Did the 1888 session yield good for the church or bad?

How can we benefit from Ellen White’s reaction and counsel? 

by Robert W. Olson, Ph. D
Secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate in Washington, D. C. 

The General Conference session held at Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 1888 proved to be a major turning point in the history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The change in our course was made slowly during the three years following the conference. During that time the unflagging efforts of Ellen White, A. T. Jones, and E. J. Waggoner helped move the church away from the debating spirit and legalism of former years to an emphasis on justification by faith in the righteousness of Jesus Christ. 88IOL 1.1

But this change in direction was not a natural outgrowth of the Minnesota conference. In many ways the Minneapolis meeting was a disaster. The church hit bottom spiritually at that session. Ellen White called it “the saddest experience of my life” ^{1Endnotes E. G. White Manuscript 21, 1888. All quotations from E. G. White manuscripts and letters in this article are drawn from the four-volume Ellen G. White 1888 Materials (Washington, D.C.: Ellen G. White Estate, 1987) unless otherwise noted.} and “the most grievous trial of my life.” ^{2E. G. White Manuscript 30, 1889.} It is the only General Conference session in Adventist history that was marked by open rebellion against Ellen White on the part of a large number of our ministers. She even wondered at one point whether God might have to call out yet another movement. Concerning many of the delegates, she declared: “As reformers they had come out of the denominational churches, but they now act a part similar to that which the churches acted. We hoped that there would not be the necessity for another coming out.” ^3Ibid. 88IOL 1.2

Nevertheless, in spite of her deep anguish over the unbelieving spirit manifested by so many, Ellen White confidently anticipated that the Lord would somehow overrule and that much good would come from the meeting. On the last day of the conference, she wrote to her daughter-in-law: “I have spoken nearly 20 times with great freedom, and we believe that this meeting will result in great good. We know not the future, but we feel that Jesus stands at the helm and we shall not be shipwrecked.” ^{4E. G. White, Selected Messages 3:177, 178 (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Pub. Assn., 1980).} 88IOL 1.3

There were others who saw a positive as well as a negative side to the session. Three weeks after its close W. C. White wrote the newly elected president of the General Conference, who was still in Europe: “The delegates at the close of the meeting carried away very different impressions. Many felt that it was one of the most profitable meetings that they ever attended; others, that it was the most unfortunate conference ever held.” ^{5W. C. White to O. A. Olsen, Nov. 27, 1888. Quotations from non-E. G. White letters in this article are drawn from the two-volume Manuscripts and Memories From Minneapolis (Washington, D.C.: Ellen G. White Estate, 1988).} 88IOL 1.4

Clearly, that session prompted differing reactions. Some felt that the session was bad—very bad. Others, that it was good—very good. What made that meeting so bad? And what made it so good? 88IOL 1.5