Messenger of the Lord

What About Plagiarism? ²⁴

The legal aspect of the charge that Ellen White plagiarized was reviewed by Attorney Vincent L. Ramik of the law firm of Diller, Ramik and Wight, Washington, D.C. In his August 14, 1981 report, after spending more than 300 hours researching about 1,000 relevant cases in American legal history, he concluded that “Ellen G. White was not a plagiarist and her works did not constitute copyright infringement/piracy.” ²⁵ MOL 458.7

Ramik observed: “Nowhere have we found the books of Ellen G. White to be virtually the ‘same plan and character throughout’ as those of her predecessors. Nor have we found, or have critics made reference to, any intention of Ellen White to supersede ... [other authors] in the market with the same class of readers and purchasers.” MOL 459.1

Continuing, Ramik pointed out that Mrs. White “modified, exalted, and improved” the writings of others in an ethical, as well as legal, manner. ²⁶ MOL 459.2

Ramik came to his conclusions after many hours of reading Ellen White’s books, as well as those used in her writing. Further, he read the material written by critics, from D. M. Canright to the present. He began his study with a prejudiced mind, due to certain newspaper articles of the late 1970s and early 1980s. But he turned 180 degrees after reading her own books, those of critics, and case law: “It was reading her messages in her writings that changed my mind.... I believe that the critics have missed the boat badly by focusing upon Mrs. White’s writings, instead of focusing upon the messages in Mrs. White’s writings.... Mrs. White moved me! I am a Roman Catholic; but, Catholic, Protestant, whatever—she moved me. And I think her writings should move anyone, unless he is permanently biased and is unswayable.” ²⁷ MOL 459.3

When asked what he meant by “message,” Ramik replied: “The message is what is crucial. The critic reads a sentence, and receives no meaning from it—he may, and often does, even take it out of context. But read the entire message. What is the author’s intent? What is the author really saying—where the words come from is really not that important. What is the message of this? If you disregard the message, then even the Bible itself is not worth being read, in that sense of the word.” ²⁸ MOL 459.4

In response to a question concerning the ethics of Mrs. White in using materials of others without publicly stating where she got them, Ramik responded, after noting some legal precedents: “Ellen White used the writings of others; but in the way she used them, she made them uniquely her own, ethically, as well as legally. And interestingly, she invariably improved that which she ‘selected’! ... She stayed well within the legal boundaries of ‘fair use,’ and all the time created something that was substantially greater (and even more beautiful) than the mere sum of the component parts. And I think the ultimate tragedy is that the critics fail to see this.” ²⁹ MOL 459.5

Ramik found it interesting and “absurd” that, at times, critics charged Ellen White with plagiarizing books “that she publicly urged her readers to get ... and read ... for themselves.” ³⁰ MOL 459.6

And yet questions remain. Has the church been silent until recently regarding Ellen White’s use of sources? Has anyone deliberately been trying to hide the facts? Would it have been better to have known this information through the years? Does proving that Ellen White did not violate plagiarism laws settle all questions regarding her integrity and authority as a divinely used messenger? MOL 459.7

Regarding the silence or hiding of facts, the record shows that the church through the years has attempted to convey the facts to its membership. ³¹ However, for various reasons, the information either did not get out effectively or it was received with indifference. As in most other areas, it is always easier to look back and fault others than it is to help resolve present concerns. MOL 459.8

However, the record is not silent. At the 1899 General Conference session held at South Lancaster, Massachusetts, A. T. Jones summed up his remarks regarding Ellen White’s method of writing: “There are statements that are true which God has led man to write. The Spirit of prophecy [as manifested in Ellen White] picks out of surroundings that are not all true these gems of perfect truth, and sets them in the setting that is all true, so that they can shine in their own true luster.” ³² MOL 459.9

At the 1913 General Conference, W. C. White spoke clearly about many aspects of his mother’s writing ministry, including how The Desire of Ages was written. ³³ MOL 460.1

W. C. White and Dores Robinson, representing the E. G. White Estate, tried to explain what we all see more clearly today. In a 1933 document, “Brief Statements Regarding the Writings of Ellen G. White,” they wrote of how Mrs. White had been counseled by the Lord to seek out books that would provide “gems of truth tersely expressed.” Further, she had “divine assurance that she would be guided in distinguishing the true from the false.” MOL 460.2

In fact, they told how Mrs. White “made no effort to conceal the fact that she had copied from other writers statements that exactly suited her purpose. And in her handwritten manuscripts, most of the passages that she had copied word for word, were enclosed in quotation marks.” They then reviewed the printing process and noted: “The question arose, How shall these passages be handled? Much time would be required to study each passage and mark it consistently. The printers were waiting for copy, and the public were waiting for the book. Then it was decided to leave out quotation marks entirely. And in that way the book was printed.” ³⁴ We today would have given more attention to the use of quotation marks. ³⁵ MOL 460.3

Probably the lack of discussion among Seventh-day Adventists regarding Ellen White’s indebtedness to certain literary sources was due, in part, to a lack of understanding of how inspiration worked, both in Bible writers and in the ministry of Ellen White. The prevailing concept among conservative Christians in the nineteenth century (as it is among many modern conservative Christians) was that prophets were verbally inspired and not thought inspired. ³⁶ To think otherwise probably never occurred to most ministers and church members. But only an unconscious half step separates verbal inspiration from the greater error that “inspiration” means no human input—that the prophet speaks only “divine” words. MOL 460.4

Another reason was that earlier Adventists were living with the prophet. They heard her speak often, followed her instruction at key intervals in the establishment of most denominational enterprises, and were greatly blessed with her “messages” contained in their periodicals. MOL 460.5