|
|
Ellen Gould White
(1827-1915)
| |
Ellen Gould White, the much-revered co-founder of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, is seriously misunderstood. Her well-published writings—that were once considered so essential to define, explain, and defend virtually all post Battle Creek doctrine—are no longer viewed as credible or even honest. In fact, this backlash has grown so strong that few support Ellen White or her version of historic Adventism.
Today, the Adventist community is conflicted, angry, and even embarrassed about Ellen White. Many doubt her credibility and most dismiss her writings altogether. In recent years, the Church has become so uncertain about Ellen White's theology, including her definition of historic Adventism and even her role in the famous 1888 Gospel debate, that many have given up trying to understand and defend her or the Church. Such a cynical state of affairs has reduced the most published of all the Pioneers to a very uncertain and dubious status within the Denomination.
|
A Deceitful Policy
|
For purposes of our study, the problems with Ellen White can be traced to the relocation of the Denomination’s headquarters in Takoma Park, Maryland, at the turn of the Century. This is when a plan was developed to cover-up Ellen White's involvement concerning the infamous 1888 debate that destroyed the Church’s Battle Creek Empire. Thus, from the very beginning in Takoma Park, Ellen White's writings, especially about doctrine, were not honestly communicated to the Church. In fact, this ill-fated and deceitful policy was a serious blunder that eventually allowed many myths about Ellen White and the Pioneers to become a part of the fundamentals that defined and controlled Seventh-day Adventist theology. As a result, this policy of suppression prepared the way for much confusion and falsehood about Ellen White, which in turn led to great debate and eventually, schism.
As the Twentieth Century wore on, the White Estate made considerable information available to the Church. Surprisingly, this new evidence from the vault only raised more questions because it did not support Arthur White’s promotion of Ellen White’s theology. But the leaders continued to ignore the growing problems that were slowly morphing into scandal. In spite of evidence to the contrary, they repeatedly reassured the Church that Ellen White and the pioneers fully supported the traditional position about the Investigative Judgment and 1844. Anyone who suggested otherwise was a traitor to the Advent cause and to Ellen White.
|
The Church Divided |
Notwithstanding these official assurances from the leaders, the Church was becoming hopelessly divided about historic Adventism as well as Ellen White's role within the modern Church. Many also realized that there was something very wrong with any Gospel interpretation that depended upon the sinner's good works to obtain salvation. The evangelical-minded Seventh-day Adventists demanded that the Church repudiate any doctrine that did not fit within the fundamentals of Protestant theology, regardless of the positions of Ellen White or the White Estate.
By 1980, the Church was in a religious civil war over Ellen White. Some members said that she had no authority to declare doctrine, while others strongly claimed the opposite. To make matters even more confusing, many in the Church agreed with Dr. Ford's competing version of the First Angels’ Message, which rejected both the sanctification-focused Gospel of the White Estate as well as the Battle Creek doctrine of the Investigative Judgment. The Church leaders strongly objected to this variant theology as the traditional Adventists pronounced doom on all who did not fully support their legalistic, 1844 theology, which they claimed had the full support from Ellen White and all the pioneers.
As the bitter Gospel debate wore on, the Seventh-day Adventist hierarchy had no solutions for either side. Since the published evidence from the White Estate was contradictory and unclear, the leaders opted for the status quo and declared that Dr. Ford lost the debate and had to be removed from the Adventist community in an effort to protect Ellen White and the fundamentals that she allegedly supported.
Such a decision meant that the emerging Gospel Reform movement, which featured Dr. Ford's evangelical theology, had to be terminated. Although new evidence was discovered in the White Estate that supported Dr. Ford’s position, the leaders thought it best to support the familiar traditions of the White Estate rather than call into question the long-standing teachings of the Church. Thus, in 1980, at Glacier View, the leaders upheld Arthur White's interpretation of Ellen White's theology and officially sanctioned his version of historic Adventism, which he had been promoting from the White Estate for the past forty years.
This turn of events, however, did not make Ellen White popular. Because she was so closely identified with Arthur White's theology, the evangelically minded Adventists dismissed Ellen White as a true Protestant. In addition, after Glacier View, many Adventists abandoned not only Ellen White and the Investigative Judgment, but the Sabbath as well. The church was now seriously divided over the Gospel and Ellen White.
|
Ellen White Loses Credibility |
If things looked bad for Ellen White because of Glacier View, her credibility got even worse two years later in 1982. It was during this year that Pastor Walter Rea, a once ardent supporter of Ellen White's ministry, published The White Lie. In his book, Rea explained how he caught the White Estate misstating facts about how Ellen White’s books were written. This additional revelation, directly on the heels of Glacier View, was too damaging for the White Estate to contain, as the leaders were not able to refute Walter Rea any better than they had Dr. Ford. Thus, the credibility of Ellen White, and that of the Traditionalists who claimed to revere her, plummeted. Many now viewed Ellen White as a legalist, a plagiarist, and a fraud. And the White Estate was powerless to stop the overwhelming tide of criticism that seemed fatal for Ellen White's credibility. A great schism followed, as the Denomination and the White Estate lost credibility.
The Church leaders soon realized that Glacier View theology was a mistake. They privately recognized that Arthur White's theology was not only misleading, it was also indefensible and unsustainable. Many understood that regardless of the outcome of Glacier View, the emerging facts about Ellen White did not justify the expulsion of Dr. Ford and the evangelicals, nor did these facts support the traditional position of the conservatives (also known as “traditionalists”). Glacier View was an obvious and devastating mistake that somehow must be addressed and resolved.
Consequently, within a decade after Glacier View, the Church reversed its position and recognized that Ellen White could not be relied upon as a doctrinal guide as previously taught by the White Estate. Moreover, the evidence now suggested that the two favorite doctrines of the Traditionalists—the Investigative Judgment and the human nature of Christ—were not clearly supported by Ellen White as the Church had been taught for decades. By the early 1990's, the leaders bluntly told the Traditionalists that they were to stop promoting the very doctrines that the Church had upheld earlier at Glacier View. The leaders made it clear that if the Conservatives refused to surrender to the Evangelicals on this point, they would suffer the same fate as the exiled Dr. Ford.
This turn of events infuriated the conservatives and ignited even more conflict and schism within the Adventist community. But no amount of protest could stop the post-Glacier View plans to "chart a new course" away from the debilitating and irreconcilable debates about Ellen White and the fundamentals. The Traditionalists were being silenced and marginalized. Their once victorious theology was gradually being phased out and replaced with a less problematic brand. Although Ellen White's most ardent and passionate supporters were furious at what they considered “apostasy” by the Church, the official voice of Ellen White was nonetheless muted and marginalized. In short, the leaders determined that Ellen White was too controversial and difficult to understand. Now, with so much contradictory evidence surfacing about Ellen White, it seemed impossible to unify the Church around her conservative theology. There were just too many anomalies, unanswered questions, and problems to resolve. Consequently, the leaders determined to gradually remove Ellen White as the focus of debate and lead the Church away from the conflicting and legalistic conservative viewpoints.
|
The Fundamentals Rejected |
As the Church staggered forward into the Twenty-first Century, the leaders were resolute in recreating modern Adventism into a pluralistic Denomination independent of Ellen White's counsel or theology. A decade or so after Glacier View had divided the Church, the General Conference now officially downplayed Ellen White’s writings, and so, too, the fundamental teachings that she said could never be compromised or removed. Therefore, the very time when the Adventist community needed Ellen White's apocalyptical insight and spiritual guidance, this remarkable Pioneer was now unwanted, unappreciated, and very misunderstood.
Although there was plenty of new evidence in the White Estate that helped explain Ellen White and her positions, the leaders were hesitant to re-open the earlier debates that had torn the Church apart. Rather than take the time to correct the many errors and myths that had flourished due to Arthur White's influence, the leaders decided to ignore the problems and concentrate on building up a modern Adventist empire that did not have to rely on Ellen White's theology. As far as the leaders were concerned, it was time to "chart a new course" away from historic Adventism as well as away from Ellen White so that the Church could grow in peace.
Today, in spite of the fact that the Church owns a massive archive of Ellen White's writings, few Adventists understand this remarkable Pioneer or know how to relate to her version of historic Adventism. Instead of embracing her writings, many now view Ellen White as cultic and dishonest. She has become a lightening rod for the critics and an embarrassment to this religious community. How did this turn of events take place? Why did Ellen White become so marginalized at the end of the Twentieth Century? And how can her credibility be restored?
The answers to these and other questions about Ellen White and her writings will be answered in a new book entitled, The Hidden Truth About Ellen White. This work will expose and document a massive and systematic cover-up in the White Estate that will shock the church and stun the critics. It will show how this long-running fraud developed, explaining not only how it was sustained and covered up, but also who was responsible for deceiving the church about Ellen White all these years. It is a story about Ellen White and church history that has never been heard before, one that will forever change, for the better, the way this beleaguered Pioneer is understood.
For more information about The Hidden Truth About Ellen White, including the table of contents, and the first chapter, click here.
|
|
|
