It was a painful experience to Ellen White to know that there were members of God's family who were well acquainted with her and her work but who, on the basis of hearsay and flimsy evidence, had lost confidence in her prophetic mission. That they could so easily forget the many faith-confirming evidences of her call and work burdened her heart. It was not she who was being rejected, but the Holy Spirit.
Only rarely did she defend herself. This she left to others. But, as she said in a letter written January 3, 1906, with Dr. Kellogg in Battle Creek presenting "anything and everything possible to make of no effect the testimonies" the Lord had given her, she must "meet the situation" (Letter 14, 1906).
After a vision in which she saw physicians of her acquaintance in a meeting setting forth what they considered valid reasons for their waning confidence, she told W. C. White that everything must be "ready for action." She felt she could, and must, meet many things she heard rehearsed in that meeting (Ibid.).
Repeatedly in the early months of 1906 she mentioned her intention of getting a clear statement of facts from those who were troubled about the testimonies. "If statements have been made that there are contradictions in the testimonies," she wrote to Elder E. W. Farnsworth, temporary pastor of the Battle Creek church, "should I not be acquainted with the charges and accusations? Should I not know the reason of their sowing tares of unbelief?"--Letter 84, 1906.
When in March the A. T. Jones attack came, she helped to meet it. On April 9 she sent out the letter she had written on March 30, addressed "To Those Who Are Perplexed Regarding the Testimonies Relating to the Medical Missionary Work":
Recently in the visions of the night I stood in a large company of people. There were present Dr. Kellogg, Elders Jones, Tenney, and Taylor, Dr. Paulson, Elder Sadler, Judge Arthur, and many of their associates.
I was directed by the Lord to request them and any others who have perplexities and grievous things in their minds regarding the testimonies that I have borne, to specify what their objections and criticisms are. The Lord will help me to answer these objections, and to make plain that which seems to be intricate.--Letter 120, 1906.
She pointed out in this letter that if the thought was being entertained that "Sister White's work can no longer be trusted," she wanted to know why that decision had been reached. "It may be," she conjectured, "that some matters that seem to you to be very objectionable can be explained." Making her position clear, she stated, "I am now charged to request those who are in difficulty in regard to Sister White's work to let their questions appear now."
This letter was sent not only to those named but to about a dozen others. Then three days later she and part of her staff were off to the meetings in southern California for the dedication of the sanitariums at Loma Linda and Paradise Valley. This was the only trip, except those to Mountain View and the Bay Area, that she made in 1906. Returning to Elmshaven on May 7, she found that question-laden responses were beginning to come in.
Circumstances at Elmshaven
The weather in northern California she found to be comfortably warm. Mustard grew high in the orchards and vineyards. Poppies bloomed in profusion. The home had undergone a good spring cleaning, and the early garden was beginning to yield its treasures. It seems likely that fresh peas were on the table for Ellen White's first noon meal at home. This was the foretaste of the good things garden and orchard would yield through spring and summer--loganberries, blackberries, cherries, potatoes, tomatoes, sweet corn, apples, and then grapes and grape juice. So abundant was the yield that after feasting on fresh loganberries, canning for winter use, and making jelly, they sold $200 worth. Fifty dollars' worth of peas were sold. By late summer the cellar was well stocked with all kinds of fruits (Letters 222 and 240, 1906).
W. C. White was at home after his long winter trip east to College View, Battle Creek, and Washington, followed by the month-long trip to southern California. In his absence his twin sons, Henry and Herbert, the first male grandchildren, had been baptized. They were nearly 10 years old. Ellen White had been consulted, and she heartily approved.
At the office there was a shortage of help because Dores Robinson had, in W. C.'s absence, gained leave so that he and his wife, Ella, might teach the church school at Chico, to the north, finishing out the school year. For them it was an interesting experience. A number of the students of that school year became earnest workers in the cause at home and overseas. But the work at Elmshaven suffered. School over, Dores and Ella were back, busy with the office program.
Questions Calling for Careful Answers
The questions about Ellen White's work that came in from Battle Creek called for earnest attention, not only by Ellen White but by her staff. Some of the questions were serious; others were of a quibbling nature dealing with "supposed inconsistencies in the testimonies" (Letter 142, 1906).
Many of the questions had their foundation in faulty concepts of inspiration. The prophet was thought of as a mechanical agent, speaking or writing each word dictated by the Holy Spirit. This "verbal inspiration" concept at times led to the expectation of more from Ellen White than was justified--more than was demanded of the prophets and apostles of old.
Her defense of the testimonies and of herself actually dated back to January. "I have been very busy of late," she wrote on January 19. "The Lord has sustained me in preparing matter to meet the unbelief and infidelity expressed regarding the testimonies He has given me to bear to His people. He has given me words to write."--Letter 34, 1906.
Response to Specific Questions
But now in the responses to her invitation for men to write out their problems, she and the staff were dealing with specific questions. What did she mean when she used such expressions as "I," "we," and "us"? Was not every word she wrote as inspired as the Ten Commandments? What did she mean when she declared in Battle Creek that she did not claim to be a prophetess? Why were there times that a message addressed to an individual was not sent? How could she, if she were a prophet, favor plans for the 1903 General Conference session to be held at Healdsburg and a little later favor plans for Oakland as the place for the session? What about the buildings in Chicago she saw in vision and condemned, when no such buildings had ever been erected?
Because of her illness, she felt unable to take up the specific questions immediately on her return from southern California. She asked for a little time to make a full recovery from the "effects of the influenza." In the meantime, on May 26, she wrote a general statement touching on several basic points. This was published in the Review and Herald of July 26. It was titled "A Messenger," and dealt with the question of claims to be "a prophetess" and the broad nature of her work. She also cited her experience in writing many books that the Lord by His Spirit had helped her to write. They "contain light from heaven," she wrote, "and will bear the test of investigation." Then on June 14, she wrote to Dr. David Paulson at Battle Creek, doubtless drawing on material that had been brought together by her helpers:
Dear Brother,
Your letter came to me while in southern California.... Now I must respond to the letters received from you ... and others. In your letter, you speak of your early training to have implicit faith in the Testimonies and say, "I was led to conclude and most firmly believe that every word that you ever spoke in public or private, that every letter you wrote under any and all circumstances, was as inspired as the Ten Commandments."
My brother, you have studied my writings diligently [he had in 1897 compiled the book Healthful Living, made up of quotations from the Ellen G. White writings], and you have never found that I have made any such claims. Neither will you find that the pioneers in our cause have made such claims.--Letter 206, 1906 (Selected Messages 1:24, 25).
Then, citing her introduction to The Great Controversy, from which she quoted, and drawing statements from the testimonies, she provided an answer to his main question and then followed this with admonition. (Her clarifying statements on this point appear in Ibid., 1:25-31.)
The next day she undertook to answer Dr. C. E. Stewart's question:
I have received your letter, in which you inquire what is meant by the words "I," "we," "us," and so on, in my testimonies.
In my work, I am connected with my helpers, and I am also connected and in close touch with my Instructor and other heavenly intelligences. Those who are called of God should be in touch with Him through the operation of His Holy Spirit, that they may be taught by Him.
Of mine own self I can do nothing. I feel that all credit must be given to a higher Power....
I cannot always say "I." I am not accustomed to doing so. Without the special light and grace of Christ, I can do nothing. Furthermore, I am connected with my workers. During the night season I am often deeply impressed with representations passing before me, and usually, whatever the hour of the night may be, I arise at once, and write out the instruction that has been given me. This manuscript is placed in the hands of one of my copyists, who makes several copies on the typewriter. Then it is returned to me, and I carefully read it over to see if it is all correct. Matter written for publication is sometimes sent direct to one of our periodicals, and sometimes laid aside with other matter to be published later in book form or in some other way.
This is one reason why I often say "we." My helpers and I are co-workers in sending out the light given me to be a blessing to the world.--Letter 170, 1906.
"Read the second chapter of First Corinthians," she urged, "and notice carefully how Paul uses the words 'I,' 'we,' and 'us.'"
An Array of Questions from One Physician
A letter from one prominent physician contained the most complete list of questions yet brought forward by the Battle Creek medical workers. A few illustrated the kind of trivia that the questions sometimes dealt with. Among the points presented in this letter were:
1. Is everything from Ellen White's pen a "testimony," or are some just "letters"?
2. Is one to assume that the conditions described in the testimonies actually exist or are they just designed to forestall such conditions?
3. What was meant by Ellen White's statement in the college library just before the 1901 General Conference that perhaps she had written too strongly to Dr. Kellogg?
4. What about the statement "I am not a prophet"?
5. Does W. C. White influence the testimonies?
6. What about "contracts"?
7. Can I have a statement about what you mean by God in nature?
8. Do you approve of sending personal testimonies, which the Lord has given to certain men, to other people also?
9. Referring to the Berrien Springs incident regarding the confrontation over pantheistic teachings, does Ellen White give directions as to when, how, in what order, and to whom her writings should be sent, or is it left for others to decide?
10. What about W. C. White's influence? Here the doctor quotes J. Edson White's alleged statements at the Berrien Springs meeting that if W. C. White did not quit tampering with the testimonies the Lord would have to take the prophetic gift from Ellen White. (Edson denied having said this. See J. E. White to EGW, July 24, 1907.)
11. Are the testimonies a test of fellowship?
12. What about the recall of the volume 7 galley proofs for revision?
13. Is it right for any Seventh-day Adventist to labor in the [Battle Creek] Sanitarium?
14. Does a late testimony abrogate all the previous ones on the same theme?
15. What about the K-4-1899 Ellen G. White letter to Kellogg stating that medical missionary work is undenominational?
16. What about the reform dress? (See The Review and Herald, October 8, 1867.)
17. Were there eleven or twelve disciples at the Last Supper? [Probably supported by a mistake made by Edson White in his first issuance of the book Christ Our Saviour, an adaptation that was a mixture of E. G. White materials and his writings on the life of Christ.]
18. To what extent and in what ways are the testimonies edited after leaving your pen?
Ellen White answered some of these questions; a few she ignored. At times the Elmshaven staff prepared answers. Sometimes the answer was readily available; sometimes the question itself was more a statement than a question (30 WCW, p. 333).
Involvements in Answering Questions
A glimpse of the involvements in answering these questions is found in a W. C. White letter written on July 13, 1906, to Elders Daniells, Prescott, and Irwin:
This is Friday afternoon. We have had a busy week in copying out and sending away letters Mother has been writing. Today Dores [Robinson] has copied one of eleven or twelve pages to Elder A. T. Jones in which Mother refers to past experiences, and makes some interesting quotations from letters sent to him in former years. For several days Brother Crisler has been hunting up what has been written in past years regarding contracts and agreements [between the Battle Creek Sanitarium and students and employees]. I think he will be able to submit to Mother his collection of manuscripts early next week.-- Ibid., 767.
Commenting on the questions she was receiving and answering, Ellen White wrote:
During the past few weeks I have not had much rest in spirit. Letters, full of questions, are continually crowding in upon us.... I have been sent some of the most frivolous questions in regard to the testimonies given me by the Lord.--Letter 180, 1906.
But she did not dismiss all the questions as frivolous. Many she answered, writing kind, tolerant letters that dealt in a straightforward way with the problems presented.
Answer Regarding Chicago Buildings
She personally answered the questions concerning the vision given to her in Australia in which she was shown a large building in Chicago erected to serve the medical missionary interests. No such building existed, and the complaint was that Ellen White wrote a testimony of reproof for something that did not take place.
She had dealt with this on March 8, 1903, but took it up again in 1906 on March 10. The earlier statement was sparked by a visit to Elmshaven by Judge Jesse Arthur, for many years an attorney connected with the Battle Creek Sanitarium. After attending important meetings at the St. Helena Sanitarium in June, 1902, he and Mrs. Arthur spent some time with Ellen White and key members of the office staff.
The judge was in a cordial mood, having been deeply impressed with her presentations at the meetings, where, he declared, he had "heard the very things I needed to hear" (Manuscript 33, 1906). In the conversation, the matter of the vision of Chicago buildings was discussed. For several years there were features of this matter that perplexed Ellen White. Of the experience she wrote:
When I was in Australia, I was shown a large building in Chicago. This building was elaborately furnished. I was shown that it would be a mistake to invest means in a building such as this. Chicago is not the place in which to erect buildings. The Lord would not be honored by such an investment of His means.
She commented:
Someone said that the testimony that I bore in regard to this was not true--that no such building was erected in Chicago. But the testimony was true. The Lord showed me what men were planning to do. I knew that the testimony was true, but not until recently was the matter explained.--Letter 135, 1903.
She then told of how the visit of Jesse Arthur and his wife cleared up all questions. He told Ellen White that the testimony was perfectly plain to him, "because he knew that preparations were being made to erect in Chicago a building corresponding to the one shown ... [to her] in vision" (Ibid.). She recognized that the vision was a warning given to prevent the carrying out of plans "not in harmony with God's will." It did. No buildings were erected in Chicago. But individuals critical of her work later used this as an illustration that the visions were not reliable.
Judge Arthur, after his return to Battle Creek, wrote on August 27, 1902, giving facts in the case. He told of how in late May or June, 1899, as leaders in Battle Creek sought recognition for the American Medical Missionary College, pressure was brought by the Association of American Medical Colleges for buildings in Chicago more suitable for medical education than the rented quarters in use.
In response to this, the decision was made to erect, at the cost of $100,000 or more, a suitable and rather elaborate building. Judge Arthur himself was made chairman of a building committee of three. The judge described what took place:
The committee met on [June 26, 1899] and immediately formulated plans for the purchase of a site and the erection of such a building. I was instructed as chairman of the committee to open negotiations ... and otherwise take steps to raise the necessary funds to purchase the site, and erect the building contemplated.--DF 481, Jesse Arthur to WCW, August 27, 1902.
Mr. William Loughborough, a brother to the well-known Elder J. N. Loughborough, drew up the plans, and then they waited for Dr. Kellogg to return from a trip to Europe. The doctor discouraged proceeding with the project, the reason for which Judge Arthur says he never knew.
It seems clear that Dr. Kellogg, having received Ellen White's reproof for erecting large buildings in Chicago, turned away from the project. Of this Ellen White wrote to Dr. Kellogg on October 28, 1903:
In the visions of the night a view of a large building was presented to me. I thought that it had been erected, and wrote you immediately in regard to the matter. I learned afterward that the building which I saw had not been put up.
When you received my letter, you were perplexed, and you said, "Someone has misinformed Sister White regarding our work." But no mortal man had ever written to me or told me that this building had been put up. It was presented to me in vision.
If this view had not been given me, and if I had not written to you about the matter, an effort would have been made to erect such a building in Chicago, a place in which the Lord has said that we are not to put up large buildings. At the time when the vision was given, influences were working for the erection of such a building. The message was received in time to prevent the development of the plans and the carrying out of the project.--Letter 239, 1903.
The presentation of these facts satisfied most who were concerned and may for a time have done so for Dr. Kellogg. But the criticism that Ellen White wrote a message reproving Dr. Kellogg for something he did not do formed a convenient excuse for rejecting the testimonies. Dr. Kellogg in 1942 in his own home recounted the story to the author of this biography, presenting it as a basis for his impaired confidence in Ellen White and her work.
Whether Past or Future She Did Not Always Know
This experience points up an interesting facet of her work--that is, that she herself on several occasions did not know whether the vision given to guide and guard represented something that had taken place or was given as a warning to guard against a wrong course of action.
While in Australia Ellen White wrote a testimony to a minister, reproving him for a violation of the seventh commandment. When he received it, he felt much troubled, for he had not so transgressed. He went to W. C. White and declared that he was greatly perplexed, for he had received a testimony reproving him for something he had not done.
"I am very glad that you have come to me," Elder White replied, and reminded him that while men draw fine distinctions between the past, present, and future, with God, all is present. He looks at the thoughts of the heart.
"I see the point," the minister replied. "I accept ... [the] warning, and I will keep ... far away from the evil course referred to."--DF 105b, WCW, "W. C. White Statements Regarding Mrs. White and Her Work," pp. 4, 5.
But within six months he was dismissed from the ministry for the very thing he had been reproved for, in advance, in the testimony.
The Chicago building episode brought to Ellen White's mind two other experiences of seeing in vision buildings not yet erected. Of this she wrote in 1903:
I have been thinking of how, after we began sanitarium work in Battle Creek, sanitarium buildings all ready for occupation were shown to me in vision. The Lord instructed me as to the way in which the work in these buildings should be conducted in order for it to exert a saving influence on the patients.
All this seemed very real to me, but when I awoke I found that the work was yet to be done, that there were no buildings erected.
Another time I was shown a large building going up on the site on which the Battle Creek Sanitarium was afterward erected. The brethren were in great perplexity as to who should take charge of the work. I wept sorely. One of authority stood up among us, and said, "Not yet. You are not ready to invest means in that building, or to plan for its future management."
At this time the foundation of the Sanitarium had been laid. But we needed to learn the lesson of waiting.--Letter 135, 1903.
But the climate when these visions were given was quite different from what it was in Battle Creek during the crisis over accepting the visions.
Now, in 1906, with so many in Battle Creek raising questions about the testimonies, the Chicago building question was projected. On March 20, Ellen White prepared her second and more direct answer, embodying the points she covered in her 1903 letter written soon after Judge Arthur's visit (Manuscript 33, 1906).
Who Manipulated Her Writings?
The questions raised concerning the manipulation of her writings, and the influence of W. C. White on the testimonies, distressed Ellen White, particularly such charges as were traced to careless statements made by James Edson White. As referred to earlier, the two sons of James and Ellen White were much unlike in personality and character. The younger, William C., was steady, calm, loyal to the testimonies, dependable, and endued with leadership qualifications.
The older, James Edson, while talented, creative, and a good author, was unsteady, a poor manager of finances, and, because his brother and church leaders could not and did not endorse all his ventures, very critical. The testimonies of his mother addressed to him from early years carried at times little weight; yet when fully consecrated to God he did a remarkable work, particularly among the neglected blacks in the South. [Note: See ron graybill, Mission to Black America, and A. W. Spalding, Origin and History of Seventh-day Adventists, Volume 2, chapter 18, "American Negro Evangelism."]
Because he was the son of James and Ellen White, James Edson was able to borrow, mainly from Adventists, to support his various enterprises, many of which failed. Again and again his mother and his brother came to his personal financial aid as various enterprises he had been warned against collapsed.
As Ellen White found she could not endlessly support him in these ventures, his brother attempted to counsel him. He in turn took the position that W. C. was influencing his mother. Among his personal friends in and around Battle Creek were a number who were voicing Dr. Kellogg's insinuations that Ellen White was being influenced by her son William and others. It was easy for James Edson to join in. He said some most unfortunate things that were quickly picked up and, coming from Ellen White's son, were capitalized on.
Finally, painful as it was, Ellen White had to step in and set the record straight. To James Edson she wrote:
What kind of a move was it that you made in rushing to Battle Creek and saying to those there that W. C. White, your own brother, for whom you should have respect, manipulated my writings? This is just what they needed to use in their councils to confirm them in their position that the testimonies the Lord gives your mother are no longer reliable....
Must I have such an impression go out? It is false, and I am sorry that you stand as you do.... You have regarded your brother in a strange, false light, and persist in doing this.
This has been the grief of my life. Your stubborn persistence forces me to speak now. I will not keep silent.... Your sentiments are the prevailing sentiments of a deceived mind.
As she brought the six-page, cutting reproof and censure to a close, she declared:
Your position is a grievous thing to your mother and wears upon the life of your brother.... I shall have to speak. I cannot and will not suffer reproach to come upon the cause of God, and my work that God has given me to do, by your saying he manipulates my writings. It is falsehood--but what a charge is this! Not one soul manipulates my writings.--Letter 391, 1906.
In another letter to Edson, written May 21, 1906, covering somewhat the same ground, she stated:
The position you have taken, the words you have said, are not a secret. Everywhere they are handled by those who would uproot confidence in the testimonies, and they have influence because you are WCW's brother and the son of Ellen G. White.... W. C. White is true as steel to the cause of God, and no lie which is in circulation is of the truth.--Letter 143, 1906.
Earlier in the year she had written:
There are those who say, "Someone manipulates her writings." I acknowledge the charge. It is One who is mighty in counsel, One who presents before me the condition of things in Battle Creek.--Letter 52, 1906.
As to W. C. White, she wrote later in the year to Elder G. I. Butler, president of the Southern Union Conference. She referred to her experience following upon the death of her husband, the nights of deep sorrow and then of her healing at Healdsburg, and she recounts the messages that came to her concerning her work and the work of W. C. White:
I was instructed that the Lord had mercifully raised me up because He had a special work for me to do, and I was assured that I should have the special protection and care of God. The Lord had spared my life, and had saved me from that which was surely sapping my life forces.
The Mighty Healer said, "Live. I have put My Spirit upon your son, W. C. White, that he may be your counselor.
"I have given him the spirit of wisdom, and a discerning, perceptive mind. He will have wisdom and counsel, and if he walks in My way, and works out My will, he will be kept, and will be enabled to help you bring before My people the light I will give you for them.
"Let your light so shine before men that they may see and understand in a special manner that the Lord has given a message to meet the emergencies that will arise. As you speak the words I give you, angels of heaven will be with you, to make impressions on the minds of those who hear.
"I will be with your son, and will be his counselor. He will respect the truth that comes through you to the people. He will have wisdom to defend the truth; for I will take charge of his mind, and will give him sound judgment in the councils that he attends in connection with the work.
"The world in its wisdom knows not God. It does not behold the beauty and harmony of the special work that I have given you. Your son will be perplexed over many matters that are to come before My people, but he is to wait and watch and pray, and let the words of God come to the people, even though he cannot always immediately discern the purpose of God.
"If you watch and wait and pray, Providence and revelation will guide you through all the perplexities that you will meet, so that you will not fail nor become discouraged."--Letter 348, 1906.
Care Required in Answering Questions and Charges
Through June and the early part of July, Ellen White devoted much of her time to answering the many questions. Scores of letters totaling hundreds of pages were written. Many of these carried warnings concerning the perils of cherishing doubts in the face of the strong evidences God had given of the integrity of the Spirit of Prophecy.
What care Ellen White had to exercise as she dealt with these questions from the physicians in Battle Creek! She found that she must measure her words very precisely.
She wrote:
When I am meeting with evidences that these communications will be treated by some in accordance with the human judgment of those who shall receive them; when I realize that some are watching keenly for some words which have been traced by my pen and upon which they can place their human interpretations in order to sustain their positions and to justify a wrong course of action--when I think of these things, it is not very encouraging to continue writing....
The twistings and connivings and misrepresentations and misapplications of the Word are marvelous.... What one does not think of, another mind supplies.--Letter 172, 1906.
The time came when "the most frivolous questions" were being asked (Letter 180, 1906). She wrote:
I am to sow the good seed. When questions suggested by Satan arise, I will remove them if I can. But those who are picking at straws had better be educating mind and heart to take hold of the grand and soul-saving truths that God has given through the humble messenger, in the place of becoming channels through whom Satan can communicate doubt and questioning.--Letter 200, 1906.
Instruction began to come to her that she need not pick up and answer "all the sayings and doubts that are being put into many minds" (Manuscript 61, 1906). She and her staff, after providing answers to the principal questions, considered their work quite well finished in this line of defense.
It was now mid-July. Ellen White felt relieved as she turned her attention to other interests. Camp meeting would soon open in Oakland, and she would attend.