SDARM x 2 & The International Missionary Society (IMS)

A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand: The the Nicolici Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement (SDARM) versus the International Missionary Society (IMS)

SUMMARY The Reformists of the SDARM generally BELIEVE and TEACH: - They are the ‘true’ Adventists, and the mainstream SDA Church is apostate. The Reformists are WRONG because: - There are actually two – not one – SDARM Churches, resulting from a schism in the 1950’s: the Nicolici SDARM (Nicolici Reformists) and the International Missionary Society (IMS) of the SDARM. - There were virtually no significant differences between the two branches of the SDRAM – the main cause of division was simply one of power. In Luk 9:46-48 Jesus also condemned the disciples for trying to argue who was the greatest. - Jesus tells us in Matt 7:20 to watch religious leaders by their fruits. The SDARM ‘fruits’ are one of worldly control and power – not godly humility and service.

Introduction: SDARM x 2
It may surprise many readers that there are in fact two Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement churches.  Jesus’ words in Matt 12:25:

‘Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand’

SDARM Churches: What are there two of them?

Yes, there are in two of them – the ‘American’ Nicolici SDARM and the ‘German’ International Missionary Society of the Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement (‘IMS’). As helpfully explained by Vance Ferrel in The Truth About the Adventist Reform Church:

‘After this 1951 [SDARM] General Conference Session, the main body of the Reform Church split in two... One of the branches is the Nicolici Branch. It calls itself the Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement... The original of the two main branches, commonly referred to as the ‘International Missionary Society’ (IMS) branch, is headquartered in Speele, Germany (pronounced “Speel-eh”). Its U.S. branch was located in Sacramento for a time; but, while leaving behind a large congregation in Sacramento in the mid-1950s, it was moved to Colorado, where it is still located. Also calling itself the Seventh-dayAdventist Reform Movement, it took the official name, International Missionary Society of Seventh-day Adventists, Reformation Movement. Two of its U.S. leaders were Oscar Kramer, and Arthur Doerschlor.'

The story of the SDARM’s origins does not stop in 1920, because there was a major schism within the SDARM itself.   In short:

• In 1951 there was a major split during the session held in Zeist, Utrecht (province) Netherlands, where nearly half the delegates of the SDARM walked out following the then Secretary of the movement.
• In 1952, the faction subject to the protest reorganized itself, under an old but unofficial name, ‘International Missionary Society of the Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement’ (‘IMS’), headquartered in Baden Germany.
• In 1955, the faction who had walked out formally registered the name ‘Seventh-day Adventist Reform Movement General Conference’ in the USA. 
•  Between 1952 and 1967, there were various legal actions between the two groups. 
• In 1967 and 1993, attempts were made to further reconcile the two factions, but were again ultimately unsuccessful.

As noted by Helmut Kramer in SDA Reform Movement at page 18, the underlying cause was ultimately one of power struggle over the leadership of the American Union of the SDARM:

‘In 1948 the General Conference leadership in Germany decided to act decisively to bring the American Union under its domination and to transfer the movement's headquarters to the United States. A worker, previously known for his high-handed actions in Australia, was assigned to the United States to reorganize the work in the American Union. When the American leaders refused to hand over the leadership as demanded, this 4tlcial, with one stroke of the pen, dissolved the entire American Union and disfellowshipped its leaders. This arbitrary action agitated a conflict which caused the majority of the members in America to withdraw from the movement entirely. Some returned to the Seventh-day Adventist church, while others gave up their faith completely.

In 1951, at another Reform General Conference session, the same official, who had on his own supposed authority dissolved the American Union, staged a rebellion himself in an attempt to become president of the (general Conference. When he was not able to get his wishes, he withdrew with about 45 percent of the delegates and organized a new movement. He had already secured, in a devious manner, a hold on much of the property. These bold actions resulted in a court case in which the two groups fought each other for the right to use the name and the properties. The case was settled out of court with the understanding that there was to he no further litigation regarding the name. For this reason there are two "Reform Movements" today, each claiming to be the original one.’

The important lesson to take from this is again, is one of judging by fruits.  Despite the clear exhortations of Paul in 1 Cor 6:1-8, brother sued brother before the state courts of Caesar, rather than judging the matter themselves in Christian humility.  It makes one wonder how the SDARM Church(es) say with a straight face that the mainstream SDA Church is supposedly apostate and in Babylon.

Fighting twins: What are the doctrinal differences between the two branches of the SDRM?

Not much.  There appears to be some slight differences about the nature of Christ (which is still an open discussion within the mainstream SDA Church with no official position) and certain ideas about organisation. As noted by Helmut Kramer in SDA Reform Movement at page 22:

‘In this booklet I speak mostly about the "International Missionary Society" faction of the movement, because I was a member. But what is said here applies to both groups since they have common origins and hold to the same basic teachings. If anything, the other faction of the movement ('51) is even more radical and its leaders even more deceitful than the group of which I was a member.

Reformers still spend much of their time either criticizing the Adventist Church to justify themselves as a separate organization or ridiculing the other faction of the Reform Movement and its people. Such criticism has, sad to say, become their religion.

Satan is "the accuser of the brethren," and it is his spirit that inspires men to watch for the errors and defects of the Lord's people, and to hold them up to notice, while their good deeds are passed by without a mention.’ 

Who is the greatest: If there are no major doctrinal differences, what is stopping the two branches of the SDARM from re-joining?

Good question.  It would appear the major problem is essentially one of money, status and power. As noted by Helmut Kramer in SDA Reform Movement at page 18:

‘There have been several futile attempts to reunite these two factions of the Reform Movement. The most notable attempt took place in 1967 at a General Conference session of the '51 Reform Movement in Brazil. An appointed "peace committee," after examining all the documents and interviewing the leaders of their faction who were involved in the split of 1951, came to the conclusion that "there is no difference between us in principle[s of faith]."7 Despite such a conclusion, reunion did not take place. Some leaders feared that they would lose their positions of power; t hey were also unwilling to admit they had made any mistakes. It is evident, however, that both movements tenaciously hold the same false teachings reviewed in this book.’

The behaviour of the SDARM leaders, of both groups, is somewhat reminiscent of the behaviour of the disciples in Luke 9:46-48, arguing over who would be the greatest:

‘An argument started among the disciples as to which of them would be the greatest.  Jesus, knowing their thoughts, took a little child and had him stand beside him. Then he said to them, “Whoever welcomes this little child in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. For it is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest.”’

Conclusion: By their fruits you shall know them

The best point to take from the internal power struggles of the two SDARM Churches is Jesus simple warning in Matt 7:20:

‘Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.’

No amount of clever proof-texting or theological gymnastics is sufficient for SDARM to explain away this simple biblical test.