|
Abstract
Part 1 of this study suggests that the attendees at the first International
Prophetic Guidance Workshop (1982) acknowledged and began to interpret
information about the inspiration of Ellen White’s writings that was largely
unavailable or unknown to most researchers even two or three decades previously.
This article (as Part 2 of the study) briefly describes five examples of this
evidence before claiming that such information illumines the current discussion
of Ellen White’s spiritual giftedness and offers guidelines for the proper use
of her writings by individual Seventh-day Adventists and by the church as a
corporate entity.
Introduction
I was one of about seventy attendees at the first International Prophetic
Guidance Workshop that convened at the world headquarters of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church (1982). This article, therefore, may have the strengths and
suffer from the biases of any report about an epochal event written by an
observer-participant. A short description of the baggage that I carried to the
Workshop may help the reader understand my view of it at the time as well as
now, a quarter-century later.
I began pastoral-evangelistic ministry in 1958, and nurtured a special
interest in Adventist history during the conflicts that were occurring at that
time in New Zealand. During graduate study under the auspices of the Seventh-day
Adventist Theological Seminary at extension schools that convened in Australia
(1957-8, and 1965), plus on-campus study in Berrien Springs (1970-1972), I
focused as much as was allowable upon research relating to Adventist history and
thought, from Millerite times to the 1970s. My background in ministry (New
Zealand, the United States) and formal study (M.A., M.Div. in Berrien Springs;
D.Min. in Indianapolis) was known to and considered by church leaders when they
appointed me as the founding director of Australasia’s Ellen G. White/SDA
Research Centre (1976). Thereafter, with primary sources relating to Adventist history
and thought more readily available, I tried to offer honest answers
to the host of new questions that Adventists began to ask during the
effervescence of the 1970s.
While I valued attendance at the workshop for White Estate
employees and research centre personnel that convened in Washington during 1978,
I viewed the 1982 event as far more significant due to its fuller grasp of the
contemporary issues, the wealth of documentary evidence it provided attendees
(941 pages, mostly in typescript), and the oral discussions that it facilitated
(recorded on cassettes). Now, twenty-five years after the 1982 Workshop, it is
apparent that the evidence acknowledged there (now available in the church’s
research facilities that serve various regions of the world) impacts the current
discussion of Ellen White’s inspiration in a dramatic way.2
Therefore, this article will select arbitrarily five examples
of this evidence (many others could be included) and suggest how such data
inform the 2007 discussion of Ellen White’s writings. I believe that Ellen
White’s writings are inspired by God and crucial in the life and witness of
individual Adventists and the church. More specifically, this article will seek
to forward the discussion of how the available information suggests her writings
should and should not be used.
Example I: The Great Controversy Narrative
The story of Ellen White’s panoramic view of the conflict between good and
evil is told often in Adventist literature. Herbert Douglass recounts it
succinctly:
At Lovett’s Grove, Ohio, mid-March 1858, after her husband preached a
funeral sermon, she was bearing her testimony on the cheery hope of the Second
Advent. Then, she wrote later, "I was wrapt in a vision of God’s
glory." For the next two hours she remained in vision as those in the
crowded schoolhouse watched with avid interest. That Lovett’s Grove vision has
become known as "the great controversy vision." 3
Before me as I write is the volume Ellen G. White wrote in 1858, entitled Spiritual
Gifts. The Great Controversy Between Christ and His Angels, and Satan and His
Angels, published by James White, printed by the Steam Press at the Review
and Herald Office, Battle Creek, Michigan. This book’s 219 tiny pages begin
with "The Fall of Satan" and, 41 chapters later, end with "The
Second Death." It was a large printing project for an as-yet unnamed
movement and its small press.
Ellen White’s voluminous writings from 1858 until her death in 1915 focused
on the "Great Controversy Theme" more than any other topic. Her
exposition included many periodical articles, further content in her Spiritual
Gifts volumes (1864), her four-volume Spirit of Prophecy series
(1870-1884), her five-volume Conflict of the Ages series (1890-1917),
plus uncounted allusions and references in letters, manuscripts, and other
books. Douglass cites, approvingly, Joseph Battistone’s suggestion that
"this central theme directly affected her religious teachings in theology,
health, education, history, and science" (264).
A crucial question that must be asked about this huge volume of written
material concerns what was given to Ellen White versus what was derived
from her wide reading, conversations with others, travels, and more. From her
writings and those of her contemporaries, especially statements by her son
William ("Willie") Clarence White (1854-1937), we learn that her
visions usually came in the form of "scenes," "views,"
"representations," or "flashlight pictures." In other words,
her visionary experience in 1848 (when the first Great Controversy panorama was
given to her) and 1858 (when she was commissioned to report the major vision in
writing) may have been something like ours in watching a feature film on a
theatre screen or as a DVD.
During 2007, Signs of the Times in the South Pacific Division and the
United States published five articles that I wrote about stalwart Christian
leaders who stood for biblical truth amidst difficult circumstances: Wycliffe,
Tyndale, Huss, Luther, and Bonhoeffer. I found it very helpful to watch DVDs
about such historical figures as an important but small part of the research
that lies behind the 1500 words I wrote about each of them. In addition to
viewing DVDs, I needed to go to many historical sources to determine when and
where these individuals lived, details of their life experiences, the identity
of both their principal supporters and enemies, the nature and content of their
major writings, and the way they influenced the course of human history.4
That process helps me to understand Ellen White’s experience in writing
about the far larger number of biblical and historical characters that she
discusses (often in much more detail than my articles do) within her Great
Controversy writings. It was absolutely necessary for her to consult the
writings of many other Adventist and non-Adventist authors, in order to
adequately describe the "scenes" she had witnessed, even though some
"views" were repeated more than once. The evidence is abundant that
the panoramas of her visions gave her the theme but not the detail required for
her written accounts. This understanding creates a context for her years of
diligent toil between 1858 and 1915. During those fifty-seven years she greatly
expanded the detail of her narrative, far beyond that she gives in the first
telling of the story. To follow both the historical development of Adventism and
the maturation of Ellen White’s literary work is to see clearly the need for
the major revisions of the 1884 book that is much like the one we call The
Great Controversy; these revisions were effected especially in the
editions copyrighted in 1888, 1907, and 1911.
Divine inspiration gave Ellen White the idea, the theme, the outline,
or "the big picture" for her magnificent telling of the conflict
between Christ and Satan. I cannot conceive how she could have worked this out
for herself, unaided.5 Human "perspiration" filled out the detail; this
she could achieve with diligence and the help of the spiritual community that
she served so effectively. God met the need of the Adventist Church by His gift
to us through Ellen White, what we now often refer to as The Great Controversy
Theme. He chose not to present this to His chosen messenger in the ways some
Adventists appear to wish: word for word, as some kind of text message, or as an
encyclopedic history. Her supernatural experience was the foundation; the
communication of its message required hard work by a diligent,
spiritually-gifted author and her associates.
The 1982 Workshop attendees knew this background history far better than any
other group of Adventist believers who had conferred together since 1919.
Probably most of them had read as least some of the transcripts of the 1919
conversations that engaged administrators, Bible, and history teachers who had
worked with Ellen White during part of her long lifetime (1827-1915). They had
read or at least were aware of the research listed in Donald McAdams’
excellent review of Ellen White studies during the 1970s, including the Arthur
White papers on what he called "a factual view of inspiration." One of
the important studies of the era was a doctoral dissertation by Frederick Harder
who concluded that Ellen White "was not writing history, she was
interpreting it." Indeed, Harder suggested that "the history was
learned by ordinary means, but the activity of God in the historical situation
was seen by revelation." McAdams also reported results from his own
detailed study of Ellen White’s handwritten draft that later became her
published account of John Huss. This study made it abundantly clear where she
obtained the historical data and the way in which she used it: "the
objective and mundane historical narrative was based on the work of historians,
not visions."6
Due to this background, many attendees at the Workshop in 1982 were
ready to appreciate Robert Olson’s clear and helpful presentation in a
nine-page paper, "The Question of Inerrancy in Inspired Writings," and
to recognize the reality of "historical difficulties in The Great
Controversy" as presented earlier by Ronald Graybill. During November
1982, I wrote down for researchers a two-page list of documents that were
available in the research centre that was under my care at that time. I
suggested that these documents, "taken together, give some guidance in
understanding how the Seventh-day Adventist Church relates to the question of
inspiration in general and the matter of inerrancy in particular."7
In summary, the Workshop of 1982 marked for me a high point in the church’s
long struggle to affirm the reality of Ellen White’s inspiration at the same
time as it recognized her writings were not (as had so often had been claimed)
inerrant. However, her writings were exactly what the church needed as it
struggled to understand from Scripture its place in the plan of God: its
identity and mission.8
Example II: The Harmony of the Gospels Issue
My mother gave me a wide-margin Bible in 1954, during my first year as a BA
(Theology) student at Avondale College. Of the twenty subjects required over
four years for graduation, one of my favourites was entitled "Life and
Teaching of Jesus," a year-long study of the four Gospels using Ellen White’s
1898 classic The Desire of Ages as a main textbook. I already cherished The
Desire of Ages, not least because when quarantined with mumps I had read its
835 pages in a few days. Therefore, I relished the opportunity to mine its
treasures more thoroughly under the stimulus of academic assignments. With the
aid of a mapping pen and Indian ink, I made copious notes in the generous
margins of my Bible. I used a number of harmonies of the four Gospels, as well
as many commentaries, but the detailed notes reflected mainly what Ellen White
wrote about Jesus. Often my focus was upon details such as the chronology of our
Lord’s ministry and the sequence of events between His birth and His
ascension.
On 17 November 1957 I graduated from college with a great certainty about how
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John fitted together because I had used The Desire
of Ages to correct all the harmonies and commentaries to which I had access.
Ellen White alone, I believed, had an absolute understanding of Christ’s life
in all its details, including such matters as the sequence of events and the
chronology of His ministry. However, after thirteen years of college and
ministry, the binding of my expensive Bible no longer held the worn pages
together. With a keen sense of bereavement I ceased using it. (Recently, I
donated it to an Adventist Heritage Centre.)
Not until 1978, two years after I became director of the Ellen White/SDA
Research Centre located at Avondale College, did I even begin to understand that
for more than two decades I had seriously misunderstood and greatly misused The
Desire of Ages. Elder Arthur White was my teacher in the Seminary Extension
School of 1957-8; I cherished his guidance as my first mentor in my role at the
Research Centre from 1976. Then Dr. Robert Olson replaced Elder White as
Secretary of Ellen G. White Estate, so that Elder White could devote more of his
time to the six-volume biography of his grandmother. During those years we were
all discovering fresh insights, especially as we explored Ellen White’s
unpublished manuscripts and letters in the light of the new questions that were
being asked. On 23 May 1979, Dr. Olson and Elder Ronald Graybill released a
47-page study for distribution as a "Shelf Document," entitled
"How The Desire of Ages Was Written." The first seven pages were
"An Introductory Statement" followed by "exhibits," arranged
chronologically, beginning in 1858 and extending to 1936.
Those 47 pages are a rich source of data about how to understand Ellen White
as a dedicated, diligent, inspired writer on the life and teachings of Jesus.
Never did she claim to know so many of the things that I believed her writings
defined with absolute precision. "Send books, red-covered Jewish
Antiquities and the Bible Dictionary. Is Night Scenes of the Bible there? If so,
send it," she wrote in Letter 60, 1878. "Tell Mary to find me some
histories of the Bible that could give me the order of events, I have nothing
and can find nothing in the library here" (Letter 38, 1885). On 16 January
1887, Willie White (Ellen White’s longest-serving and most-trusted advisor
after the death of her husband in 1881) ordered for her a list of books
including Hanna’s Life of Christ and "a good harmony of the
gospels." Then he added: "She ought to have a copy of the latest and
best Bible dictionary." On 23 November 1896 Marian Davis, Ellen White’s
principal "bookmaker," wrote to the publisher of The Desire of Ages
re "Transposition of Chapters."
In the order of chapters we followed Andrews’ Harmony, as given in his life
of Christ. He is generally regarded as the very best authority, and is quoted by
leading writers. We know of no better arrangement than his. (The year between
the first and second Passover seems to have been a period of comparative quiet
and seclusion; that between the second and third, of activity and publicity.)
Those who read the MS, Professor Prescott and Sister Burnham, agreed with our
arrangement. We would not like to see this chapter transposed.
Just before The Desire of Ages was published, Marian Davis wrote as
follows, on 15 June 1898:
In the preface, would it be well to state, in some way that this book is not
a harmony of the gospels, that it does not attempt to teach chronology. Its
purpose is to present the love of God, the divine beauty of the life of Christ,
and not to satisfy the questioning of critics. The above may not be the best way
to put it. It is intended only as a suggestion.
Such basic information was well known to at least a majority of the attendees
at the Workshop in 1982. Thus, as the recorded sessions demonstrate at length,
the delegates were able to apply such insights whenever Ellen White’s use of
sources and other matters relevant to the fuller understanding of her
inspiration came under discussion. The delegates did identify, as a major need,
a detailed paper on the ways in which Ellen White’s literary assistants
supported her work. Of course, much more is now known about this important
subject.9
Had I known, during the first two decades of my ministry, about such
important information that now enables the church to offer a coherent
understanding of Ellen White’s inspiration, years of fruitless toil may have
been avoided. It was my duty to do in the 1950s what Ellen White and her
associates did during the 1890s: use the best sources available to understand
Christ’s life and teachings in all its dimensions. Moreover, many of my
sermons and Bible studies should have focused more fully on "the love of
God" and "the divine beauty of the life of Christ" instead of
declaring authoritatively matters that were not germane to Ellen White’s
purpose.10
While the data referred to in this article are now widely
available throughout the world, these pieces of information are either not known
to or are being ignored by many Adventists who continue to misuse the writings
of Ellen White in the same way that I did from the 1950s to the 1970s.
Example III: Prescott as a Consultant on Scripture and History
The present understanding of Ellen White’s life and writings is enriched by
the testimony of those who worked closely with her during the seventy years of
her public ministry (1844-1915). A host of important names might be mentioned in
this regard, along with letters these people wrote and the books, doctoral
dissertations and other studies that detail the evidence that they have left
behind. Some of these individuals are well known; they include close relatives
of Ellen White (in particular, James and Willie White), church leaders (such as
George I. Butler, Arthur G. Daniells, William A. Spicer), literary assistants
(among them Fanny Bolton, Marian Davis). However, there are many others whose
voices must be heard; some important witnesses are still not widely known.
Only one example of the many is cited here to illustrate the value that we
derive from this type of testimony. William Warren Prescott was born of
Millerite parents in 1855 and lived until 1944. He had more opportunities for
education than most Adventists of his era; for instance, he was already teaching
Greek while still a student. By thirty years of age, when he accepted the
presidency of Battle Creek College, Prescott was an experienced teacher and
editor. His long and very public service thereafter involved him in
administering and founding educational institutions, editing the Review and
Herald, world travel, teaching, writing, and engagement in various aspects
of church leadership. Prescott was a close associate of six General Conference
presidents.
Since the publication (Spectrum, May 1979) of some of the transcripts
of the 1919 discussions amongst Adventist leaders, Prescott’s understanding of
Ellen White’s ministry has become better known. Most importantly, Gilbert
Valentine has written a doctoral dissertation on Prescott that is so detailed it
is bound in two large volumes. Valentine’s dissertation informed his major
book on The Shaping of Adventism (1992), recently republished in amended
form (2005).11
Prescott’s long career demonstrates the potential value for the church of
an inquiring mind at the same time as it illustrates how an intensely loyal
leader can be misunderstood by some of his contemporaries. Due to Prescott’s
stature as a scholar, Ellen White and her literary helpers valued his counsel
highly. More than fifty of his suggestions for the updating of The Great
Controversy were adopted for the 1911 edition. When Ellen White and her
associates were struggling with historical issues discussed in the Old Testament
book of Ezra, Willie White and Clarence Crisler appealed to Prescott for his
assistance.12
The broad and deep understanding of Prescott that Dr. Valentine’s research
affords also enables us to interpret a highly important letter that Prescott
wrote to Willie White during 1915. Dr.Valentine, in a recent journal article,
explores the context and import of this letter thoroughly.13 Several conclusions
are evident from a careful perusal of this article. The difficulties Adventists
now face in understanding Ellen White’s inspiration are not new. The people
who were close to Ellen White during her lifetime understood the issues well but
they found it difficult to share their fuller understanding of Ellen White’s
inspiration with the Adventist community. An appreciation of this history and
its comparative complexity was crucial at the 1982 Workshop when in a major
presentation Dr. Roger Coon highlighted the fact that most Adventists probably
have an "impaired" view of inspiration.
Example IV: Olson and the Shut Door Teaching
From the vantage point of 2008, it is hard to imagine the intensity of the
discussion about the Shut Door that stirred the church during much of the
twentieth century. When Nichol wrote his monumental Ellen G. White and Her
Critics in 1951, the issue was so important that he devoted ninety of his
703 pages to it. Nichol’s eloquent defence of Ellen White attempted to build
an impregnable wall around her. 14 Unfortunately, despite his best endeavours, the
wall soon started to crumble and within two decades it was as ineffective as the
historic walls of London were when the city was attacked by airplanes. A
European researcher, Ingemar Linden, in a doctoral dissertation and a book was
one of those who demonstrated the relevance of information that Nichol did not
include in his discussion. Adventism was in a dynamic period of its development,
not least due to the fact that its archives were being better organised, more
effectively indexed, and thoroughly searched.
To read Arthur White’s writings of the 1970s is to note that the Shut Door
was one of a cluster of issues that refused to move from the centre of the
discussion about Ellen White. As one example: we had become accustomed to
reading Early Writings without realising that its text was edited to
remove concepts that the growing movement no longer found applicable. The
inspiring chapter entitled "My First Vision" recounts Ellen Harmon’s
encouragement that Jesus was still leading the disappointed Millerites toward
the Kingdom of God.
But soon some grew weary, and said the city was a great way off, and they
expected to have entered it before. Then Jesus would encourage them by raising
His glorious right arm, and from His arm came a light which waved over the
Advent band, and they shouted, "Alleluia!" Others rashly denied the
light behind them and said it was not God that had led them out so far. The
light behind them went out, leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they
stumbled and lost sight of the mark and of Jesus, and fell off the path down
into the dark and wicked world below. Soon we heard the voice of God like many
waters, which gave us the day and hour of Jesus coming.
This inspired vision gave the fledgling movement a presiding symbol that was
of immense importance for its early development and remains instructive for us
all these years later. However, some Adventists are still surprised when they
read Ellen Harmon’s earliest accounts of the story.
But soon some grew weary, and they said the City was a great way off, and
they expected to have entered it before. Then Jesus would encourage them by
raising his glorious right arm and from his arm came a glorious light which
waved over the Advent band, and they shouted Hallelujah! Others rashly denied
the light behind them, and said it was not God that had led them out so far. The
light behind them went out leaving their feet in perfect darkness, and they
stumbled and got their eyes off the mark and lost sight of Jesus, and fell off
the path down in the dark and wicked world below. It was just as impossible for
them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which
God had rejected. They fell all the way along the path one after another, until
we heard the voice of God like many waters, which gave us the day and hour of
Jesus’ coming.
The first of these accounts is quoted from Early Writings copyrighted
in 1882 and 1945. The second is from a broadside written by "ELLEN G.
HARMON, PORTLAND, April 6, 1846," entitled "TO THE LITTLE REMNANT
SCATTERED ABROAD." The differences in the quoted portions are more profound
than the "softening" of the charismatic "Hallelujah" to the
more sedate "Alleluia." The earlier account obviously is written in a
context where the early Adventists believed that those who left Millerism were
eternally lost and that non-Millerites were rejected by God.
It was a dramatic occasion for me when, at the 1982 Workshop,
Dr. Robert Olson presented a 58-page compilation entitled "The 'Shut Door'
Documents: Statements Relating to the 'Shut Door,' the Door of Mercy, and the
Salvation of Souls, by Ellen G. White and Other Early Adventists, Arranged in a
Chronological Setting from 1844 to 1851." This compilation, along with what
Olson termed "Occasional Commentary," gave the church convenient and
more comprehensive access to the statements about a crucial aspect of its early
doctrinal development, thereby stimulating movement from a vigorous denial
of evidence to the coherent interpretation of evidence.
Ellen White’s first vision gave the infant church a powerful and
constructive symbol to cherish on its journey of faith. She and the community
she served grew in understanding, as the disciples did after the crucifixion of
Jesus. It was clear from the outset that her writings are not inerrant, despite
the expectations of so many Adventists. It is also evident that she was a
dedicated servant of God who moved forward, step-by-step, as her visions, Bible
study and interactions with fellow believers enlarged her understanding of truth
and duty. Elsewhere I claim that Ellen White’s ability to grow in
understanding and even change important ideas mark her as a truly creative
person.15
Example V: Health Reform from the Workshop to McMahon
Most of the attendees at the 1982 Workshop were raised with the belief that
Ellen White’s writings on health were far in advance of other
nineteenth-century health reformers and required no revision of details. Such
concepts were reinforced as recently as 1971, with the publication of Medical
Science and the Spirit of Prophecy that quoted a medical doctor as saying
after nineteen years in practice:
I have not had to change one medical idea that I have gotten from the
writings of Mrs. E. G. White, but all my medical books have had to be replaced
with up-to-date versions based on more modern medical research.16
Such understandings were challenged by the first detailed
study of Ellen White as a health reformer to be undertaken by a trained
historian. A teacher at Loma Linda University, Dr. Ronald Numbers suggested that
his book, published in 1976, was the first to neither praise nor blame Ellen
White but simply to try and understand her. Looking back, we can see clearly
that in the 1970s the church was discovering much historical information that
related to Ellen White’s inspiration. The church could not, at the time, offer
Dr. Numbers a coherent concept of her inspiration that embraced the data he had
discovered. This reality is mentioned here simply to highlight the fact that
many of the attendees at the 1982 Workshop were very aware of the significance
of the 1970s studies relating to Ellen White’s writings on health: they had
read Dr. Numbers book, two White Estate reviews of it, and other material about
the historical development of Adventist concepts of health reform.
To assist the discussion at the Workshop, exhibits from Ellen White’s
articles in the Health Reformer were provided to attendees, demonstrating
clearly that many of her statements did not accord with health science of the
1980s. It was at that time that I developed a fourteen-point analysis of how the
freshly-discovered information changed the church’s earlier understandings.
For instance, prior to the 1970s, most believers would have accepted with little
or no hesitation the claim that Ellen White’s "writings on health placed
Seventh-day Adventists on vantage ground by relating bodily health to spiritual
well-being and by pointing out numerous paths to right living." However,
with the kind of data that was before the Workshop attendees in 1982, this
sentence needed re-phrasing along the following lines: "Her writings on
health placed Seventh-day Adventists on vantage ground by relating bodily health
to spiritual well-being and by pointing out numerous paths to right living, even
though she reflected some of the ideas of her Adventist and non-Adventist
contemporaries." When a South Pacific Division sub-committee heard the
evidence that I presented to it, the members agreed that the word
"incorrect" fitted the evidence. Thus, ideally, the sentence would
include that descriptor in this way: "some of the incorrect ideas of
her Adventist and non-Adventist contemporaries." In the editorial process, Ministry
understandably softened the expression slightly.17
Two decades later, Adventists started to became aware of important research
by an Australian specialist medical practitioner, Don McMahon. I have discussed McMahon’s
findings in a Spectrum article and elsewhere, so I will not repeat the
detail here, except to quote one sentence: "The what statements in Spiritual
Gifts (1864) may have a 96 percent congruence with twenty-first-century
medical opinion; some 38 percent of its why statements are considered
verified by the same standard."18 The conclusion is evident, to my mind: God
entrusted Ellen White with counsel that helped Adventists develop their health
message, thereby enhancing their longevity and quality of life and, as well,
supporting their mission. However, this supernatural help did not negate the
value of medical science that would, over time, far more fully describe the
reasons why Ellen White’s lifestyle recommendations were so valuable. Her
inspiration met a specific need despite the scientific errors that occur in her
writings on health matters. The 1982 Workshop attendees wrestled with
disquieting evidence that Ellen White’s writings on health are not inerrant;
it took another two decades for Adventists to understand this reality more
coherently.19
Conclusion
After his very detailed study of Ellen White’s writing about John Huss,
Donald McAdams shared his convictions clearly and cogently.
I believed when I wrote "Ellen G. White and the Protestant
Historians," and still do, that the evidence is compatible with Ellen White’s
statements claiming inspiration regarding historical events and describing her
use of protestant historians. A belief that God revealed to Ellen White the
activities of Christ and His angels and Satan and his angels in the
great-controversy struggle, along with occasional flashlight views of historical
events with explanations about the spiritual significance of those events, is
compatible with the evidence. A belief that God showed Ellen White one
historical scene after another making up the continuous historical narrative
that appears in The Great Controversy is not."20
This quotation intimates the fact
that 34 years ago, after a very detailed
examination of the evidence relating to Ellen White’s experience in
writing The Great Controversy, a reputable Adventist historian expressed a then-fresh
and still-valid understanding of her inspiration. The view of Dr. Donald McAdams
derived from his study of the Huss narrative coheres with a huge body of
evidence from within Ellen White’s writings about other matters: the Life of
Christ, Adventist teachings (for example, our change from the Shut Door concept
to that of Global Mission), health, and so on. In addition, it needs to be said
that McAdams already, even at that early stage in the widening discussion, had
some important insights about the role of Ellen White’s literary assistants
and advisors.
So far this two-part study has focused only on how to understand the inspired
Ellen White in the light of the evidence that has been part of the Adventist
discussion since the 1970s, data that was before the attendees at the 1982
Prophetic Guidance Workshop. But the title of this article also suggests there
is a need to understand and appreciate the inspiring Ellen White. She
used the best sources and advice that was available to her in explicating the
Great Controversy Theme, in writing on the Life of Christ, in exegeting the book
of Ezra, in expressing Adventist beliefs, and in describing how to live
healthfully.21 Her example inspires us now, in the 21st Century, to invest similar
diligence and commitment to that she demonstrated as we use wisely and well the
more abundant resources that are available in our time and place. Ellen White’s
spiritual gift enhances our ability to understand the message and engage in the
mission God has given Seventh-day Adventists in these last days of earth’s
history.22 It does not encourage spiritual laziness on our part.
_______________
1 It may be helpful for those who read this
article to be aware that it is written for those Adventists who honestly want to
understand the present discussion of Ellen White’s inspiration but who do not
themselves possess the historical documents that illumine this important topic.
Therefore, while this article is brief and simple, it does refer to some of the
crucial sources that may be consulted on the topic. Those who want more detailed
information are invited to read at least some of a hundred other items I have
written that offer much more data about every aspect of the contemporary
discussion. Some of those other articles are listed in the online SDA Periodical
Index, under my name; the full text of a selection of my articles is available
on http://www.sdanet.org/atissue. [back]
2 I
thank Dr. William G. Johnsson (an assistant to the General Conference President)
for sharing a draft of an appendix (entitled "The 1982 International
Prophetic Guidance Workshop") that he has written for the book being edited
by Dr. Merlin Burt. Dr. Burt reported on the forthcoming book in the January
2008 Newsletter of the Biblical Research Institute. [back]
3 Herbert E. Douglass, Messenger of the Lord:
The Prophetic Ministry of Ellen G. White (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press,
1998), 128; cf. 131, 445-454, 264. [back]
4 See http://www.signsofthetimes.org.au. [back]
5 The reader might note a thesis of the 1960s
that detailed Ellen White’s use of Milton’s Paradise Lost, as well as
the more recent volume by Gregory Boyd that explores the "God at War"
issue. [back]
6 See Donald R. McAdams, "Shifting Views of
Inspiration: Ellen G. White Studies in the 1970s," Spectrum 10, no.
4 (March 1980), 27-41. [back]
7 See
"The Seventh-day Adventist Church and the Question of Inerrancy," 16
November 1982, two pages. It is important to explore the relationship between
the concept of inerrancy and other issues, including that of authority. For an
excellent historical analysis of the Adventist struggle to be truly Protestant
and to faithfully apply Ellen White’s writings, see George R. Knight,
"Visions and the Word: The Authority of Ellen G. White in Relationship to
the Authority of Scripture in the Seventh-day Adventist Movement," Adventist
Today 15, no. 6, at http://www.atoday.com/node/3095
. See also, the much earlier paper by Bert Haloviak (c. 1980), "Ellen
White and the SDA Church", at http://sdanet.org/atissue/white/haloviak
in which he gives a very similar historical analysis of different views toward
the work of Ellen White during and in the years immediately following her death.
(also available at the GC Archives site, at http://www.adventistarchives.org/docs/AST/Sligo_Series.pdf
[back]
8 To understand these matters more fully, the reader may consult the text and
the sources listed in such of my papers as "Ellen White and South Pacific
Adventism: Retrospect and Prospect," delivered at the Ellen White Summit
convened by the South Pacific Division at Avondale College, February 2-5, 2004.
That paper is one of those available on SDAnet/AtIssue,
http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/white/patrick/egw-retrospect.htm . [back]
9 For example, note Messenger of the Lord, 444-465;
(http://www.whiteestate.org/books/mol/TOC.html
) also, consult the
Index (pages 580-586) to locate comments about Ellen White’s literary
assistants such as Fanny Bolton and Marian Davis. Cf. "How The Desire of
Ages Was Written" with the Valentine article discussed below. [back]
10 I now interpret The Desire of Ages in terms of Ellen White’s
conception of its theme; see, for instance, page 22. Her book is about how to
fall in love with God as revealed in Jesus. [back]
11 See Gilbert Murray Valentine, "William
Warren Prescott: Seventh-day Adventist Educator," (PhD diss., Andrews
University, 1982), 660 pages; Gilbert M. Valentine, The Shaping of Adventism:
The Case of W.W. Prescott (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press,
1992); Gilbert M. Valentine, W.W. Prescott: Forgotten Giant of Adventism’s
Second Generation (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2005).
[back]
12 The need at that time for a comprehensive
statement on Ellen White’s inspiration is evident from the contents of
"The Blue Book," the popular name for A RESPONSE TO AN URGENT
TESTIMONY from Mrs. Ellen G. White CONCERNING Contradictions, Inconsistencies
and Other Errors in Her Writings (Battle Creek, Mich.: The Liberty
Missionary Society, 1907). A copy of this rare publication was loaned to me on
11 December 2007; I read its 89 pages within the next 24 hours as part of the
process of checking sources relevant to this article. It would be difficult to
over-estimate the relevance of Dr. Valentine’s research for those who want to
assemble a sustainable understanding of Ellen White’s inspiration. [back]
13 See Gilbert M. Valentine, "The Church
'drifting toward a crisis': Prescott's 1915 Letter to William White," Catalyst
2, no.1 (November 2007), 32-96;
http://www.missioncollege.edu/downloads/Catalyst_1_1.pdf
(or http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/white/valentine-drifting.htm). I will not summarise this most-recent of Valentine’s articles here, since it
is readily available to everyone who has Internet access. [back]
14 See Francis D. Nichol, Ellen G. White
and Her Critics: An Answer to the Major Charges That Critics Have Brought
Against Mrs. Ellen G. White (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1951). [back]
15 See "Ellen White Yesterday and
Today," http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/patrick/egw-affirm.htm. [back]
16 See
Medical Science and the Spirit of Prophecy (Washington, D.C.: Review and
Herald, 1971), 3-4. The booklet was prepared in the offices of The Ellen G.
White Estate, Incorporated. [back]
17
See Arthur N. Patrick, "Does our past
embarrass us?" Ministry, April 1991, 7-10. ( http://www.sdanet/atissue/white/documents/embarrass.htm
) [back]
18 Arthur Patrick, "Prophets Are Human! Are
Humans Prophets?" Spectrum 33, issue 2 (Spring 2005), 71-2. Cf. my
paper entitled "Ellen Gould White: Pioneer of Adventist Health
Emphases,"
http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/white/patrick/egw-health-1.htm
. [back]
19 I
thank Dr. Don McMahon for sharing with me summaries of his ongoing research
relating to Ellen White’s writings on health. Dr. McMahon’s current
investigations hone his earlier reports made in typescript, books, and CDs. It
is my conviction that his findings are congruent with an array of other evidence
relating to Ellen White’s inspiration. [back]
20 McAdams, "Shifting Views," 34; cf.
his 244-page manuscript entitled "Ellen G. White and the Protestant
Historians: The Evidence from an Unpublished Manuscript on John Huss,"
dated March 1974. [back]
21 Some of these sources are deeply flawed from our perspective
in Century 21. For instance, Uriah Smith was not a trained historian; therefore,
because Ellen White followed his narrative of the French Revolution closely, her
account requires extensive revision. But Smith’s description of such events
was the best that was immediately available to Ellen White as she drafted The
Great Controversy. We can (and must!) do much better with such history than
was possible in her setting, remembering she was not writing history;
rather, she was interpreting history in terms of the panorama that was
disclosed to her mind. [back]
22At the Questions on Doctrine 50th Anniversary Conference that
convened at Andrews University, 24-27 October 2007, my friends Dr. Russell
Standish and Dr. Colin Standish gave away copies of some of their books (see http://www.sdanet.org/atissue
) for perspectives on the conference). One of those books
written by the Standish brothers, A History of Questions on Doctrine:
Fidelity or Compromise? (Highwood Books: Narbethong, Victoria, 2007)
suggests on page 116 that an earlier attempt I made to address the matter of
Ellen White’s inspiration "must rank among the most disingenuous material
ever to blight a Seventh-day Adventist denominational publication." I have
tried to keep such expressions of concern in mind as I have written this
article; I will also formally invite my friends to comment on this further
attempt to address the matter in the light of Adventist history. A polar
opposite viewpoint is advocated by those friends who disagree strongly with the
conviction I hold that can be simply stated as follows: Ellen White received
supernatural input that formed a basis for many of her major writings. When
such friends read this article they will desire to correct my use and
application of this concept. Therefore, I acknowledge again that this belief is
foundational for my understanding and interpretation of Ellen White’s life and
writings. However, I ask my friends who are located on the opposite wings of the
contemporary discussion to consider the evidence on which I base the convictions
that they challenge in forthright terms. [back]
Arthur Patrick, Honorary Senior Research Fellow, Avondale
College
28 January, 2008
|
