Nineteenth-century standards
Ellen White’s borrowing may have been legal, but was it ethical? Was it acceptable, common practice in her time? Why did she not always use quotation marks when using passages from other books? What do we know about the standards of writing in the nineteenth century?GP 85.3
In his History in the United States, 1800-1860, George H. Callcott said the following about the writing of nineteenth-century historians:GP 85.4
Despite their emphasis on honest scholarship, the Romantic historians have suffered grievously at the hands of subsequent scholars, for they have been accused of dishonesty, of altering direct quotations, and of using each other’s material without the scrupulous use of quotation marks. . . . However, accusations of dishonesty were unjust, for the historians were never secretive about their practices, and they must be judged by their own standards. It had never occurred to many that accurate quoting was desirable. GP 85.5
A second major assault by modern critics on the historians of the early nineteenth century centers on the issue of plagiarism—“the practice of using in their own works the same phraseology as someone else had used. The early nineteenth-century historian would have been dismayed by the attack, would have pleaded nolo contendere , and would simply have pointed out that he had never pretended to be original when he could find someone else who had satisfactorily said what he had in mind.” GP 85.6
Furthermore, “The early nineteenth-century historian felt no need to argue for originality, and he would not have understood why he should make a fetish of reworking material when what he wanted to say already had been said better by another. . . .GP 86.1
“Historians usually felt flattered rather than insulted when their words were used by another.” GP 86.2
It is true that toward the end of the nineteenth century, plagiarism became more of an issue and people began to be more careful in using sources. When the book The Great Controversy was revised in 1910-11, Ellen White instructed her staff to give proper credit to the sources wherever that was possible. Nevertheless, during most of the nineteenth century, religious writers in particular felt that they could freely use whatever contributed to their objective of advancing the kingdom of God.GP 86.3
Ellen White read widely and had a retentive memory, which meant that she often used material she had read without going back to her library to find out exactly where it was found. Furthermore, God told her “that in the reading of religious books and journals, she would find precious gems of truth expressed in acceptable language, and that she would be given help from heaven to recognize these and to separate them from the rubbish of error with which she would sometimes find them associated.” So far from trying to hide her use of the writings of others, she explained in print how and why she did it. She even recommended that people read the books she used in writing her own works. Her work as an author was in accordance with the customs of her time. As we have seen, she broke no copyright laws. Her conduct was defensible both legally and morally.GP 86.4
During Ellen White’s lifetime and ever since her death, critics have questioned her integrity. She has been accused of deception, falsehood, and lies. One major reason for these accusations has been presuppositions about how a prophet should function. For example, some critics believe that “prophets ‘should have full knowledge’ from the start of their ministry; their predictions should be unalterable, their writings exempt from all errors, discrepancies, and mistakes, and never include uninspired sources. For them, prophets never express merely personal opinions in their writings.” GP 86.5
As we have seen in our study of biblical prophets, these presuppositions assume a verbal-inspiration concept that Seventh-day Adventists do not hold.GP 87.1
Ellen White’s personal integrity was confirmed many times by those who worked with her as well as by those who were not Seventh-day Adventists. Upon her death, The Independent, a weekly journal published in New York, devoted a column to her life and work. It concluded with these words: ” ‘she was absolutely honest in her belief in her revelations. Her life was worthy of them. She showed no spiritual pride and she sought no filthy lucre. She lived the life and did the work of a worthy prophetess[,] the most admirable of the American succession.’ “ GP 87.2
Responses to the major challenges to her writings can be found in the following books: F. D. Nichol, Ellen G. White and Her Critics (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald®, 1951); Arthur L. White, The Ellen G. White Writings (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald®, 1973); Robert Olson, One Hundred and One Questions on the Sanctuary and on Ellen White (Washington, D.C.: Ellen G. White Estate, 1981); Herbert E. Douglass, Messenger of the Lord (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 1998); and Leonard Brand and Don S. McMahon, The Prophet and Her Critics (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 2005).GP 87.3