Dear Friend,
Thank you for contacting the Ellen G. White Estate. From this message and the other one that you sent, it is clear that you have been reading one of the major websites that is critical of Mrs. White. You may do this, of course, but I don't recommend it. Mrs. White's critics often present a very narrow and unbalanced picture of her. They give you only the information that they think will cause you to doubt her, while in many cases other information (sometimes lying close to the passages they quote) would give you quite a different perspective on the matter. Their purpose is to try to shake your faith. They succeed all too often.
We have responded to some of the charges that critics have made against Mrs. White. You will find the responses on our website, www.WhiteEstate.org. On the menu at the left of the home page, click on "Issues & Answers." Some of the critics' charges against Mrs. White stem from a misunderstanding of what inspiration is and how it works. The first section of the "Issues & Answers" material deals with these basic matters. There is much good reading there, which I would encourage you to read. The second and third sections deal with some of the specific criticisms people have made against Mrs. White. These will be of interest to you, too. The other two sections are also worth exploring, but they are not so directly aimed at responding to criticisms.
You may also want to look at a book we have on the site, called "Ellen G. White and Her Critics." It was written more than 50 years ago by Francis D. Nichol, and yet it still addresses a good many of the criticisms people bring against Mrs. White. You will find it by clicking "Online Books" on the menu at the left of the home page. Then scroll down the list until you find the link to it.
You asked whether I agree with the "rules" the critic assembled. First, let me say that she didn't make "rules." She offered counsel, sometimes in strong terms. The critic is putting his own "spin" on this. But do I agree with them? I do accept her counsel; I believe that God's instruction lay behind it. The counsel to avoid the theater, for instance, is an application of such Bible passages as Philippians 4:8 and Psalm 101:3. Why would a Christian who wants his life to honor his Lord disagree with this?
The counsel against dairy products is conditional on the safety (or lack of it) of the products, as Mrs. White herself indicated. She warned that the time would come when these products might not be safe to use, and she urged that we learn how to cook without them. But she did not make a "rule" that everyone had to follow in all circumstances. Here are some statements from "Counsels on Diet and Foods," pp. 351, 352, that relate to some of these items:
I use no meat [written in 1903, nearly 10 years after she decided to refuse meat under all conditions]. As for myself, I have settled the butter question. I do not use it. This question should easily be settled in every place where the purest article cannot be obtained. [Note the issue: purity, and presumably safety.] We have two good milch cows, a Jersey and a Holstein. We use cream [in place of butter], and all are satisfied with this.
Milk, eggs, and butter should not be classed with flesh meat. In some cases the use of eggs is beneficial. The time has not come to say that the use of milk and eggs should be wholly discarded. There are poor families whose diet consists largely of bread and milk. They have little fruit, and cannot afford to purchase the nut foods. In teaching health reform, as in all other gospel work, we are to meet the people where they are.
We must remember that there are a great many different minds in the world, and we cannot expect every one to see exactly as we do in regard to all questions of diet. Minds do not run in exactly the same channel. I do not eat butter, but there are members of my family who do. It is not placed on my table; but I make no disturbance because some members of my family choose to eat it occasionally. Many of our conscientious brethren have butter on their tables, and I feel under no obligation to force them to do otherwise. These things should never be allowed to cause disturbance among brethren. I cannot see the need of butter, where there is abundance of fruit and of sterilized cream.
Those who love and serve God should be allowed to follow their own convictions. We may not feel justified in doing as they do, but we should not allow differences of opinion to create disunion.
The above statements may illustrate what I mean about the critics' presenting an unbalanced view, even making a "rule" out of things that Mrs. White clearly did not make into rules.
Sometimes, too, they put their own construction on something and then blame Mrs. White for it. On masturbation, for instance, the critic objected to Mrs. White's calling it an "abomination." He claimed that this meant something that called for the death penalty, and he pointed out that the Bible did not name it as such. But the word "abomination" does not mean "a capital crime," and Mrs. White was not using it that way. My dictionary says it means "something that elicits extreme dislike." Mrs. White was claiming that God looks upon this as a sin, and we know that God dislikes all sin extremely. The critic claims to be against lust, impure thoughts, and such things, even as he seems to defend masturbation. I think that such thoughts are a key part of masturbation. Morally, Mrs. White is on the right ground on this.
Please do take a look at the materials on our website. I believe they will help you. Then if there are specific issues you would like some further help with, I will be glad to try to be of service. Feel free to ask about one or two items at a time. I may be able to help you recognize how the critics are distorting Mrs. White's views and her character.
I hope this will be helpful to you. Thank you for writing, and God bless!
William Fagal
Associate Director
Ellen G. White Estate
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20905-6600 U.S.A.
Phone: 301 680-6550
FAX: 301 680-6559
http://www.WhiteEstate.org