7 J. H. Waggoner, The Law of God (Rochester,
N.Y.: Review and Herald, 1855), p. 74.
8 Uriah Smith to Ellen G. White, Feb. 17,
1890.
® Ellen White did not clarify her position on the
law in Galatians until several years later. She did
not see it as an either-or question, but believed the
added law included both the ceremonial and moral
law. See The SDA Bible Commentary, Ellen G.
White Comments, vol. 6, pp. 1109, 1110.
1% George I. Butler, The Law in the Book of Ga-
latians (Battle Creek, Mich.: Review and Herald
Pub. Assn., 1886), p. 4.
I' G.I. Butler to Ellen G. White, Dec. 16, 1886.
12 Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Dec. 14,
1886, p. 779.
3G. 1. Butler to Ellen G. White, Dec. 16, 1886.
14 E. G. White letter 37, 1887.
1 E. G. White letter 13, 1887.
© G.I. Butler to Ellen G. White, Oct. 1, 1888.
YE. G. White letter 13, 1887.
18 \¥. C. White to Dan T. Jones, Apr. 8, 1890.
1° E. G. White letter 20, 1888.
” he White to Dan T. Jones, Apr. 8, 1890.
i
22E. G. White, Selected Messages, book 3,
p. 164.
23 E. G. White letter 21a, 1888.
24 Uriah Smith to Ellen G. White, Feb. 17,
1890.
25 E. G. White manuscript 24, 1888.
26 E. G. White letter 14, 1889.
21 E. G. White letter 40, 1890.
28 E.G. White letter 21, 1888.
29 E. G. White manuscript 13, 1889.
30 E. G. White letter 6, 1896.
SLE. G. White, Selected Messages, book 1, p.
235.
32 E.G. White manuscript 15, 1888.
3 E. G. White manuscript 13, 1889.
** E. G. White letter 57, 1895.
3 WW. C. White to G. C. Tenney, May 5, 1893.
A. O. Taitto W. C. White, Oct. 7, 1895.
37 C. C. McReynolds, “Experiences While at
the General Conference in Minneapolis, Minne-
sot, in 1888,” written in 1931.
8E.G. White letter 51a, 1895.
FE. G. White manuscript 9, 1890.
“1. D. Van Horn to Ellen G. White, Mar. 9,
1893 (written in Battle Creek).
' E. G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets (Moun-
tain View, Calif.: Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1958)
p- 590.
42 E. G. White letter 24, 1892.
43 E. G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 590.
#4 McReynolds.
# E. G. White manuscript 30, 1889.
4 E.G. White letter 7, 1888.
#7 E. G. White letter 20, 1888.
* E. G. White, in Signs of the Times, Nov. 11,
1889.
* E. G. White manuscript 9, 1888.
0 E. G. White manuscript 15, 1888.
SLE. G. White letter 82, 1888.
2 E, G. White letter 85, 1889 (April 1889).
53 E. G. White letter 24, 1889.
** E. G. White in Review and Herald, June 11,
1889, Pp. 376.
E. G. White manuscript 5, 1889.
6 E.G. White manuscript 24, 1888.
>" E. G. White manuscript 36, 1890.
8 E. G. White manuscript 15, 1888.
59 E. G. White letter 32, 1891.
80 E. G. White letter 59, 1890.
SLE. G. White letter 82, 1888.
62 E. G. White letter 4, 1896.
E. G. White manuscript 156, 1898 (not pub-
lished i in Ellen G. White 1888 Material 5).
* E. G. White, in Review and Herald, Sept. 20,
1892, p. 594.
SE. G. White, Testimonies to Ministers (Moun-
tain View, Calif.: Pacific Press Pub. Assn., 1923),
p- 410.
Life Sketches (Mountain View,
Calif: Pacific Press Pub. Assn. , 1915), pp. 437,438.
10 MINISTRY/FEBRUARY/1988
The men of
Minneapolis
George R. Knight
How much of the
conflict at
Minneapolis in 1888
could be attributed
to theological
differences and how
much to personality
clashes?
George R. Knight,
Ph.D., is a professor
of church history at
the Seventh-day Ad-
ventist Theological
Seminary, Andrews
University, Berrien
Springs, Michigan.
ersonality conflict
was a central ele-
ment in the struggle
that took place at the
1888 General Con-
ference meetings.
The champions of
“old guard” orthodoxy were George I.
Butler (1834-1918), president of the
General Conference, 1871-1874 and
1880-1888, and Uriah Smith
(1832-1903), editor of the Review and
Herald and the church’s acknowledged
authority on prophetic interpretation.
The “opposition forces” from the
West Coast were represented by Alonzo
T. Jones (1850-1923) and Ellet J. Wag-
goner (1855-1916), coeditors of the Signs
of the Times and the American Sentinel.
Their theological emphases were per-
ceived by the old guard as a threat to
some aspects of Adventist doctrine and
traditional scriptural interpretation.
Smith and Butler did not take such
threats lightly.
George I. Butler
Butler had a lofty view of the role of
the General Conference president.
Never, he wrote in 1873 in reference to
James and Ellen White, was there a
“great movement in this world without a
leader; and in the nature of things there
cannot be. As nature bestows upon men
a variety of gifts, it follows that some
have clearer views than others of what
best advances the cause. And the best
good of all interested in any given object
will be attained by intelligently following
the counsels of those best qualified to
guide.” I~
Butler, who had a draft of leadership
blood in his veins (his grandfather was