Inspired Author or

Plagiarist?
Can we trust Ellen White’s
books?
Denis Fortin
The Writings of Ellen G. White
 The Issue
One of the most discussed issues
regarding the writings of Ellen White
is the use in her own literary
productions of material she
borrowed, or allegedly plagiarized,
from other sources without giving
explicit credit to the original authors.
 The Issue
The charge that Ellen White plagiarized
affects not only the credibility of her claim to
a prophetic gift, but also the very integrity
and genuineness of her personal life.

She has been accused of being a thief, a

liar, and an exploiter of church members
who constituted a captive market for her
books.
 The Issue
That Ellen White borrowed from other
authors was openly acknowledged by
herself (cf. GC xi-xii) and by people close
to her (cf. 3SM 451-465).

The real issue, however, is not whether

she borrowed without giving proper credit
but whether she borrowed in such a way
as to deceive the reader.
 The first allegation
Dudley M. Canright, former Adventist
minister and colleague of James and
Ellen White.

Seventh-day Adventism Renounced

(New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1889).
 More recent accusations
Walter Rae, The White Lie

Dale Ratzlaff, The Cultic Doctrine of

Seventh-day Adventists

Video: Seventh-day Adventism:The Spirit

Behind the Church
 The church’s response

The Seventh-day Adventist church has

repeatedly addressed these accusations.

In 1951, Francis D. Nichol’s Ellen G. White

and Her Critics (RHPA) gave a synopsis of
the charges and provided answers (403-
467).
 Legal opinion
But renewed and intensified charges of
plagiarism in the 1970s and early 1980s
led the church to begin an extensive study
into Ellen White’s borrowing of external
material in the production of her works.

At the same time, a legal opinion was

sought and the charge that Ellen White
plagiarized her books was reviewed by
Attorney Vincent L. Ramik.
 Legal opinion

In his August 14, 1981 report, after

spending more than 300 hours researching
about 1,000 relevant cases in American
legal history, he concluded that "Ellen
White was not a plagiarist, and her works
did not constitute copyright
infringement/piracy."
 Legal opinion
Ramik explained that, "Nowhere have we
found the books of Ellen G. White to be
virtually the ‘same plan and character
throughout’ as those of her predecessors.
Nor have we found, or have critics made
reference to, any intention of Ellen White
to supercede . . . [other authors] in the
market with the same class of readers and
purchasers."
 Legal opinion

Instead he found that "she invariably

introduced considerable new matter to that
which she borrowed, going far beyond
mere ‘colorable deviations,' and, in effect,
created an altogether new literary work."
(Adventist Review, September 17, 1981)
 John Wesley’s practice
"It was a doubt with me for some time," he wrote in
the preface, "whether I should not subjoin to every
note I received from them the name of the author
from whom it was taken; especially considering I
had transcribed some, and abridged many more,
almost in the words of the author. But upon further
consideration, I resolved to name none, that
nothing might divert the mind of the reader from
keeping close to the point of view, and receiving
what was spoken only according to its own intrinsic
value." (quoted in F. D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics, 406)
 Ellen White’s practice
"The great events which have marked the
progress of reform in past ages are matters of
history, well known and universally acknowledged
by the Protestant world; they are facts which none
can gainsay. This history I have presented briefly,
in accordance with the scope of the book, and the
brevity which must necessarily be observed, the
facts having been condensed into as little space
as seemed consistent with a proper
understanding of their application.
 Ellen White’s practice
“In some cases where a historian has so grouped
together events as to afford, in brief, a comprehensive
view of the subject, or has summarized details in a
convenient manner, his words have been quoted; but in
some instances no specific credit has been given, since
the quotations are not given for the purpose of citing that
writer as authority, but because his statement affords a
ready and forcible presentation of the subject. In
narrating the experience and views of those carrying
forward the work of reform in our own time, similar use
has been made of their published works" (GC xi-xii).
Truth Belongs to God
 Both John Wesley’s and Ellen White’s
admission to borrowing from other authors
without giving full credit indicates that for both
the truths they were borrowing transcended
these authors.
 For Wesley and White truth ultimately
belongs to God and not to humans.
 Ellen White’s practice
In The Great Controversy (in all three editions of 1884,
1888, and 1911) materials are borrowed from:

Merle D'Aubigné, History of the Reformation

J. A. Wylie, History of the Waldenses

J. N. Andrews, History of the Sabbath

Uriah Smith, The Sanctuary and Its Cleansing

James White, Life of William Miller

(itself drawn from other sources as admitted on its title page)
 Ellen White’s practice
Regarding D’Aubigné’s book, Ellen White
recommended,

"Provide something to be read during these

long winter evenings. For those who can
procure it, D'Aubigne's History of the
Reformation will be both interesting and
profitable. From this work we may gain some
knowledge of what has been accomplished in
the past in the great work of reform." (RH December
26, 1882)
 Ellen White’s practice
A study done by the Ellen G. White Estate
to document passages in her writings
known to be verbally dependent upon prior
external material indicates that about 15%
of The Great Controversy (1911 edition) is
taken from other sources for which she
gave the proper references and about 5%
is from uncredited sources.
W. C. White’s explanation
“The great events occurring in the life of our Lord
were presented to her in panoramic scenes as also
were the other portions of The Great Controversy. In
a few of these scenes chronology and geography
were clearly presented, but in the greater part of the
revelation the flashlight scenes, which were
exceedingly vivid, and the conversations and the
controversies, which she heard and was able to
narrate, were not marked geographically or
chronologically, and she was left to study the Bible
and history, and the writings of men (continued)
W. C. White’s explanation
“who had presented the life of our Lord to get the
chronological and geographical connection. Another
purpose served by the reading of history and the
Life of Our Lord and the Life of St. Paul, was that in
so doing there was brought vividly to her mind
scenes presented clearly in vision, but which were
through the lapse of years and her strenuous
ministry, dimmed in her memory. Many times in the
reading of Hanna, Farrar, or Fleetwood, she would
run on to a description of a scene which had been
vividly presented to her, but forgotten, (continued)
W. C. White’s explanation
“and which she was able to describe more in detail
than that which she had read” (3SM 459, 460).
“In some of the historical matters such as are
brought out in Patriarchs and Prophets, and in Acts
of the Apostles and in Great Controversy, the main
outlines were made very clear and plain to her, and
when she came to write up these topics, she was
left to study the Bible and history to get dates and
geographical relations and to perfect her description
of details” (3SM 462).
Desire of Ages Source Study
In the 1980s, Dr. Fred Veltman, retired
professor of New Testament Literature from
Pacific Union College, was commissioned by
the Ellen G. White Estate to study the literary
dependency of Ellen White’s Desire of Ages
book on the life of Christ. We knew that her
library contained a number of books on the
life of Jesus and we wondered to what extent
the Desire of Ages was dependent upon
other literary sources.
Desire of Ages Source Study
 Fifteen chapters were selected at random
and were compared to other books using a
scale of seven levels of dependency applied
to each sentence.
 The criteria differentiating between these
levels of dependency are the amount of
verbatim words and the order of word
elements in the parallel sentences.
Desire of Ages Source Study
 Levels of dependency
 Level 7 – Strict verbatim (all words identical)
 Level 6 – Verbatim (1 or 2 words changed)
 Level 5 – Strict paraphrase
 Level 4 – Simple paraphrase
 Level 3 – Loose paraphrase
 Level 2 – Source Bible
 Level 1 – Partial independence
 Level 0 – Independent
Desire of Ages Source Study
 Results of 2,647 sentence units of text
studied
 No level 7 – strict verbatim
 29 (1.1%) level 6 – verbatim
 183 (6.9%) level 5 – strict paraphrase
 823 (31.1%) levels 4,3,2,1
 1,612 (60.9%) level 0 – independent sentences
 Average level of dependency is level 3.3 (a little
higher dependency than loose paraphrase).
Desire of Ages Source Study
Fred Veltman – “While the investigation followed
through on its initial method of research, in the final
analysis it was not able to ascertain the extent of
Ellen White’s literary dependence, given the amount
and variety of her writings and the limitations of time
and research personnel. Nevertheless there can no
longer be any doubt that she used sources
regardless of the subject content. And though there
are many facets of her dependency yet to explore,
and questions about her borrowing that beg for
answers, there is also something to be said about
her independence and originality. [continued]
Desire of Ages Source Study
“The research clearly shows that the sources were
her slaves, never her master. She readily
recognized what expressions in her sources would
enhance her writing and serve her purposes. Ellen
White with the aid of her literary assistants, built out
of the common quarry of stones not a replica of
another’s work but rather a customized literary
composition which reflects the particular faith and
Christian hope she felt called to share with her
fellow Adventists and the Christian community at
large.” (Ellen G. White Encyclopedia)
 The Life of Paul
Ellen White's writings on the life of Paul expanded
slowly through the years:

Spiritual Gifts, volume 1 (1858)

The Spirit of Prophecy, volume 3 (1878)

Redemption series, number 8 (1878)

Sketches from the Life of Paul (1883)

Acts of the Apostles (1911)

 The Life of Paul

The charge against Sketches from the

Life of Paul states that she copied large
sections from a work found in her library,
by W. J. Conybeare and J. S. Howson's
The Life and Epistles of St. Paul (New
York: Crowell, ca.1855).
 The Life of Paul
An advertisement for Conybeare and
Howson's book appeared in the Signs of
the Times of February 22, 1883, with an
endorsement from Ellen White:

"The Life of St. Paul by Conybeare and

Howson, I regard as a book of great merit,
and one of rare usefulness to the earnest
student of the New Testament history."
 Paul in Ephesus
Conybeare and Howson:
Eustathius says that the
mysterious symbols called
‘Ephesian Letters’ were engraved
on the crown, the girdle, and the
feet of the goddess.... When
pronounced they were regarded
as a charm, and were directed to
be used especially by those who
were in the power of evil spirits.
When written they were carried
about as amulets.... The study of
these symbols was an elaborate
science, and books, both
numerous and costly, were
compiled by its professors. (p.
392)
Ellen White:
Upon it [the statue of the goddess]
were inscribed mystic characters
and symbols, which were believed
to possess great power. (1) When
pronounced, they were said to
accomplish wonders. (4) When
written, they were treasured as a
potent charm to guard their
possessor from robbers, from
disease, and even from death. (3)
Numerous and costly books were
written by the Ephesians to
explain the meaning and use of
these symbols. (3) (p. 134-135)
 Paul in Ephesus
This statement throws some light on
the peculiar character of the miracles
wrought by Paul at Ephesus. We are
not to suppose that the apostles were
always able to work miracles at will. An
influx of supernatural power was given
to them at the time and according to
the circumstances that required it. And
the character of the miracles was not
always the same. They were
accommodated to the peculiar forms
of sin, superstition, and ignorance they
were required to oppose. Here, at
Ephesus, Paul was in the face of
magicians, like Moses and Aaron
before Pharaoh; and it is distinctly said
that his miracles were ‘not ordinary
wonders,’ from which we may infer that
they were different from those which
he usually performed. . . .
As Paul was brought in direct contact
with the idolatrous inhabitants of
Ephesus, the power of God was
strikingly displayed through him. (0)
The apostles were not always able to
work miracles at will. (6) The Lord
granted his servants this special power
as the progress of his cause or the
honor of his name required. (1) Like
Moses and Aaron at the court of
Pharaoh, the apostle had now to
maintain the truth against the lying
wonders of the magicians; hence the
miracles he wrought were of a different
character from those which he had
heretofore performed. (3)
 Paul in Ephesus
A miracle which has a closer reference to
our present subject is that in which the
hem of Christ’s garment was made
effectual to the healing of a poor sufferer
and the conviction of the bystanders. So
on this occasion garments were made
the means of communicating a healing
power to those who were at a distance,
whether they were possessed with evil
spirits or afflicted with ordinary diseases.
Yet was this no encouragement to blind
superstition. When the suffering woman
was healed by touching the hem of the
garment, the Saviour turned round and
said, ‘Virtue is gone out of me [italics
theirs].’ And here at Ephesus we are
reminded that it was God who ‘wrought
miracles by the hands of Paul’ (v.11), and
that ‘the name,’ not of Paul, but ‘of the
Lord Jesus, was magnified’ (v.17) (393).
As the hem of Christ's garment
had communicated healing power
to her who sought relief by the
touch of faith, so on this occasion,
garments were made the means
of cure to all that believed;
"diseases departed from them,
and evil spirits went out of them."
(4) Yet these miracles gave no
encouragement to blind
superstition. (5) When Jesus felt
the touch of the suffering woman,
he exclaimed, “Virtue is gone out
of me [italics hers].” (5) So the
scripture declares that the Lord
wrought miracles by the hand of
Paul, and that the name of the
Lord Jesus was magnified, and
not the name of Paul (5) (p. 135).
 The Life of Paul
These two paragraphs show that in many instances
Ellen White borrowed or paraphrased key words and
expressions from Conybeare and Howson. In Sketches
from the Life of Paul the borrowed material, estimated at
about 12%, was almost entirely limited to historical
information and backgrounds, and was often rearranged
by Mrs. White to fit her own thought and chapter outline.
Whereas Conybeare and Howson give little spiritual
application of and commentary on the events Paul
encountered, White emphasizes the spiritual lessons to
be gained from these events. In these spiritual
applications she borrows little from the earlier authors.
 The Life of Paul
When in 1911 Ellen White published an
expanded edition of Sketches from the Life of
Paul and included its content in Acts of the
Apostles, she used even less material from
Conybeare and Howson and added more of
her own theological and practical
commentary.
 Thoughts on inspiration
Comparison of:

Calvin E. Stowe, Origins and History of the

Books of the Bible (1867), pp. 19-20.

Ellen G. White, Manuscript 24, 1886 (published

in 1SM 21)
 Thoughts on inspiration
Stowe -- It is not the words of the Bible that
were inspired, it is not the thoughts of the Bible
White – It is not the words of the
that were inspired; it is the men who wrote the Bible that are inspired, but the
Bible that were inspired. Inspiration acts not on men that were inspired. (5)
the man’s words, not on the man’s thoughts, Inspiration acts not on the man's
but on the man himself; so that he, by his own
spontaneity, under the impulse of the Holy words or his expressions but on
Ghost, conceives certain thoughts and give the man himself, who, under the
utterance to them in certain words, both the
words and the thoughts receiving the peculiar influence of the Holy Ghost, is
impress of the mind which conceived and imbued with thoughts. (4) But the
uttered them, and being in fact just as really his words receive the impress of the
own, as they could have been if there had been
no inspiration at all in the case. . . . Inspiration individual mind. (5) The divine
generally is a purifying and an elevation, and an mind is diffused. (6) The divine
intensification of the human intellect
subjectively, rather than an objective suggestion mind and will is combined with the
and communication; though suggestion and human mind and will; thus the
communication are not excluded. The Divine utterances of the man are the
mind is, as it were, so diffused through the
human, and the human mind is so word of God. (4)
interpenetrated with the Divine the utterances
of the man are the word of God, that for the
time being.
 Thoughts on inspiration
Assigning levels of literary dependency to this example
is difficult because although the words are the same, the
theological thought is not. Had Ellen White simply copied
Stowe’s words without thinking carefully through their
ramifications, she might have adopted a theology of
inspiration similar to that later developed by theologians
such as Karl Barth or Emil Brunner. Stowe advocated a
theory of inspiration in which the subjective elements of
the prophet are predominant and in which inspiration is
an encounter between the divine and the human. There
is no actual transmission of objective information
between God and the prophet.
 Thoughts on inspiration
Note that two key phrases on the inspiration of
thoughts in Stowe’s explanation of the process of
inspiration at the beginning of his paragraph are not
inserted by Ellen White in her own shorter text.
While Stowe mentions that a prophet’s thoughts are
not inspired, Ellen White’s understanding of
inspiration gives a greater role to the Holy Spirit in
imparting inspired thoughts to a prophet. In her
explanation of the process of inspiration there is an
actual objective transmission of information between
God and the prophet.
 Thoughts on inspiration
Although much of Ellen White's wording is
taken from Stowe, the two views are very
different. It seems obvious from this example
that she had Stowe’s text nearby when she
wrote her own. Yet she did not mindlessly
copy from Stowe but carefully weighed the
concepts and understood the difference she
wished to emphasize in her own
understanding of the process of inspiration.
What would she do today?
 Were Ellen White alive today, would she use
her sources in the same way as she did in
her time?
 Would she be more aware of her uncredited
use of sources and would she be willing to
give proper references?
W C White to L E Froom
 "In many of her manuscripts as they come from her
hand quotation marks are used. In other cases they
were not used; and her habit of using parts of
sentences found in the writings of others and filling
in a part of her own composition, was not based
upon any definite plan nor was it questioned by her
copyists and copy writers until about 1885 and
onward. When critics pointed out this feature of her
work as a reason for questioning the gift which had
enabled her to write, she paid little attention to it.
(continued)
W C White to L E Froom
 “Later on, when complaint was made that this was
an injustice to other publishers and writers, she
made a decided change--a change which you are
familiar with. It is my belief, Brother Froom, that I
cannot too frequently restate the fact that Sister
White’s mind was keenly active with reference to the
contents of the articles published in our periodicals,
and the chapters composing her books, and that
she had help from heaven and was remarkably
acute in detecting any error made by copyists or by
copy editors" (3SM 460-461).
 No plagiarism
Ellen White was fully engaged in the process of
redaction of her books and adapted the external
material to fit her thought.

She used external material not in lieu of her own

thought, but to enhance her expression of her
thought.

She made references to other authors and

openly invited people to read their books.