Ellen White Investigation

Ellen White Supremacist

By , last updated Nov.

Ellen White, like many in the Northern United States in the mid-1800s, was opposed to the institution of slavery and wrote against it during the Civil War. In 1863, she wrote: "Christ died for the whole human family, whether white or black."1 After the Civil War, Mrs. White encouraged gospel outreach for African-Americans in the South, and even contributed her own money towards that work. While all of this is admirable and should be applauded, she also made statements which were racially intolerant. This article will examine those statements.

Humans Will Be White in Heaven

Mrs. White assured her largely white sect that heaven would be free of dark-skinned people:

In heaven there will be no color line; for all will be as white as Christ himself. Let us thank God that we can be members of the royal family.2

Thus, according to Ellen White, only white-skinned people will be in heaven.

Racist Books in Her Library

While Mrs. White forbid her followers from reading the anti-slavery book Uncle Tom's Cabin, she had author Thomas Dixon's white supremacist books The Clansman and The Leopard's Spots in her private library. Dixon's father and uncle were at one time members of the white supremacy group Ku Klux Klan. The Clansman book portrays the Klan in a relatively positive light. Both these books portray Blacks as inferior to Whites.

Mrs. White also had John Campbell's book Negro-Mania.3 This entire book was an argument that Blacks should not be considered equal with Whites. Campbell argued:

Why, then, all this rant about negro equality, seeing that neither nature or nature's God ever established any such equality. ...all attempts at establishing an equality of races is silly; nay more, it is wicked. ... The more this question is discussed, the more certain is to be decided against Negro equality.4

Mrs. White also had John H. Van Evrie's 1853 book, Negroes and Negro Slavery.5 The purpose of the book was to justify slavery.

Eyewitness Account of Elders B.F. Snook and W.H. Brinkerhoff

Ellen White's amalgamation statements, published in 1864, raised questions as to whether she thought Negroes were an amalgamation of man and beast. Uriah Smith attempted to clarify the matter when he published his defense of her in 1868. He identified the amalgamated species as certain African and Indian tribes.6

Not everyone bought Smith's explanation. Elders Snook and Brinkerhoff were Seventh-day Adventist leaders in Iowa who were ordained by James White in 1862. They later learned the truth about Ellen White. In 1866, they published a book unveiling not only the errors in Mrs. White's visions, but also the racist views she held at that time:

These visions teach that the Negro race is not human. This charge they deny, but we will let the reader decide for himself. Here is what she says; 'Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species, and in certain races of men.'—Sp. Gifts. Vol. 3, p. 75. But what are we to understand by certain races of men? She has not informed us in her writings, but left us to fix the stigma of amalgamation where we may see fit. But the interpretation has come to light. She told it to her husband, and he made it known to Eld. Ingraham, and he divulged the secret to the writer, that Sister White had seen that God never made the Darkey.7

Blacks To Be Led By Whites

Mrs. White permitted African-American gospel workers in the SDA ministry, but she felt that white men should lead up the work for Blacks in the Southern USA:

Opportunities are continually presenting themselves in the Southern States, and many wise, Christian colored men will be called to the work. But for several reasons white men must be chosen as leaders.8

SDA corporate leaders took this testimony to heart as if it came from God. All leadership positions in the South were given to White leaders. This practice continued for decades. One SDA writer explains:

To add insult to injury, Oakwood College, which served black students, had white administrators who maintained a wall of separation between students of color and white employees. For example, it was not uncommon for white employees and black students to eat in segregated dining spaces. Also, it was not uncommon for racial epithets to be uttered and black employees to be dismissed by white administrators.9

Not to Push for Equality with Whites

Mrs. White certainly gave lip service to the concept of equality for Blacks. She wrote:

He [Christ] laid the foundation for a religion by which Jew and Gentile, black and white, free and bond, are linked together in one common brotherhood, recognized as equal in the sight of God.10

No distinction on account of nationality, race, or caste, is recognized by God. He is the Maker of all mankind. All men are of one family by creation, and all are one through redemption.11

You have no license from God to exclude the colored people from your places of worship. Treat them as Christ’s property, which they are, just as much as yourselves. They should hold membership in the church with the white brethren.12

Men have thought it necessary to plan in such a way as to meet the prejudice of the white people; and a wall of separation in religious worship has been built up between the colored people and the white people. The white people have declared themselves willing that the colored people should be converted...yet they were not willing to sit by the side of their colored brethren, and sing and pray and bear witness to the truth which they had in common. Not for a moment could they tolerate the idea that they should together bear the fruit that should be found on the Christian tree. The image of Christ might be stamped upon the soul; but it still would be necessary to have a separate church and a separate service.13

From these quotes, it would seem that Ellen White...

This all sounds wonderful on paper. Mrs. White penned those beautiful passages between 1891 and 1902. But did she and corporate SDA leaders follow her testimonies?

The sad reality is that she and SDA corporate leaders caved quickly to the "prejudice of the white people," and made plans accordingly. Denying her earlier statements denouncing a "wall of separation in religious worship," in 1908 she called for just such a wall:

In regard to white and colored people worshiping in the same building, this cannot be followed as a general custom with profit to either party — especially in the South. The best thing will be to provide the colored people who accept the truth with places of worship of their own, in which they can carry on their services by themselves. Let them understand that this plan is to be followed until the Lord shows us a better way.14

In the same manuscript, which was published the following year in the ninth volume of Testimonies, Mrs. White advised that among SDA workers, "the mingling of whites and blacks in social equality was by no means to be encouraged."15 Like author John Campbell, Mrs. White saw little value in agitating for racial justice. She encouraged Blacks not to strive for equality with Whites:

The Colored People should not urge that they be placed on an equality with White People.16

Ronald Graybill, former secretary of the White Estate, summed it up this contradictory behavior accurately:

These three passages—one discouraging "social equality," one advising separate worship services and buildings, and one saying that the Negro should not urge that he be placed on an equality with white people—seem to have cut the nerve of Ellen White's earlier protestations against white prejudice and her condemnation of those who were unwilling to worship with Negroes.17

While many excuses and reasons have been bantered about to justify Ellen White backpedaling on this issue, the bottom line is that she and SDA corporate leaders planned "in such a way as to meet the prejudice of the white people." This was the exact opposite of what she admonished in the highlighted quote above. The SDA sect implemented what become known as the Kilgore policy, which "was practiced in the Adventist Church from 1890 until 1965." Under this policy...

African Americans were not admitted to many Adventist schools during this period... Some schools used a quota system to limit the number of black students that could be admitted. ... African Americans were also refused medical services at Adventist medical facilities.18

Sadly, even to this day, Whites and Blacks are segregated into separate divisions of the SDA Church. The Blacks operate nine regional conferences in the United States that are distinct from the White conference structure.

The Color Line

By 1909, Mrs. White was adamantly opposed to addressing the issue of the "color line," writing:

It is Satan's plan to call minds to the study of the color line. If his suggestions are heeded, there will be diversity of opinion and great confusion. No one is capable of clearly defining the proper position of the colored people. Men may advance theories, but I assure you that it will not do for us to follow human theories. So far as possible the color line question should be allowed to rest.

The work of proclaiming the truth for this time is not to be hindered by an effort to adjust the position of the Negro race.19

The phrase "the color line" was a common 19th-century shorthand for the rigid system of racial separation in the United States—social rules, laws, and customs that kept Black and White people apart in schools, churches, public life, and leadership.20 This is what would later be called Jim Crow.

In the passage above, Mrs. White counsels the sect to avoid open debate or agitation over racial integration. Her reason appears to be her fear that pushing the race question aggressively would provoke some type of backlash from Whites in the South which could damage the sect's ability to convert White Christians in the South to Seventh-day Adventism. In other words, she made plans to "meet the prejudice of the white people."

While Mrs. White may have been taking the "practical" approach at the expense of justice, she missed a golden opportunity for prophetic leadership against racial oppression. Other Christian thought leaders—those who were not led be a false prophet—were interested in integrating blacks into their congregations and uplifting them to a position of equality with Whites. Kenneth Bailey explains how forward-thinking Christians churches were advocating for equality between Whites and Blacks in the church:

In the autumn of 1865, the Reverend Isaac T. Tichenor [Southern Baptist] emphasized that the criterion of skin color for church membership was contrary 'to all our past history and in violation of the first principles of our faith' ... and the Southern Presbyterian General Assembly, persuaded as to the 'advantage of the colored people and white being united together in the worship of God.'21

It is amazing that other Christian denominations, such as the Quakers—even though they had no "prophet" guiding them—were pushing for racial equality during this era. This was the just and equitable course of action, while the SDA "prophet" was saying Blacks should not push for a position of equality with Whites. As noted above, separate SDA Black conferences and churches still exist in the United States of America. Do they still believe that addressing the color line is "Satan's Plan"? When will the time ever come for SDA corporate leaders to "adjust the position of the Negro race"?

Forbidding Interracial Marriage

Despite some positive statements about all races being equal before God, Mrs. White—for so-called "practical" reasons—took a hard line against interracial marriage:

But there is an objection to the marriage of the white race with the black. All should consider that they have no right to entail upon their offspring that which will place them at a disadvantage; they have no right to give them as a birthright a condition which would subject them to a life of humiliation. The children of these mixed marriages have a feeling of bitterness toward the parents who have given them this lifelong inheritance. For this reason, if there were no other, there should be no intermarriage between the white and the colored race.22

In reply to inquiries regarding the advisability of intermarriage between Christian young people of the white and black races, I will say that in my earlier experience this question was brought before me, and the light given me of the Lord was that this step should not be taken; for it is sure to create controversy and confusion. I have always had the same counsel to give. No encouragement to marriages of this character should be given among our people. Let the colored brother enter into marriage with a colored sister who is worthy, one who loves God, and keeps His commandments. Let the white sister who contemplates uniting in marriage with the colored brother refuse to take this step, for the Lord is not leading in this direction. Time is too precious to be lost in controversy that will arise over this matter. Let not questions of this kind be permitted to call our ministers from their work. The taking of such a step will create confusion and hindrance. It will not be for the advancement of the work or for the glory of God.23

You have no license from God to exclude the colored people from places of worship. Treat them as Christ's property, which they are, just as much as yourselves. They should hold membership in the church with the white brethren. Every effort should be made to wipe out the terrible wrong [slavery] which has been done them. At the same time we must not carry things to extremes and run into fanaticism on this question. Some would think it right to throw down every partition wall and intermarry with the colored people, but this is not the right thing to teach or practice.24

Let the colored brother enter into marriage with a colored sister who is worthy, one who loves God, and keeps His commandments. Let the white sister who contemplates uniting in marriage with the colored brother refuse to take this step, for the Lord is not leading in this direction. ... The taking of such a step will create confusion and hindrance.25

Interestingly, many modern SDAs in the United States, Europe, and South Africa engage in interracial marriages. Apparently they do not regard Ellen White's counsels as "light" given to her by the Lord.

Following is a letter of counsel, written January 8, 1901, to a young man who entertained plans that would have resulted in an interracial marriage. Its counsels are similar to those of other communications on this matter, but Ellen White adds words that call for thoughtful contemplation:

Do not unite yourself in marriage with a girl who will have cause to regret the step forever after. . . . O what covetous, selfish, short-sighted creatures human beings are. Distrust your own judgment, and depend on the judgment of God. Distinguish between what is pleasing and what is profitable. Do God's will submissively. . . . Following your own way and your own will, you will only find thorns and thistles.26

Any SDA reading this quote would conclude that interracial marriage would...

Is this woman really speaking for God?

A Horrid Legacy

While SDA corporate leaders and administrators were typically loathe to follow Ellen White's testimonies, they followed her segregation testimonies with great vigor. The Lucy Byard story is an infamous example. In 1943, this Black SDA woman was denied treatment at the SDA Sanitarium in Maryland and died a month later. Tuwan White explains:

Prior to 1943, the Washington Sanitarium practiced a quota system, and only admitted African Americans in emergency cases. Even then, the care was given by off-duty employees in the basement of sanitariums. In 1943 they changed their policy to not admit any black patients.27

One would think that the public outrage over this case would have forced the SDA corporation to make a change, but they clung to Ellen White's testimony, and refused to fully address the "color line" issue. In fact, SDAs were one of the last Christian denominations in the United States to end segregation. Tuwan White writes:

The U.S. Supreme Court declared segregation unconstitutional in 1954 (Brown v Board of Education of Topeka). Yet the Adventist church did not stop practicing segregation until eleven years later. What prompted the change? In 1965, the Department of Justice's Attorney General Nick Katzenbach heard that the Adventist church still practiced segregation. He contacted the General Conference, and told them they had a matter of weeks to integrate their institutions or face consequences from the federal government. Can you guess what happened next? Very quickly the Adventist church desegregated their institutions.28

This is the bitter fruit of Ellen White's decision to defy her own testimony and "plan in such a way as to meet the prejudice of the white people."

Conclusion

Contrast the "prophet-led" SDA legacy with that of the Quakers:

The Quakers...pushed aggressively for integration of schools in the South, fought against employment discrimination, and in 1947 won the Nobel Peace Prize for their significant peacemaking and reconciliation efforts around the world.29

Amazingly, this small group of Quakers, with no prophet leading them, had the wisdom to fight for the equality of the races. Meanwhile, when the Quakers won their Nobel prize, SDAs still had segregation of races in their General Conference headquarters cafeteria.30

Yes, Mrs. White should be applauded for verbally opposing slavery and encouraging the SDA sect to engage in gospel work for "Colored people" in the South. However, when it came to the integration, her words rang hollow. When pressure mounted in the South, she backpedaled and decided the question of the "color line" was Satan's territory and would best be left alone. Today, many of her statements regarding the position of Blacks and interracial marriage appear to a modern audience to be short-sighted and racially-charged. It is obvious these statements were not inspired in any way, but were merely human opinions, reflective of the common attitudes and fears of her era. This being the case, one must ask which other of her "inspired" statements were also merely reflecting common attitudes of her era?

See also

Category: Shocking Statements