So Close and Yet So Far: A Comparison of John Wesley & Ellen G. White on Perfection

SO CLOSE AND YET SO FAR:
A COMPARISON OF JOHN WESLEY AND ELLEN G. WHITE ON PERFECTION

Larry Kirkpatrick
August 1998

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Problem

John Wesley and Ellen G. White appear to manifest very similar views on the doctrine of perfection. But when one peruses a panoramic rather than a snapshot view of their theology, is the similarity as fully confirmed as is commonly imagined?

Purpose

This paper explores the views of John Wesley and Ellen G. White on perfection through an examination of their teachings encompassing more than just one or two sermons. It seeks to determine whether the differences between White and Wesley are greater than has sometimes been suggested.

Method

Pertinent statements are brought together from the array of available sources, especially primary sources, for evaluation and comparison. Because perfection, by its very nature involves what is possible, the precursor issue of what sin is (hamartiology) in the teachings of Wesley and White is necessarily touched upon. Basic presuppositions on this point--before the Bible is ever opened--can radically modify the conclusions arrived at concerning perfection.

Delimitations

The limited range of the project as assigned makes this paper neither exhaustive nor comprehensive. The selection of materials is limited to those appearing to bear most directly upon the topic.

CHAPTER 2
JOHN WESLEY ON PERFECTION
His Hamartiology

Before considering Wesley's teaching on perfection, his hamartiology must be explored at least briefly. According to Wesley, in the lives of believers "The seeds of spiritual death they shall gradually expel, before this earthly tabernacle is dissolved."⁽¹⁾ The temporal indicator "before" points to a work to be accomplished during the present experience of the believer. Wesley was adamant about the cleansing presented in the gospel,

For he saith not 'the blood of Christ will cleanse' (at the hour of death, or in the day of judgment) but it 'cleanseth (at the time present) us (living Christians) from all sin.' And it is equally evident that if any⁽²⁾ sin remain we are not cleansed from all sin; if any unrighteousness remain in the soul it is not cleansed from all unrighteousness."⁽³⁾

From time to time Wesley quotes passages such as Romans 9:11 and Ezekiel 18:20--important texts supporting a doctrine of sin that is globally responsive to the entire witness of the Bible.⁽⁴⁾

Yet when Wesley comes to the issue of original sin in the 1750s, he publishes a sermon that appears initially inexplicable in the light of the rest of his doctrine. In this sermon he vividly affirms "the entire depravation of the whole human nature."⁽⁵⁾ Yet in the same message he exhorts his hearers to "Now 'go on' 'from faith to faith,' until your whole sickness be healed, and all that 'mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.'"⁽⁶⁾ Wesley presents an inconsistent picture. He asserts total depravity, while also asserting that total cleansing is possible. His sermon on Original Sin could have been occasioned by two factors: one was the assertions of current thinkers within Christendom, but another may have been his recognition that his own views were considered highly suspect and the agitation on the matter presented an opportunity to align himself with orthodoxy. To whatever extent such an impact could be made, to just that extent his views which he especially desired to secure a popular hearing for might have better chance within the church.

But the matter was more than one of expediency. He did believe in original sin, and stated so. He wrote of inbred pollution and inbred corruption of nature.⁽⁷⁾ To these he assigns the term "sin." Yet within his understanding was the kernel of a biblical distinction between temptation and guilt. For he states "if the resentment I feel is not yielded to, even for a moment, there is no guilt at all, no condemnation from God upon that account."⁽⁸⁾ He here states clearly that temptation not submitted to is not guilt-bearing sin. Yet in the same sermon still he affirms that "Here . . . there is sin without either guilt or power."⁽⁹⁾ He affirms that "Having sin does not forfeit the favor of God; giving way to sin does."⁽¹⁰⁾ Hence, Wesley considers temptation to be properly sin, although not guilt-bearing. He was careful in defining sin. Accordingly, the believer does not sin "by infirmities, whether in act, word, or thought; for his infirmities have no concurrence of his will; and without this they are not properly sins."⁽¹¹⁾ These he speaks of as "inward or outward imperfections which are not of a moral nature."⁽¹²⁾ These conflicting statements bear the marks not of dynamism but of confusion. Thus we conclude that Wesley presents a confused hamartiology, which blurs important distinctions because it assigns guilt to temptation in some situations.⁽¹³⁾ This blurred and enigmatic picture is fascinating in comparison to White's which will be surveyed also.

His teaching on Perfection

Wesley himself provides us with a definition of perfection as it stands in his thinking:

It [circumcision of the heart] is that habitual disposition of soul which in the Sacred Writings is termed 'holiness,' and which directly implies the being cleansed from sin, 'from all filthiness both of flesh and of spirit,' and by consequence the being endowed with those virtues which were also in Christ Jesus, the being so 'renewed in the image of our mind' as to be 'perfect, even as our Father in heaven is perfect.'⁽¹⁴⁾

In this sermon, as already mentioned, Wesley makes clear also his view that Christians bear "inbred pollution" and "inbred corruption" of nature.⁽¹⁵⁾ But he comes back and yet says "'He that is born of God doth not commit sin,' And though he cannot say he hath not sinned, yet now 'he sinneth not.'"⁽¹⁶⁾ Again, in his Christian Perfection sermon, he offers that

Christian perfection therefore does not imply (as some men seem to have imagined) an exemption either from ignorance or mistake, or infirmities or temptations. Indeed, it is only another term for holiness. They are two names for the same thing. Thus, everyone that is perfect is holy, and everyone that is holy is, in the Scripture sense, perfect.⁽¹⁷⁾

Wesley explicitly affirms that he is not discussing absolute perfection, an attribute that can properly be applied to God alone.⁽¹⁸⁾ Another succinct comment from Wesley is his conclusion that "A Christian is so far perfect as not to commit sin."⁽¹⁹⁾ Another definition gleaned from one of Wesley's final sermons: "In a word, holiness is the having 'the mind that was in Christ,' and the 'walking as Christ walked.'"⁽²⁰⁾ Wesley did not limit sin to external acts. He believed that personal holiness was possible while including in his definition of sin sin as inward actions and attitudes.

Nor when it comes to perfection is the reformer speaking of a mere heavenly shell game:

Least of all does justification imply that God is deceived in those whom he justifies; that he thinks them to be what in fact, they are not, that he accounts them to be otherwise than they are. It does by no means imply that God judges concerning us contrary to the real nature of things, that he esteems us better than we really are, or believes us righteous when we are unrighteous. Surely no. The judgment of the all-wise God is always according to truth. Neither can it ever consist with his unerring wisdom to think that I am innocent, to judge that I am righteous or holy, because another is so. He can no more in this manner confound me with Christ than with David or Abraham.⁽²¹⁾

More succinctly: "God implants righteousness in every one to whom he has imputed it."⁽²²⁾ This agrees with his statement that "No man sins because he has not grace, but because he does not use the grace which he hath."⁽²³⁾ And so Wesley affirms that justification is conditional, quoting Romans 2:13.⁽²⁴⁾ He has avoided the ditch of cheap grace and yet maintained the efficacy of costly grace.

The ultimate Wesley statement on perfection is probably found in his famous sermon, "The Wedding Garment." Here he states

The righteousness of Christ is, doubtless, necessary for any soul that enters into glory. But so is personal holiness, too, for every child of man. But it is highly needful to be observed that they are necessary in different respects. The former is necessary to entitle us to heaven; the latter, to qualify us for it. Without the righteousness of Christ we could have no claim to glory; without holiness we could have no fitness for it. By the former we become members of Christ, children of God, and heirs of the kingdom of heaven. By the latter we are 'made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.'"⁽²⁵⁾

Later this passage will be compared with Ellen White. Here we notice that Wesley equates personal holiness with fitness for heaven. The distinction between fitness and a claim to glory is significant. If a person could acquire a state of fitness for heaven, but lacked opportunity for forgiveness of past sins and thus a claim to heaven, he would not still be able to enter. At the bare minimum, one must have a legitimate entitlement to glory through Christ's substitutionary sacrifice on their behalf. Wesley links these carefully together and gives both aspects their place. He here attaches no saving merit to personal holiness--rather, he simply indicates a necessary condition.

To summarize, Wesley's view of perfection is that it is personal holiness. He always links the concept of holiness with soteriology and never with eschatology. He did not substantively approach the issue of the incarnation of Christ especially in relation to His human nature. His doctrine of sin is not always consistent. His doctrine of perfection is a leap forward in comparison with Luther and Calvin, yet looks to the practical present and not the consummation of a great controversy. Wesley has many of the pieces, but does not see the sweeping breadth that White will see.

CHAPTER 3
ELLEN G. WHITE ON PERFECTION
Her Hamartiology

A crucial element in Ellen White's understanding of sin and grace is foundational to understanding her theology: "Sin affects the entire being; so also does grace."⁽²⁶⁾ White's wholistic understanding of the impact of the great controversy upon humankind is a decisive aspect when considering her understanding of sin. Largely because of this presupposition, she presents a biblical and self-consistent doctrine of sin.

So how did White define sin? A highly representative definition statement is the following: "Every sin, every unrighteous action, every transgression of the law of God, tells with a thousandfold more force upon the actor than the sufferer."⁽²⁷⁾ In numerous other statements she explicitly identifies 1 John 3:4 as "The only definition of sin" found in the Bible.⁽²⁸⁾ The threefold parallelism of "sin," "unrighteous action," and "every transgression" in the above reference shows us that whatever else she may have had in mind, this consistent definition of sin was her answer to the careful question that would be asked after the Leroy Froom and Edward Heppenstall years: "What is the nature of sin for which a person is considered guilty, so guilty that he will die in the flames of hell unless God forgives him?"⁽²⁹⁾

White's hamartiology is a glue in an interwoven and self-consistent system. Within this system we find baseline concepts including a "sealing" period in which God's people reach a threshold of character development that enables them to successfully negotiate a period during which they function in their sinful natures in entire obedience to God without mediation for sin.⁽³⁰⁾ These distinctive eschatologically oriented concepts can only make sense within the context of a theology that affirms the entire efficacy of grace to address the impact of sin upon humankind.

Her Teaching on Perfection

Ellen G. White's view on perfection is dynamic, successfully holding together two concepts: (1) perfection as threshold, and (2) perfection as relative to infinite growth. The difference between goal and threshold must be kept clear. In White's thought we do not see perfection presented in the guise of an ultimate terminus or static goal-point. Instead we see it as a crucial waymark or threshold that must be successfully reached in order to prepare one to pass through the time of trouble:

Now, while our great High Priest is making the atonement for us, we should seek to become perfect in Christ. Not even by a thought could our Saviour be brought to yield to the power of temptation. Satan finds in human hearts some point where he can gain a foothold; some sinful desire is cherished, by means of which his temptations assert their power. But Christ declared of Himself: 'The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in Me.' Satan could find nothing in the Son of God that would enable him to gain the victory. He had kept His Father's commandments, and there was no sin in Him that Satan could use to his advantage. This is the condition in which those must be found who shall stand in the time of trouble.⁽³¹⁾

White here is unmistakable in defining what our becoming perfect in Christ is. Not even by a thought must we be willing to yield to temptation. Again she has written of the state to be attained: "Every one who by faith obeys God's commandments, will reach the condition of sinlessness in which Adam lived before his transgression."⁽³²⁾ Here are exceedingly striking statements. They must be permitted to speak.⁽³³⁾ It is clear that White's doctrine of sin is a clear departure from traditional understandings.

One passage that some have suggested moderates White's view is the following:

The religious services, the prayers, the praise, the penitent confession of sin ascend from true believers as incense to the heavenly sanctuary, but passing through the corrupt channels of humanity, they are so defiled that unless purified by blood, they can never be of value with God.⁽³⁴⁾

While this seems to hint that the best that can be produced remains tainted due to our fallen nature, a different conclusion appears warranted based upon internal evidence and outward consistency with the broader White corpus.⁽³⁵⁾ The phraseology of this passage is unique in the White corpus. The entire article itself consists of 18 paragraphs. The second paragraph asserts concerning man's fallen state that (1) man has been severed from the life of God, (2) his soul is palsied, and furthermore, (3) he is doubly incapacitated, now lacking capacity to sense sin or capacity to appreciate and appropriate the divine nature.⁽³⁶⁾ In a nutshell, his state--unassisted by grace--is utterly hopeless. Yet in contrast to this, paragraph four asserts that through Christ man's nature can be vitalized, his tastes transformed, and his affections set flowing toward heaven. Through a union of the divine and human nature⁽³⁷⁾ the understanding can be enlightened and Christ can "infuse⁽³⁸⁾ His life-giving properties through the soul dead in trespasses and sins."⁽³⁹⁾

White's linkage of perfection and eschatology is not limited to her book Great Controversy. Her book Christ's Object Lessons (developed largely in the 1890s during the writing of The Desire of Ages) has a vibrant eschatological focus on perfection, the words and ideas appearing dozens of times throughout its almost 400 pages. No wonder Herbert Douglass has said that in this work White links the return of Jesus to a God-vindicating people with "single-minded emphasis, dropped repeatedly on the reader, like truckloads of concrete . . ."⁽⁴⁰⁾

A well-known quotation from Christ's Object Lessons is "Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then He will come to claim them as His own."⁽⁴¹⁾ Articles in recent issues of the church paper, in contrast to those printed in the days of Douglass, have repeatedly sought to explain away the statement, and have sought to minimize the meaning of the very next sentence in the book: "It is the privilege of every Christian not only to look for but to hasten the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."⁽⁴²⁾ That this perfect reproduction of Christ's character is the very same idea already described in White's thought linking one aspect of character perfection to a threshold is evident from the closing sentences of the same paragraph, which explicitly portray the punctiliar sense of a final harvest reaped as a result.⁽⁴³⁾ The reinterpretations repeatedly offered in the Review are unconvincing.

A sampling of some statements from Christ's Object Lessons echo much of White's thought:

"It is the righteousness of Christ, His own unblemished character, that through faith is imparted to all who receive Him as their personal Saviour . . . . He proved that humanity and divinity combined can obey every one of God's precepts . . . . God requires perfection of His children . . . . The righteousness of Christ will not cover one cherished sin . . . . Those who reject the gift of Christ's righteousness are rejecting the attributes of character which would constitute them the sons and daughters of God."⁽⁴⁴⁾

Although the above obviously leaves out several intervening lines. Yet it is indicative of White's view.

There are in White's writings some passages that essentially echo Wesley. Note the following:

Righteousness within is testified to by righteousness without. He who is righteous within is not hard-hearted and unsympathetic, but day by day he grows into the image of Christ, going on from strength to strength. He who is being sanctified by the truth will be self-controlled, and will follow in the footsteps of Christ until grace is lost in glory. The righteousness by which we are justified is imputed; the righteousness by which we are sanctified is imparted. The first is our title to heaven, the second is our fitness for heaven.⁽⁴⁵⁾

The "title" and "fitness" distinction is her way of portraying Wesley's "claim" and "fitness" distinction. But she added that

the proud heart strives to earn salvation; but both our title to heaven and our fitness for it are found in the righteousness of Christ. The Lord can do nothing toward the recovery of man until, convinced of his own weakness, and stripped of all self-sufficiency, he yields himself to the control of God."⁽⁴⁶⁾

White's Christ-centeredness is evident, but like Wesley she refuses to minimize the necessity of personal holiness.

For Ellen G. White, perfection was a necessity. It was linked strongly with the ever-present knowledge in the background of her mind that we are living during the rapidly terminating investigative judgment. Her thought was built from a soteriology linked with eschatology as demonstrated in her eschatologically focused works The Great Controversy and Christ's Object Lessons.

CHAPTER 4
DISCUSSION
Differences Between Wesley and White

The following differences must be viewed while remembering that hindsight is much more accurate. White stands-in point of time-upon the shoulders of Wesley, as it were. She builds upon the strides that he made before her. But there are important differences. Wesley's understanding of sin was marred by mistaken notions about original sin. But White, through developing a Biblically based doctrine of sin, avoided the lengthy entwining tendrils of Augustine's virulent heresy. Her wholistic view--her understanding that where sin abounded, grace did much more abound--she applied also to sin. She portrays a grace that is great enough to bring the entire cleansing that Wesley taught. She does not play down the depravity of man, but instead points up to grace provided.

Wesley was concerned with actively living-out the Christian life. He wanted to apply the Biblical prescriptions and healing helps to the spiritual needs of the soul here and now. He lived within the setting of a Christianity that needed badly to step away from dry formality and find anew a vivid Christian response to God. He was concerned with present salvation and the application of the benefits here and now. But Wesley rarely approached eschatology, and his concerns were almost exclusively soteriological and practical. In contrast, White vividly saw everything against the backdrop of the end-time, and this concept was a decisive element in her thinking. The great controversy theme was presented to her in vision and it was a driving and consuming element in her theological framework that was never far out of sight. In this context, the vindication of God through the character perfection of His people as a crucial exhibit of His grace before a watching and thinking universe is a decisive necessity. And so White looks at perfection from this standpoint.

Similarities Between Wesley and White

Wesley and White both viewed holiness as a crucial necessity in the Christian life. They arrived at it from different perspectives, at least in relation to eschatology and to the original concerns in their minds, and yet came to almost the same conclusion: holiness is indispensable for God's people. They also shared an essential Arminian perspective and emphasized human free will. Early Methodism and early Adventism both have strong links to anabaptist theology that make their early systems working-wholes, while later nudges toward reformed theological positions in areas of sin and justification are alien and unravelling in their effects.

Insights Developed Through This Comparison

On first glance, White and Wesley appear to have much in common because they both arrive at and write about the need for personal holiness in order to gain a fitness for heaven. But they start with different premises and end with different premises. They start with differing understandings of sin, and they end with differing concepts of what God is doing. White sees the necessity of a final vindication of God through His people. So they end in different places as well. It is interesting to note that many years after the death of these theological shapers, that the heirs of Methodism moved to a punctiliar view of sanctification and thus salvation, and eventually to a very liberal theological position in general. At the same time, the heirs of Adventism inherit both a process oriented salvation from White and the Adventist pioneers, and also through the impact of theological reshaping after White's death, a significant trend that is in the act of embracing reformed theological perspectives. Indeed, this transition has been underway for many decades.

CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Summary

White and Wesley look like they are very close together. They do agree that character perfection means holiness, and has tremendous implications for presently living the Christian life. But they start with different understandings of sin and end with different understandings of the entirety of grace's impact upon the Christian this side of glorification. Whereas Wesley's doctrine of perfection at its core was soteriological and involved a practrical present application of overcoming to the Christian life, White's views were shaped also by her emphasis on eschatology and her sense of the overarching plan of redemption and the moment in salvation history at which she lived. Her system was built upon the great controversy motif. It ends differently because it begins differently.

Conclusion

Although appearing to be so close, White and Wesley are actually separated by a significant distance. Wesley had made great advances over the magisterial reformers who inherited the dogma of original sin from the hoary ages. He was still caught in it, but not altogether so far from extrication. White stands apart from that destructive dogma, and to her the great controversy eschatological theme fuses together a great system in its completeness. She can speak clearly and consistently about overcoming now and living through a period without intercession for sin in the end of time, because she has embraced a sound hamartiology. The inheritors of Adventism must not lose it.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Douglass, Herbert E. "Editorial." Review and Herald, 23 May 1974, 12.

North American Division of Seventh-day Adventists. Issues: The Seventh-day Adventist Church and Certain Private Ministries, Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1992.

Priebe, Dennis. Face to Face With the Real Gospel. Frederick, MD: Amazing Facts, 1990.

Wesley, John. John Wesley's Sermons: an Anthology. Edited by Albert C. Outler & Richard P. Heitzenrater, Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1987.

White, Ellen G. Christ's Object Lessons. Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1900.

________. The Desire of Ages. Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1898.

________. The Great Controversy. Battle Creek, MI: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1911.

________. Mind, Character, Personality, vol. 1. Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing Association, 1977.

________. "Qualifications for the Worker." Review and Herald, 4 June 1895, 261.

________. Selected Messages, vol. 1. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1958.

________. "The Life and Light of Men." Signs of the Times. 17 June 1897, 390.

________. Testimonies to Ministers. Nampa, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1962.

________. This Day With God. Washington D.C., Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1979.

1.
¹John Wesley, "The Image of God," sermon of 15 November 1730, printed in Albert C. Outler & Richard P. Heitzenrater's John Wesley's Sermons: an Anthology, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1987), 19.

2.
²All italics are John Wesley's unless otherwise indicated.

3.
³"Christian Perfection," sermon published in 1741, 83.

4.
⁴ For example, in "Free Grace," 59, "The Great Assize," 317, etc.

5.
⁵ "Original Sin," sermon dated approximately 1759, 333.

6.
⁶ Ibid., 334.

7.
⁷ "The Circumcision of the Heart," sermon of 1 January 1733, 27, 29.

8.
⁸ "On Sin in Believers," sermon published in 1763, 367.

9.
⁹ Ibid., 367.

10.
¹⁰ Ibid., 368.

11.
¹¹ "Salvation by Faith," sermon dated to May-June 1738, 43.

12.
¹² "Christian Perfection," sermon published in 1741, 72.

13.
¹³ James 1:13-15 presents concisely the biblical distinction between temptation and sin. Biblically there is no concept of sin without guilt. Even when Christ was made "sin for us" He bore the guilt associated with the sins of the world in His experiential punishment upon the cross.

14.
¹⁴ "The Circumcision of the Heart," sermon of January 1, 1733, 25.

15.
¹⁵ Ibid., pp. 27, 29.

16.
¹⁶ "Salvation by Faith," 43.

17.
¹⁷ "Christian Perfection," 73.

18.
¹⁸ Ibid.

19.
¹⁹ Ibid., 81.

20.
²⁰ "On the Wedding Garment," 564.

21.
²¹ "Justification by Faith," sermon published in 1746, 115.

22.
²² "The Lord Our Righteousness," sermon 24 November 1765, 388.

23.
²³ "On Working Out Our Own Salvation," sermon published 1785, 491.

24.
²⁴ Ibid., 115.

25.
²⁵ "On the Wedding Garment," sermon finished by Wesley 26 March, 1790 and published in 1791 after his death, 562.

26.
²⁶ Ellen G. White, Mind, Character, and Personality, vol. 1, 29.

27.
²⁷ Ellen G. White, This Day With God, 350.

28.
²⁸ Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, 492. Many of these references are flat (simple assertions made deftly while more attentively pursuing other points), while others offer additional elucidation. It would be illuminating to consider these statements on a case by case basis. The significant idea pursued here is that White's understanding of sin was a deeply rooted and self-consistent element within her soteriological framework.

29.
²⁹ Dennis Priebe, Face to Face With the Real gospel, 23.

30.
³⁰ "Those who are living upon the earth when the intercession of Christ shall cease in the sanctuary above are to stand in the sight of a holy god without a mediator. Their robes must be spotless, their characters must be purified from sin by the blood of sprinkling. Through the grace of God and their own diligent effort they must be conquerors in the battle with evil. While the investigative judgment is going forward in heaven, while the sins of penitent believers are being removed from the sanctuary, there is to be a special work of purification, of putting away of sin, among God's people upon earth." Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, 425.

31.
³¹ Ibid., 623.

32.
³² Ellen G. White Signs of the Times 23 July 1902. The entire paragraph reads: "Those who believe on Christ and obey His commandments are not under bondage to God's law; for to those who believe and obey, His law is not a law of bondage, but of liberty. Every one who believes on Christ, every one who relies on the keeping power of a risen Saviour that has suffered the penalty pronounced upon the transgressor, every one who resists temptation and in the midst of evil copies the pattern given in the Christ-life, will through faith in the atoning sacrifice of Christ become a partaker of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. Every one who by faith obeys God's commandments, will reach the condition of sinlessness in which Adam lived before his transgression." See also Desire of Ages, 664.

33.
³³ One well-meaning author has described statements such as the latter as "manifestations of imprecision." Yet those disenfranchised conservatives within Adventism who hold to such views have no difficulty in finding an abundance of these "manifestations of imprecision" spread out across the broad and rich canvas of Ellen White's writings. These quotations are all beautifully consistent with each other--if one will permit the explicit and implicit hamartiology of White to stand. It is a misguided practice to automatically claim that such statements are "out of context." Some doubtlessly are, but many are not. These issues have to be fairly addressed. They are not "moot" issues. See Issues: The Seventh-day Adventist Church and Certain Private Ministries, 109b, 103, 48b-49a, 49b.

34.
³⁴ Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 1, 344.

35.
³⁵ The document itself is Manuscript 50, 1900. It is dated March 28, which immediately follows White's participation at the Geelong camp-meeting. An examination of her's and W. C. White's correspondence near that time does not reveal any significant link between events and the statement. Tim Poirer of the Ellen G. White Estate has linked this passage with the wording of Herman Melvill. A comparison of the documents reveals that White's page 340 of Selected Messages, vol. 1 is derived very closely from Melvill's 1844 book, Sermons. Melvill was an Anglican minister.

36.
³⁶ Ibid.

37.
³⁷ Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, 17 June 1897: "Christ did nothing that human nature may not do if it partakes of the divine nature." Also her Testimonies to Ministers, 173: "What Christ was in His perfect humanity, we must be; for we must form characters for eternity.

38.
³⁸ Again, White's terminology here is somewhat uncharacteristic of her. By "infuse" she appears to mean "impart." In White, grace does not become an innate property of the soul so that Christ's righteousness is unnecessary. Rather, the converted Christian needs always to maintain constant connection with heaven. Christ's "life-giving properties" reanimate previously numbed capacities, but the power of Christ is ever necessary. Notice the work of the Holy Spirit in the last portion of this passage: "In the work of redemption there is no compulsion. No external force is employed. Under the influence of the Spirit of God, man is left free to choose whom he will serve. In the change that takes place when the soul surrenders to Christ, there is the highest sense of freedom. The expulsion of sin is the act of the soul itself. True, we have no power to free ourselves from Satan's control; but when we desire to be set free from sin, and in our great need cry out for a power out of and above ourselves, the powers of the soul are imbued with the divine energy of the Holy Spirit, and they obey the dictates of the will in fulfilling the will of God." Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, 466.

39.
³⁹ Ibid., 341.

40.
⁴⁰ Herbert E. Douglass, Review and Herald 23 May 1974, 12.

41.
⁴¹ Ellen G. White, Christ's Object Lessons, 69.

42.
⁴² Ibid.

43.
⁴³ Ibid.

44.
⁴⁴ 310, 314, 315, 316, 317.

45.
⁴⁵ Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, 4 June 1895.

46.
⁴⁶ Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, 300.

Footer Graphic
Last Modified 23 March 2000