A Concise History of Adventist Scholarship

Although Adventist leaders have addressed this issue over the past century, ^{2See, for example, W. C. White and D. E. Robinson, Brief Statements Regarding the Writings of Ellen G. White (Washington, D.C.: Ellen G. White Estate, 1933); and Francis D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald®, 1951), in which chapters 28-30 were devoted to the plagiarism charge.} since the early 1980s when Walter Rea publicly raised the issue of plagiarism in his book The White Lie, ^{3Walter Rea, The White Lie (Turlock, Calif.: M & R Publishers, 1982); see Morgan, 9, 10, for more details on the publicity of Rea’s work during this time. The historical-critical method of literary analysis was first applied to Ellen White’s writings within the church (for example, in Roy Branson and Herold D. Weiss, “Ellen White: A Subject for Adventist Scholarship,” Spectrum 2, no. 4 [Autumn 1970]: 30-33; William S. Peterson, “A Textual and Historical Study of Ellen G. White’s Account of the French Revolution,” ibid., 57-69; W. P. Bradley, “Ellen G. White and Her Writings,” Spectrum 3, no. 2 [Spring 1971]: 43-51) and followed by an avalanche of similar studies (for example, Ron L. Numbers, Prophetess of Health: A Study of Ellen G. White [New York: Harper & Row, 1976]; and Ingemar Lindén, The Last Trump: An Historico-Genetical Study of Some Important Chapters in the Making and Development of the Seventh-day Adventist Church [Frankfurt am Main:Peter Lang, 1978]). For more discussion on the challenges to Ellen White’s prophetic ministry, see Alberto Timm, “Development of Contemporary Issues Related to Ellen G. White,” Ellen White and Current Issues Symposium, vol. 9 (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Center for Adventist Research, Andrews University, 2013), 90-110.} the scholarly research on Ellen White’s use of sources has been extensive. In a sense, some Adventists were caught off guard during this turbulent time in the church’s history because the plagiarism charge and the church’s earlier responses had long been forgotten. ^{4See note 2, above.} The mechanical view of inspiration had failed to explain the literary parallels to other sources in Ellen White’s writings. ^{5Herbert Douglass suggested, in his Messenger of the Lord: The Prophetic Ministry of Ellen White (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 1998), 460, 461, that because a wrong view of inspiration prevailed throughout the twentieth century with no open discussion on Ellen White’s literary borrowing, the church was caught by surprise in the early 1980s by the plagiarism charge. For a discussion of the challenges the church was facing during the turbulent early 1980s, see William Johnsson, “Crossroads in Adventism: An Inside Perspective on the Modern Seventh-day Adventist Church,” Ellen White and Current Issues Symposium, vol. 4 (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Center for Adventist Research, Andrews University, 2008), 39-47.} Consequently, many lost faith and confidence in her as an inspired author. Even before Rea’s book was published, however, the White Estate had been working on the issue of Ellen White’s literary borrowing, and eventually produced a flurry of scholarly research that was released throughout the 1980s and 1990s. ^{6See Merlin Burt, “Bibliographic Essay on Publications About Ellen G. White,” in The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia (EGWE), 2nd ed., ed. Denis Fortin and Jerry Moon (Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald®, 2014), 199, note 213, for a listing of these numerous publications. It should also be noted that book 3 of Selected Messages was published in 1980, which contains the letters of W. C. White to L. E. Froom on the subject of Ellen White’s literary borrowing (Ellen G. White, Selected Messages [Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald®, 1958, 1980], 3:451-465).}GOP 320.2

Two major studies produced during this time made a significant contribution to the question of Ellen White’s use of sources. First was the study of the legal issue by attorney Vincent Ramik, senior partner in the then-Washington, D.C.-based law firm of Diller, Ramik, and Wight, specialists in patent, trademark, and copyright law. After spending 300-plus hours researching more than 1,000 cases in American literary law that spanned Ellen White’s lifetime (1790-1915), Ramik produced a 27-page legal opinion, or “lawyer’s brief,” with 53 source-citation footnotes, and concluded in the August 14, 1981, document “that Ellen G. White was not a plagiarist and her works did not constitute copyright infringement/piracy.” ^{7Vincent L. Ramik, “The Ramik Report: Memorandum of Law Literary Property Rights, 1790-1915” (Ellen G. White Estate, Aug. 14, 1981, SDoc), 26, 27.} The second study was the Life of Christ Research Project directed by Fred Veltman, professor of New Testament literature at Pacific Union College. Veltman and his team devoted eight years (1981-1988) to the preparation of a detailed analysis of 15 randomly selected chapters in The Desire of Ages and produced a 2,561-page report that concluded that although Ellen White used numerous sources in her writing, she was not slavishly dependent on these sources. Rather, she customized them to “enhance her writing and serve her purposes,” and demonstrated authorial independence and originality. ^{8Fred Veltman, Full Report of the Life of Christ Research Project, 4 vols. (Life of Christ Research Project Review Committee, 1988); idem, “The Study of The Desire of Ages Sources,” in The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia, 766-770 (citation in 770).} GOP 321.1

In more recent years Ellen White’s use of sources has continued to receive attention in such works as Leonard Brand and Don S. McMahon, The Prophet and Her Critics: A Striking New Analysis Refutes the Charges That Ellen G. White “Borrowed” the Health Message, and Don S. McMahon, Acquired or Inspired: Exploring the Origins of the Adventist Lifestyle, both published in 2005. In 2009 E. Marcella Anderson King and Kevin L. Morgan published More Than Words: A Study of Inspiration and Ellen White’s Use of Sources in the Desire of Ages, which built upon the Veltman study and made it more accessible to the general reading audience. In 2013 Kevin L. Morgan released White Lie Soap: For Removal of Lingering Stains on Ellen White’s Integrity as an Inspired Writer, which continued to build upon and expand the Veltman study. In the 2014 release of the Ellen G. White Encyclopedia Denis Fortin authored a significant article, “Plagiarism,” which dealt with this charge and Ellen White’s use of sources. In 2015 Tim Poirier authored “Ellen White and Sources: The Plagiarism Debate,” chapter 11 in Understanding Ellen White: The Life and Work of the Most Influential Voice in Adventist History, edited by Merlin Burt and commissioned by the White Estate trustees. Finally, the Ellen G. White Estate Web site, whiteestate.org, contains material on the plagiarism issue. ^{9Leonard Brand and Don S. McMahon, The Prophet and Her Critics: A Striking New Analysis Refutes the Charges That Ellen G. White “Borrowed” the Health Message (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 2005); Don S. McMahon, Acquired or Inspired: Exploring the Origins of the Adventist Lifestyle (Victoria, Australia: Signs Publishing, 2005); E. Marcella Anderson King and Kevin L. Morgan, More Than Words: A Study in Inspiration and Ellen White’s Use of Sources in The Desire of Ages (Millers Creek, N.C.: Honor Him Publishers, 2009); Morgan, White Lie Soap; Denis Fortin, “Plagiarism,” in The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia, 1028-1035; Tim Poirier, “Ellen White and Sources: The Plagiarism Debate,” in Merlin Burt, ed., Understanding Ellen White: The Life and Work of the Most Influential Voice in Adventist History (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 2015); see also Kevin Morgan with David J. Conklin, “Plagiarism: A Historical and Cultural Survey,” Ministry, August 2007, 22-24; idem, “Plagiarism: Alternate Explanations?” Ministry, October 2007, 20-22; idem, “Was Ellen White a Plagiarist?” Ministry, December 2007, 21-23; David J. Conklin and Kevin L. Morgan, Was Desire of Ages Plagiarized? A Comparative Literary Analysis of the Literary Borrowing by Authors in Their “Life of Christ” on Jesus’ Trial Before Pilate (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Litho Tech, 2011); Douglass, 458-462; Jud Lake, Ellen White Under Fire: Identifying the Mistakes of Her Critics (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 2010), 120-123.}GOP 322.1

The most comprehensive summary of all the major issues relating to the plagiarism charge and Ellen White’s use of sources has been the lecture notes of Roger W. Coon, associate director of the Ellen G. White Estate during the 1980s and 1990s. In his seminary classes and camp meeting presentations to Adventist audiences he addressed the terminological, biblical, legal, ethical, and practical issues related to Ellen White’s use of sources, and demonstrated that Ellen White engaged in legitimate literary borrowing rather than plagiarism. ^{10Roger W. Coon, “Ellen G. White and the So-called ‘Plagiarism’ Charge: An Examination of Five Issues” (GSEM534 Lecture Outline, Andrews University, Apr. 30, 1999), 1-25.} Coon’s material continues to influence researchers today and is utilized in college and seminary classes whenever Ellen White’s literary borrowing is discussed. ^{11Coon’s material is used, for example, in the Ellen White classes of Denis Fortin, Jerry Moon (Andrews University Theological Seminary), and Jud Lake (Southern Adventist University). Fortin and Moon dedicated The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia to Coon: “Teacher, mentor, and friend whose career work on the life and ministry of Ellen White made a major contribution that many others have built upon” (The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia, 5).} GOP 322.2