Our Denominational History and the
Laodicean Message
We return now to our Lords words
"unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans". He rightly
assumes that we should have learned the lessons of history and that we are
ready in our generation for the closing lesson preparatory to the end of
history:
These things saith the Amen, the
faithful and true witness … I know thy works … Because thou sayest,
I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and
knowest not that thou art [the one] wretched, and miserable. and poor,
and blind, and naked: (Rev. 3:14-17)
Not yet do we know our own
"works" or history. Our history actually, as discerned by the
heavenly universe, discloses our true plight as preeminently
"wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked" of all the seven
churches. (Note the use of the Greek article ho, "the one").
What is our true history? Unpleasant as
the revelation may be, truth requires that it be faced honestly. Most
earnest and persistent attempts have been made to identify the
"they" of the following quotations as a small minority.
Regrettably, the full context of Ellen G. White’s writing on the subject
identifies them as the bulk of the responsible leadership of the church
-"the angel of the church of the Laodiceans":
All the universe of heaven witnessed
the disgraceful treatment of Jesus Christ, represented by the Holy
Spirit. Had Christ been before them, they would have treated Him
in a manner similar to that in
which the Jews treated Christ. (Special Testimonies, Series A,
No. 6, p. 20. The context speaks of 1888; emphasis added).
We read such a statement with horror. Can
it be true? How did this terrible thing happen? "This just can’t be
true - someone’s mistaken somewhere." This is our usual attitude
toward this and similar statements. "Someone find another inspired
statement that cancels this one out," we plead. It is as difficult
for us to face this fact as it was for Adam and Eve to face their true
guilt in the Garden! But nonetheless, though we may hesitate to recognize
the fact, "all the universe of heaven witnessed the disgraceful"
scene.
What do the books of heaven say about
this sin? According to 5BC 1085, they "record the sins that would
have been committed had there been opportunity". What would our
brethren have done "had Christ been before them" in 1888? The
word is clear: "They would have treated Him in a manner similar to
that in which the Jews treated Christ." Since the books of heaven
"record the sins that would have been committed had there been
opportunity", it is clear that they show that the brethren mentioned
above did indeed treat Christ in a manner similar to that in which the
Jews treated Him. In other words, in plain English, they "pierced
Him", to borrow Zechariah’s phrase!
We have tried ever so earnestly to
believe that the pronoun "they" refers only to "some",
a few, who treated Jesus Christ so disgracefully. One recent, highly
respected denominational history describes them as "less than a
score", "not even a fourth of the total number of
participants". And of those "few", "most of those who
first took issue made confessions within the decade following 1888, and
largely within the first five years,
and thenceforth ceased their opposition". (See Movement of
Destiny, pp. 367, 368, emphasis original).
So Ellen White allowed herself to get all
upset over the attitude and actions of a tiny minority of ministers, less
than ten, to be exact. And she continued to fulminate against this tiny
enclave of ministers for a decade, declaring that they had power to
withhold from the church and the world the glorious blessings of the
Latter Rain and the Loud Cry even though the vast majority of responsible
leaders wholeheartedly and enthusiastically accepted the message!
Not one statement from Ellen White’s
pen exists in which she declares that the "some" among the
responsible leadership who truly accepted the message were many or a
majority. Without exception, her use of the word "some" in
reference to those who accepted means "few". And above and
beyond all debate on the issue looms the overwhelming fact that whatever
reaction toward the 1888 message occurred, good or ill, the finishing of
the work and the coming of the Lord were long delayed thereby.
Let us look briefly at some of the
statements from Ellen G. White’s pen which throw light on her reference
to the "some":
In Minneapolis God gave precious gems of
truth to His people in new settings. This light from heaven by some was
rejected with all the stubbornness the Jews manifested in rejecting
Christ. (MS 13, 1889; CWE 30).
Now I was saying what was the use of our
assembling here together [at Minneapolis, 18881 and for our ministering
brethren to come in if they are here only to shut out the Spirit of God
from the people? … I have been talking and pleading with you, but it
does not seem to make any difference with you … (MS 9, 1888).
It is not wise for one of these young men
[Jones and Waggoner] to commit himself to a decision at this meeting where
opposition rather than investigation is the order of the day. (MS 15,
1888)
If the ministers will not receive the
light I want to give the people a chance; perhaps they may receive it. (MS
9,1888).
The really critical issue is, Are the
words of our Lord in His Laodicean message present truth today? Or did the
so-called "glorious" acceptance of the 1888 message by the
responsible leadership of the church render this passe? Was the above
statement a single out-of-character outburst of Ellen White, something
that her calmer nature later repudiated? We look again. She talks about it
times almost without number (all emphasis added):
Every time the same spirit [of
opposition at Minneapolis] awakens in the soul, the deeds done on that
occasion are endorsed, and the doers of them are made responsible to God
… The same spirit that actuated the rejectors of Christ rankles in
their hearts, and had they lived in the days of Christ, they
would have acted toward Him in a manner similar to that of the godless
and unbelieving Jews.(Special Testimonies to the Review and Herald
Office, pp. 16, 17).
If you reject Christ’s delegated
messengers, you reject Christ. (TM 96, 97. 1896).
Men professing godliness have
despised Christ in the person of His messengers. Like the
Jews. they reject Gods message. (FCE 472; 1897).
Christ has registered all the hard.
proud, sneering speeches spoken against His servants as against
Himself. (R&H. May 27, 1890).
Men among us can become just as were
the Pharisees—wide-awake to condemn the greatest teacher that the
world ever knew. (TM 294; 1896).
How do we know that this sin was an
unconscious one?
|
