It was a warm summer evening when I knocked on the door of a new family who had started attending our church. They wanted more information about becoming members, and the father had recently asked me to give baptismal studies to his oldest son. Even though the parents were new to the Adventist church, they had been dedicated Christians for most of their adult life. It was clear to many in our church that the father had definite pastoral leadership gifts. I even invited him to the local conference pastor's retreat, where he met with several other ministers and conference workers. I could tell that he was pondering the idea of becoming an Adventist pastor himself.

But first, he was hoping to sort out some serious questions about how Seventh-day Adventists understand the Bible.

When he opened the door, I was immediately directed to the dining room for our visit. Going through the kitchen, I noticed a witnessing book (which I had recently loaned him) lay open on the dining table. The pages were open to the appendix where the 27 Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church were printed.

The Twenty-Seven

He had read through the statement of these 27 beliefs, and he started right in with several serious questions about authority in the church. For example: Were these Fundamental Beliefs authoritative for Adventists, or was there room for disagreement? If so, how much? How much freedom was there for someone to disagree with the doctrines as written, and still be a pastor in good standing? Could one revise or ignore any of these beliefs? Was it "OK" to openly disagree? In other words, he wasn't simply interested in what the church believed on paper, but how the church believed, and how much freedom there was to differ. The reason was obvious as he pointed to Fundamental Belief No.17.

Number 17-Is Ellen an Option?

I remember when he pointed to Fundamental Belief No. 17, which described the gift of prophecy in Ellen White as a "continuing and authoritative source of truth." This bothered him extremely, as it was a clear message to him and other Christians that Adventist belief was not really based on the Bible "alone." Even though the rest of the Fundamental Beliefs pointed to the Bible as the final appeal, this first part bothered him. He couldn't buy it. I explained how the Fundamental Beliefs were not inerrant, nor infallible. They were more descriptive of what many members believed, but there was room to wiggle. I explained that I didn't "buy" this doctrine either.

Of course, I explained how spiritual gifts will be in the church until the coming of Jesus, including the gift of prophecy. (Eph. 4:11-13) I also explained that many members do see her in a prophetic light. Yet there were also those who could not accept her as a voice of authority. It seemed to undermine the role of Scripture.

I couldn't really ignore this topic. I admit, frankly, that it bothered me how many of my fellow pastors used Ellen White's writings with pulpit power and persuasion. I've been in Sabbath schools and church meetings where Ellen White's writings were used as the final word for the discussion, an appeal of authority.

Both Sides of the Coin

Ellen White herself described the Bible as the only authoritative revelation of God's will (Great Controversy, p. vii) Early Adventists, especially her husband James, were convinced that believing in Ellen White's prophetic gift was not to be a test among Adventists. It was to be a personal and private conviction among Advent believers (1).

But I also knew of other statements: "God speaks to men today through the Testimonies" (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 4, p. 148). "The Holy Ghost is the author of the Scriptures and of the Spirit of Prophecy" (Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 30). "The power of God would come upon me, and I was enabled clearly to define what is truth and what is error" (Gospel Workers, p. 302). "In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision--the precious rays of light shining from the throne" (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5, p. 67).

Was Ellen White an option? That was the question. I confessed to my friend, that even as an Adventist pastor, I couldn't support this belief or the way many church members utilize her writings. "Let's just say," I reasoned, "that she was highly influential, and her writings remain so." But that's not what the statement says, and I knew it.

That wasn't enough to satisfy his question. He didn't want to simply theorize, but see how she was used in the local church. Would she be used with biblical-like authority in our services? He planned to visit another Adventist church nearby to find out.

A few weeks later, my friend visited a nearby Adventist church to see how they believed in scripture, not what, but how. Well, it wasn't a positive experience. The Sabbath school class appealed to Ellen White's writings "90 percent of the time" for confirmation in discussing the lesson. He could hardly stay through church, he admitted. In his own words, "I didn't sense the passion for the word of God." He wept as he shared this experience with me. This was very unsettling to my friend-- and to me.

I knew my church. I'd visited scores of Adventist churches and knew that he would find a mixture on this issue. Some Adventist churches rarely used Ellen White in sermon and study. Others used her every week. Does it really matter? Is how we live Fundamental Belief No. 17 really that important?

The Option Matters

There are a couple of reasons why I believe and hope that Ellen White's writings and authority in the Seventh-day Adventist Church will become more publicly endorsed as "optional" in our preaching, teaching, and literature. The way we often live our beliefs in this matter really does complicate and confuse the role of Scripture at times. Let's not be too offended or zealous to think otherwise.

There is a definite conception among sincere and interested non-Adventist Christians that we Seventh-day Adventists are not based on the Bible alone for our faith and practice. This, I believe, is largely because of our inability to clarify the relationship between the Bible and Ellen White's prophetic function. Clarification is needed, not silent avoidance or intentional indifference.

There are many sincere Seventh-day Adventists who have found the recent research regarding Ellen White's role and inspiration troubling, including myself (especially since 1980). There are thousands of pages of information on the internet for those interested in learning about Ellen White. Some are positive and some are more skeptical. Instead of a natural defensive reaction to confirm, entrench, and defend, we really need to consider the honest seeker for truth in this matter.

If we are truly sola scriptura (based on scripture alone), then even the most negative information won't be too bothersome. It won't matter. A lion doesn't need to be defended, and neither should Ellen White. Her authority shouldn't be an issue, if she is actively promoted as optional. Scripture is the final foundation for the Adventist faith.

While some will undoubtedly disagree with my assessment, let's at least be honest with what often takes place in scores of churches around the world. I've preached and worshipped with Adventists in four continents and have received the same concern over how Ellen White is often elevated above Scripture.

A final reason why Ellen White's writings should be optional has to do with reaching the lost. For the many members still waiting to invite their unsaved friends and family, we need to provide assurance that we really are a people who appeal to Scripture alone in matters of faith and lifestyle.

This shift in thinking will be no problem for those firmly grounded in Scripture. They will lose nothing, for they already have biblical support for teaching, preaching, and witnessing. Through time and additional research, our understanding of Ellen White will be revised, but the role of Scripture will remain secure.

Whether we change Fundamental Belief No. 17 is not the most important challenge facing the church today. But others are watching, from within and without, to see how we will practice using God's Holy Word. This teaching alone, in what my friend read and experienced, was enough to keep him from wholeheartedly embracing the Adventist message.

And I'm sure that he's not the only one.

References

1. Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, Oct 16, 1855; Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, June 13, 1871. See also Testimonies, vol. 1, pp.327-329, 382-384; Evangelism, p.172, 258; Welfare Ministry, p. 172; Colporteur Ministry, p. 42; Counsels to Parents and Teachers, p. 453; Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 259, 383-388.

Randy A. Croft is a teacher at Walla Walla Adventist Academy, College, Place, Washington.