A Reply to D. It Canright's False Claims on Systematic Benevolence

Our  ministerial and lay workers frequently are confronted by both Protestant and Cath­olic opposition based on the false accusations and misconstrued arguments of D. M. Canright.

Mr. Canright was born in 1840 and grew up in the western part of New York State. He accepted the Adventist faith in 1859 under the preaching of James White. He was a brilliant young man and obtained his academic education the bard way. Encouraged by James White who was instrumental in bringing him into this message, he entered the ministry in 1861. In assisting Canright and Van Horn, another able minister, to acquire a good library, Elder White set before them this worthy objective:

When you study, study with all your might, and when you visit, visit with all your might, and ex­ercise briskly. Whatever you do, do it with all your might. And now, because we think the Lord is coming soon, and that there is but little time to obtain an education, to make up our minds to gather a little here and there, and be content to get along in this way, I think is a grand mistake. Dr. Clarke said, "A Methodist minister should know everything;" so I say of our ministers. And if any class of men can be strong in the word of God, I think it is Seventh-day Adventists.—The Review and Herald, May 20, 1873.

Canright was a diligent student and a good speaker, and the people enjoyed listening to him. Unfortunately, he was highly opinionated. In 1880 Mrs. E. G. White gently but firmly re­buked him for his "desire for power" and "pop­ularity." This counsel was not received in the spirit in which it was given.

Early in 1870 Elder Canright almost made shipwreck of his faith even to the point of giv­ing up faith in God and the Bible. Four times he left the Adventist ministry, returning each time with sincere repentance, asking the breth­ren to forgive him. Each time he was reinstated in the ministry. But about 1886 he left the church for the fifth and final time, and from henceforth attacked Adventists by voice and pen. He then began to preach for the Baptists, occasionally writing a pamphlet or a book against his former church. His last and most detrimental book entitled Life of Ellen G. White was published in 1919, the year that Can-right died in Michigan of paralysis. He died on May 12, at the age of seventy-nine years.

His Spirit of Accusation

The following accusation reveals the spirit of D. M. Canright's attack against not only Mrs. E. G. White but also her husband:

Elder White was not a literary man, not a student of books, not scholarly, not a theologian. He under­stood neither Hebrew, Greek nor Latin, read only the common English version of the Bible, and sel­dom ever consulted other translations. . . He at­tended high school only twenty-nine weeks, and learned enough simply to teach a country school. Though he published and edited papers for thirty years, he produced no commentary, no critical work, no book on any doctrinal subject. He pub­lished two bound books: Life Sketches, a simple story of his and his wife's lives, and Life of Miller, taken almost wholly from another author. He drew his knowledge from observation and from convers­ing with leading men who were students. All doc­trinal subjects requiring study he turned over to these men for them to dig out, after which he used them himself.—D. M. CANRIGHT, Life of Mrs. E.G. White, pp. 65, 66.

We might well raise the question, "Did Can-right have a working knowledge of Greek, Latin and Hebrew?" All the internal evidence that we have from his writings do not reveal that he was an authority on Biblical languages. No one is justified in tearing down another's ability when he is lacking in that respect himself. Canright failed to produce the literary works he expected ,of his opponent. James White published much more than Canright ever did. In 1853 Elder White did publish a very fine little doctrinal book entitled Signs of the Times, thus refuting Canright's claim that he was not capable of producing a book on doctrine. His 408-page book on Christian Life and Public Labors of William Miller published in 1875 depicted the development of Miller's theology, and was more than a biography. James White also wrote a 300-page book on The Life of Joseph Bates. During the years from 1849-1881 he was at different times editor of The Review and Herald; founder and editor of The Signs of the Times, and The Youth's Instructor. We recog­nize that Elder James White did not have as much formal education as Canright, but it ap­pears to an unbiased mind that he accomplished a more permanent and outstanding work in preaching, writing, and especially in leadership.

Canright Challenges the Gift of Prophecy Through Ellen G. White

In his feverish attempt to disprove the gift of the Spirit of prophecy, D. M. Canright re­sorted to subtle and untruthful measures as is evident in the following quotations:

From the writer [D. M. Canright] they accepted three items of vital importance to their financial success. Early in the work Elder White arranged what was called "Systematic Benevolence." Every person was asked to put down in a book a state­ment of all his property at its full value, and pay so much on each dollar, whether the property was producing anything or not. All were asked to pledge ahead each year what they would give each week. This is not tithing. No one can tell a year ahead what he may have, nor whether he may live that long.

This plan was strongly endorsed by Mrs. White in the first volume of her "Testimonies to the Church." She says: "The plan of Systematic Be­nevolence is pleasing to God. . . . God is leading his people in the plan of Systematic Benevolence" (pp. 190, 191). "Systematic Benevolence looks to you as needless; you overlook the fact that it originated with God, whose wisdom is unerring. This plan he ordained" (p. 545).

So, God ordained this plan! It ought to have worked, then; but it failed. This is confessed in their Lake Union Herald of Feb. 24, 1915, thus: "The money was called Systematic Benevolence, but the method did not prove satisfactory, and it was discontinued with us after two years' trial [over fifteen years], and tithing according to the income of the individual was adopted in its stead."

Yes, and I was the one who made that change. In the winter of 1875-6, Elder White requested me to visit all the churches in Michigan and straighten up their finances, which were in bad shape. I found them discouraged, and behind on their pledges, and dissatisfied with the Syste­matic Benevolence plan. After studying the sub­ject, I set that plan all aside, and had the churches adopt the plan of tithing as practiced by that church ever since. All were pleased, and the finances greatly improved. I went to Battle Creek and laid the new plan before Elder White. He readily ac­cepted it, and the change was made general.

Now, was the other plan ordained of God? Was He pleased with it? and did He direct Mrs. Write to say so? No; her husband got it up, and she endorsed it. That was all. After this she just as strongly endorsed the tithing as I arranged it. Was my plan better than the Lord's? This is a fair sample of how Mrs. White endorsed what others studied out, but had no special light on, herself, as she professed to have.—CANRIGHT, op. cit., pp. 65-70.

Reply

To intelligently refute these untruthful criti­cisms it is necessary to study the genesis of sys­tematic benevolence in our denominational his­tory.

In the beginning of our work—from late 1844 to 1859—the contributions, constituted exclusively of freewill offerings for the preach­ing of the third angel's message, were rather sporadic and irregular and without any definite or systematic plan.

To meet the immediate need for the support of our ministry, on January 29, 1859, the Gen­eral Conference adopted a plan called systema­tic benevolence:

If Paul found it essential to complete success, that method should be observed in raising means for benevolent purposes, it is certainly not un­reasonable to conclude that we should find the same thing beneficial in promoting a similar object. As Paul wrote by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, we may rest assured that his suggestions were not only safe to follow, and calculated to insure success, but also that they were in exact accordance with the will of God. We shall not therefore displease Him by adopting the suggestions of His servant Paul.

In an attempt to make a practical application of the apostle's principles of each individual concurring in a private act of setting apart for the Lord "upon the first day of the week" a portion of his possessions, "as God hath pros­pered him," the resolution set forth the follow­ing three recommendations:

I. Let each brother from eighteen to sixty years of age lay by him in store on the first day of each week from five to twenty-five cents.

2. Each sister from eighteen to sixty years of age lay by her in store on the first day of each week from two to ten cents.

3. Also, let each brother and sister lay by him or her in store on the first day of each week from one to five cents on each and every one hundred dollars of property they possess.—The Review and Herald, Feb. 3, 1859.

In order to comply with the above recommen­dation, the church members owning property, houses, or lands, were to assess their value, and 10 per cent of the assessment was to be con­sidered a yearly income. One per cent of this ac­cepted yearly income figure was solicited for the Systematic Benevolence fund. It was to be paid on an installment plan. In reality it amounted to one tenth, or a tithe, of the sup­posed income. From its very inception, there­fore, as J. N. Andrews observes, systematic bene­volence included the principle of tithing, al­though the early believers had not as yet be­come fully cognizant of the scriptural doctrine —the tithe.

It is enlightening to read the following state­ment by J. N. Loughborough:

Here also in the early spring of 1859, a two days' Bible class was conducted by Elder J. N. Andrews, our theologian, as Elder James White called him, which resulted in the conviction and decision that the tithing system was still the Lord's plan for sustaining the Gospel ministry. It was first called "Systematic Benevolence of the Tithing Prin­ciple."—Missionary Magazine, 1901, pp. 266, 267.

In this same year, 1859, Mrs. White stated:

The plan of systematic benevolence is pleasing to God. . . . God is leading His people in the plan of systematic benevolence, and this is one of the very points to which God is bringing up His peo­ple which will cut the closest with some.—Testi­monies, vol. 1, pp. 190, 191.

Here the servant of the Lord indicates that although the plan of systematic benevolence had not as yet been perfected, God was leading or "bringing up His people" in this respect. This is in harmony with the principle of progressive revelation. It is possible that if the members of the church had been required right from the start to pay tithe on everything, they might have become discouraged. God guided them step by step in this matter.

The Lord Himself enunciated this principle of progressive revelation when He said, "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now" (John 16:12).

Paul similarly dealt with some of the believers in his day:

But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ. I fed you with milk, not solid food; for you were not ready for it; and even yet you are not ready (1 Car. 3:1, 2, R.S.V.).

About this we have much to say which is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of God's word. You need milk, not solid food; for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil (Heb. 5:11-14, R.S.V.).

Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrines of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God (Heb. 6:1, R.S.V.).

The Year 1861

In 1861 Ellen G. White published her first vision concerning systematic benevolence.

Some have not come up and united in the plan of systematic benevolence, excusing themselves be­cause they were not free from debt. They plead that they must first "owe no man anything." But the fact that they are in debt does not excuse them. I saw that they should render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. . . . Rob not God by withholding from Him your tithes and offerings. It is the first sacred duty to render to God a suitable proportion. Let no one throw in his claims and lead you to rob God. . . . I saw that in the arrangement of syste­matic benevolence, hearts will be tested and proved. It is a constant, living test.--Testimonies, vol. 1, pp. 220, 221. (Italics supplied.)

In this statement published in the very year D. M. Canright entered the ministry, the gen­eral principle of tithing was thus actually recog­nized as God's plan long before any minister, including Canright, thought about it. Tithing was not Canright's patent. However, its real significance was not at this time fully compre­hended by the leading brethren.

An early admonition by James White implies that the then prevailing concept of the tithe was that it should be paid by the rich brother on his increase.

Let a discourse on Systematic Benevolence be preached in every church. Patiently, kindly, faith­fully hold it before that rich brother till he sees that God calls on him for a tithe of all his increase. Soon he will see, and along will come his free-will offering.—The Review and Herald. Jan. 29, 1861.

1862—Tithing Urged

In The Review and Herald, vol. xix, January 7, 1862, appears an editorial entitled "Systema­tic Benevolence," which urged the principle that this fund should not be used to help the poor, who should be assisted with other means, but "that the object of systematic benevolence is the advancement of the cause of the third mes­sage."

J. Clarke in The Review and Herald of July 22, 1862, in an article, "Posting Up," wrote:

It was suggested by a brother at the conference at Lovette's Grove, that we post ourselves, or be­come informed as to "the plan" of systematic be­nevolence which God prospers, and avoid a plan which is sure to fail. .

The fact is, if we want the work to prosper in Ohio, we must bring all the tithes into the store­house. We must have our S.B. [systematic benevo­lence} treasuries full to overflowing, must be zeal­ous to find ways to do for the Lord.

Bro. White suggests a tenth of one's income as a general rule. . . . A tithe means a tenth—Web­ster. . .

But, says one, We have not adopted the plan till of late, at the organization. Well, if that is so, let us haste and redeem the time. Let us get into the habit of giving, setting apart the tithe (tenth), and let the person who gives think of what Malachi says, and pledge accordingly; looking up to our heavenly Father for prosperity.

This statement of J. Clarke in 1862 docu­ments the fact that tithing constituted the main revenue of systematic benevolence. Thus tith­ing was ,already advocated in the first year of the ministry of the young man, D. M. Canright. Although apparently the recognition of the fact that the poor as well as the rich ought to pay tithe from all income, whether they were property owners or not, came gradually, one is led to question how Canright could write in 1919 that after many years of financial failure he finally abolished the plan of systematic benev­olence and instituted in its place the tithing system that is still practiced today. Biblical tith­ing was not a change of system but rather the perfecting of the plan. Canright himself recog­nized this as long as he was still with the church and even for many years after he left.

1875

In 1875 Mrs. E. G. White thus identified tith­ing and systematic benevolence:

If systematic benevolence were universally adopted according to God's plan, and the tithing system carried out as faithfully by the wealthy as it is by the poorer classes, there would be no need of repeated and urgent calls for means at our large re­ligious gatherings. There has been a neglect in the churches of keeping up the plan of systematic be­nevolence, and the result has been an impoverished treasury and a backslidden church.—Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 409.

1876

In the March 2, 1876, issue of The Review and Herald, D. M. Canright himself identified faithfulness in tithe paying with systematic be­nevolence.

Not only does the Lord require one-tenth of all our increase, but this one-tenth must be the first-fruits of our increase; that is, the first of whatever the Lord gives us. . . . Let them honor God first, just as the Bible says. Let them commence the very first day of January, the first day of the week, and the first day of the month, and lay apart to the Lord the first tenth of all they receive. When you re­ceive a dollar, lay out the first ten cents for the Lord's treasury. If it is five dollars, take out half a dollar. If it is ten, lay out a dollar. Continue to do this strictly and conscientiously. This is God's plan; this is Systematic Benevolence; nothing less is. . . . Moreover, this is the only way to pay s.s. [systematic benevolence] easily. All our brethren who have tried this plan thoroughly testify that such is the case. When we first receive five dollars it is easy to take out half a dollar and lay it by itself; or if one dollar is received, to lay aside ten cents. But when our S.B. [systematic benevolence] has run behind, six, nine, or twelve months, it seems like a very hard thing to pay into the treasury at once the whole amount due.

Canright then did not divorce tithe paying from systematic benevolence as he later did in his book, but recognized it as a perfecting devel­opment of the plan of systematic benevolence.

1878

Our pioneers had no thought of substituting the tithing system for the "imperfect" system­atic benevolence, as Canright interpreted it. Note the following statement:

We solemnly promise, before God and to each other, to conscientiously pay to the Systematic Be­nevolence Treasurer a tithe of all our income, to be paid on the first Sunday of each one of the four quarters of the year.... By the defective plan, those who had little or no property, and at the same time had considerable income, in some cases robbed the Lord of nearly or quite all of the tithes of their actual income. By the Bible plan [systematic be­nevolence] one dollar of every ten earned is secured to the Lord's cause.—JAmEs WHITE in The Review and Herald, Aug. 29, 1878.

It is important to note that D. M. Canright with James White and three other brethren were the coauthors of the foregoing statement, which clearly indicates that tithe paying did not super­sede systematic benevolence, but brought it more into conformity with the Bible ideal.

At the 1878 General Conference session a special committee was appointed to prepare a publication on tithe paying, setting forth the instruction in Malachi as the perfect system of systematic benevolence. The minutes, as re­corded in The Review and Herald of October 17, 1878, read as follows:

"Resolved, that Elds. Andrews, White, Has­kell, Smith, and Canright be a committee to prepare a work on the Scriptural plan of System­atic Benevolence."

In Defense of Truth

With unrestrained passion Canright tries to tear down what we believe God has raised up—the prophetic church of Revelation 14:6, 7, with all its peculiar characteristics, including the Spirit of prophecy (Rev. 12:17; 19:10).

Is he endeavoring with one blow to prove from a casual and perhaps unpremediated state­ment made by William Covert, that the Spirit of prophecy in Mrs. White lacks genuineness?

Brother Covert in an article entitled "Preach­er's Time, Salary, Pay" made the following personal appraisal: "The money was called Systematic Benevolence, but the method did not prove satisfactory, and it was discontinued with us after two years' trial, and tithing according to the income of the individual was adopted in its stead."—Lake Union Herald, Feb. 24, 1915.

The history of the development of the plan of systematic benevolence, which includes tith­ing, eloquently speaks for itself. "By their fruits ye shall know them."