
Francis McLellan Wilcox
Photo courtesy of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Archives.
Wilcox, Francis McLellan (1865–1951)
By Douglas Morgan
Douglas Morgan is a graduate of Union College (B.A., theology, 1978) in Lincoln, Nebraska and the University of Chicago (Ph.D., history of Christianity, 1992). He has served on the faculties of Washington Adventist University in Takoma Park, Maryland and Southern Adventist University in Collegedale, Tennessee. His publications include Adventism and the American Republic (University of Tennessee Press, 2001) and Lewis C. Sheafe: Apostle to Black America (Review and Herald, 2010). He is the ESDA assistant editor for North America.
First Published: December 11, 2023
Francis M. Wilcox was a minister, author, editor, and administrator. He became one of the most influential Seventh-day Adventist leaders of the first half of the 20th century, primarily through his 33 years (1911-1944) as editor of the denomination’s flagship periodical, the Review and Herald (later renamed Adventist Review).
Early Years
Frank Wilcox, as he is named in the earliest available records, was born on February 28, 1865, in Rossie, New York. His parents, Allen David Wilcox (1819-1887) and Julia Ann Lawton Wilcox (1825-1900) owned a farm in Theresa, a rural township in Jefferson County, northern New York state, where they raised their six children—four sons and two daughters. Frank was their fourth-born.1
He attended the public school in Theresa and worked on the farm as a teenager. In 1877, 12-year-old Frank and his older brother, Milton, became Seventh-day Adventists through the evangelistic labors of Henry H. Wilcox (1819-1911), no relation, joining a small new congregation at Rossie organized by Dudley M. Canright. Milton C. Wilcox (1853-1935) would precede his brother in entering the ministry and in serving as longtime editor of a major Adventist periodical, in his case the California-based Signs of the Times (1891-1913).2
Frank Wilcox was among the charter students at South Lancaster Academy (later Atlantic Union College) in Massachusetts when it opened for its first full-academic year in September 1882. By 1883, his work in canvassing, evangelism, and city missions had already demonstrated evidence of a ministerial calling, and the New York Conference issued him a preaching license at age 18.3 Frank spent most of 1884 and 1885 in Battle Creek, Michigan, learning the printers’ trade at the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association. He was a typesetter for the Review and Herald, then edited by Uriah Smith, the only editor in the periodical’s history with greater longevity than Wilcox would later achieve. In 1886, Frank returned to the East for two more years of study at South Lancaster Academy, interspersed with evangelistic work as a licensed minister in the New York Conference during the late spring and summer months.4 In 1887 he married Lucretia (Louie) M. Higby (1858-1897), a canvasser and Bible worker in the New York Conference.5
New York Conference Ministry
Published reports of Wilcox’s evangelistic labors suggest that he was an effective speaker. Yet, the crowds were generally small and the converts few and hard won in the tent efforts that he, teamed with one or two colleagues, conducted in the towns and rural villages of upstate New York.6 He apparently stood out, though, for his organizational skills. When the position of New York Conference secretary suddenly became vacant in January 1888, Wilcox, though still only 22 and not yet ordained, was appointed to the position. He was elected conference secretary at each of the three subsequent annual sessions, 1888 through 1890.7 In 1889 and again in 1890, Wilcox was elected to another leadership position in the conference—president of the Health and Temperance Association. His wife, Louie, was elected to serve with him as secretary-treasurer for both terms.8
Wilcox was ordained to gospel ministry in a typical setting—the annual New York Conference camp meeting. Yet this particular camp meeting, held at Rome, New York, in June 1889 would be of exceptional historical significance due to the presence of Ellen G. White, Alonzo T. Jones, and Ellet J. Waggoner, who were crisscrossing the nation to uplift the message of “Christ our righteousness” stemming from the historic 1888 General Conference at Minneapolis. Multiple witnesses attest that F.M. Wilcox’s ordination service on Sabbath afternoon, June 18, was a remarkable experience. After a “powerful discourse” delivered by Ellen White and “the laying on of the hands of the eldership present,” A.T. Jones gave the ordination charge “almost entirely in the language of the Scriptures in several passages.” The moving ceremony left “but few dry eyes” in the congregation, according to Sands Harvey Lane, newly-elected as New York Conference president.9
Editor and Administrator
From the outset of his ministry, Wilcox demonstrated a penchant for writing and began publishing brief devotional and doctrinal articles in the Review and the Youth’s Instructor in 1884, while still in his teens.10 At the General Conference session held in March 1891, Wilcox was called to “go to California, and connect with the Sabbath-school work.”11 Accordingly he and Louie moved to Oakland, where he edited the Sabbath School Worker, published at Pacific Press, and served as recording secretary for the International Sabbath School Association. In 1893 Wilcox became president of the Sabbath School Association while also engaging in evangelistic work.12
The Wilcoxes became parents on April 16, 1893, with the birth of Allen Francis Gage Wilcox, “Allie” for short. Sadly, they lost him to death just seven weeks later on June 4.13 They had no other children.
Later that year, the couple moved back to Battle Creek where Elder Wilcox took up new responsibilities as secretary of the Foreign Mission Board and editor of the Home Missionary, the monthly periodical of the International Tract and Missionary Society.14 The magazine’s broad purpose was to advance all aspects of home and foreign missions, and included departments devoted to health and temperance, religious liberty, and canvassing.15 The dual role placed Wilcox at the center of the denomination’s administrative hub, and he seemed to thrive there.
However, Louie’s deteriorating health due to tuberculosis became his main concern in 1895. In December he took her to the Boulder Sanitarium in Colorado for treatment. Wilcox returned to Battle Creek in late January 1896, encouraged by the improvement in his wife’s condition but nonetheless convinced that she would never be well enough to return to the East. He submitted a letter of resignation to the Foreign Mission Board on March 17, 1896, not to take effect immediately but when a satisfactory replacement could be arranged. During the year that followed, he juggled his Battle Creek responsibilities with attending to his wife in Boulder, where he envisioned moving permanently to work in connection with the sanitarium and possibly earning a medical degree.16
Louie passed away in Boulder on February 4, 1897, at age 38.17 After laying her to rest in Constableville, New York, Wilcox headed for Lincoln, Nebraska, where he was assigned, along with L. T. Nicola, to assist G. C. Tenney with editing the General Conference Bulletin.18 By May, Wilcox was back in Boulder, this time his own health being the paramount concern.19 The Foreign Mission Board accepted his “unconditional resignation” on July 6, 1897, while expressing “high appreciation for his earnest and efficient labors.”20
Colorado Sanitarium Leadership
With his health improving, Wilcox took up new responsibilities as Colorado Sanitarium chaplain and pastor of the 150-member Boulder Church.21 On October 13, 1897, he married 18-year-old Maude M. Sawyer (1879-1962) of Niobrara, Nebraska, a graduate of the sanitarium’s first nursing class. Their daughter, and only child, Ruth Naomi, was born exactly a year later October 13, 1898.22
Wilcox became involved in a public controversy near the outset of his ministry in Boulder when Seventh-day Adventist students were expelled from public schools for refusing to participate in a mandatory new ritual called the “American Patriotic Salute.” A national wave of “coercive patriotism,” as termed by historian Eric Foner, stirred by increasing fervor for war to liberate Cuba from Spanish colonial rule, prompted school districts in various locales to institute such exercises.23 More elaborate than the official Pledge of Allegiance promulgated by the federal government in 1954, Boulder’s patriotic salute required students to declare, “We give our heads,” while touching their foreheads, then, moving their hands over their hearts, say, “and our hearts,” and then, stretch out their right arm high, tilt their heads back slightly and say “to God and our country!” Finally, after a slight pause, with arms back at their sides, pupils were to exclaim, “One country! one language! one flag!”24
Wilcox sent articles and letters to newspapers both to advocate for dissenting children and to correct misrepresentations of Adventist views. He assured Coloradans that Adventists were “law-abiding citizens” who held the principles of civil and religious liberty represented by the American flag in “the highest respect.” He pointed out, however, that true patriotism is a matter of the heart and thus that “enforcement of the flag salute begets a patriotism in form and name only, and not in fact.” Wilcox also argued that a pledge of one’s head and heart carried militaristic implications contrary to the convictions of Seventh-day Adventists, who were “non-combatant” based on their understanding of the law of God. Hence, they saw it as “contrary to God’s Word to permit their children to pledge themselves to warfare or to have inculcated in their young minds a warlike spirit.”25
The flag salute controversy soon subsided, but in it Wilcox foreshadowed the approach he would later take as a spokesperson for the denomination on controversial matters. He would repudiate extremes, avoid inflammatory rhetoric, and go as far as possible to avoid conflict, while explaining and defending the church’s core principles in a forthright, clear, and insistent manner.
Colorado Sanitarium (renamed Boulder-Colorado Sanitarium in 1905 and eventually Boulder Memorial Hospital in 1962) benefitted not only from Wilcox’s pastoral guidance but also his administrative acumen. He served as business manager from 1902 to 1909 and as president of the board of trustees during his final few months there (1908-1909). Amidst the institution’s erratic growth and heavy indebtedness, Wilcox proved an effective advocate for the institution and a steady influence, endeavoring to keep it tethered to the reform principles and missional purposes envisioned by Ellen White for Adventist health institutions.26
At the Helm of the Review and Herald
In January 1909 Francis and Maude Wilcox, along with 10-year-old Ruth, relocated to suburban Washington, D.C., where Elder Wilcox began a connection with the Review and Herald and its publisher that would continue for the remainder of his life. Starting with the February 4, 1909, issue, Wilcox became associate editor of the Review, serving, initially, with William W. Prescott as editor until Prescott was replaced later that year by William A. Spicer. In 1911 Wilcox became editor, a position he would hold for 33 years. Along with editorial work he also carried an important administrative role as president of the Review and Herald Publishing Association (RHPA) from 1909 to 1944. The publishing house, after its exodus from Battle Creek, Michigan, in 1903, relocated to Takoma Park, just inside the Washington, D.C. side of the Maryland-D.C. border. Wilcox also served on numerous institutional boards and committees during his Takoma Park years, including those governing Washington Missionary College (WMC) and Washington Sanitarium.27
In addition to all that she did in life partnership with her husband, Maude served as a proofreader at RHPA for several years.28 Daughter Ruth, a 1921 graduate of WMC, was vice president of her class and editor of the Sligonian (1920-1921), a monthly periodical published by the college’s Student Association. She taught at an Adventist school in Baltimore until her life was cut short at age 26 on January 31, 1925, a week after she contracted pneumonia.29
Wilcox’s dual role as Review editor and RHPA president for more than three decades afforded him unparalleled influence over what Seventh-day Adventists read and thus the information and ideas that shaped their outlook on the church and the wider world. The first (begun 1850) and foremost Seventh-day Adventist paper, the Review was formally identified on its masthead as the “General Church Paper of the Seventh-day Adventists” beginning with the January 6, 1910 issue, near the outset of the Wilcox era. No publication spoke for and to Seventh-day Adventists as authoritatively as the Review. Wilcox, as RHPA president, also had general oversight of the books as well as the array of other major church periodicals, including Liberty, Life and Health, and the Youth’s Instructor, that came forth from its presses.
Wilcox used his influence to preserve and defend the heritage of a faith formulated in the 19th century as the church navigated the rapidly-changing world of the 20th century. “To guard and to promote Adventist beliefs and standards was to him more than an editorial duty, it was a passion,” wrote Francis D. Nichol, for nearly two decades one of Wilcox’s associate editors, later a successor as editor.30
Fundamentalism and Adventist Fundamental Principles
Conflict between fundamentalists and modernists (or liberals) dominated the American religious and cultural context in which Wilcox endeavored to keep Adventist theology on the right track. “Fundamentalism” here refers specifically to the movement of conservative evangelicals that coalesced in the 1910s and gained full force in the 1920s to defend traditional beliefs such as the deity and resurrection of Christ and the historical veracity of the Bible in opposition to modernists who sought to adapt the faith to modern historical and scientific thinking. A series of pamphlets entitled The Fundamentals, published 1910-1915 with funding from oil barons Lyman and Milton Stewart, defended the traditional verities of the faith and in 1920 Baptist editor Curtis Lee Laws defined “fundamentalists” as those ready “to do battle royal for the Fundamentals.” In other words, being a fundamentalist in this context meant not only holding to fundamental beliefs but engaging in a militant campaign to rid the Protestant denominations of modernist deviations from “the faith once delivered to the saints.”31
Wilcox saw much that impressed him when he attended a landmark event in the rise of fundamentalism—the World Conference on Christian Fundamentals—held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in May 1919. The organizers envisioned that the “constructive teaching on the fundamental and vital doctrines” of the Bible at the conference would galvanize believers to go forth everywhere to battle the inroads of modernism, calling for “new allegiance” to the fundamentals of the faith. While quick to point out ways the fundamentalists differed from Adventism, Wilcox “appreciated none the less the high-mindedness and lofty interest which characterized their endeavors.”32
Adventist leaders saw a similar need to re-unify on a strengthened biblical foundation in order for the church to fulfill its mission in the new, post-World War I world, and toward that end had likewise scheduled a Bible Conference for July 1919. Though not faced with overt, large-scale liberalism within, Adventism was in a state of flux after disruptions caused by World War I and the death of the church’s prophet, Ellen White, in 1915, leaving controversies between “traditionalists” and “progressives” to simmer unresolved.33
In the meantime, the Philadelphia conference on Christian fundamentals apparently inspired Wilcox to take a bold initiative of his own to formulate and solidify the Adventist foundation of faith. For background, it should be noted that, at the adamant insistence of its pioneers, the Seventh-day Adventist Church had no creed or binding articles of faith. To meet inquiries and correct inaccurate characterizations by others, a pamphlet stating 25 generally held “Fundamental Principles” was published in 1872.34 However, the church published no formal summary of its teachings until 1931 when the Seventh-day Adventist Yearbook began including a listing of 22 “Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists.” Historian Michael Campbell has shown that the historic summary thus formalized in 1931 had its origins in 1919 when Wilcox crafted a statement of “Fundamental Principles for Which Seventh-day Adventists Stand” modeled on the World Conference on Christian Fundamentals (WCCF)—1919 Doctrinal Statement.”35 Soon thereafter, Wilcox published two further summations of Adventist belief in the Review—“A Sure Foundation” (August 21, 1919) and “The Fundamentals of Christian Faith” (April 1, 1921). These documents are provided in their entirety in this article’s Related Content.
Most of the language of the 1931 statement of “Fundamental Beliefs” clearly reflects the language of one or more of the three doctrinal summaries that Wilcox introduced in 1919 and 1920, although some language and re-configuration of points suggests the input of others as well. Published as a pamphlet and printed in the Church Manual as well as the Yearbook, “Fundamental Beliefs” may be the most significant achievement of Wilcox’s career. It was widely viewed as normative for nearly five decades until a new 27-point statement was approved at the 1980 General Conference.
Verbal Inspiration?
It is worth considering whether Wilcox, in seeking to conserve Adventist belief, in fact shifted it in a fundamentalist direction. The question turns in part on the doctrine of inspiration—what makes sacred writings inspired and authoritative? The first point in the 1919 WCCF Doctrinal Statement laid down a foundational tenet of the fundamentalist movement in declaring the Scriptures to be “verbally inspired of God, and inerrant in the original writings.”36 Adventists had never adhered to the verbal inspiration theory according to which the very words of the Bible were selected under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The 1883 General Conference had instead endorsed the position that it was the Bible writers and their thoughts that were inspired, but not the exact words. However, some prominent Adventists moved toward the verbal inspiration concept beginning in the 1890s and its influence became readily apparent during the 1920s.37
Some evidence suggests that Wilcox was among those who became favorable toward the verbal inspiration theory. In his book What the Bible Teaches (1926), for example, he contended, quite to the contrary of the 1883 GC statement, that it was not “the instrument [author] through whom the message came that was inspired; it was the message itself.” He observed, based on 1 Peter 1:10-11, that sometimes the biblical prophets did not even understand that which was revealed to them.38 It may not be a coincidence that in his evaluation of the 1919 WCCF Doctrinal Statement, Wilcox offered no critique of its verbal inspiration/inerrancy claim about Scripture as he did with regard to its version of premillennialism and the eternal conscious torment of the unsaved. That said, in his own summaries of the church’s teaching about the Scriptures, Wilcox used language more widely acceptable to Adventists and in continuity with their 19th-century forebearers, such as “a full revelation” (June 1919) or “all-sufficient revelation” of God’s will (1931) and as “infallible” (June 1919) or “unerring” (1931) for its intended purpose as a “rule of faith and practice.”
The Authority of the “Testimonies”
With regard to the verbal inspiration of Ellen White’s writings, Wilcox seemed to seesaw, but decisively rejected that explanation in favor of “thought-person inspiration” by 1934, when his book The Testimony of Jesus: A Review of the Work and Teachings of Mrs. Ellen Gould White (based on an 18-part series in the Review during 1933) was published.39 However, he was steadfast in promoting Ellen White’s writings as “inspired commentaries” on Scripture, and he asserted that failure to accept this was evidence of a lack of faith in her prophetic gift.40
In this latter respect, Wilcox differed, in emphasis at least, from other leaders such as Arthur G. Daniells and William W. Prescott who, at the Adventist Church’s 1919 Bible Conference, had spoken frankly about the dangers of regarding the “Testimonies” (short-hand for the writings of Ellen White) as an inspired, final authority on biblical interpretation, history, and theology.41 Wilcox’s concern was to establish that, through her writings, the late prophet carried an ongoing authority in the Seventh-day Adventist community that could not simply be dismissed on the basis of one’s own research, expertise, or views. He was willing to grant that “Sister White might be mistaken in details” but proposed that in “general policy and instruction she was an authority.” If her counsels lacked any binding authority, he suggested, the logical outcome would be “to sweep away the whole thing.”42
Furthermore, while he did not dispute the accuracy of the evidence related at the 1919 conference that pointed to the human fallibility and imperfections of Ellen White’s work, Wilcox warned against making such information generally known to the church as a whole. “I believe there are a great many questions that we should hold back, and not discuss,” he said. If “students or others” raised such issues, ministers and teachers will be “driven into a place where we will take a position that will lessen faith,” Wilcox believed. That, in turn, he suggested, posed a potentially fatal danger to the church: “I think the Testimonies of the Spirit of God are a great asset to this denomination, and I think if we destroy faith in them, we are going to destroy faith in the very foundation of our work.”43
The high regard for Ellen White’s prophetic gift that Wilcox had developed, not just through study, but through considerable personal communication and interaction with her, is one factor that helps explain the depth of his concern that her writings continue to have an authoritative status in the church. The role that he held from 1915 to 1922 as president of the Board of Trustees of the Ellen G. White Estate, as custodian of her writings after her death, added to his sense of responsibility for protecting her reputation and preserving her legacy.44 So, his desire to keep troublesome information from disturbing the faith of average church members was understandable, and it reflected the general sentiment of the 1919 conference participants. No substantive accounts were published in denominational papers and detailed minutes of the proceedings were “locked up . . . in a vault” at the direction of GC President Daniells.45
However, the paternalistic policy of sequestering information and avoiding difficult issues enabled a distorted perception of Ellen White’s counsels to prevail for more than a half century following 1919. It became normative to regard her writings as virtually inerrant, transmitting ideas and facts delivered “directly to her through divine revelation,” and constituting “a divine commentary on the Bible”—none of which she claimed, nor did many the church’s early pioneers closely associated with her. Some 60 years later, publication of portions of the 1919 Bible Conference minutes, in conjunction with other developments, brought these realities to light and called into question long-dominant assumptions, with consequences that Wilcox had wanted to prevent by keeping inconvenient truths hidden. An unprecedented polarization in Adventism over the role and significance of Ellen White’s prophetic ministry followed that might have been avoided or lessened had different choices been made in the aftermath of 1919.46
Evangelical Orthodoxy and Adventist Unity
The influence of the fundamentalist movement on Wilcox’s work was not limited to the question of inspiration. His promulgation of the 1931 statement of fundamental beliefs indeed helped foster a remarkable degree of unity during the middle decades of the 20th century. It also helped move Adventism closer to the conservative evangelical mainstream than it had been in the 19th century. By the 1960s, though, it would become evident that the surface calm disguised a lack of true consensus on theological shifts that Wilcox helped bring about.
The doctrine of the Trinity is the most striking example. The founders of Seventh-day Adventism sharply rejected what James White, in 1852, called “the old trinitarian absurdity that Jesus Christ is the very and Eternal God.”47 The 1872 statement of principles made no mention of the trinity or threeness in the Godhead.48 Around the turn of the century, Ellen White became the leading voice for a major shift in Adventist thought, writing with unprecedented clarity about the “three living persons of the heavenly trio” and Christ as “equal with God” and “the pre-existent, self-existent Son of God.” But this relatively recent emphasis had not brought about unanimity. Moreover, Ellen White, while affirming the doctrine, never used the word “Trinity” to describe God and had avoided terminology from the ancient creeds.49 Thus, Wilcox stepped further into disputed territory in his “Fundamental Principles” summary of June 1919 by using the term “Trinity” and echoing its Nicene formulation by referring to Christ as “being of the same nature and essence as the Eternal Father.” This language was then included in the denominationally accepted statement of 1931.50
Additionally, the Wilcox stream of doctrinal summaries completely abandoned the notion expressed in 1872 that the cross of Christ was “but the offering of the sacrifice,” not the atonement itself, and that, instead, making the atonement was “the very last portion of [Christ’s] work” as high priest in the heavenly sanctuary, begun in 1844.51 Wilcox, by contrast, excluded any reference to atonement being made in the heavenly sanctuary and described the work begun in 1844 as “the judgment phase of [Christ’s] ministry in the heavenly sanctuary foreshadowed in the earthly service of cleansing the sanctuary on the day of atonement.”52 Along with this exclusion, he added an affirmation expressing more clearly than in 1872 that God “furnishes a substitute, even Christ the Righteous One, to die in man's stead” and that the sinner therefore is “justified, not by obedience to the law, but by the grace that is in Christ Jesus.”53
Wilcox’s endeavor to conserve Adventist theology thus entailed some adaptations that were neither inevitable nor supported by all Adventists. In this regard, his affinity for fundamentalism was manifest, not as unbending traditionalism but, as Michael Campbell has put it, in an “ecumenical form of Adventism” that encouraged interdenominational cooperation, something that typically made Adventists wary.54 While always forthright about the ways Adventists differed from other conservative Protestants and why these differences were important, Wilcox was also emphatic that “Seventh-day Adventists, with their historical belief in the Divine Word, should count themselves the chief of Fundamentalists today” and rally to the defense both of the “authenticity of the Scriptures” and ”the great fundamentals of the plan of salvation.”55
According to T. Edgar Unruh, who helped initiate the historic consultations between leading representatives of Adventism and prominent evangelicals (also sometimes called “fundamentalists” in press reports) during the mid-1950s, the 1931 statement of fundamental beliefs was useful in establishing trust between the two sides. It gave support to the Adventists’ affirmation of belief in “the eternal and complete deity of Christ” and “in his atoning death on the cross, once for all and all-sufficient.” However, the Adventists then had difficulty explaining publications that the evangelicals discovered from Adventist publishers taking different positions on these and other issues.56
Since the 1950s the conflicts between Adventists over the human nature of Christ, justification by faith, sanctification and its eschatological significance, and even the Trinity, have become open and persistent. The large measure of unity around a set of beliefs oriented towards conservative evangelical orthodoxy that Wilcox sought to solidify in the middle decades of the 20th century has not been recovered.57
Unity on the Essentials
The term “fundamentalist” fits Wilcox mainly as it pertains to his desire to align Adventism with the broader fundamentalist movement in uncompromising defense of core historic claims of Christian faith from the corrosive influence of liberalism. Regarding doctrinal orthodoxy within Adventism, Wilcox was firmly conservative but not particularly hardline or militant, and thus not particularly “fundamentalist” in that sense of the word. He did believe that wholehearted unity was essential on the 20 or so fundamental beliefs in his various listings but also affirmed the importance of ongoing “critical examination of the reasons for our faith” in the light of the Bible. Such investigation could “lead to clearer light on the fundamentals, and even to a modification of view on some of the details of fundamental truth” although not “nullify or set aside the great fundamental principles upon which this movement is based.”58
He included the investigative judgment and the major prophetic time periods culminating in 1798 and 1844 as part of the “warp and woof” of Adventist faith and in the late 1930s warned against a “destructive” approach to study that “counted it an evidence of scholarship to call in question our accepted historical and prophetic interpretation.”59 However, dissent within the church that popped up here and there during the Wilcox era over what he called “the great fundamental principles” did not gain widespread support. A greater concern for him was what he called “pseudo-tests of orthodoxy.” Such were created when details of biblical interpretation, such as “the personnel of the 144,000, the identity of Melchizedek, the question of ‘the daily,’ or some particular date in prophecy” were disproportionately magnified in importance to the point of becoming a “shibboleth” or litmus test of orthodoxy. Against this sort of narrow dogmatism, Wilcox called for “grace to obey Christ’s command not to judge others, not to set up our own standards and conceptions of truth as a gauge of others beliefs and practice.”60
Pseudo-Tests of Orthodoxy
Amidst the accelerated cultural changes of the 1920s, Adventists seemed to set up “pseudo-tests of orthodoxy” around standards of adornment, recreation, and healthful living much more frequently than doctrine. Wilcox’s response, though, was similar in principle: a firm stand on essentials, avoidance of judgmentalism in application of those principles, and an emphasis on a loftier vision of Christ beyond the petty particulars.
The predominant concern, by far, was with rapid changes in women’s fashion, in particular the ways in which they blurred traditional distinctions between the genders.61 Men, however, were not exempt from the Review’s discussion of such issues. Wilcox, for example, called out Adventist pastors who could be seen in the pulpit “with half-shaven crown, with flashy necktie, with high-colored hose,” and suggested it was “about time that some of our ministry applied this principle of reform in worldly dress to themselves before preaching it to others.”62
In his calls for adherence to “the principles of simplicity of attire which are enunciated in the Bible and in the writings of the spirit of prophecy [Ellen White’s writings],” Wilcox emphasized that individual believers must use their own “enlightened judgment” and “quickened conscience” in applying the principles. At some level, though, applications of principle would have to be standard for all Adventists, and in 1926 Wilcox wrote that adopting “ultra-extreme costumes, such as breakdown all distinctions between the sexes,--styles of dress clearly condemned in the Scriptures” would require the church “to enforce appropriate Christian discipline.”63
At the same time, Wilcox avoided detailed pronouncements on particular styles that would call for such discipline. He repeatedly rebuked the judgmentalism of those “who characterize as worldly-minded, and even as impure-minded, sisters who simulate some of the styles of modern dress.” He regarded some “women whom we meet daily, who dress in bold, bizarre styles, some of them amounting to half nudity” as in fact “women of high morals and refined feeling.” His concern was that “these sisters, by thus following the extreme styles of the world,” whether they realize it or not “place themselves on the side of the worldly class” of church members. He urged such to consider the impact of their choices on others both within and outside and follow the Pauline admonition to make “the glory of God” supreme in all things.64
As for “bobbed hair,” perhaps the single most-debated fashion issue of the time, Wilcox pointed out that, though “generally disapproved by the leadership of the church” and the majority of members, it was not being made “a test of church membership or even a test of holding office in the church or Sabbath school.”65 The style was not “immodest,” he suggested, but “unwomanly” and along with certain styles of dress stood “at this time as the insignia of worldly attire.”66
Though Wilcox believed it was important to address such issues as adornment and “worldly amusements” he tried to avoid getting too bogged down in them. Rather than harsh judgments or calls for punitive action against church members, he repeatedly emphasized the importance of leaders—pastors, teachers, and conference workers—leading by example. He concluded one of his editorials on such issues with counsel that seems apropos a century later:
Let us in all our relation to questions of dress and of diet judge carefully our own course and exercise charity and kindness in our judgment of others. The youth of this denomination can never be driven to Christ by force, nor drawn to Him by unkind criticism. They can be won by the gospel of Christian love, fortified and emphasized by a godly example in the life of the teacher.67
Seventh-day Adventists in Time of War
At the same time that he sought to conserve and foster Adventist theology in the context of the fundamentalist-modernist conflict, Wilcox sought to preserve another aspect of Adventist faith and practice, one that came under test with the outbreak of World War I. During the Colorado flag ritual controversy of 1897-1898, he had explained that “Seventh-day Adventists, like the followers of Penn [the Society of Friends, or Quakers], are non-combatants” who “recognize the authority of a higher law as paramount to human enactment, and that law says, ‘Thou shalt not kill.’”68 In 1864, amidst the Civil War, and, just a year after organizing as a denomination, Adventists had gained federal government recognition as noncombatants.69 During the era of the Spanish-American and Filipino-American wars (1898-1902), Adventist periodicals were rife with pronouncements against war, militarism, imperialism, and any legitimation of these in the name of Christianity.70 However, World War I brought a much more telling test to the depth and pervasiveness of the church’s early stand for noncombatant principles because, for the first time since the Civil War, American Adventists faced military conscription on a large scale.
At a meeting of the North American Division Conference committee at Huntsville, Alabama, in April 1917, soon after the United States entered the war, Wilcox helped draft a statement of the Adventist position with respect to the impending military draft. The issue sparked what one participant recalled decades later as “a heated debate” between those favoring an accommodating stance toward the military while seeking non-combatant assignments for Adventists draftees, and those favoring “a more pacifistic stance.”71 Nonetheless, the statement finally agreed upon was a clear re-affirmation of the church’s original position. After declaring: “We have been noncombatants throughout our history,” the church leaders re-affirmed the 1865 General Conference statement of convictions that compelled Adventists “to decline all participation in acts of war and bloodshed.” While expressing peaceful support for civil government and loyalty to the United States Constitution, the 1917 statement petitioned that Adventists “be required to serve our country only in such capacity as will not violate our conscientious obedience to the law of God as contained in the decalogue, interpreted in the teachings of Christ, and exemplified in His life.”72
Wilcox and the other members of a five-person committee appointed to “handle the Non-Combatant Statement” decided to release it to Washington, D.C. newspapers after sending it to the proper authorities in the War Department. Though brief, articles in the Washington Post and Washington Evening-Star, by using eye-catching headlines and omitting important details, gave the impression that the statement was more confrontational towards the government than its crafters intended, and newspapers throughout the nation picked up the story.73
The distorted public perception caused in part by press reports was one factor that led Wilcox to support a revised statement in July 1918 that foregrounded a more explicitly positive attitude toward the government and the war effort: “While ever in our history we have been of noncombatant principles by religious conviction, we believe equally by the same religious conviction, that we should render to our government the lines of noncombatant service as defined by the President in his declaration of March 20, 1918.”74
While federal government mobilization of mass support for U.S. participation in the war was bringing coercive patriotism to an unprecedented level,75 advocates for legal recognition of the United States as a Christian nation, long antagonized by relentless Adventist opposition, accused Adventists of being unpatriotic. In this heated atmosphere, Wilcox and other church leaders were concerned to remove any stigma that might hinder Adventist draftees from receiving noncombatant assignments as stipulated by the draft law. Thus, Wilcox gave a fervent “Yes” to the question he used to entitle his July 18, 1918 Review editorial, “Are Seventh-day Adventists Loyal to Their Government?” He distanced Adventists from the “radical and unreasonable stand” of some who thereby “brought noncombatancy into disrepute” and “created doubt as to the loyalty of all noncombatants.” By contrast, Adventists, wrote Wilcox, were not only accepting noncombatant military service if drafted, but also purchasing liberty bonds, contributing to the Red Cross, supporting the government’s program of conservation and economy in use of resources, and, in sum, “seeking to assist the government in every way possible, aside from the bearing of arms.”76
Despite bending, sometimes in deeply controversial ways, to the pressures of war-time governments, Adventist noncombatancy officially survived World War I. Wilcox, despite his own support for the shift to a stronger pro-war (albeit noncombatant) stance, remained firmly dedicated to sustaining the early Adventist commitment to noncombatant principles, based on the teachings and example of Jesus as well as the Ten Commandments. Nor had he lost the critique of militarism that he expressed in the 1890s. These commitments involved him in a conflict over the noncombatant question in the American Adventist church during the years between World War I and World War II.
The stand against “bearing arms” remained uncontested, at least openly, but in efforts to better prepare Adventist youth for military conscription in the future, church leaders differed over the mind-set and orientation that should undergird this commitment. During these years, an effort was made to define the Adventist noncombatant position as sharply distinct from the Christian pacifism practiced by Quakers and Mennonites. According to Our Youth in Time of War, published in 1934, Adventists were not pacifists, antimilitarists, or conscientious objectors. Instead, as noncombatants, their stand was simply against “taking combatant part in the destruction of human life.”77 A few years later, the phrase “conscientious cooperators” was widely embraced as best expressing the distinctive Adventist form of noncombatancy.78
Peace, Disarmament, and Ecumenical Endeavor
Wilcox, though, had always understood Adventist noncombatant principles as essentially the same as the biblical pacifism held by the Quakers. This ethic of nonviolence opposed not just individual acts of killing but identified warfare itself as sinful and entailed a prophetic critique of militarism. Accordingly, in the years following World War I, Wilcox spoke out in favor of efforts toward international peace and disarmament. In contrast to many prominent fundamentalists, Wilcox’s view of end-time prophecy did not lead him to speak out against United States membership in the League of Nations. On the contrary, he saw it as a “feasible” plan for reducing international conflict and urged that “Seventh-day Adventists, with their noncombatant principles, of all peoples in the world, should stand in full sympathy with every consistent and laudable effort to preserve peace.”79 In 1922 he expressed similar sentiments regarding efforts for disarmament through international diplomacy and treaties, and celebrated ecumenical religious support for such measures.80
At the same time, Wilcox rejected utopian aspirations for a complete and lasting abolition of war. He also recognized the danger, in fact the likelihood, that Christian leaders seeking to bring about the reign of Christ through the coercive instruments of law and politics would overstep appropriate bounds and inject the “poison of so-called religious internationalism . . . into the scheme for maintaining the world’s peace.” Democracy would then be supplanted by a “religious autocracy worse than any civil autocracy the world ever saw.”81 Though this final crisis before the return of Christ would not, in Wilcox’s view, be far distant, he regarded work for peace between nations as cooperation with the four angels of Revelation 7 commissioned to hold in check the world’s seething and volatile animosities for a time of relative peace that would facilitate international proclamation of the gospel.82
With the likelihood of another major outbreak of warfare becoming increasingly apparent, Wilcox compiled and edited Seventh-day Adventists in Time of War, a 407-page volume published in 1936 to guide and inspire faithfulness to noncombatant principles on the part of young people. In addition to documents and articles establishing the church’s historic commitment to the noncombatant ethic, Wilcox gathered stories of faithfulness under fire during World War I from many nations, including the full range of governmental systems.83
Wilcox’s volume breathed a quite different spirit than that of the recently published Our Youth in Time of War. He reprinted the portion of that pamphlet giving practical guidance to Adventist draftees while pointedly excluding its discussion of underlying principles and including much that seemed to support the pacifism and antimilitarism opposed in that pamphlet. For example, Wilcox placed George W. Amadon’s brief Review article “Why Seventh-day Adventists Cannot Engage in War” (March 7, 1865), perhaps the most blunt and absolute early Adventist expression of pacifism, at the beginning of a section laying the biblical and theological foundations for the church’s position. He also included articles by R.C. Porter and I.H. Evans firmly grounding the noncombatant ethic in allegiance to Christ’s kingdom and characterizing militarism as an overreach of civil government’s divinely ordained role that Christians must question.
In a concluding chapter entitled “Church Pronouncements Against War,” Wilcox presented several pages of statements by Protestant denominations, editors, and prominent leaders denouncing warfare and affirming peace as central to the gospel. As with the fundamentalist defense of what he regarded as doctrinal essentials, Wilcox had no qualms about making common cause across denominational lines in speaking out against militarism. He opened the chapter by declaring, “The Seventh-day Adventist Church is not the only denomination which has opposed war and the bearing of arms.” He then pointed out that many denominational spokespersons and interdenominational agencies that had expressed strong sentiments for peace before the war had become “active in support of war propaganda,” only to revert back to “even stronger pronouncements against war” after the world war’s conclusion.84 While, as we have seen, Adventists were not immune to wartime pressures to support the government’s cause, Wilcox implied that they had been more consistent in holding to noncombatant principles. He concluded the volume with the prayer that in future conflicts they would remain true to the faith that had “made them noncombatants in theory throughout their history.”85
By the time the United States entered World War II, Wilcox was in his upper 70s and nearing retirement. The “conscientious cooperator” model prevailed in the American church, but Wilcox and others, largely behind the scenes, expressed concerns that Adventists had gone too far in embracing the U.S. military and that some leaders responsible for providing information and counsel to young men about the draft were sending mixed messages, even implying that bearing arms for a just cause was an acceptable option.86
Legacy
The December 28, 1944 issue of the Review and Herald was the last in which Francis McLellan Wilcox appeared as editor. At age 79 he retired, along with his wife, Maude, to Glendale, California. He remained on the Review masthead as an associate editor, and a prolific one at that, writing weekly editorials that he called “Heart-to-Heart Talks” and articles in other Adventist publications. One of his “Heart-to-Heart Talks” appeared on the day of his death on August 30, 1851, at age 86 in Glendale, with two more still to be published. The editor was laid to rest at Forest Lawn Memorial Park in Glendale, and Maude Sawyer Wilcox interred beside him following her death on May 21, 1962.87
Francis M. Wilcox’s 33 years is the longest tenure of consecutive years of service as editor in the periodical’s history, although Uriah Smith served for the largest total number of years. Wilcox skillfully used this platform of unparalleled influence in Seventh-day Adventism, writing with clarity and conviction, but also with nuance and moderation. Not only a man of letters, his 35 consecutive years of service as president of the Review and Herald Publishing is the most impressive albeit not the only testament to his prudence and effectiveness in administrative leadership. Altogether, Wilcox labored for close to 60 years in the Adventist cause.
In his efforts to conserve the “fundamental principles” of Adventist belief and practice throughout the first half of the 20th century, he in fact made adaptations to fundamentalist theology and the expanding scope of federal government authority. This article has highlighted some examples in support of this claim, but in so doing leaves important facets unexplored. The research necessary for a comprehensive and satisfactory analysis of Wilcox’s work and its impact remains to be done.
If Wilcox were afforded the vantage point of the 21st century, he might be disappointed that some of the positions he advocated no longer have the dominant influence in the denomination that they once had. At the same time, he likely would not have imagined or even desired the perspectives he held to go unchallenged over a period of decades. He did not want a “conservatism that leans backward” and would “restrict our vision and narrow our conception.”88 In pursuing his staunchly conservative course, he avoided extremes and harsh denunciations, and exhibited a measure of flexibility in adapting to new realities. In fact, F. D. Nichol credited Wilcox with a “sweet reasonableness” and a “large elasticity of soul” that “enabled him to revise, and even to reverse, his view when the weight of evidence went against it.”89
Wilcox’s final editorial, published posthumously in the September 13, 1951, issue of the Review, was entitled, “Will We Triumph With the Message?” He directed it particularly to long-time Adventists, including himself in the target audience, and spoke to an issue that must have at times perplexed many who had served for so many years: “Have we grown weary with long waiting? . . . Have we sacrificed in time and money to give the message to others? Have we sent our loved ones overseas as heralds of the cross? And now has all this been in vain?”
Then, after quoting from Scripture powerful assurances to the contrary, he concluded with this exhortation: “The nearness of Christ’s coming needs to be sounded from all our church pulpits. Nothing will so brighten the hopes and strengthen the faith as the preaching of this message.”90
Sources
Campbell, Michael W. 1919: The Untold Story of Adventism’s Struggle With Fundamentalism. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2019.
Campbell, Michael W. 1922: The Rise of Adventist Fundamentalism. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2022.
Cottrell, R. F. “New York Camp-meeting.” Signs of the Times, July 8, 1889.
Cottrell, R[oy] F. “Life Sketch of Francis McLellan Wilcox.” ARH, September 27, 1951.
Ellen G. White Estate (EGWE). White Estate Incoming Correspondence, ellenwhite.org.
Foreign Mission Board Minutes. General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Online Archives (GCA), https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Minutes/Forms/AllFolders.aspx.
General Conference Committee Minutes. General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Online Archives (GCA), https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Minutes/Forms/AllFolders.aspx.
Knight, George R. The Afterlife of Ellen White: Delightful Fictions, Troubling Facts, Enlightening Research. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2019.
Knight, George R. End-Time Events and the Last Generation: The Explosive 1950s. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2018.
Knight, George R. A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2000.
Lane, S. H. “The New York Conference Camp-meeting.” Signs of the Times, July 15, 1889.
“Maude S. Wilcox obituary.” ARH, July 5, 1962.
Nichol, F. D. “Francis McLellan Wilcox: A Personal Tribute by the Editor.” ARH, January 13, 1951.
North American Division Committee Minutes. General Conference Online Archives, https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Minutes/Forms/AllFolders.aspx.
Olsen, O. A. “More About the ‘Bulletin.’” ARH, January 12, 1897.
Place, A. E. “A Word of Sympathy.” New York Indicator, February 17, 1897.
“Religion in the Public Schools in Colorado.” American Sentinel, November 25, 1897.
“Reverend Francis Mclellan Wilcox.” FamilySearch. Accessed August 2, 2023, https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/K2TK-NWD.
Salisbury, “Ruth Naomi Wilcox obituary,” ARH, March 5, 1925.
T[enney], G. C. “Louie M. Wilcox obituary.” ARH, March 16, 1897.
Timm, Alberto R. “A History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on Biblical and Prophetic Inspiration (1844-2000).” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 10, no. 1-2 (1999): 486-542.
Unruh, T. E. “The Seventh-day Adventist Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956.” Adventist Heritage 4, no.2 (Winter 1977): 35-46.
Wilcox, F. M. F. M. Wilcox to J. L. McElhany. May 28, 1943. Presidential Correspondence, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Archives, Silver Spring, MD (GCA).
W[ilcox], F. M. “Are Seventh-day Adventists Loyal to Their Government?” ARH, July 18, 1918.
Wilcox, F. M. “Be Not Conformed to This World: A Discussion of Underlying Principles.” ARH, July 16, 1925.
Wilcox, F. M. “The Colorado Sanitarium.” ARH, September 7, 1897.
W[ilcox], F. M. “A Conference on Christian Fundamentals.” ARH, June 19, 1919.
W[ilcox], F. M. “Forsaking the Foundations of Faith.” ARH, November 28, 1929.
W[ilcox], F. M. “The Peace of the World: Belligerent Nations Arrange Armistices.” ARH, November 28, 1918.
W[ilcox], F. M. “The Peace of the World—No. 4.” ARH, December 19, 1918.
Wilcox, F. M. “Pseudo-Tests of Orthodoxy.” ARH, April 5, 1923.
Wilcox, F. M. “Stray Offshoots.” ARH, August 22, 1940.
W[ilcox], F. M. “A Sure Foundation.” ARH, August 21, 1919.
Wilcox, F. M. “A Sure Foundation.” ARH, January 19, 1939.
Wilcox, F. M. “Two Classes in the Church: To Which Do You Belong?” ARH, September 2, 1926.
W[ilcox], F. M. “The Washington Conference for the Limitation of Armaments.” ARH, April 13, 1922.
W[ilcox], F. M. “Will We Triumph With the Message?” ARH, September 13, 1951.
Wilcox, F. M and L. M. “Allen Francis Gage Wilcox obituary.” ARH, August 1, 1893.
Wilcox, Francis M. What the Bible Teaches: A Synopsis of Leading Bible Doctrines Setting Forth the Everlasting Gospel as Revealed in Jesus Christ Our Divine Lord and Only Saviour. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1926.
Wilcox, Francis M. and Mrs. George Pease. “Seventh-day Adventists and the Public Schools.” American Sentinel, January 6, 1898.
Wilcox, Francis McLellan. Biographical Information Blank, n.d. Secretariat Files, RG 21, Box 114953. General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Archives, Silver Spring, MD (GCA).
Wilcox, Francis McLellan, ed. Seventh-day Adventists in Time of War. Review and Herald, 1936. Accessed August 17, 2023, https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Books/ITOW1936.pdf.
Notes
-
“Reverend Francis Mclellan Wilcox,” FamilySearch, accessed August 2, 2023, https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/K2TK-NWD.↩
-
Francis McLellan Wilcox, Biographical Information Blank, n.d., Secretariat Files, RG 21, Box 114953, GCA; [F.M. Wilcox], “Stray Offshoots,” ARH, August 22, 1940, 12; Milton Hook, “Wilcox, Milton Charles (1853–1935),” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists, October 18, 2020, accessed August 1, 2023, https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=8AEP.↩
-
R[oy] F. Cottrell, “Life Sketch of Francis McLellan Wilcox,” ARH, September 27, 1951, 15; Wilcox Biographical Information Blank. In the biographical information provided to the GC Secretariat, Wilcox indicates that he first received a conference preaching license in 1882, however he is not included as such in denominational records until the New York Conference listings in the Seventh-day Adventist Yearbook for 1884 (compiled in late 1883), General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Online Archives, https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Yearbooks/Forms/AllItems.aspx.↩
-
Wilcox Biographical Information Blank; Stella Parker Peterson, “Uriah Smith,” ARH, December 28, 1944, 7.↩
-
Cottrell, “Life Sketch of Francis McLellan Wilcox”; A. E. Place, “A Word of Sympathy,” New York Indicator, February 17, 1897, 2.↩
-
See for example, M.C. Wilcox, F.M. Wilcox, and Olim Ross, “New York--Brownsville,” ARH, August 30, 1887, 556; A.E. Place, F.M. Wilcox, and C.G. Satterlee, “New York—Memphis and Phoenix,” ARH, July 31, 1888, 491; F.M. Wilcox and H.L. Bristol, “New York—Orchard Park, Erie Co.,” ARH, September 2, 1890, 537; F.M. Wilcox and H.L. Bristol, “New York—West Falls,” ARH, September 30, 1890, 667.↩
-
“Notice to New York Church Clerks and Treasurers,” ARH, January 17, 1888, 45; “The New York Conference Proceedings,” ARH, October 23, 1888, 669; “New York Conference Proceedings,” ARH, July 16, 1889, 459; “New York Conference Proceedings,” ARH, August 5, 1890, 491.↩
-
“New York H. and T. Society Proceedings,” ARH, July 30, 1889, 491; “New York H. and T. Society Proceedings,” ARH, July 29, 1890, 476.↩
-
S.H. Lane, “The New York Camp-meeting,” Signs of the Times, July 15, 1889, 427; R.F. Cottrell, “New York Camp-meeting,” Signs of the Times, July 8, 1889, 410; M.H. Brown, “The New York Camp-meeting,” ARH, July 16, 1889, 459.↩
-
Frank M. Wilcox, “New Year’s Thoughts,” Youth’s Instructor, January 16, 1884, 10; Frank M. Wilcox, “The Promises of God,” ARH, October 14, 1884, 644. Among other early articles: Frank M. Wilcox, “Christians,” ARH, April 14, 1885, 228; F.M. Wilcox, “The Spirit of Christ,” ARH, April 15, 1890, 226; F.M. Wilcox, “The Genuine and the Counterfeit,” ARH, January 6, 1891, 4.↩
-
“The Conference,” ARH, March 243, 1891, 192.↩
-
Wilcox Biographical Information Blank.↩
-
“Allie Wilcox,” Find A Grave, Memorial ID 48336969, February 19, 2010, accessed August 3, 2023, https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/48336869/allie-wilcox#source; F.M. and L.M. Wilcox, “Allen Francis Gage Wilcox obituary,” ARH, August 1, 1893, 495.↩
-
“Field Notes,” Signs of the Times, November 6, 1893, 12; Wilcox Biographical Information Blank.↩
-
Milton Hook, “Missionary Magazine (1898–1902),” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists, September 27, 2020, accessed August 1, 2023, https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=E9SZ.↩
-
“Elder F.M. Wilcox is at present in Boulder . . . ,” ARH, January 7, 1896, 16; General Conference Committee, March 19, 1896, 151-152, and March 15, 1897, 226-227, GCA.↩
-
G.C. T[enney], “Louie M. Wilcox obituary,” ARH, March 16, 1897, 174.↩
-
O.A. Olsen, “More About the ‘Bulletin,’” ARH, January 12, 1897, 32.↩
-
“Editorial Notes,” ARH, June 1, 1897, 352.↩
-
Foreign Mission Board Minutes, July 6, 1897, 27-28, GCA.↩
-
F.M. Wilcox, “The Colorado Sanitarium,” ARH, September 7, 1897, 571-572; Cottrell, “Life Sketch of Francis McLellan Wilcox.”↩
-
“Maude S. Wilcox obituary,” ARH, July 5, 1962, 25; “Colorado Statewide Marriage Index,1853-2006,” accessed August 4, 2023, https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:KNQT-RQQ; Wilcox, “The Colorado Sanitarium”; E.G. Salisbury, “Ruth Naomi Wilcox obituary,” ARH, March 5, 1925, 22.↩
-
Eric Foner, The Story of American Freedom (New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co., 1998), 134.↩
-
“Religion in the Public Schools in Colorado,” American Sentinel, November 25, 1897, 723–725.↩
-
F.M. Wilcox, “Objections to the Flag Salute,” American Sentinel, April 14, 1898, 230.↩
-
Wilcox Biographical Information Blank; Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, 2nd rev. edition (1996), s.v. “Boulder Memorial Hospital.” Letters dated as follows are among the numerous that Wilcox addressed to Ellen White seeking her counsel and reporting on endeavors to implement it at the sanitarium: July 27, 1905; October 28, 1906; April 17, 1907; and July 27, 1908; accessible in “Correspondence” at Ellen G. White Estate, https://ellenwhite.org/correspondence. See also Ellen G. White, Record of Progress and Appeal in Behalf of the Boulder-Colorado Sanitarium (1905), Ellen G. White Estate, https://m.egwwritings.org/en/book/374/info.↩
-
Wilcox Biographical Information Blank; Wilcox Biographical Information Blank.↩
-
“Maude S. Wilcox obituary.”↩
-
Sligonian Annual, 1921, 26; Salisbury, “Ruth Naomi Wilcox obituary.”↩
-
F.D. Nichol, “Francis McLellan Wilcox: A Personal Tribute by the Editor,” ARH, January 13, 1951, 24.↩
-
George M. [Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006), 5, 119-120, 159.↩
-
F. M. W[ilcox], “A Conference on Christian Fundamentals,” ARH, June 19, 1919, 5.↩
-
Michael W. Campbell, “Bible Conference of 1919,” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists, April 21, 2023, accessed August 1, 2023, https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=88Z2.↩
-
Richard W. Schwarz and Floyd Greenleaf, Light Bearers: A History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church (Silver Spring, MD: General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, Department of Education, 2000), 160-161.↩
-
Michael W. Campbell, 1922: The Rise of Adventist Fundamentalism (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2022), 47-55.↩
-
Ibid., 5.↩
-
George R. Knight, A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2000), 134-135.↩
-
Francis M. Wilcox, What the Bible Teaches: A Synopsis of Leading Bible Doctrines Setting Forth the Everlasting Gospel as Revealed in Jesus Christ Our Divine Lord and Only Saviour (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1926), 8, cited in Alberto R. Timm, “A History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on Biblical and Prophetic Inspiration (1844-2000),” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 10, no. 1-2 (1999): 504.↩
-
George R. Knight, The Afterlife of Ellen White: Delightful Fictions, Troubling Facts, Enlightening Research (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2019), 33; Timm, “A History of Seventh-day Adventist Views on Biblical and Prophetic Inspiration (1844-2000),” 506.↩
-
Knight, The Afterlife of Ellen White, 34.↩
-
Campbell, “Bible Conference of 1919,” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists, https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=88Z2.↩
-
“The 1919 Bible Conference Minutes” in Knight, The Afterlife of Ellen White, 167-168.↩
-
Ibid., 154.↩
-
James R. Nix, “Ellen G. White Estate, Incorporated,” in The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia, ed. Denis Fortin and Jerry Moon (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2013), 799-803.↩
-
Knight, The Afterlife of Ellen White, 31.↩
-
Knight, A Search for Identity, 140-141, 184-186; Knight, The Afterlife of Ellen White, 37-41.↩
-
Quoted in Knight, A Search for Identity, 111.↩
-
Fundamental Principles Taught and Practiced by Seventh-day Adventists (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1872), reprinted in Gary Land, ed. Adventism in America (Grand Rapids, MI: Willam B. Eerdmans, 1986), 231-237.↩
-
Knight, A Search for Identity, 115-117.↩
-
“Fundamental Principles” (June 1919), No. 2; “Fundamental Beliefs” (1931), No. 2.↩
-
“Fundamental Principles” (1872), No. 2.↩
-
“Fundamental Beliefs” (1931), No. 14; compare with “A Sure Foundation” (August 1919), No. 4.↩
-
“Fundamental Beliefs” (1931), No. 8; compare with “Fundamental Principles” (June 1919), No. 13.↩
-
Michael W. Campbell, 1919: The Untold Story of Adventism’s Struggle With Fundamentalism (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2019), 28.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “Forsaking the Foundations of Faith,” ARH, November 28, 1929, 14.↩
-
T.E. Unruh, “The Seventh-day Adventist Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956,” Adventist Heritage 4, no.2 (Winter 1977): 37-38; Milton Hook, “Unruh, Tobias Edgar (1894–1982),” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists, October 14, 2020, accessed August 1, 2023, https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=CABF.↩
-
George R. Knight, End-Time Events and the Last Generation: The Explosive 1950s (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press, 2018), 77-118.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “A Sure Foundation,” ARH, August 21, 1919, 8.↩
-
F.M. Wilcox, “A Sure Foundation,” ARH, January 19, 1939, 6.↩
-
F.M. Wilcox, “Pseudo-Tests of Orthodoxy,” ARH, April 5, 1923, 3-5.↩
-
See the discussion in Campbell, 1922, 37ff.↩
-
F.M. Wilcox, “Two Classes in the Church: To Which Do You Belong?” ARH, September 2, 1926, 5.↩
-
Wilcox, “Two Classes in the Church,” 3-4. Wilcox cited Deuteronomy 22:5 as the scriptural basis for his comment.↩
-
Ibid.↩
-
F.M. Wilcox, “Be Not Conformed to This World: A Discussion of Underlying Principles,” ARH, July 16, 1925, 3.↩
-
Wilcox, “Two Classes in the Church,” 4.↩
-
Wilcox, “Be Not Conformed to This World,” 6.↩
-
Wilcox, “Objections to the Flag Salute.”↩
-
Francis McLellan Wilcox, ed. Seventh-day Adventists in Time of War (Review and Herald, 1936), 62-65.↩
-
Jeffrey Rosario, “Spanish-American and Philippine-American Wars (1898–1902),” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists, January 29, 2020, accessed August 15, 2023, https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=EA7G.↩
-
North American Division Conference Committee minutes, April 13-18, 1917, 497-498, 504, 507-508, 515, GCA, http://documents.adventistarchives.org/Minutes/NAD/NAD1917-04.pdf; Roger G. Davis, Conscientious Cooperators: The Seventh-day Adventists and Military Service, 1860-1945 (Ph.D. dissertation, George Washington University, Washington, D.C., 1970), 113-115.↩
-
NAD Conference Committee minutes, April 18, 1917, 516-517; I.H. Evans, “Exemptions in the Selective Draft Law,” ARH, June 14, 1917, 3, 5.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “A Word of Explanation,” ARH, May 31, 1917, 24; “Adventists Against War, Church Officials Notify Department of Conscientious Scruples,” Washington Evening Star, April 27, 1917, ?; “Adventists Will Not Fight, Notify War Department Their Religion Forbids Army Service,” Washington Post, April 28, 1917, ?. On the concerns expressed within the church, J.L. Shaw to A.G. Daniells, May 29, 1917, RG 21, Box 10, GCA.↩
-
W.A. Spicer, “Resolutions of Loyalty and Service,” ARH, August 1, 1918, 6.↩
-
Foner, The Story of American Freedom, 169-170.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “Are Seventh-day Adventists Loyal to Their Government?,” ARH, July 18, 1918, 3-5.↩
-
J.P. Neff, Our Youth in Time of War, M.V. Pamphlet 8 (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1934), 5-7.↩
-
Sabrina Riley, “Haynes, Carlyle Boynton (1882–1958),” Encyclopedia of Seventh-day Adventists, June 13, 2023, accessed August 21, 2023, https://encyclopedia.adventist.org/article?id=C9GC.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “The Peace of the World: Belligerent Nations Arrange Armistices,” ARH, November 28, 1918, 2. On fundamentalist opponents to U.S. membership in the League of Nations, see Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture, 154-156, 166.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “The Washington Conference for the Limitation of Armaments,” ARH, April 13, 1922, 4-5.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “The Peace of the World—No. 4,” ARH, December 19, 1918, 5.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “The Peace of the World: Belligerent Nations Arrange Armistices,” 2.↩
-
Francis McLellan Wilcox, ed. Seventh-day Adventists in Time of War (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1936).↩
-
Wilcox, Seventh-day Adventists in Time of War, 399-400.↩
-
Ibid., 407.↩
-
F.M. Wilcox to J.L. McElhany, May 28, 1943, Presidential Correspondence, GCA.↩
-
“Maude M. Sawyer Wilcox,” Find a Grave, Memorial ID 85547846, February 12, 2012, accessed August 21, 2023, https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/85547846/maude-m-wilcox#source; “Maude S. Wilcox obituary,” ARH, July 5, 1962, 25.↩
-
W[ilcox], “Psuedo-Tests of Ortthodoxy,” 5.↩
-
Nichol, “Francis McLellan Wilcox,” 399-400.↩
-
F.M. W[ilcox], “Will We Triumph With the Message?,” ARH, September 13, 1951, 12.↩