W. C. White Statement of October 31, 1912
This was a personal letter
Written to S. N. Haskell
(See also
W. C. White letter to W. W. Eastman, November 4, 1912, published in Selected
Messages, book 3, pp. 445-450.)
[Handwritten
note by Ellen G. White: "I approve of the remarks made in this letter."]
Regarding Mother's writings, she
has never wished our brethren to treat them as authority on history. When Great
Controversy was first written, she often times gave a partial description
of some scene presented to her, and when Sister Davis made inquiry regarding
time and place, Mother referred her to what was already written in the books
of Elder Smith and in secular histories.
When Controversy was written,
Mother never thought that the readers would take it as an authority on historical
dates and use it to settle controversies, and she does not now feel that it
ought to be used in that way. Mother regards with the greatest respect those
faithful historians who have given their [lives] to the study of the working
out in this world's history of God's great plan, and who have found in this
study a correspondence of the history with prophecy.
Whenever proof has been found that
the writers of our Adventist literature had come short of finding the exact
truth regarding some detail, she has always taken her position in favor of correcting
those things that were clearly found to be errors, and when consulted about
the efforts that were being made to revise and correct the good book Daniel
and Revelation [by Uriah Smith], she has always opposed making unnecessary
changes and has always favored correcting those things that were plainly shown
to be inaccurate.
It seems to me that there is danger
of placing altogether too much stress upon chronology. If it had been essential
to the salvation of man that he should have a clear and harmonious understanding
of the chronology of the world, the Lord would not have permitted the disagreements
and discrepancies which we find in the writings of the Bible historians, and
it seems to me that in these last days there ought not to be so much controversy
regarding dates.
For myself I will say this, that
the more I study the experience the experience of the Adventist people, the
more I feel to honor and praise and magnify the wisdom of the God of heaven
who gave to a plain man like William Miller an understanding of the great truths
of the prophecies. It is evident to anyone who will study his explanation of
prophecy that while he had the truth regarding the principal features, that
he adopted at first many inaccurate and incorrect interpretations regarding
details. At first these were accepted by his associates; but God raised up scholarly
men who had enjoyed broader opportunities for study than Miller, and these men
by their study of the prophecies and history found the truth regarding many
points in which Miller's exposition was incorrect.
One who studies this experience from the standpoint of faith in that great Advent
movement, as presented in Daniel and Revelation, and in Great Controversy,
cannot fail to rejoice in the goodness of God as they see how He brought in
truth and light through the study of many men and it seems to me that we who
love the work that was built upon that foundation ought to treat very kindly,
very considerately, very reverently the work which God helped Miller to do.
It seems to me that there is nothing
any one can do at the present time that would more effectually destroy confidence
of the people in Miller's work and the work of his associates than to speak
and write about the matter in the tone and the spirit used by Brother _____.
It seems to me that nothing could be done more effectually to destroy the confidence
of the people in that good and glorious movement than to claim perfection for
that which we know was not perfect, and thus challenge the criticism of thinking
men.
I need not quote Brother ______'s
words. I think you are familiar with them. It may be that you helped him to
adopt the views which he expressed so unfortunately in his tract. But wherever
he got his untimely assurance, I wish to say regarding it again that I think
there is nothing that can so effectually destroy the respect and confidence
that our people ought to maintain in the 1844 movement than for men to make
such inconsiderate assertions as were made by Brother _____ in his tract and
in his correspondence.
I believe, Brother Haskell, that
there is danger in injuring Mother's work by claiming for it more that she claims
for it, more than Father ever claimed for it, more than Elder Andrews, Waggoner,
or Smith ever claimed for it. I cannot see consistency in our putting forth
a claim of verbal inspiration when Mother does not make any such claim, and
I certainly think we will make a great mistake if we lay aside historical research
and endeavor to settle historical questions by the use of Mother's books as
an authority when she herself does not wish them to be used in any such way.