After having considered the main myths related to October 22, 1844, and the rituals that were performed daily in the earthly sanctuary; in this article, we will review some myths related to the ministry of Ellen G. White. George Knight in his book: “Our Identity: Origin and Development”, on pages 30-31, records an interesting quote from Mrs. White, where she mentions the following: “There is no excuse for anyone to take the position that there are no more truths to be revealed, and that all our explanations of the Scriptures are free from mistakes. That certain doctrines have been considered true for many years is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Time will not convert error into truth, and the truth has the ability to be impartial. No true doctrine will lose anything from careful investigation. Only God is infallible. Those who think they will never have to abandon a favorite position, or have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed.” The previous quote shows that for Mrs. White, the revelation of truth is progressive because as humans we are not ready to receive and understand everything that God is willing to reveal to us.
It is possible that some may resist accepting what was previously written by Sister White, remembering what Jaime White wrote, who stated that her Testimonies were either from God or from the devil; a quote endorsed by his wife in her early years; that contrast with what she wrote in the second half of her ministry. An example of Mrs. White’s changing thoughts is that, during the early years of her ministry, she condemned the consumption of meat from clean animals; only to write decades later that “the consumption of meat, even pork; was not a matter of determining faith” (Knight, Walking with Ellen G. White, p. 43). In the first mentioned book by Knight, on page 184; mentioning her ministry, he also wrote: “Those who knew her and had worked with her generally did not accept that her advice was unparalleled; that they were a hundred years ahead of their time and that all her writings had been given to her through direct heavenly revelation. She never made such claims. On the contrary, those ideas developed after her death, thanks to the work of her followers. G. B. Thompson put it correctly at the 1919 Bible Congress when he said: “If we had always taught the truth about the inspiration of Ellen G. White, we would not have any problems or discord in the organization today. However, conflict arises because we have not taught the truth, and we have placed the Testimonies on a level where they should not be”. On page 216 of the same work, Knight notes the following: “The decades following Mrs. White’s death in 1915 witnessed a continuous and growing trend towards placing her writings at the center of Adventist theology; as well as a continued interest in expanding the mythology associated with her life and ministry.” From there arise widely disseminated ideas that she was a hundred years ahead of her time, that her advice was exceptional, free from errors and textually inspired; as well as that the ideas and data she used were revealed to her directly through divine revelation. Hans La Rondelle, one of our prominent theologians in recent decades; in his book “Prophecies of the End”, in its final part, records the comments of Robert Olson, former secretary of the White Center, who comments on the writings of Ellen White as follows: “I believe there were times when she was an exegete, but those cases are extremely rare. I think that generally she was like a preacher. She used the Scriptures as an evangelist would.
The previous quotes may be misinterpreted in the sense of trying to discredit her figure; when in reality what is intended is to demystify her, because the majority of the membership unconsciously considers her our ‘vegetarian Virgin Mary,’ as one of our writers labeled her. Regarding Mrs. White’s health reform, she was sincere in confessing that she would not give a penny for her example in such practices. This will be better understood when reviewing what Herbert Douglass wrote in the book “Messenger of the Lord,” written at the request of the White Center Board of Directors. On pages 315-317 of that book, we find the following statements: A – “Her son William C. wrote to G. B. Starr in 1933 that the White family had been vegetarian, not always completely abstaining from meat.” B – “… For Ellen G. White, a vegetarian was not necessarily a complete abstainer, but someone who did not habitually eat meat.” C – “In 1876 she wrote to her husband who was traveling: ‘We have not had a particle of meat in the house since you left… we have had salmon a few times. D – “Two years after her personal pledge in Brigton countryside (Australia) not to eat meat, Mrs. White wrote to her non-Adventist niece Mary Clough Watson: ‘Two years ago I came to the conclusion that it was dangerous to use meat from dead animals, and since then I have not eaten meat at all. It is never placed on my table. I use fish when I can get it. We get beautiful fish from the nearby saltwater lake.’ E – “… Ellen White requested oysters in 1882 in a letter to Mary, her daughter-in-law: ‘If you can get me a good box of fresh herrings, please do so. The last ones Willie got are bitter and old…, and if you can get a few cans of good oysters, get them.’ What deduction can we make from this request for herrings and oysters – which are unclean animals? Obviously, approximately 19 years after presenting the health reform, Mrs. White was not only not vegetarian, but she consumed unclean animals. Herbert Douglass, trying to justify Mrs. White’s consumption of oysters, argues that in Leviticus 11, oysters are not specifically mentioned as unclean animals. What is forgotten is that in 1865 the Whites reprinted an article written by Dr. James Jackson in the magazine ‘Health and How to Live’ where oysters are disqualified as human food because they are scavengers and therefore unclean.
This is not alarming, as what is recorded in this account only reveals her humanity with her particular tastes, which does not disqualify her as an instrument of God; but it does demystify the image of perfection and infallibility that we have had of her. Blessings.”
Comments