michigan to unite in one conference with the name of the Michigan Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.
The resolution was quickly adopted. Then the ministers and delegates from the churches were declared members of the Michigan Conference. Appropriate officers and a conference committee were elected. The chairman, Joseph Bates, and the clerk, Uriah Smith, were voted in as the officers for the current year, and the time for the first session was set for October 5 to 8, 1862. There was one more important question, and that was "ministers' papers." Here is the action:
Resolved, That our ministers' papers consist of a certificate of ordination, also credentials to be signed by the chairman and clerk of the conference, which credentials shall be renewed annually.-- Ibid.
The fourth step in the organization of the Seventh-day Adventist Church had now been taken. The foundations were laid with Michigan as an example of what might be accomplished. The responsibility for the organization of local churches and State conferences now passed to the believers in other States.
The conference over, James White reported through the Review and Herald:
A calm, sweet, melting spirit pervaded this meeting, making it the best of the kind we ever witnessed. We heard many brethren remark in regard to the conference that it was the best ever held at Battle Creek....
The unity existing among the brethren at this conference, the eagerness to take a decided position upon organization, and the general readiness to sustain the publishing association, have greatly encouraged us.... We certainly made rapid progress during the three days of our conference.--Ibid.
With a sigh of relief, James and Ellen White now looked ahead. In the same issue of the Review that reported the meeting of the Michigan Conference and the annual meeting of the publishing association, they announced, under "Appointments," plans to visit Ohio.
Other States Organize
When that Review came to the hands of J. N. Andrews, who was working in Minnesota, he took the matter of organization to a conference held there. Believers and workers adopted a resolution following the example of Michigan.
It was announced that Brethren Allen, Bostwick, and Morse would soon pass through the State, establishing order in the churches. The stage had been set, and now the believers in most States moved rather promptly into full organization.
Cautions Sounded
New questions arose, such as the way in which those who were a part of the loose-knit Sabbathkeeping groups would be accepted into newly organized churches. In the issue of the Review for October 22 James White sounded a timely warning:
Great caution should be used in taking members into the churches. There should be great faithfulness in the examination of persons who offer themselves as members.
If we, without examination, take into our churches all who profess the Sabbath, we may find our condition worse than it now is. If the matter of organization be judiciously and faithfully managed, it may prove the means of relieving the brethren of many who are a burden and hindrance to the cause: first, in showing all the necessity of doing right; and, second, those who will not receive admonition and instruction can be left where they belong; viz., outside of the church....
All should understand New Testament discipline before uniting with a church. Let those who cannot yield to the pure discipline of the Word remain outside until they can. Goats will at once wander away from the fold, but the sheep and lambs, should they be left out awhile, will bleat around the fold.-- Ibid., October 22, 1861.
Two weeks later, J. N. Loughborough, whose name was frequently in the Review giving reports and answering questions, took up some inquiries on close points in the matter of receiving members:
You ask, "How do you manage in forming a church about taking in members who use tea, coffee, tobacco, and wear hoops, and some who do not believe in Sister White's visions?--Ibid., November 5, 1861.
Loughborough worked very closely with James and Ellen White, and White was editor of the Review, where the answers would be published. So we may be very certain there was some counseling together on these points--what appeared in print represented the mind of the three. To this question Loughborough answered:
To this I simply answer, We do not take in any who use tobacco, and reject the gifts of the Spirit of God, if we know it. One of the very objects to be accomplished by church organization is to lop off these things, and only have those come together who stand in the light. To take in those who are holding on to their sins and wrongs would be to encourage the things we are seeking to remedy.
You ask, "What shall be done with such? Should such persons be taken into the church before they break away from these things, or should they be taken in and labored with?"
To both of these questions I answer, No. To take persons into the church is saying that we fully fellowship them; and to labor with them then would throw them into distraction, if it did not entirely destroy them. Better let them know the straitness of the way before taking them into the church. If they cannot stand the truth, don't bring them into the church to fill that with darkness, and perhaps in the end, with trial and confusion.
As to taking in members and laboring with them, the very time to commence to labor is when their names are proposed for membership. (See "Conference Address.") Then if they cannot be brought to terms, it will be best to let them stand outside till they can come in right.--Ibid.
One cannot miss the points made by Loughborough. No one, not even those who had been united in worshiping on Sabbath with a company of believers, should be taken into the church as a member unless he or she was in full harmony with the beliefs of the church.
The October 29 Review and Herald also expressed James White's concern over the peril of inexperienced individuals attempting to lead out in organizing local churches. He closed an editorial with these words:
The question has been Shall we organize? That question being answered in the affirmative, the question now is How shall we organize? Beware, brethren, of moving hastily in this matter. By hard tugging, our experienced ministers may be induced to take hold of this work, and not leave it for novices in the faith to make still greater confusion by meddling with the organization of churches.--Ibid., October 29, 1861.
This was followed by an in-depth article from Loughborough titled "Church Discipline," which he opened by quoting 1 Timothy 3:15: "That thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." Loughborough elaborated:
At the present time when we are talking of, making effective moves toward, more permanent order in the church, it is highly important for us each to obtain the knowledge spoken of by Paul in the above text, to "know how to behave ourselves in the church." ... To each know our proper sphere, and our duty; to know our position and fill it; to know how to occupy our proper place and not meddle with that which belongs to the rulers in the church.--Ibid.
Loughborough wrote at length of the relation of members to church officers, of the problems of dealing with those who have never been under discipline, of some inclined to rebel against the Spirit of Prophecy counsels, of receiving and propagating rumors and accusations, et cetera.
M. E. Cornell to Go to Ohio
These were sensitive and vitally important times. James and Ellen White found that being badly worn, they dared not attempt to fill appointments made for them in Ohio. M. E. Cornell, known for his good judgment and evangelistic perception, was sent in their place. There he met agitation over the adoption of a name and also over spiritual gifts. At Green Spring when his work was brought to a close, he reported that out of a hundred believers only eight or ten were not satisfied and ready to express their "confidence in the gifts, and in those whom the Lord has placed at the head of this work." At Lovett's Grove he found some who thought there was danger of exalting the gifts above the Bible. Through an apt illustration he showed that this was impossible:
Take a small vessel and a large one, and connect them with a small tube; then if you pour water into the small vessel it will rise in the large one. So in proportion as our interest increases in that which the Holy Spirit communicates at one time, it will increase in all that it has ever revealed. Like the law, if we fail in one point we fail in all, because in slighting one we offer insult to all.... There is not a caution in all the Bible against thinking too much of what God has revealed, any more than there is against becoming too pure or too holy.--Ibid., November 12, 1861.
Before Cornell left, Ohio was organized into a conference, and the plan followed at Battle Creek was recommended in the organization of churches.
Confessions of Negative Attitudes
Through all of this the Review carried statements from lay members and ministers confessing their wrong attitudes toward organization and their doubts about the Spirit of Prophecy. Frederick Wheeler's "Confession," published in the Review of December 3, was typical. It was heartfelt and extended. It opens:
Dear Brother White,
We are taught to confess our faults one to another, and pray one for another that we may be healed. I wish to confess and forsake all my faults and sins.... I have murmured against Brother and Sister White, and have thought them too severe, and have spoken of them to a few of my brethren in a way calculated to prejudice their minds against them. I am sorry that I have been left to do thus....
I have been slow ... to engage in the work of organization. I regret this, and intend for the future to be more diligent, believing it will accomplish a work in bringing the church on higher and holier ground.
I humbly ask forgiveness of God and all my brethren, and ask an interest in their prayers.--Ibid., December 3, 1861.
A confession was made by J. N. Andrews, writing from Waukon, Iowa, on November 28, 1861. He confessed his negative attitude and influence concerning "the testimony of the Spirit of God, given through vision to Sister White." He mentioned his failure to reprove "sin ... and wrongs" that came under his observation, and referred to his turnaround, stating that "the present work of organization meets my hearty approval."--Ibid., December 17, 1861.
James White Surveys the Battle and Victory
As the year 1862 opened, James White reminisced in his editorial column:
Two years since we suggested the necessity of organization, and had a right to expect that the subject would be met with Christian candor by all of our people. In this we were disappointed. Some of our best men opposed, and stirred up that element of insubordination and lawless independence which has ever followed us as a people, and not a few distinguished themselves in heaping their anathemas upon us for suggesting such a thing as organization....
Others secretly were in favor of organization, but dared not advocate it openly, until the scale turned in its favor, and now their tongues and their pens are employed in its advocacy. But certainly their labors on this subject were more needed eighteen months since than now. Then we stood nearly alone. The battle went hard, and we needed help; but many of our very prudent men saved their ammunition to fire away upon the subject of organization now when the battle is fought and the victory won....
As we turn from the present prosperity of the publishing department to the struggle of the past two years, sadness comes over us. We feel at least four years older than two years since, and sometimes fear that we never can fully recover from the effects of those heartrending discouragements which so nearly drove us from the brethren, and from that cause which was dearer to us than life.--Ibid., January 7, 1862.
Then White turned to the influence of the experience of the past year or two on the members of the church, and noted:
Our people have had great confidence in their self-sacrificing ministers. This confidence with many has been dreadfully shaken. The shock has been felt by all, and it is hard to recover from it. Until full confidence is restored between preacher and preacher, and between preachers and people, but little success can be expected. May God give wisdom to His servants that they may see the cause of the evils which have fallen upon us, and labor to remove it, that these evils may cease to tear down the cause of truth.--Ibid.
As he brought his rather extended editorial to a close he stated:
We hope to be able to rise above the discouragements of the past. It may not be our duty to again refer to the trials connected with the subject of organization. We advise all to make thorough work in relation to their past wrongs which have brought the cause into its present condition, and may God forgive past errors, and help all to press forward to the crown of life. A lack of confidence in each other will ruin us as a people. Then let us be faithful and true to our own consciences, true to each other, and true to our God.--Ibid.
There was one more step to be taken in church organization, and that was the binding of the State conferences together in the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.