First consider the idea set forth in Movement of Destiny that the post- 1888 leadership headed by President O. A. Olsen did truly accept the message. This point is vital because we are told that “we must. . . look chiefly to him for determinative evidence” pages 358, 359. In other words, if the post-1888 General Conference President was clearly on the right side, it would be very likely that his administration was also on the right side. This is reasonable and fair. We agree that the General Conference President’s record provides such “determinative evidence.” Quoting in context as full and complete as possible, note what Movement of Destiny says:
The nineties were marked by a succession of powerful revivals and helpful institutes—and confessions and a surrender to truth on the part of a growing majority of the Minneapolis disputants...
… These were tremendous gains.—Page 264.
The leading post-1888 mold on the Movement was, of course, largely given by the incoming General Conference president. We must consequently look chiefly to him for determinative evidence. Now, the record of Olsen’s spiritual leadership is clear and loyal, and his definite support of, and undeviating leadership in, the broad field of Righteousness by Faith is openly before us.
… Olsen seemed to sense the spiritual bearings of the questions at issue, and gave quiet but effective leadership to their solution.
… Olsen’s calm and kindly spirit helped to bind the Church together at this most difficult time, and to advance the Message of Minneapolis during those nine crucial years of his presidency following ‘88—that is, from 1888 to 1897. His was a healing, unifying, and helpful influence, following the tension of the stormy Session.
… The years of Olsen’s administration saw a real revival and reformation. . . Olsen’s tenure of office was a time of awakening from Laodicean self-satisfaction and self-reliance, a renewal brought about through the growing acceptance of the message of Righteousness by Faith. …
So it cannot, with any show of right, be said that Olsen personally rejected or subdued the message of Righteousness by Faith, or led or aided or abetted in such a direction. Rather, those were the years of its steady early advance and spread. …
Olsen diligently fostered various Ministerial Institutes in which Righteousness by Faith was stressed among our ministry. He fostered the study of the Spirit of Prophecy. . . . That surely cannot be construed as rejection. Indeed, it was the precise opposite. …
… Clearly, Olsen did not reject the message of Righteousness by Faith. . . . Derogators of our post-1888 leadership have not, perhaps, thought this through.—Pages 358-364.
There are nearly fifty repetitions of these ideas in the book, some being the concurring opinions of other scholars and researchers cited. But the Church cannot help but discern that this vast and impressive repetition includes no vital Ellen G. White documentation.