James White’s Declarations, 1851-1855

In the Review of April 21, 1851, James White announced to the readers of the paper his position in regard to the place of spiritual gifts in the church and their perpetuity, but made no reference to Ellen White’s experience. He made it clear that the Bible alone was the test of faith and duty, but that this did not preclude spiritual gifts given to “lead us to His living Word.”—Review and Herald, April 21, 1851, p. 70, col. 1. The same position was reiterated in 1854. The 1851 article was reprinted on October 3, with this appended note:EGWMR 51.7

“The position that the Bible, and the Bible alone, is the rule of faith and duty, does not shut out the gifts which God set in the church. To reject them, is shutting out that part of the Bible which presents them. We say, Let us have a whole Bible, and let that, and that alone, be our rule of faith and duty. Place the gifts where they belong, and all is harmony.”—Review and Herald, October 3, 1854, p. 62, col. 5.EGWMR 51.8

One year later, October 16, 1855, in meeting false charges, Elder White again stated his position:EGWMR 51.9

“There is a class of persons who are determined to have it that the Review and its conductors make the views of Mrs. White a test of doctrine and Christian fellowship. It may be duty to notice these persons on account of the part they, are acting, which is calculated to deceive some. What has the Review to do with Mrs. White’s views? The sentiments published in its columns are all drawn from the Holy Scriptures. No writer of the Review has ever referred to them as authority on any point. The Review for five years has not published one of them. Its motto has been, ‘The Bible, and the Bible alone, the only rule of faith and duty.’”—Id., Oct. 16, 1855, p. 61, cols. 2, 3.EGWMR 51.10

To illustrate his uniform position through the years, Elder White then quotes his first published statement on the subject of the Spirit of prophecy. (See page 31, column 2.) In meeting the charge that the denominational doctrinal positions were based on “the visions,” he states: “It should be here understood that all these views as held by the body of Sabbathkeepers, were brought out from the Scriptures before Mrs. White had any view in regard to them. These sentiments are founded upon the Scriptures as their only basis.”—Ibid.EGWMR 51.11

While the position set forth in the 1855 Review and Herald on the relationship of the Spirit of prophecy to the word of God was sound, yet it is clear from the experience of those years that the rather negative treatment of the subject, together with absence of any of the visions from the columns of the Review, led to a general lack of appreciation of the gift, and to a lowering of its place of importance in the work. The results of this course of near silence was not at once perceived, but at the general conference of 1855, held in Battle Creek, commencing November 16, it was clear that all was not right. A realization of this led to “confessions relative to the evident departure of the remnant from the spirit of the message, and the humble, straightforward course taken by those who first embraced it.”—“Report of Conference,” Review and Herald, December 4, 1855, p. 75, col. 1.EGWMR 52.1

It may also be noted in this connection that there had been a partial withdrawal of the prophetic gift from the believers. Writing of this shortly afterward, Ellen White stated:EGWMR 52.2

“The visions have been of late less and less frequent, and my testimony for God’s children has been gone. I have thought that my work in God’s cause was done, and that, I had no further duty to do, but to save my own soul, and carefully attend to my little family.”—The Review and Herald, January 10, 1856, p. 118, col. 1.EGWMR 52.3