Consider now the testimony of Ellen G. White. The extensive quotation in context is from a letter she wrote to Elder A. 0. Tait dated August 27, 1896. This is eight years after Elder Olsen’s administration began, giving plenty of time for adjustments and “confessions” to become effective (see Movement of Destiny pages 368-370). She describes in vivid language how the over-all leadership situation appeared to her:
Letter to Elder O. A. Tait, Battle Creek; “Sunnyside,” Cooranbong, August 27, 1896.
Dear Brother: —
I have not written to you much because I knew that that which I should write you would only increase your burden and intensify the painful feelings you must have, while there is no hope that you can in any way relieve the situation.
I feel very sorry for Brother Olsen. I have written him much in regard to the situation. He has written back to me, thanking me for the timely letters, but he has not acted upon the light given. The case is a mysterious one. While traveling from place to place he has linked with him as companions men whose spirit and influence should not be sanctioned, and the people who repose confidence in them will be misled. But notwithstanding the light which has been placed before him for years in regard to this matter, he has ventured on, directly contrary to the light which the Lord has been giving him. All this confuses his spiritual discernment, and places him in a relation to the general interest, and wholesome, healthy advancement of the work, as an unfaithful watchman. He is pursuing a course which is detrimental to his spiritual discernment, and he is leading other minds to view matters in a perverted light. He has given unmistakable evidence that he does not regard the testimonies which the Lord has seen fit to give His people, as worthy of respect, or as of sufficient weight to influence his course of action.
I am distressed beyond any words my pen can trace. Unmistakably Elder Olsen has acted as did Aaron, in regard to these men who have been opposed to the work of God ever since the Minneapolis meeting. They have not repented of their course of action in resisting light and evidence. Long ago I wrote to A. R. Henry, but not a word of response has come from him to me. I have recently written to Harmon Lindsay and his wife, but I suppose he will not respect the matter sufficiently to reply.
From the light God has been pleased to give me, until the home field shows more healthful heart-beats, the fewer long journeys Elder Olsen shall make with his selected helpers, A. R. Henry and Harmon Lindsay, the better it will be for the cause of God. The far-away fields will be just as well off without these visits. The disease at the heart of the work poisons the blood, and thus the disease is communicated to the bodies they visit. Yet, notwithstanding the sickly, diseased state of things at home, some have felt a great burden to take the whole of believing bodies under their parental wings. … It is not in the order of God that a few men shall manage the great interests throughout the field.
Many of the men who have acted as counselors in board and council meetings need to be weeded out. Other men should take their places; for their voice is not the voice of God. … These men are no more called Israel, but supplanters. They have worked themselves so long, instead of being worked by the Holy Spirit, that they know not what spirit impels them to action.
The spiritual blindness which rests upon human minds seems to be deepening. …
... It would have been much better to have changed the men on boards and committees than to have retained the very same men for years, until they supposed that their propositions were to be adopted without a question, and generally no voice has been lifted in an opposite direction. …
E.G. White
We heartily agree with the following from Movement of Destiny:
Questions will be automatically answered as we painstakingly and open-mindedly survey the Ellen G. White witness. …
There is something here to anchor to—something dependable, authoritative, not marred by human misconceptions. We cannot safely go beyond Mrs. White in the revealed emphasis and positions set forth. Observance of this principle provides the safety and the certainty that we need today. And contrariwise, violation of this principle brings inevitable controversy, division, and variance.—Pages 445, 446.
Acceptance of this principle will indeed bring true and lasting unity. Nothing else will bring it. We would humbly emphasize that the only reason for any “variance” or “division” on this matter for many years has been that the dependable, authoritative revealed positions of Ellen G. White have not been open-mindedly surveyed, studied or accepted.
Do her published writings agree with this unpublished letter to Elder Tait? Does she contradict herself? We turn to a letter addressed to Elder O. A. Olsen dated May 1, 1895 as found in Testimonies to Ministers, pages 77-81. Twice in this letter those “some” who were resisting and “cultivating hatred” against the 1888 message are said as late as 1895 to be influential “men who are entrusted with weighty responsibilities” whose “satanic work” begun “at Minneapolis” is carried on by those who “have been holding positions of trust, and have been molding the work after their own similitude, as far as they possibly could.” A year later she said:
In Battle Creek you have evidence that men who have had the most to say are not walking with God. There is abundant activity, but not many are working in partnership with Christ; and those who walk and work apart from Him have been the most active in planning and inaugurating their methods.—TM 320, March 13, 1896.
Indeed, “some” were walking with the Lord truly. Were they “many” or “few”? What was the true relationship between those who believed the message and those who did not?
I have tried to present the message to you as I have understood it, but how long will those at the head of the work keep themselves aloof from the message of God?—R&H, March 18, 1890.
… Just in proportion as men of influence close their own hearts and set up their own wills in opposition to what God has said, will they seek to take away the ray of light from those who have been longing and praying for light and for vivifying power. Christ has registered all the hard, proud, sneering speeches spoken against His servants [Jones and Waggoner] as against Himself.—R&H, May 27, 1890.
In a letter to Elder Olsen dated June 4, 1896, Ellen G. White discloses that this same attitude was prevailing as late as then. She speaks 35 times of the reaction of “those in responsible positions” as still being resistance, rejection, despising, pouring contempt on, speaking against, unappreciating, refusing to accept, hating, not heeding, the “message,” etc. etc.—TM 89-98. These are generic terms.
A third vital point of evidence is Ellen G. White’s letter to Elder Olsen himself of May 31, 1896, which fully corroborates what she said to Elder Tait three months later. The context is unmistakable:
I have communications which have been written for one and two years, but I have felt that for your sake they ought to be withheld until some one could stand by your side who could clearly distinguish Bible principles from principles of human manufacture, who, with sharp discernment could separate the strangely perverted, human imaginations, which have been working for years, from things of divine origin.
I am sorry you have not regarded the warnings and instructions which have been given you, as of sufficient value to be heeded, but by disregarding them before men who care nought for them, have made them a common matter, not worthy to have weight in your practice. Your practice has been contrary to these warnings, and this has weakened them in the eyes of men who need correction, who in their life-practice have separated from God. …
Brother Olsen, you have lost much from your experience that should have been brought into your character building, by failing to stand firmly and faithfully for right, braving all consequences [the context of the letter is discussing the leadership resistance to the 1888 message]. Had you done this, you might have had a very different showing from what you now have. …
Scenes that were a shame to Christians, have been presented to me, as taking place in the council meetings held after the Minneapolis meeting. The loud voice of dispute, the hot spirit, the harsh words, resembled a political meeting more than a place where Christians were met for prayer and counsel. These meetings should have been dismissed as an insult to heaven. The Lord was not revered as an honored guest by those assembled in council, and how could they expect divine light to shine upon them; how could they feel that the presence of Jesus was molding and fashioning their plans? …
Brother Olsen, you speak of my return to America. For three years I stood in Battle Creek as a witness for the truth [1888-1891]. Those who then refused to receive the testimony given me by God for them, and rejected the evidences attending these testimonies, would not be benefited should I return. . . .
The Spirit of the Lord has outlined the condition of things at the Review and Herald offices. Speaking through Isaiah, God says, “I will not contend forever, neither will I be always wroth; for the spirit should fail before Me, and the souls which I have made. For the iniquity of his covetousness was I wroth, and smote him; I hid Me, and was wroth, and he went on frowardly in the way of his heart.”
This is precisely what has been done in the offices of publication at Battle Creek. Covetousness has been woven into nearly all the business transactions of the institution, and has been practised by individuals. This influence has spread like the leprosy, until it has tainted and corrupted the whole. … The wrong principles remain unchanged. The same work that has been done in the past will be carried forward under the guise of the General Conference Association. The sacred character of the Association is fast disappearing. …
To a large degree the General Conference Association has lost its sacred character, because some connected with it have not changed their sentiments in any particular since the Conference held at Minneapolis. Some in responsible positions go on “frowardly” in the way of their own hearts. Some who came from . . . and from other places to receive an education which would qualify them for the work, have imbibed this spirit, carried it with them to their homes, and their work has not borne the right kind of fruit. The opinions of men, which were received by them still cleave to them like the leprosy; and it is a very solemn question whether the souls who become imbued with the spiritual leprosy of Battle Creek will ever be able to distinguish the principles of heaven from the methods and plans of men. The influences and impressions received in Battle Creek have done much to retard the work …
… I have been shown that the people at large do not know that the heart of the work is being diseased and corrupted at Battle Creek.... I am called upon by the Spirit of God, to present these things before you, and they are correct to the life, according to the practice of the past few years. …
God’s work cannot be carried forward successfully by men, who, by their resistance to light, have placed themselves where nothing will influence them to repent or change their course of action.”—Letter to O. A. Olsen, “Sunnyside,” Cooranbong, N.S.W., May 31, 1896.
These are direct quotations from the Lord’s inspired servant. They are dependable, authoritative, revealed positions of Ellen G. White and not private opinions injected to support an idea as to how the post-1888 denominational leadership reacted to the 1888 message.
A fourth statement of inspired evidence follows, indicating how the Lord’s servant viewed the “real revival and reformation” and “advance [of] the Message of Minneapolis during those nine crucial years” (Movement of Destiny, pages 363, 362). She speaks in generic terms of “leaders” at “the heart of the work”:
Oh if I could have the joyful news that the will and minds of those in Battle Creek who have stood professedly as leaders, were emancipated from the teachings and slavery of Satan, whose captives they have been for so long, I would be willing to cross the broad Pacific to see your faces once more. But I am not anxious to see you with the enfeebled perceptions and clouded minds because you have chosen darkness rather than light. …
… The heart of the work, the great center, has been enfeebled by the mismanagement of men who have not kept pace with their Leader. … The whole body is sick because of mismanagement and miscalculation. The people to whom God has entrusted eternal interest, … the keepers of light that is to illuminate the whole world, have lost their bearings.—Letter, February 6, 1896; Special Testimonies for Ministers and Workers, No. 10, pages 29, 30; TM 396, 397.