WAS THERE A TRINITARIAN APOSTASY IN 1931 IN ADVENTISM?

gillespie9669

The First Trinitarian Statement by an Adventist General Conference Committee (in 1931)

After all I have said on this chat site re: The Trinity In Adventism, I now come to that very crucial year in Adventist history, 1931. Leroy Froom is said by detractors in Adventism to be the first person to inject Trinitarian type thinking among Adventists (in the 1902’s), when he used (for the first time, it is claimed) non-Adventist writings or literature on the Trinity, as he did a series of studies among Adventists on the personality of the Holy Spirit. By now you realize (if you raed my previous article under the name “gillespie9669”) that this assumption is far from true.
While it is true that Froom did use non-Adventist literature on the Holy Spirit, he was not the first, and he did not even go as far as Pacific Press did in 1892 to *PUBLISH a non-Adventist pro-Trinitarian tract, or reproduce it, unabridged, in a book form, as pioneer M.L. Anderson later did, AFTER he observed Mrs. White’s silence regarding the 1892 printing of Dr. Spear’s Trinitarian tract, and F.M. Wilcox’s 1913 Trinitarian belief statements on behalf of Adventists.
Now dear reader, lest one may take this lightly, it must be remembered that the 1892 tract spoke about the “Divine Trinity” as a * “Bible Doctrine” and it defended “Trinitarians” in saying they “are not tri-theists” even while believing in a “clear distinction between God, the Father and Christ” (and the personality of the Holy Spirit) who are, however, united by the singular “name” of the “One Spirit”, the “One Lord”, and the “One God and Father of all” (Matt, 28:19). Why should I point out again that this is basic trinitarianism Pacific Press published as a missionary tool (!!) and, in effect, declared itself supportive of in 1892, when it is self evident to he who will to his own self be true? Your conscience, dear reader, tells you that this event in Adventism, and Mrs. White’s silence on the trinity*after 1892 is a powerful argument. She only censored Dr. Kellogg because he mixed pantheism with trinitarianism. She, however, did not censor F.M. Wilcox for outrightly declaring Adventists Trinitarians before her death.
We now come to the period after Mrs. White died, that is, after 1915. Some declare that Leroy Froom influenced the General Conference towards trinitariansim in the 1920’s, because Mrs. White was now out of the way to arrest the so-called, “apostasy”. However, that too will fall by the wayside when the true facts are examined carefully by anyone interested in the historical facts; facts, which are as undeniable as the truth about the year in which Adventism first published Trinitarian teachings (1892).
In the General Conference “Minutes” of December 29,1930 are the following (easily proven) words (in verbatim):

“Statement of Faith For Year Book –
A request was presented by the African Division [not Leroy Froom] that a statement of what S.D.A’s. believe should be printed in the year book, since they felt that such a statement would help government officials and others to a better understanding of our work.
-Voted; that the chair [C.H. Watson, G.C. president] appoint a committee of which he shall be a member, to prepare such a statement for publication in the year book.
-Named: M.E. Kern, F.M. Wilcox, E.R. Palmer, C.H. Watson [G.C. president]”.
– General Conference Minutes, Dec. 29,1930, pg. 195

COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS

1. First of all, notice carefully that the above is the report of what a meeting of the world body of Adventists (the General Conference) not a clandestine group, voted on. A new statement was requested for the “Yearbook”; not for debate and putting to vote. Why did they not just ask for a reprint of the old statement, which existed from 1899?
A request of this nature (not from Froom of course) meant that for many years the last printed statements of belief of 1889 was not fully comprehensive, as it was appearing in the Adventist yearbook. Was this only happening after Mrs. White (the leading pioneer) died? The truth is, NO! Edson Rodgers became the G.C. statistician from 1903 (to 1941), and since that time, even while Mrs. White was alive, he was agitating for a *new statement of belief because much had changed in Adventist thinking since 1889. This again is self-evident. Remember the 1892 Trinitarian tract published by E.J. Waggoner (as editor of the Pacific Press), the gradual personalizing of the Holy Spirit after 1892 (the very key to trinitarianism), the F.M. Wilcox 1913 declaration, and the 1919 Bible Conferences accepting Trinitarianism?
It is also self-evident that because there was ongoing conflict about the new doctrinal changes in Adventism since 1888, it just so happened that the last statements of belief (written while Mrs. White was alive) did not take into account what developed in 1892 and after and were not always reprinted in the early 1900’s (even before 1915).

2. The official request from the African Division, headed by President J.F. Wright at the time, made the earlier unheeded requests of Edson Rodgers even more forceful, and thus led to final action. This just happened to be the series of events as they unfolded, not some ‘diabolical plot’ (as some would think) to wait until the old pioneers all died off to then change Adventist thinking. The facts will show hereafter that all the individuals involved were pioneers from the time of Mrs. White, and not a new generation of Adventists.

3. Notice, carefully, that Leroy Froom had nothing to do with the request for the Yearbook. He also had nothing to do with the G.C. committee of 1930-1931. He was not in the picture at all. He was only later responsible for reporting the facts as they took place, in his historical treatise on Adventism entitled, “Movement of Destiny” (1971). Of course he was just one among many Adventists at the time recognizing, as Pacific Press, Review and Herald, F.M. Wilcox, W.W. Prescott, and A.G. Daniells did before him (while Mrs. White was alive), that there was some validity to much of the Trinitarian type thinking, as it related to the “Eternal Godhead”, and the personhood of the Holy Spirit (even if not all explanations by original Trinitarians were valid).
He along with others before him recognized that because of the earlier ‘acidic’ anti-Trinitarian sentiments in Adventism, there was very little written in Adventism to recognize the personhood of the Holy Spirit, except for “priceless leads” in Mrs. White’s writings. He therefore drew on non-Adventist literature as a starting point (just as the Adventist Church did when it first accepted the true Christian Sabbath. Froom studied non-Adventist writings along with Mrs. White’s thoughts on the Holy Spirit, and then published his own book entitled, “The Coming of the Comforter”(1928), after Mrs. White died.
Notice too that Froom had nothing to do directly with the FRAMING of the 1931 statements of belief, as they appeared in the Adventist Yearbook of that same year. Four others (pioneers) were responsible. The committee of four were all top ranking men at the G.C. (who all knew Mrs. White personally).
Two of these men, F.M. Wilcox and E.R. Palmer, personally experienced
what happened in 1888 and 1892, but all four were fully aware of all the
doctrinal developments after 1892 (M.E. Kern and C.H. Watson became
Adventists in the early 1900’s while Mrs. White was alive). Were they a “new generation” of Adventists? Hardly!!
This writer has personally read one of F.M. Wilcox’s pioneering works on the life and teachings of Mrs. White entitled, “Testimony of Jesus” (1934), and I personally feel that he, more than any other, was the most suitable member of the committee. Why? He was (apart from being the then editor of the Review & Herald) also one of the original members of the E.G. White Publication Board of Trustees (or E.G. White Estate) who was selected for this role personally by Mrs. White herself before she died. It would therefore be difficult on my part to see him betraying the trust of Mrs. White, and after being declared as trustworthy and spiritual by Mrs. White, then help to frame statements contrary to her teachings he was entrusted with. No! No! I will believe Mrs. White had too much insight into his character to see him leading the church into apostasy.
Wilcox, along with E.R. Palmer, was there (as pioneers) in 1888 and 1892, and saw all the happenings (as described so far in this historical review) and thus fully conversant with their implications in Adventism. C.H. Watson (the G.C. President) and M.E. Kern (Associate Secretary of the G.C) were fully learnt in Adventist thinking from the early 1900’s (while Mrs. White was alive) and knew what Adventists had come to believe since 1888 and 1892, despite the resistance from the “old timers”, who were bent on holding tight to either the Arian type or semi-Arian type thinking. Semi-Arians would never affirm, as Waggoner did, Dr. Spear’s tract on the “The Bible Doctrine of the Trinity”, since even the word, “trinity” (a group of three persons), in its root meaning as a simple noun, they believe has no parallel in scripture. I wonder, where they found the parallel to “trio” (as used by Mrs. White) in scripture, upon which the Adventist ‘Trio-istic’ version of the Godhead is based? “Oh what a tangled web we weave…”

4. The committee of four were doctrinally competent to frame the statement *for the Yearbook! The statement was not to be framed for putting to the vote. This is self-evident to those willing to see the facts. Also, it is evident to the insightful that the four men were intelligent enough to realize that what was needed at the time was the publishing of a new statement, which would probably need sufficient time for gradual acceptance overtime, not an immediate vote by a representative few at the G.C. which would ‘force’ it upon the entire world church. So in 1931 they did just that.
An introduction of the word “trinity” (three Persons of the Eternal Godhead) into the official Adventist ‘creed’ (statement of belief), while it was really just an evident ‘repeat-affirmation’ of non-Adventist expressions (like Dr. Spears, in 1892) and was the just a logical summary of what started in 1892, however, this move in 1931 still needed gradual acceptance. So from 1931 to 1942, this new statement, as will be hereafter quoted, having, for the first time, the word, “trinity” in the sense of the “three persons” (or “Trio”) of the “Eternal Godhead”, was allowed to go un-voted for a few years.

Now notice carefully the wording of the 1931 Statement of Belief “No.2”; emphases in brackets supplied:

“FUNDAMENTAL BELIEFS OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS [1931]

2. That the GODHEAD, or * TRINITY consists [notice] of the Eternal Father, a
Personal, spiritual being, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, infinite in wisdom and love; [secondly] the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, through whom the salvation of the redeemed hosts will be accomplished; [and thirdly] the third person of the Godhead, the Great regenerating Power in the work of redemption. Matt.28: 19.
That Jesus is very God, being OF the same nature and essence as the Eternal Father. While retaining his divine nature took upon himself the nature of the human family…”
Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-Day Adventists, 1931 Yearbook, page 377
N.B. Please notice the word “of” coming before the words, “the same nature and essence”.

Now dear reader, anyone is free to take issue with any, and all Adventist beliefs, but what no one can dispute is that this is the very same thing Pacific Press affirmed in the Dr. Spear’s pro-Trinitarian tract of 1892 WHILE MRS. WHITE WAS ALIVE!
Now it follows logically that affirmation is almost the same as a direct proclamation. Also, “silence means consent” (our wise grandparents would say), and since Mrs. White did not oppose or take issue with the 1892 tract, or with F.M Wilcox’s 1913 Trinitarian declaration then what are we to make of this? Her consent!
It stands to reason that since Mrs. White never directly defined her own use of the phrase “Eternal Godhead” to mean nothing more than what Waggoner affirmed in 1892, that is, a “trio” or “trinity” (three persons united) in the Godhead, then no honest thinking Adventist could say that this 1931 statement was contrary to what went before.
Also since E.J. Waggoner and A.T. Jones had set the stage from 1888 by personally declaring Jesus to be, “very God” (divine), and “of one substance”, “of one nature” (or essence) and “of one Spirit” with the Father, then no one can hardly say this was contrary to what went before Mrs. White died.
I am prepared to allow anyone to disagree with me on interpretation of scripture, but cannot find myself respecting someone who has clear *historical facts before him and endeavor to deny them or explain them away in order to deceive. That is what some in Adventism are doing today, and the fruit of their labor will prove itself in the end.
But in closing it must again be acknowledged that, yes, the 1931 Trinitarian statement was not officially voted until later. Yes it just started appearing in the Adventist Yearbook after 1931, but only in fulfillment of a direct General Conference mandate; but unwittingly it served as a stimulus to test the responses and reactions within Adventism. However only those unwilling to be objective enough to see the wisdom in this move (as just described) would feel that this was ‘underhanded’ and ‘demonically designed’ to be surreptitiously ‘passed off’ on the masses of Adventists. But notice now what then took place thereafter. And again I challenge any and all readers to disapprove if they can, the historical facts being presented here, upon which I am prepared to recant or retract publicly my statements as a writer. This writer is prepared, as many of the early pioneers were, to accept that truth is constantly unfolding, and one must be prepared to see truth triumph (at the personal expense of even your pride), and show a humility, low enough and willing enough, to admit that even when you think you knew it more than others, you can still be taught by others, and be prepared to say, “I had it wrong”.

The 1942, And 1950 General Conference Vote to Accept ‘A Trinity’ in Adventist Theology.

In 1942 (on January 14), as the “Minutes” show, the General Conference Committee then voted that, the new “trinity” statements from 1931, which had been appearing in the Yearbook since then (and the Church Manual since 1933), be made available in leaflet from, since by common consent it was agreed to by most, despite it met some, but not widespread resistance.
Then in 1950, as revealed by the General Conference Bulletin of July 23, 1950, page 230, the FULL General Conference body of world representatives officially voted in San Francisco (U.S.A.) that no change be made in the “Fundamental Beliefs” statement which had the word “trinity” to mean the Godhead Trio. This session of 1950 would have afforded the airing of the necessary objections by those opposing, but as is well known, the S.D.A. Church has always respected the DEMOCRATIC principle of ‘majority vote’. Not that truth is to be held hostage to a vote, but unity in doctrine must also subscribe to the organization of the church, else there would be utter confusion among the brethren, as some are “tossed to and fro” by “every wind of doctrine” (see Eph. 4:11-16 and Rom 16:17).

CONCLUSION:

The foregoing facts stand on record, and only when ALL or even MOST facts (here presented) can be discounted or successfully proven false, would this writer see the arguments of the detractors or ‘nay-sayers’ as valid. Today the Adventist Church is ‘Trinitarian’, if even it is so after many years of gradual development before 1931, and not the result of a ‘voted-by-a-few’, ‘overnight’, occurrence. Today the Adventist Church will remain ‘Trinitarian’, even if it is so in an ‘unorthodox’ way (as pointed out by the detractors). Historical events cannot be denied, even if doctrinal matters may be a matter of interpretation and is opposed by some. Let every man be convinced in his own mind.
_________________
Derrick Gillespie (First labelled "SDA", THEN, "Pseudo-SDA", and then "Impolite". What label next?)