1901 REJECTED

BY DEONE M. HANSON

1985

INTRODUCTION

During a visit with fellow Christians who had escaped severe persecution under Communist controlled Eastern Europe, a discussion came about as to the purpose of the 1901 plan that provided for the European General Conference. Because the plan failed, these people suffered great religious persecution and hardship. To them, the 1901 plan was a call for God's people to "Turn (their) eyes upon Jesus."

During the opening session, Ellen White said that God's people must be "born again." "There must be a renovation, a reorganization. ..Let every one of you go home, not to chat, chat, chat, but to pray. Go home and pray. Talk with God. Go home and plead with God to mold and fashion you after the divine similitude."

A "renovation" was essential for the 1901 plan of reorganization to function. The call to look to Jesus is the very meaning of the 3rd angel's message. TM 93. But the work that all heaven was waiting to do as soon as men prepared the way, was not done: for the leaders closed and bolted the door against the Spirit's entrance. There was a stopping short of entire surrender to God. And hearts that might have been purified from all error were  strengthened in wrong doing. ..and said to the Spirit of God, 'Go thy way for this time: when I have a more convenient season, I will call for thee." Letter to J. H. Kellogg from Ellen White, Aug. 5, 1902.

When there was no renovation, the plan of reorganization could not be implemented. The 1901 was rejected and it had to be replaced with AG. Daniells' plan: a world General Conference” that destroyed the European General Conference.

At a time when our people are suffering great persecution in Eastern Europe there is a call to look to Jesus with the 1901 plan.

THE 1901 PLAN OF REORGANIZATION OF THE GENERAL CONFERENCE 

When Ellen White stepped to the podium on April 2, 1901 on the first day of the General Conference session, she wasted no time in calling for a reorganization. 

“What we want now is a reorganization. We want to begin at the foundation, and to build upon a different principle. ..

“According to the light that has been given me--and just how it is to be accomplished I can not say-- greater strength must be brought into the managing force of the conference.- G.C.B., 1901, p. 25. 

Just how greater strength within the organization was to be accomplished was not understood until two days later when the committee on plans presented the formation of a separate Union Conference for the work of the South. The work in the South had unique requirements and a multitude of problems because of the illiteracy, poverty, and racial difficulties still being experienced in the post Civil War period.

The Committee on Plans felt that the uniqueness of the work would present special management problems making it desirable for the South to organize into a Union Conference. They had also discussed the formation of the American Union Conference which had been sanctioned and approved by the General Conference in 1897. The European Union Conference had already been formed in 1898. G.C.B., 1901, p. 67. In this discussion, it was assumed that both of these conferences would return a tithe to the General Conference. G.C.B., 1901, p. 67.

At this time in history, the Australasian and European Union Conferences were under the administration of the General Conference in Battle Creek. The new proposal would bring two additional Union Conferences in America under the General Conference at Battle Creek. It was during this meeting, that Mrs. White was given the actual plan of reorganization:

"I am thankful that there is to be a time when the mists will be cleared away. I hope that this time has begun here. We want the mists here to be cleared away. I want to say that from the light given to me by God, there should have been years ago organizations such as are now proposed. When we first met in conference, it was thought that the General Conference should extend over the whole world. But this is not in God's order." G.C.B., 1901, p. 68.

Heretofore, it was thought that all territory organized into conferences would be under the administration of the General Conference at Battle Creek. At that time the Foreign Mission Board was still a separate organization from the General Conference and had the responsibility of the mission fields. Many messages had been given in the prior decade on the decentralization of the work at Battle Creek, but it was not understood until this meeting just how this was to be accomplished. Now It was clear the field was to be divided so that the administrative responsibilities would not be centralized in one General Conference Committee. To expect one group of men, regardless of the size of that committee, to grasp the problems and supervise the entire organized world field was beyond the capability of finite minds.

Ellen White continued:

"Conferences must be organized in different localities, and it will be for the health of the different Conferences to have it thus. This does not mean that we are to cut ourselves apart from one another, and be as separate atoms. Every Conference is to touch every other Conference, be in harmony with every other Conference. God wants us to talk for this, and he wants us to act for this. We are the people of God, who are to be separate from the world. We are to stand as representatives of sacred truth." G.C.B., 1901, pp. 68- 69.

The problem of a General Conference that attempted to extend over the whole world was then illustrated by  Mrs. White's noting several instances of mismanagement she observed on her trip to Battle Creek. There were delays as well as problems resulting from decision making by those without first-hand knowledge of the issues. Also, the centralization of the work had created a dependency at the local level, which caused weakness in the work of God. There was a loss of urgency in giving the three angels' messages, the most important work ever entrusted to a people and the only hope for a perishing world.

The work of the church was not to utilize the management principles of the world by centralization in finite human beings. The work of God was to centralize in Christ, the Great General. He would direct the various fields of labor "through the Holy Spirit. ..

"We want to understand that there are no gods in our Conference. There are to be no kings here, and no kings in any Conference that is formed. 'All ye are brethren.'. ..

"The Lord God of Israel will link us all together. The organizing of new Conference is not to separate us. It is to bind us together. The Conferences that are formed are to cling mightily to the Lord, so that through them he can reveal his power. ..

"Remember that God can give wisdom to those who handle his work. It is not necessary to send thousands of miles for advice, and then have to wait weeks before an answer can be received. Those who are right on the ground are to decide what shall be done. You know what you have to wrestle with, but those who are thousands of miles away do not know." G.C.B., 1901, pp. 68,69.

Decentralization was the theme of the reorganization of the General Conference in 1901. The call for "a renovation, a reorganization on an entirely different principle" on April 2, was now made clear on April 4. Christ was to link heads of conferences and institutions. He would do the binding. The 1901 plan was a call to look to Christ.

The clarification of basic principles of organization on April 4, 1901 resulted in the division of the field and the supervision and management of the work of God being placed in different locations. The European General Conference was formed in July 1901 with I. R. Conradi as President. A. G. Daniells became president of the ("General Conference in America. Our most detailed early Adventist Church history substantiates this fact:

"Hence, the European field came to be regarded as a self-sufficient continental unit, and it was called 'The General Conference in Europe,' while the organization in the land of origin was called, “The General Conference in America.- And there was besides, the Australasian Union Conference, which in effect was a third General Conference.- (ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS, Vol. III, pg 348.

The action taken at the 1901 session in limiting the General Conference geographically received the approbation of -The God of heaven and his angels- who -walked up and down the aisles- during that meeting. G.C.B., 1901, p. 463.

There was no suggestion of a -world General Conference- in the 1901 plan of reorganization. 

“The question to be settled is who is God? ...In his efforts to dethrone God and to put himself in the place of God, Satan has deceived man in the rebellion. ..When the true God is known and acknowledged for what he really is, when He is given the place that belongs to Him in all things, and we take the place which belongs to us, then He is glorified and we are glorified in Him. This means our salvation from sin now and eternally.- E. G. White, General Conference Bulletin, 1898, p. .221.

The geographical limitations of the General Conference in Battle Creek "were also in alignment with counsel from the servant of the Lord given in August 1896:

“As a people we should study God's plans for conducting His work. Wherever He has given directions in regard to any point, we should carefully consider how to regard His expressed will. This work should have special attention. It is not wise to choose one man as president of the General Conference. The work of the General Conference has extended, and some things have been made unnecessarily complicated. A want of discernment has been shown. There should be a division of the field, or some other plan should be devised to change the present order of things.” Testimonies to Ministers, p. 342.

..The brethren had responded to this counsel at the 1897 General Conference session by electing three presidents who presided over the General Conference Association, the General Conference committee, and the Foreign Mission Board, This only added to the problems because this was a division of the work instead a  division of the field. The Sabbath School, Publishing, Medical, Religious Liberty were still separate societies before departmentalization. The further dividing the work instead of the field only added to kingly power struggles between leaders. Although departmentalization of these societies within the church in 1901 was a major Step toward centralization, the overall impact was that of decentralization when Battle Creek no longer “extended” over the entire world. Departmentalization achieved a unity of action within the church and conferences, which was a great benefit. It also eliminated the kingly power struggles between the various independent societies.

In the 1901 plan of reorganization, Christ was to be the “greater strength” to direct and unify the different General Conferences. Mrs. White was elated. The 1901 plan was the very essence of the third angel's message applied to church government. Leadership was to look to Christ instead of man. Heads of large conferences and various institutions were to stand as equals under Christ in an apostolic form of church government. 

However, only a few months after the 1901 session problems erupted over management. Edson White's ministry in the South caused some difficulties with the administration. Nevertheless, his mother was confident that the problems would be resolved. A portion of a letter from Ellen White to her son Edson has been released for publication.

" Your course would have been the course to be pursued if no change had been made in the General Conference. But a change has been made and many more changes will be made. ..great developments will be seen.  Letter 54, 1901.

In this letter, Mrs. White explains to her son Edson that she must have given him something from her files  by mistake that was not intended for him or anyone else. Since he was her son, she cautioned him that he must be especially careful or his actions could jeopardize the work that the Lord had given her to do. However, as the Months passed by, leadership's failure to implement the 1901 plan became evident. Her confession is written in a private letter to a friend and confidant.

The result of the last General Conference has been the greatest, the most terrible sorrow of my life. No change was made. The spirit that should have been brought into the whole work as the result of that meeting was not brought in because men did not receive the testimonies of the Spirit of God. As they went to their several fields of labor, they did not walk in the light that the Lord had flashed upon their pathway, but carried into their work the wrong principles that had been prevailing in the work at Battle Creek. .." Letter to Judge Jesse Arthur from Ellen White, Elmshaven, Jan. 15, 1903.

What happened? The cause was revealed to her ten days prior to writing the letter to Judge Arthur. On January 5, 1903 she was considering what might have been done at the last General Conference when she lapsed into a dream.

"The speaker turned to those who had been praying, and said: 'We have something to do. We must confess our sins, and humble our hearts before God.' He made heartbroken confessions and then stepped up to several of the brethren, one after another, and extended his hand, asking forgiveness…The spirit of confession spread through the entire congregation It was a Pentecostal season…

“When I aroused from my unconsciousness, and for a while could not think where I was. My pen was still in my hand. The words were spoken to me: "This might have been”. ..Disappointment came over me as I realized that what I had witnessed was not a reality." 8T 104-106.

Pride prevented certain men in responsible positions at the 1901 session from settling their differences so they could look to Christ. As a result, "What Might Have Been" (the 1901 plan of reorganization) was lost to Seventh-day Adventist Church and to the world. Without an upper room experience, there could be no Pentecost. Pride, presumption, and the love of position prevented Christ from leading a people in an apostolic form of church government. The brethren preferred to be like the "Gentiles" who have "their great ones" exercise "lordship" and "authority upon them." Mark 10:42. Christ was rejected as the “Captain" and the "greater strength" of the 1901 plan. A fundamental principle of "the Third Angel 's message" was disregarded when the delegates were determined to  "look to man and expect much help from man." Testimonies to Ministers, p. 93. The 1901 plan did not fail, but men failed the plan when they failed to look to Jesus as their Captain.

 THE 1903 PLAN OF CENTRALIZATION: " A WORLD GENERAL CONFERENCE"

When Nimrod and his followers declared their independence from the Lord, Nimrod became the first King of Babylon and eventually built the tower of Babel.

"The tower had reached a lofty height, and it was impossible for the workmen at the top to communicate directly with those at the base.. . Confusion and dismay followed. All work came to a standstill. ..in their rage and disappointment they reproached one another. ..Men were made to feel that there is a God who ruleth in the heavens  and that He is able to confuse and to multiply confusion in order to teach men that they are only men." Testimonies, vol. 8, p. 214 (1903).

When the 1903 General Conference adopted a plan for a "world General Conference" with one G. C. President, Ellen White used this tower to illustrate the problems of "centralization" as a "confederacy" born of "rebellion against God." 8T 213.

When Israel rejected the Lord as their King, and asked Samuel for a king, this form of centralized government under man eventually led to the division of the nation and destruction of Israel. Men had failed to learn from the tower of Babel that man can not stand where God is to stand. The same discord generated at the tower of Babel was not comprehended by God's people. Just as the tower led to confusion, Jerusalem eventually became "the city of confusion" (Isa. 24:101.

Choosing a king only deepened an apostasy into a "conspiracy" that broke the covenant making Jerusalem a curse. 'The Lord had to destroy Jerusalem because of a false witness to the world. The prophecy of Isaiah 24:10 is a final day prophecy that applies to spiritual Jerusalem in the final days of earth's history when the “gleaning grapes”- (remnant) –“lift the voice”- against "the treacherous dealers”- which causes the –“shaking." Isa. 24:13,14.

Centralization of powers in an hierarchical system in the days of Israel compounded abuses which were considered as treachery against the Lord and a backsliding to the gods of “strangers.” Isaiah 1:7; Jer. 2:11,25. The treacherous dealers according to scripture are those who “as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so ye deal treacherously with me, O house of Israel, saith the Lord.” Jer.3:20 .

"WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN”

It was the Lord's plan in 1901 to spare the Church from repeating the history of Israel by a knowledge of  their mistakes. But warnings from the messenger in 1901 and at the beginning of the 1903 session were not heeded. G.C.B., 1901, p. 26; 1903, pp. 29-30.

Decentralization had been stressed during the 1890s in an attempt to direct the Church away from a layer system of government. Decentralization was the theme of the 1901 plan of reorganization, which provided for the division of the field into the American General Conference and the European General Conference. The presidents of these conferences were to serve under Christ, the Captain of the 1901 plan. But since the brethren failed to come into unity in a upper room experience, “what Might Have Been” (8T 104-106) , was an impossibility. "Men did not humble themselves before the Lord," and the presence of the Holy Spirit which was essential to unite men under Christ as "Captain" of the 1901 plan was "not imparted." BT 104.

Because men refused to unite under Christ in the 1901 plan, the 1903 plan of centralization under man became a necessity to prevent total fragmentation of the work. To maintain any semblance of organizational unity, the American General Conference transformed itself into "a world General Conference," and coerced the budding European General Conference to revert to the European Union Conference. The delegates chose one man as General Conference President just as Israel chose a king; and the 1903 plan of centralization under man replaced the 1901 apostolic plan under Christ. This was an hierarchical plan of church organization in which man would rule over man in a layer system of government. This plan was introduced on April 6, 1903 and was accepted on April 9, 1903.

"THE MOST TERRIBLE SORROW OF MY LIFE"

Prior to the 1903 General Conference, Ellen White had doubts about attending the session because of her disappointment aver the results of the 1901 conference.

"I do not now expect to attend the General Conference. I should not dare to go; for I am very much worn with the responsibilities. ..I feel very intensely, because I understand the peril of those who as blind men have followed their own counsel. Were I to go to the Conference, I should be compelled to take positions that would cut some to the quick. ..

“The result of the last General Conference has been the greatest, the most terrible sorrow of my life, No change was made...They did not walk in the light. ..but carried into their work the wrong principles that had been prevailing in the work at Battle Creek.

"The Lord has marked every movement made by the leading men...It is a perilous thing to reject the light that God sends..." Letter from Ellen White to Judge Jessie Arthur on 1-15-1903.

Thus, in less than two years, the test of time revealed that “wrong principles" had been carried into the work and "no change" was made after the 1901 session. In spite of her disappointment, Mrs. White arranged to attend the 1903 session which convened March 27, 1903 at Oakland, California.

BRETHREN CAUTIONED TO “LOOK BENEATH THE SURFACE”

At the April 5 meeting, she expressed deep concern over the decisions of the delegates that would influence the work of God.

"I have been carrying a very heavy burden. For the last three nights I have slept very little. Many scenes are presented to me. I feel an intense interest in the advancement of the work of God, and I say to our leading brethren, as you consider the questions that shall come before you, you are to look beneath the surface. You are to give careful consideration to every question discussed." Ellen White, G.C.B., 1903, p. 104.

ELDER DANIELLS’ PROPOSAL

The Foreign Mission Board chaired by A. G. Daniells was still an international organization between 1901 and 1903 which provided the wedge to introduce the new plan of organization.

On April 6, 1903, one day after Ellen White warned the brethren to look beneath the surface, Elder Daniells made his proposal:

"Now, with reference to making the General Conference Committee the Mission Board: As the work is now shaping, the province of the General Conference Committee is of an advisory character to a large extent--not all together, by any means--and is of a missionary character or phase.

“One who has not been in our office can scarcely realize what a complete change has been wrought at the headquarters of the General Conference...the administration in the United States has all been taken away, and is now placed in the hands of scores of men. But while that has been going on, our missionary problems have been greatly increasing. ..

“I have become convinced that one of the great purposes of the General Conference would be to deal with these world-wide problems everywhere. G.C.B., 1901, pp. 100,101. 

Elder Daniells’ proposal was actually a cry for help for a human method to give unity of action within the organization. Men in authority could not work under Christ in the 1901 plan because they failed to come into “Working order”. G.C.B., 1901, p. 23. Without Christ as "the Captain," the only alternative was d strong central committee under man. A world Conference Committee chaired by one president, a concept foreign to the principles of the 1901 plan, was now proposed to manage “world-wide problems everywhere."

Elder Daniells continued:

"I believe that the Committee ought to be composed something like this: That the president of every Union Conference and the chairman of every Union mission field in the world ought to be a member of that committee. This will give us a larger and more representative committee, even than we have to day. We get the whole world directly represented on the General Conference Committee. Then add to that the heads, the leading men in special departments, such as education, publishing, and medical, and put on a few men of special experience, and special ability from their experience, and you have a thoroughly representative committee, representing all interests of this great work in all parts of our little world. And that will give us a truly representative and General Conference Committee, a World's Conference Committee.

"Now, that, to my mind, brethren, is what should be the Mission Board of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. ...Then the members of the committees can go to different parts of the field working harmoniously, every one, though separated, to carry out this policy. Now, there must some executive body appointed to carry out the policy." G.C.B., 1903, pp. 100,101.

STRONG OBJECTIONS FROM THE MINORITY

The Mission Board, which was still an international organization, became the vehicle for the American General Conference at Battle Creek to grow into a super conference, a World General Conference.

Acceptance of Elder Daniells' plan did not come easily. The strong objections of the minority report were supported by the plea of Percy T. Magan claiming the new plan swept away the reorganizational principles of the 1897 and 1901 Conferences and opened the way for the papal form of church government.

“...Any man who has ever read those histories (Neander's, Mosheim's of the early Christian Church) can come to no other conclusion but that the principles which are to be brought in through this proposed constitution, ...are the same principles, and introduced in precisely the same way, as they were hundreds of years ago when the Papacy was made...

"1 do not deny for a moment but what improvements have been made in the distribution of administrative power. I am heartily in favor of all that has been done in regard to Union Conferences, but I say that, as far as the head of the thing is concerned, ...the moment you vote it you vote yourselves right back where we were two years ago and before it." Percy T. Magan, G.C.B., 1903, p. 150.

E. A. Sutherland stated that it was his impression that the General Conference was to be broken up into three parts. 

"I understood six years ago, when they elected their president of Europe, and also of Australia, and of this country, that those three men were supposed to be on the same plane...And that, when a General Conference should be called, it would be the calling of all of these men from these three parts, and that no one of these presidents would be supposed to occupy any greater position than either of the others...I know that it was talked at that time that it should be so, and this country was divided up into Union Conferences, or we called the districts at that time; but the plan was the same as we are following at the present time. ..

"I believe, brethren, the thing to do is to go back where we were two years ago in the matter of reorganization, and take it up, and carry it out, and give it a fair trial, because those who have been in the responsible places have admitted that they did not carry out the letter of that because they did not believe that it was possible. I believe that it is possible." E. A. Sutherland. G.C.B.. 1903. Pp. 168.169.

UNBELIEF GIVES BIRTH TO 1903 PLAN 

 The majority of the brethren simply "did not believe it was possible!" The same unbelief that prevented the Israelites from entering the Promised Land, permeated the General Conference and prevented the "Captain" of the heavenly hosts from leading His people into the heavenly Canaan. In spite of many hours and days of deliberations, the 1903 plan of centralization gathered support. Elder G. I. Butler exerted a strong influence for centralization.

"We are talking now on principles brethren, and you will pardon one of the old hands, who has been in the work for so many years, and who has had the presidency for the General Conference for thirteen terms, for saying that he fails to see that anything of a kingly nature can be brought into it. I do not believe there can.

 "'The difficulty in all these things, I believe, is in regard to the principles being put in practice by the men that are placed in office...I can not see a particle of danger in our old system of organization...

"If men will walk humbly before God, and remain willing to be instructed by the Testimonies of His Spirit, they will never find anything wrong in the old system of organization brought out under the express influence of the Spirit of God...

"As one of the old hands, I see in this new constitution the same principles that we had in the beginning, that were endorsed by Sister White at the first. This is why I favor the new constitution." G.C.B., 1903, p. 163.

JAMES WHITE’S POSITION ON ORGANIZATION

G. I. Butler was a known advocate of "centralization." He propounded his position to the General Conference in a paper on leadership- in 1873. (RH, Nov. 18, 1873) His position was endorsed by the delegates at that conference which stirred James White to write an editorial on the dangers of centralized leadership. He wrote that the dangers to the Christian church from leadership as best understood by the “prophetic eye of the Son of God” when he indicated “all ye are brethren.”

“And at no time during his public ministry does Christ intimate that anyone of his disciples should be designated as their leader ...

“And there is no intimation that the apostles of Christ designated one of their number above another as their leader...

“The apostle exa1ts Christ as the great head of the church, and the only one to whom she should look for leadership, in Heb. 12:1,2.

“Moses was simply a faithful servant in the Jewish house, while Christ is a son over his own house. Moses was not lord in the Jewish house. He was servant, while Christ was lord…

“Christ, then, is the leader of his people in all the ages...

“But here we wish it distinctly understood that officers were not ordained in the Christian church to order, or to command the church, and 'to lord it over God's heritage.’…Christ will lead his people, if they will be led.” James White, R.&H., Dec.1, 1874.

 In 1875 G. I. Butler's position on leadership was considered –“incorrect" and was “rescinded" as recorded in the Conference Constitution (August 1875) Elder White later emphasized in an editorial in 1881 that no one “can properly represent Christ who surrenders his judgment to his fellowmen.”

"It was not the design of God that any system of organization should exist in the Christian Church that would take the leadership from Christ.

"'The minister who throws himself on any Conference Committee for direction, takes himself out of the hands of Christ. And that committee that takes into its own hands the work of directing the ambassadors for Christ, takes a fearful responsibility. “One is your master (leader), even Christ, and all ye are brethren.” Matt. 23:8. May God preserve to us our organization and form of church discipline in its original form. R.& H. Jan. 4,1881.

Unfortunately, James White had been laid to rest years previously and he could offer no rebuttal to G. I. Butler's position. The majority of the delegates were charmed into voting for a World General Conference on April 11, 1903 in the most controversial session in the history of the denomination. Eighty-five delegates gave an affirmative vote, twenty delegates were opposed, and three abstained. G.C.B., 1903, p. 73. A layer system of authority under man in 1903 replaced the 1901 plan of Jesus given through the Lord's messenger and supported by the teachings of Jesus.

'"Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you.” Mark 10:42.

THE EUROPEANS ARE FORCED TO SUBMIT

After the 1901 plan was officially rejected at the 1903 Session, President I.. R. Conradi went home as “First Vice-president, ..to labor in the European Union Conferences and Missions, as the Executive Committee (in Battle Creek may advise, and to preside at the councils of the members of the Executive Committee, which may be held in Europe, in the absence of the president.- G.C.B., 1903, p. 145. The majority were determined to have a “one man president" over the whole world. At though the Europeans objected, they were finally forced to their knees at Friedensau in 1907 to accept their position as a Union Conference. World control of the ministry, the sabbath school, the publishing work, the educational work, and medical work by the General Conference Committee headquartered in America was now undisputed.

The Stone which was to be the Head of the corner, was - set at naught by the delegates of the 1903 session. Nevertheless, Ellen White supported Elder Daniells just as Samuel supported King Saul.

A “PRETENSE OF BUILDING ON THE RIGHT FOUNDATION”

Ellen White had absented herself from the discussion of the 1903 plan, but a few days after the 1903 session was adjourned, the Lord gave her a. special message for the Church. Two years previously when planning for the reorganization in 1901, she had made it clear that the brethren were to go back to the "foundation" and "build on a different principle." G.C.B.,1901, p. 25. The Lord revealed the truth about the 1903 plan on April 21,1903.

"The heavenly Teacher inquired: 'What stronger delusion can beguile the mind than the pretense that you are building on the right foundation and that God accepts your works, when in reality you are working out many things according to worldly policy and are sinning against Jehovah?'" Test., 8, p. 249.

“THEY HAVE CHOSEN THEIR OWN WAYS…I WILL CHOOSE THEIR DELUSIONS”

The delegates at the 1903 session got off the foundation- when they failed to -look beneath the surface.

"One who sees beneath the surface, who reads the hearts of all men, says of those who have had great light... ‘Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations. I also will choose their delusions. ..' 'God shall send them strong delusions, that they should believe a lie,' 'because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved,' 'but had pleasure in unrighteousness.' Isaiah 66:3,4; 2 Thess. 2:11,10,12.- Test., vol. 8, p. 249.

PROBLEMS IN MANAGING “A GREAT BUSINESS

The difficulty in administrating a World General Conference is best illustrated by Elder Daniells himself who referred to this experience as being “pressed by seemingly endless problems. ..and succession of crises. Extensive travel. ..necessary that he might have first hand knowledge. ..crowded him for time. He failed to 'tarry' he said, until he was endued with 'power from on high'. .He had been much like the busy conductor of a transcontinental train, the captain of a great ship, or the manager of a great business concern. He called it the 'peril of sheer activity of God'--the encroachment of the mechanical, and the submergence of the spiritual. That he said, “was where he had erred." Movement of Destiny , p. 25.

Saddled with the system that replaced the 1901 plan, A. G. Daniells misinterpreted its pitfalls as his own shortcomings. How many World General Conference Presidents with finite minds could share his frustrations in attempting to fulfill a position requiring the One with infinite capacity.

When the 1901 plan was re rejected, Battle Creek could not be preserved. But the denominational pillars of  faith had to be saved from pantheistic heresies described as "the Alfa of deadly heresies." Series B, #2, p. 50. The 1903 hierarchical plan became necessary.

Although the 1903 plan could not bring men into one accord, the presence of Elder Daniells as "the right man in the right place" (Series B, 12, p. 41.) preserved the denomination from falling to pantheistic theories that infiltrated our ranks through the influence of liberal protestants visiting Battle creek. A Seventh Day Baptist educator may have been instrumental in undermining the faith of Kellogg and many others at Battle Creek. "Movement of Destiny," Froom, pp. 351,352.

An hierarchical form of church government was required by default. When the brethren failed to enter into a "upper room" experience, they also failed to see "a particle of danger in the old system of organization" and the "new constitution."

The 1903 plan that allowed a powerful personality like Daniells to meet the Alpha would permit the Omega to follow (Series B, .2, p.501); because, the 1903 plan based on human power allowed self to be exalted. Self exaltation was the basis of the alpha (Ibid. p.91.) It is certainly a problem in an hierarchical form of ecclesiastical rule. Placing the entire denominational leadership under an hierarchical plan - would affect the attitude of every worker. Therefore the entire Church leadership would be threatened by the Omega.

Will a one man president of a world General Conference" be preserved from the Omega (pantheistic theories) that are rampant among other denominations today?

Will a one man president meet the deadly heresies of the Omega “with full steam ahead”? Or, Will he fall with it?

 Will the delegates at G.C. '85 consider the 1901 apostolic plan, a plan designed by Jesus prior to His ascension, and given again to His people at the 1901 session?

Will the Lord raise up delegates who will stand as Sutherland “and take it up, and carry it out, and give it a fair trial”?

Will the delegates present a resolution to reconsider the 1901 plan?  

RESOURCE STUDIES