A Lesson for Headquarters Churches

In the advance of the advent movement in land after land we have had to establish office centers, or headquarters, in many places. Our schools or other institutions, as well as our conferences and other organizations, gather in many Adventist families to one locality. This is as it ought to be. These headquarters’ churches enjoy many privileges, but they are also at times exposed to not a few spiritual dangers. It is always a great responsibility to be a member of such a church, as several object lessons from the past make plain. More than once we have had to move a school or an office because of certain conditions in the surrounding church or churches.FSG 381.7

In the very first years of our church, our leaders lived in the States of Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, and they were urged to stay there. Soon after this message came, Elder and Mrs. White decided to labor more in New York, and for a time they lived in Oswego, of that State. Then in 1852 they moved to Rochester, New York. The plan was really to establish permanent headquarters in that center, and they remained there about three years. But certain untoward circumstances. among the believers there caused them to move. Of this we read:FSG 382.1

“If, years in the past, when the office of publication was in Rochester, New York, the brethren and sisters in Rochester and vicinity had been less selfish and less jealous of those whom God had selected to bear the heaviest burdens, while standing in the most responsible positions in connection with the cause and work of God if they had shown their faith by their works; if they had been consecrated to God, and really loved the truth, and shown fruits of the same by manifesting a personal interest in the success and advancement of the work of God, the office of publication would not have been removed from Rochester.” “In view of the past God bade us to flee from Rochester, because His blessing would not prosper His work there.”—Testimony to the Church at Battle Creek (1872), 71, 72, 76.FSG 382.2

About this time our believers in Michigan, who manifested a deep spirit of sacrifice and love for the advent cause, urged our leaders to come to that State, with the result that our headquarters were located in Battle Creek in 1855. It was understood from the beginning, however, that the decision to settle in Battle Creek was made on condition that the experience in Rochester was not to be repeated. As early as 1871 light was given that “there is a great lack with many of the church at Battle Creek of feeling their responsibility.”—Testimony to the Church at Battle Creek, 51.FSG 382.3

“If our people at Battle Creek refuse to heed reproof and counsel, if a reform cannot be brought, about, or if those at Battle Creek do not see and repent of their disrespect of the light God has given them, our important institution will have to be moved from Battle Creek. If so, tracts of land should be purchased in some good locality and then sold only to those who will be true, and will give evidence that they will sustain the important institutions in their midst.”—Testimony to the Church at Battle Creek, 66, 67.FSG 383.1

When the messages came to move our headquarters and institutions from Battle Creek to the East, we were clearly instructed not to locate in New York, and also that “any place within thirty miles of that city would be too near.”—Abiding Gift Of Prophecy, Page 347. When a few weeks later the message came to locate near Washington, it was stated twice that this was “for the present.” (Ibid., Pages 348, 349.) We were also told what institutions should be at headquarters, and only these were established. Some who have read these messages have interpreted them to mean that we are to move again. Of this, however, there is no suggestion or instruction in these messages from the Lord. The great lesson taught Adventists in it all is that our headquarters’ churches ever should be spiritual and loyal supporters of our denominational leadership and unselfishly earnest in the work of the Master. These churches should stand as examples, and give the keynote for the advent movement.FSG 383.2

It was on April 2, 1903, at the General Conference in Oakland, California, that the committee on plans and constitution recommended that “the General Conference Offices be removed from Battle Creek, Mich., to some place favorable for its work in the Atlantic States.”—The General Conference Bulletin, 67, 1903. The vote, however, was not taken until four days later.FSG 383.3

In the meantime there was much earnest consideration and prayer on the subject. After much thought the brethren presented to Mrs. White a written statement and requested a written reply. This question, read by A. G. Daniells, was as follows:FSG 384.1

“It is a serious thing for us to move the headquarters of our General Conference. Battle Creek has been the headquarters for many years, ever since you and Elder White went there in 1853 [18551. It is a serious thing to take this step. But some feel as if it ought to be done; that we will never secure the reformation called for; that we will never rise to do this work as God’s people, to finish it in the earth, until we can break up some of the conditions that now exist, and thus set the work free. We have felt from what has occurred during the last two years, and the counsels you have given, that the time had come to move from that place. But we do not want to, do this unless it is right, and we felt that we would like to place the matter before you, and receive any counsel and light you could give us.”—The General Conference Bulletin, 84.FSG 384.2

To this weighty inquiry Mrs. White gave a long reply, from which a few excerpts will follow:FSG 384.3

“It will be impossible for me to do justice to the question before us unless I take some time. The question is one that should be clearly and distinctly understood by us all. Few of our people have any idea of how many times light has been given that it was not in the order of God for so much to be centered in Battle Creek. Much was gathered there; many meetings were called there. A school, and a sanitarium and a publishing house were there.....FSG 384.4

“Again and again testimonies were given in regard to the principles that were coming in to leaven the publishing house. And yet, though the messages kept coming that men were working on principles which God could not accept, no decided change was made....FSG 384.5

“Before the fire came which swept away the Review and Herald factory, I was in distress for many days. I was in distress while the council was in session, laboring to get the right matter before the the meeting, hoping, if it were a possible thing, to call our brethren to repentance, and avert calamity. It seemed to me that it was almost a life and death question. It was then I saw the representation of danger—a sword of fire turning this way and that way. I was in an agony of distress. The next news was that the Review and Herald building had been burned by fire, but that not one life had been lost. In this the Lord spoke mercy with judgment....FSG 385.1

“The very worst thing that could now be done would be for the Review and Herald Office to be once more built up in Battle Creek.... I must say to our people that the Lord would have that institution established in an entirely new place. He would have the present influences of association broken up....FSG 385.2

“In reply to the question that has been asked in regard to settling somewhere else, I answer, Yes. Let the General Conference offices and the publishing work be moved from Battle Creek. I know not where the place will be, whether on the Atlantic Coast or elsewhere. But this I will say, Never lay a stone or a brick in Battle Creek to rebuild the Review Office there. God has a better place for it.”—The General Conference Bulletin, 84, 85.FSG 385.3

After this reply from Mrs. White had been studied anew, the delegates met in session again to make a decision. H. W. Cottrell, often called the legal counselor of the church, was in the chair. He asked Elder Daniells to make a further explanation of the motion mentioned above, which he did as follows:FSG 385.4

“This proposition has been under consideration by different members of the General Conference Committee for many months. It has been quite thoroughly canvassed from time to time in our councils. It has seemed for some time that God was calling us to get out of Battle Creek, as far as possible, and decentralize.”—The General Conference Bulletin, 100.FSG 385.5

When the vote was taken it was practically unanimous. Returning to Battle Creek from the conference in Oakland, the brethren began to plan definitely to make the move. A committee was chosen to go east. Concerning their experience we quote the following, as related in the Review:FSG 385.6

“At the Tabernacle, last Sabbath, July 25, the time of both the forenoon and afternoon services was devoted to the presentation of facts pertaining to the removal of the denominational headquarters from Battle Creek to a place on the Atlantic coast.... Elders Daniells and Prescott conducted the services....FSG 386.1

“When the committee left Battle Creek the first time, they went to New York City, fully expecting that the new location for a headquarters would be in the vicinity of that great city. In a letter from Sister White, however, they were told to move very cautiously, and that it was not clear in her mind that any place in that vicinity would be the right one.... Meanwhile instruction had come to them that in their investigations they should not overlook the city of Washington. Accordingly, members of the committee went to Washington to compare the advantages there with those of localities farther north. They found Washington to be altogether different from the great commercial center which had been their first objective point. There advantages were found which they had not met with in the district first explored. Before they had been long in Washington, the conviction began to come over them individually that they were on the ground where the right location was to be found.FSG 386.2

“After the conviction had come to the committee that the vicinity of Washington afforded the advantages sought, a letter from Sister White came, saying she had clear light that Washington was the city where the new headquarters should be fixed. These letters, however, were entirely independent of any statements or representations made to Sister White by members of the committee....FSG 386.3

“Looking at the matter in the light of the experience now gained, it is easy to see that the move to Washington is in the providence of God.”—The Review and Herald, July 28, 1903, page 24.FSG 386.4

A statement found in the Review a few weeks later, from one of the union conference presidents, reveals how our leaders felt about the move to Washington:FSG 386.5

“This move is significant. Vital interests on both sides of the great conflict are now centering at Washington. Quietly but rapidly the National Reform movement has been entrenching itself there. Through its quiet but persistent efforts, and recent liberal donations of friends, it is now erecting large office buildings in that city.... We can but believe that the Lord has directed us in locating our headquarters at the national capital, and that all these things indicate that we are entering upon a new era of our work.”—The Review and Herald, August 27, 1903, p. 16.FSG 386.6

The Spirit of prophecy also at this time gave decided counsel that Washington should be chosen as our denominational headquarters.FSG 387.1

“My dear brethren and sisters in america: For some time I have been strongly impressed that decided efforts should be put forth to proclaim the testing truths of the third angel’s message in the city of Washington, the capital of the American nation.”—The Review and Herald, July 28, 1903, page 7.FSG 387.2

Then two weeks later:FSG 387.3

“The Lord has opened this matter to me decidedly. The publishing work that has been carried on in Battle Creek should for the present be carried on near Washington. If after a time the Lord says, Move away from Washington, we are to move. We are pilgrims and strangers in this earth, seeking a better country, even a heavenly. When the Lord tells us to move, we are to obey.”—The Review and Herald, August 11, 1903, page 8.FSG 387.4

In Adventist history the year 1903 stands out as one of far-reaching decisions. At the Oakland session that year a long forward step was taken in perfecting our world-wide organization. The transfer of the Review and General Conference offices to Washington captured the interest of our people in every land. In view of the many testimonies that had been given to leave Battle Creek, with no definite statement at first as to where we should go, Adventists were on the alert to see what the outcome would be. It was planned to begin a large evangelistic work in Washington and build a new church worthy of the location. A fund of $ 100,000— the largest sum ever raised in one appeal up to that time was called for. Mrs. White joined others in appealing for help on that fund through the Review. Many stockholders in the old Review donated their shares to help in the move. A few others, with fairly large sums involved, opposed the move and not only held on to their shares but talked of taking the matter to court and getting an injunction against leaving Battle Creek. Mrs. White wrote a strong appeal in the Review, not alone against going to law, but in favor of giving to the Review.FSG 387.5

“Will not the brethren and sisters of the Battle Creek church, and of the churches in every other place, remember that they are working as for eternity? Will not they obey the injunctions of God’s Word, the teachings of which are to be brought into the life practice as spiritual food?”—The Review and Herald, 24.FSG 388.1

It was a happy and stirring year, one that quickened our zeal for the message and our love for one another. A feeling of triumph and victory, as well as faith and love, inspired our people. Many of them remembered the appealing calls that had come from the Lord’s messenger to leave Battle Creek, such as the following:FSG 388.2

“Why is it, brethren, that you continue to keep so many interests bound up in Battle Creek? Why do you not listen to the counsels and warnings that have been given you regarding this matter? Why do you not take decisive steps to establish centers of influence in many of the large cities? Why do you not encourage the Michigan Tract Society and the International Tract Society to establish their offices in cities where there is much missionary work to do, and where their secretaries and other workers may engage personally in missionary work, acting as leaders in important missionary enterprises? Move out, brethren, move out, and educate your workers to labor for those outside the camp. Why do you hide your light by continuing to remain in Battle Creek? Go out, brethren, go out into the regions beyond.”—Testimonies for the Church 8:76.FSG 388.3

The spiritual blessings which these messages brought to our people when they were heeded can hardly be felt today. It is not too much to say that never have our members trusted their leaders more or prized the Spirit of prophecy more highly than at that time. And such mutual confidence is certain to bring success.FSG 388.4