The Great Disappointment
By J. O. Corliss
The Experiences of Former Days—No. 3
As an instance of the impression left from the services of those days, the following is to the point: Immediately after a conference held in Washington, D. C., in 1843, Brethren Joseph Bates and Herman S. Gurney passed on into Maryland, then a slave-holding State, and sought to proclaim the message. At one place a slaveholder attended the service, and after the meeting, insisted on the brethren’s returning with him to his plantation for the night. On the way thither, he told them that he had already seen them in a dream, in connection with the subject they were handling. So impressed was he with the circumstances, that he gave permission for all the slaves to attend the remainder of the meetings (a hitherto unheard-of circumstance), and when the meetings closed, he took these ministers with his own team to their next appointment, twenty-five miles away, and on parting with them said: “I would willingly sacrifice all my property, if I could but be in your situation.” Up to the year 1843, the leaders in that message had based their faith on time, declaring that the Lord’s coming would take place in the autumn of that year. Their conclusion was easily drawn. From Daniel’s prophecy they learned that from the going forth of a certain commandment, 2,300 years would close up all things earthly, and usher in the eternal reign of Christ on earth. By reference to the book of Ezra, the seventh chapter, it was found that this commandment went forth in the year 457 B. C. Subtracting 457 B. C. from 2,300, we have the date 1843 A. D. as the result. But in this loose calculation they were doomed to disappointment; for after getting everything ready to meet the Lord on the tenth day of the seventh month of that year, according to Jewish reckoning, the time went by, leaving them in great perplexity. Many theories were advanced to explain the disappointment, both by Mr. Miller and by others, but none of these seemed satisfactory. Before the end of the year, however, a conference was called at Exeter, N. H., in which the matter was intelligently adjusted, and the message received new life and vigor. At the conference mentioned, several were making commonplace remarks, when a sister arose and said: “It is too late to be dealing in these platitudes; a brother in the audience has light for the people.” Immediately upon the sister’s taking her seat, John Couch arose and reviewed the data of the prophetic utterance upon which their message had been based. He showed that the 2,300 years reaching to the cleansing of the sanctuary must include both the first and the last day of the full time given; that inasmuch as the 2,300 years, if beginning with the first day of the year 457 B. C., could not be called completed before the last day of 1843, since it required 457 full years B. C. and 1843 full years A. D. to make 2,300 years. He then showed that the commandment on which their time message depended for its data, did not take effect until the autumn of 457 B. C., and so the term of 2,300 years would extend to the autumn of 1844. This would designate the autumn of 1844 as the time for the coming of the Lord. This explanation was so simple and satisfactory that the whole audience was electrified. They went forth from that conference with the cry on every lip: “Behold the Bridegroom cometh.” Men sold their homes, and gave their means to the proclamation of the Lord’s return, believing that now they would surely see the fruition of their fondest hope. But again disappointment overtook them. The time set for the Lord to come in 1844 passed, as had the date set in 1843. To many the disappointment seemed a relief. Their faith had never been very strong, but they had followed in the way others were going, hoping to be saved if the views held were correct. These soon mingled with the world, or united with nominal churches, and joined in ridiculing those with whom they had before been so closely associated. Not so, however, with others. To them the disappointment was very bitter. All their earthly goods had been swallowed up in the promulgation of a doctrine that had now left them where they did not know which way to turn. They could not believe that the Lord, whom they had so sincerely served, would desert them at that juncture, and so they “stood still,” to hear the voice of God. In referring to this time, Elder Bates told the writer that he had never supposed one could possibly have such a strong sense of grievous disappointment and live. Said he: “All my means were gone except a few pennies. I had purposely allowed my provisions to run out. The morning following the disappointment, when I went down the street to purchase a few pounds of flour for my family’s sustenance, the boys of the street followed and hooted after me, and men pointed the finger of scorn at me, saying, ‘I thought you were going up yesterday.’ Could the ground beneath my feet have opened to swallow me, it would have been a great relief, so intensely bitter was the disappointment of the time.” But the people were not long left in this lamentable state. O. R. L. Crozier soon published in an extra of the paper <i>Day Star</i>, an exposition of the sanctuary and its priesthood. This opened a line of thought, a few years later more fully developed by Elder J. N. Andrews, which explained the nature of the disappointment of 1844, and led loyal Adventists to see a beauty in the law of God which had not hitherto been appreciated by them. But God anticipated this movement, and as the truth of the sanctuary developed, witnesses to that truth were already prepared to move forward in its defense. This point must, however, be reserved for another article.