Anyone who does not dig deep enough into the facts, but contents himself with the shallow information supplied by official Adventist sources, may be led to think: "Well, three men in Europe made a mistake by issuing certain documents which did not represent the historic position of the church." The impression given is that, in spite of the mistakes made by a few European leaders, who "confessed in writing that they had been wrong," the General Conference did not support these leaders in their error. The following quotations will confirm our statement:

In the Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopaedia (Commentary Reference Series, vol. 10), p. 1183, we read:

"The military question came to the front when the conflict between Austria-Hungary and Serbia exploded into World War I in early August, 1914....

"On the German mobilization, in August, 1914, the SDA's of that country were faced with the necessity of making an immediate decision concerning their duty to God and country when called into the armed forces.... After counseling with the few SDA leaders locally available at the time, the president of the East German Union Conference informed the German War Ministry in writing, dated August 4, 1914, that conscripted SDA's would bear arms as combatants and would render service on the Sabbath in defense of their country....

"As a result of unfavorable statements against the German Government made by some of the fanatics, SDA churches in the state of Saxony were closed by the public authority. Only when three SDA leaders at Hamburg in a letter to the government in Berlin on March 4, 1915, reasserted their stand on combatancy, was the ban against SDA churches in Saxony lifted....

"Admittedly, the three SDA leaders in Germany took a stand concerning the duty of SDA's in military service that was contrary to the historic stand officially maintained by the denomination ever since the American Civil War (1861-1865)."

During the meeting in Friedensau, Germany, 1920, A. G. Daniells, then General Conference president, tried to explain away the gravity of the situation as follows:

"We regret and we do not accept certain statements that were written and sent out here. When, however, we consider the circumstances and the motive behind these writings, we have come to the conclusion that our brethren here were just as faithful in their relation to the work as we were. And why, if that be so, should the one judge the other.... We must say that everyone has the right to his own conviction and to follow his own conscience with reference to the war.... We are ready to admit that we have made mistakes, but we are not ready for a single minute to agree to the idea that we as a church have departed from the right way, and that another movement has come to take our place. We claim that we are yet on the right road and the original road of the Advent Movement."-Report of the Meeting With the Opposition Movement (July 21-23, 1920), pp. 43, 55, 56.

Elder L. H. Christian, referring to the European crisis, gave the following evasive and misleading explanation:

"Our responsible men in Europe did their utmost to hold things together, and it is a joy to remember how well they succeeded. This Advent movement owes a debt of gratitude to the loyalty and earnest zeal of our brethren in the countries at war as well as to the balanced judgment and sound counsel of our leaders in neutral lands. What might not have happened to the Advent cause in Europe during the war if these men had not stood true? . . .

"This last visit [of Elder W. A. Spicer, in 1916] was very helpful in explaining to the General Conference the loyalty of our brethren in Central Europe to the Advent message." RH June 8 1930.

In his Aftermath of Fanaticism, a vitriolic tirade against the Reform Movement, in which the truth is often grossly distorted, Elder Christian says:

"It is true that such statements were sent to the government. We have always deplored this, and we have never tried to hide the fact that this was done. We do, however, object to the false statement that this was an 'apostasy of the European Division,' since that is not in harmony with the facts, . . . There never was a European Division action taken authorizing those statements."

Elder Christian is confusing the issue and evading the point. What we emphasize is that neither the Committee of the European Division nor the General Conference of SDA's has ever remedied the situation. The apostasy has simply been left without correction. Therefore, the highest leadership must carry the responsibility.

"If the sins of the people are passed over by those in responsible positions, His [God's] frown will be upon them, and the people of God, as a body, will be held responsible for those sins." 3T 265.

The issuing of documents by European leaders who committed the membership to the war machine was only the tip of the iceberg-the beginning of the trouble. After the poisonous seeds of Satan were sown (in the form of declarations in behalf of combatancy), the fruits appeared immediately in a copious harvest which changed the character of the church. Ever since that unfortunate experience, combatancy in the Adventist Church has been tolerated by the leadership and practiced by a large pro portion of the membership.

It has been stated, repeatedly, that the European leaders confessed their mistake. We have never denied that. But we believe that genuine confession is followed by certain evidences. "Confession will not be acceptable to God without sincere repentance and reformation." SC 39. Those who are sorry for their wrongs will not repeat them. The rule for them is, "Go and sin no more" (John 8:11) .

VIII-PUBLIC DECLARATIONS

The controversy in the Adventist Church, which resulted in a split, could not escape observation by outsiders. It found its way to the press, and was even commented on by Protestants and Catholics.

1. Dresden Paper, Germany (April 12, 1918)

"At the beginning of the war our church split up into two parties. Whilst 98% of our members, by studying the Bible, adopted the point of view that it was a conscientious duty to de fend the Fatherland with weapons, and that also on the Sabbath, and while this standpoint, taken by the leadership as a whole, was immediately brought to the knowledge of the Ministry of War, 2% were opposed to this decision and, finally, had to be disfellowshipped because of their unchristian conduct. These unstable elements set themselves up as preachers and, without much success, have tried to make converts to their foolish ideas. They call themselves, falsely, preachers and Adventists. But they are not; they are deceivers. If these elements receive their merited lot, we will regard that as a favor done to us. Our leadership has, up to this day, used the surplus church money in war loans, in the firm hope that, with God's help, Germany will come off victorious in this terrible struggle. Everywhere our members are giving their help in the fulfillment of their duty to provide the necessary means for the Fatherland. The Adventist men are practically all in the field or in the army service, faithfully fulfilling their duties, and, as a recognition by the Fatherland, they expect just and equitable treatment."-Dresdner Neueste Nachrichten, April 12. 1918.

2. Stuttgart Paper, Germany (September 26, 1918)

"At the beginning of the war there were some members, as there are some also in other places, who did not want to take part in war service, either for lack of unanimity or because of fanaticism. They started to spread around their ideas in the congregation orally and in writing, trying to induce others to do the same J thing. They were warned by the church, but because of their obstinacy they had to be put out, for they became a threat to internal and external peace."-Stuttgarter Neues Tageblatt, September 26, 1918. .

3. Article by Lutheran Minister

"Divisions among Adventists

"In strong opposition to the official Adventist Church, the International Missionary Society of the SDA Reform Movement was formed in 1915 with headquarters in Wuerzburg. The cause [of this separation] was a booklet entitled Der Christ und der Krieg [The Christian and War] published by the official leader ship of the Adventists during the war. This booklet was to be given only to church members and was to be concealed from the public. It explained that strict observance of the Sabbath commandment was not required during the war, and, therefore, that it was all right to fight on the Sabbath; and it also brought out that the commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill,' was not in force during the war. When one thinks how unconditional Sabbathkeeping is required at other times,-declarations by Mrs. White, who is reverenced as a 'prophetess,' and by German Adventist leader Conradi prove this sufficiently, one should be surprised at the suspension of such an important commandment. This can be explained by the fact that ruthless proceedings on the part of the State were feared. As can be seen, however, this publication caused a split. The Wuerzburg line is now using against the official Adventists the same expressions which are often used against the church (Babylon . . .). On top of that, other points also do act a part. The Wuerzburg Adventists also take a strict stand on health reform; they condemn meat eating, vaccination, and similar things. In their publication, Revival and Reformation, under the title "A Terrible Apostasy" they present more detailed accusations against the old form of Adventism. To us this controversy is instructive in so far as it shows that even Adventists have failed to stand on a legalistic and literal conception of the Bible. A strong weapon against the church has thus been snatched from their hands." -Pastor D. Steinlein, Allgemeine Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirchenzeitung, No. 37, 1925 [Ansbach, Germany].

Remark: Some of the details in this article are inaccurate. Examples: The Reform Movement was formed in 1914, not in 1915. Its headquarters were established in Wuerzburg, in 1915. The Reform Movement came into existence before the mentioned booklet (Der Christ und der Krieg) was written. Not the booklet, but the problem discussed in the booklet, caused a separation at the beginning of the great crisis. When the "German Union" of the SDA reformers was first incorporated, in 1919, "Reform Movement" was not part of the name officially adopted at that time.

4. Article in Catholic Paper

"In 1914 two percent of the members were disfellowshiped from the German Seventh-day Adventist Church, because they declared that participation in war service, and that on the Sabbath (Saturday), cannot be reconciled with the Adventist doctrine."Paulinus, March 9, 1953.

Outsiders have written about this problem among the Adventist people, not only in Germany, but also in other countries Therefore, it is not possible to pretend that everything went its normal way during World War I. The great crisis, the shaking (separation), and the new position adopted by the church (see Study 13), cannot be ignored, hushed up, or explained away. The problem is still there. And the effort to vilify the origin of the SDA Reform Movement, by associating it with some extremists and fanatics, does not do justice to the truth. Fair and unbiased references to the Reform Movement have been rare in the official publications of the Adventist Church.

Only after L. R. Conradi had left the Adventist Church was a more balanced and acceptable explanation given, in a denominational publication, as follows:

"In truth the 'reform movement' mentioned by Mr. Meier sprang into being in Germany during the World War, while Mr. Conradi was the leader of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination in the whole of Europe. The movement as it is today and has been since it came into existence, is the practical protest of a large number of Seventh-day Adventists, not against the teachings of the denomination, but against the high-handed actions of this very man Conradi and of a few others who were associated with him in his leadership of the church in Europe.... The departure of these people was not from 'a lot of gross errors and a dominating hierarchy,' but from Conradi's leadership which had committed them, without their voice or consent being given to his action, to the cannon and the bayonet of the battlefield. From the hour that he so basely betrayed them, they have had absolutely no faith in him either as a man, a minister, or a leader in the church of God."-Brown Exposes Ballenger [Southern Publishing Assn.], p. 30

IX-BETWEEN WORLD WAR I AND WORLD WAR II

The serious condition which found its way into the Adventist Church during the first world war, when combatancy was permitted or even encouraged, was regrettably left without correction. But what really complicated matters was the new denominational stand officially adopted during, and confirmed after the war-that church members are free to serve their country according to their own convictions, both in time of peace and time of war. (Read Study 13.) And, as a matter of fact, Adventists acted in harmony with this new stand, in different places, after World War I. Examples:

1. In the Soviet Union

During their fifth general assembly in Russia, the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church declared:

"The Soviet Government is actually endeavoring to ensure our full freedom of conscience, permitting us to fulfill our duty toward the State according to our conscientious convictions before God and before the Soviet Government. The doctrine of the Seventh-day Adventists grants their members freedom of conscience in this question, and does not give them any instruction as to how they should act, inasmuch as each individual must be responsible for himself in regard to the military question, in accordance with his own conscience. The Seventh-day Adventist Conference, moreover, does not forbid its members to render military service if their conscience permits them to do so." -Report of the Fifth General Assembly of Seventh-day Adventists, Moscow, August 16-23, 1924.

The following declaration was made during the sixth general assembly of Adventists in Russia:

"1. Based on the teachings of the Holy Scriptures (Old and New Testaments: 1 Sam. 8:10-12; 10:25; Luke 20:25; Rom. 13:1-6 and Titus 3:1), which show that the authorities are ordained of God to protect the faithful and punish the wicked, and having in view the declaration of the Fifth General Assembly of Seventh-day Adventists, where our relationship to the Soviet Government was clearly outlined in 1924, this Sixth Assembly of Seventh-day Adventists, 1928, declares and decides that SDA's are required to render to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar and to God that which belongs to God. This means that they are to serve the State in the army and render all forms of service, according to the established rule for all citizens.

"This assembly regards as false teachers all those who teach contrary to this decision and who try to induce the people not to perform their duties toward the State. Those doing so act contrary to the Holy Scriptures and separate themselves from the united church of God, placing themselves outside the Seventh-day Adventist organization.

"2. We draw the attention of our members to the fact that the peril of our church does not come from other denominations or beliefs, but from an organization which has departed from us as mentioned in Acts 20:30 and 1 John 2:19. Therefore, we recommend to all our members: Separate yourselves from the false Reformers who wrongly call themselves Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement. They are led astray by wrong ideas of godliness and cause division among the fold of Christ.

"The apostle Paul advised the believers to beware of such ( Rom. 16:17; Gal. 5:7-9).

"We must take this stand against such a corrupt teaching, that they may know they are not our brethren, but branches that were cut off from God's olive tree. Let us break all relationship and brotherhood with them so that they may feel ashamed (2 Thess. 3:14) and find repentance." -Report of the Sixth General Assembly of Seventh-day Adventists, Moscow, May 12-19, 1928.

2. In Romania

The following declaration was submitted by the Adventist Church to the Ministry of Public Worship and Education in 1923:

"It is true that at the mobilization in 1914, and also during the war, 1916-1918, all Seventh-day Adventists, numbering many| hundreds, reported themselves. Their officers have in many instances praised them, testifying to their faithful service rendered during the time of the war....

"If there are any who refuse to take the oath or decline to bear arms and do military service, then these either belong to another sect or do not belong to any, but interpret the Bible according to their own understanding."-Memorial Acts, p. 18.

In 1924, the Romanian Union issued a publication authored by its president, P. P. Paulini, stating:

"Doing military service and taking part in war does not involve a covenant with the world, nor is it equivalent to taking sides with Babylon. Participation in war is a mere civil duty. As far as the war service is concerned, our young men will perform' their duties also on the Sabbath."-Prophecy, p. 41.

3. In Yugoslavia

In 1925 the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Yugoslavia published a book setting forth their beliefs and practices, in which they explained their stand as follows:

"In Regard to Military Duties

"1 Sam. 10:25; 8:11, 12; Rom. 13 quoted.

"According to the Bible standard, 'Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's,' Adventist Christians fulfill all their duties, including their military duties.

"They conscientiously serve the army with arms in time of peace as well as in time of war. In the world war a great number of Adventist Christians proved so prominent in the battlefield that their breasts are decorated with the highest war and military medals.

"Let photos and army records of some of the Adventist soldiers on pages 112, 114, 116, and 117 serve as proof of the above statement."-Adventisam [Adventism], pp. 53, 54.

As a matter of fact, on pages 112-114 of the same book, for example, they show how a man (in this case a church elder) can be a good Adventist and a valiant warrior at the same time. Here is the story:

"In the Service of the King and the Fatherland

"As great-grandson of Vujice Vulicevica, who is the godfather of the brave Duke Karadzardza, who in turn is the great-grandfather of our beloved King Alexander, I entered the army on January 1st, 1914, with the 7th Infantry Regiment. After six months I was transferred to 9th Military Academy Regiment in which I remained until the war with Austria. Then our Regiment was dissolved and I was transferred to the machine-gun department of the 18th regiment where I tasted all that was good and bad in Albania, Crete, France, and at the Thessalonian front, while fighting for the freedom of the Fatherland.

"The Advent hope gave me much more love towards the Fatherland and the Serbian nation and made me a fearless warrior. My commander, Jovan Leko, who then was a first captain, and who is now a lieutenant-colonel of the Kings Guard and professor at the Military Academy in Belgrade, liked me especially because of this.

"One time ammunitions had to be supplied and someone had to go to bring them. No one was willing to go and expose himself to certain death. Then, finally, my commander sent me, knowing that I feared nothing but God, and that I was quite faithful to my oath of loyalty towards the king and the Fatherland.

"The assignment was completed with great success and, as a reward, I received the colonets commendation, was promoted to the rank of corporal, and also received a silver medal for bravery.

"Between January 7th and 10th, in the year 1917, his excellency, the heir to the throne, Alexander, visited our regiment at Elvish and asked to meet the best and most courageous soldier in I our regiment. My commander then called me and introduced me to his excellency, who then awarded me a gold medal. These awards still decorate my chest, and I carry them with pride and respect.

"Later I received two more awards, one for loyalty to the Fatherland in 1915 and another for the 1915-1918 period.

"Then I was transferred from the 18th to the 7th regiment, from which I was discharged." (Sgd.) Zivadin Branko Vulicevica, Azanja, August 30, 1925.

It is not our purpose here to cast contempt on this man, since s he was acting in accordance with the position maintained by the church. In the light of the third angel's message, however, we s have no option but to say that such procedure is evidently a direct transgression of the law of God. When an individual member takes a wrong stand, we say, "That man is wrong." But when the church takes an indefensible course and boasts about it by using ' confirmatory examples from among her own members, then it, becomes evident that the church is off the right track. r

As the result of the new stand taken by the church in connection with military service, open violation of the law of God, especially of the fourth commandment, came to be looked upon as of little consequence in the denominational ranks, particularly in certain areas. Hereunder is a good example:

Difficulties in Europe

"It is hard to believe, but there [in Europe] the lack of liberty is a real problem. Not even in one country of our Division are the children allowed to attend the Sabbath school. All of them are 5 enrolled in public schools, except those whose parents can pay tuition for their children in private schools. In some of the countries private schools are not permitted.

"In one country, Yugoslavia, children have to produce baptismal certificates in order to attend school. Therefore, all Adventist children are baptized by a Catholic priest so they can obtain a baptismal certificate.

"In practically all countries military service is compulsory by law. All young men have to be under arms for one and a half to three years. They cannot even dream of keeping the Sabbath. Military service takes the young people in their most impressive age and places them under the most unfavorable conditions, without any religious help. Some of our brethren show a true character by obeying God. In some countries all army units have to listen to Catholic preaching and attend mass. These conditions seem to be real obstacles to the development of a Christian character."-La Revista Adventista [SDA paper published in Argentina], November 1937, last page.

4. In Germany

From an article published in an Adventist church paper in Germany we quote:

"There have always been Christians who have tried to extend their love for their enemies beyond the obligations that we have toward ourselves and toward others. They have gone so far as to think that any fight for truth, rights, and property is sin; that it is not permitted to present a case before the judge in court; and that any defensive combat is a crime. This concept is wrong. Should all men maintain this idea, then, of course, lost paradise would soon be restored to mankind. Yet this condition will never be reached so long as Satan and sin rule the world. Where there are differences of opinion and knowledge in connection with a certain subject, or where the rage of animal passions controls brutal men, there is also contention. .; . Therefore, the authorities are necessary for the protection of rights and property against evil encroachments. Where, however, among nations ruled by different laws, a legal decision cannot be brought about, each side tries to enforce its rights by force. For, where rights are not respected any more, one cannot be sure of one's life.

"For this reason, the soldier goes to the battlefield, faces the enemy, and fights with him for the freedom, the rights, and the property of the Fatherland. Thereby he fulfills a holy duty. For the sake of future safety, he tries to render the enemy harmless through the destruction of his forces. But even in the middle of the battle the soldier can show Christian love: toward the disarmed [adversary] he uses kindness, toward the conquered [foe] he uses mercy, toward the prisoners he uses compassion. In this way he does for the good of his enemies all things that he would desire for himself if he were in their unfortunate position."-Der Adventbote [SDA paper published in Germany], October 15, 1927.

In a booklet prepared by Hilda Jost, head of the Welfare Work of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Germany, and published by the Adventist publishing house in Hamburg, Germany, 1935, faithfulness in the fulfillment of military duties was urged upon the members. This was the instruction:

"He who despises true Christianity is also hostile to the welfare work, being therefore an enemy of the State. All those who spread unbelief under any form hurt the precious possessions of the nation. Taking Christianity away from our people is cutting the root of the tree of our national life. It is the realization of Christianity that gives our people their peculiar national character. On the other hand the State has a right to count on the spiritual, physical and material powers of its citizens. The State must not wait to see if, in the hour of danger and need, some will volunteer to take up arms. The State must watch all the time so that the nation will be fully armed to repulse every s enemy beyond its borders and subdue every rebel against the laws in the country. Whoever refuses to render this service to the Fatherland acts dishonorably and severs his connection with the nation as a whole.

"The State must watch and protect the honor of the nation. Therefore, the State is vested with God-given authority, which is the focal point of its righteous constitution. In this way liberty and order are guaranteed, and from this arrangement every individual receives the greatest blessing." Unser Dienst am Volk [Our Service to the People], p. 12.

5. In South America

At the beginning of the Chaco War (1932-1935) between 3 Bolivia and Paraguay, the president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Bolivia reported that the Adventist people in Bolivia were going through a great test. He wrote:

"At this time hundreds of our members, including teachers, evangelists, and lay members, are found in the battle line. All those to whom I could speak before their departure I advised to take their own Bibles in their pockets and also New Testaments for missionary work in the trenches. We are waiting for interesting I reports to see how God protects His faithful ones in this war, so that we may be able to convey the news to the brethren. During the four weeks I was absent from Bolivia on holiday at Melendo, Peru, I heard that many other teachers and evangelists had to leave our churches and church schools to take up military duties at the front. We are sorry that it so happened, still we have confidence in the Lord and we know that He is able to use our brethren for the preaching of the truth, even in such places where they now are. When our sons reach military age they must march to the battle line, but their aged parents remain behind with their younger brothers, consecrating their lives to God."-Revista Adventista [SDA paper published in Bolivia], December 5, 1932.

In these examples, we have not only a wrong practice unfortunately sanctioned by the church, but, what is worse, we also have a new doctrinal stand which cannot be harmonized with the requirements of the law of God. According to this new stand, a church member can serve as a combatant, performing his military duties at the front, and still be an Adventist. As far as we can see, the statement that God regards the Adventist combatants as "His faithful ones in war" is a self-contradiction containing a very misleading doctrinal idea.

In an effort to answer our objections, some have said that "Reformers are dealing with ancient history." Maybe they do not realize what their argument actually implies. Are they virtually suggesting that an apostasy which, instead of being removed, is allowed to become deep-rooted, must finally be overlooked, or regarded as an innocent condition, because it has become "hoary with age"? Those who are inclined to reason this way have never been able to tell us why they do not, by the same token, dismiss much older apostasies, such as the Sabbath-Sunday change. Was that only a local and temporary controversy raised by Joseph Bates? We would not use the documentary evidences showing what the church did during the first world war, if the problem had actually been corrected. If a genuine repentance had taken place, as it was claimed, then the apostasy would have been eradicated. But we see it taking deeper roots, growing, and bearing fruit, after World War I. Therefore, we cannot remain silent. We must show the beginning, the development, and the final consequences of this new doctrinal position.

[Return to the Index]   [Part I]   [Part III]