controversey with the great controversy

[Adventist Heretic]

Just something to consider.
As many of you are aware there is considerable conflict over the nature of the prophetic ministry of EGW and the exact nature of the inspiration of her writings. In the following post I have endoverd to post some of the criticims of Ellen White and her writings in an orderly fashion. The purpose is to raise awareness of the issues and ficilate discussion, of these issues. What exactly are we to do with the following information. Some would have you ignore it or dissmiss it as the work of disgrentled heritics but that is not the case.
I come to this issue from the stand point of some one seeking answers. I stumbled accross these issues quite on accident, now they need to be addrssed. it is likely that there will be those who take this as a personal offence and a personal attack. Let me assure you that is not the case. I have nothing personal aginst EGW or the SDA chruch, but I do feel like there are serious questions to be answered. I have endoverd to be orderly in my posting. why should you care aoubt this let me quote the scripture "Test the spirits to see if they are from God, for many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1. that is why. the Lord tells us to Test the spirits, what exactly are the spirts, Jesus in John "my WORDS are SPIRIT and LIFE, and if you listen to my words you will have eternal life. the WORDS rer the spirit and are to be TESTED there are many who have come claimng to be speeking for God. EGW is one of them, yet most of her followere have never followed the command of the Lord to Test the spirits. it is along the lines of testing that I endovor to post these questions.

A table of contents
1. origin of GC post 1-5
2. Martin Luther post 6-8
3. interdict 1411-1412 post 9-10
4. the albigensens 11-12
5. diet of 1529 13-14
6. french revol. 3.5 years post 15
7. 100 chages to the GC 16-24
8. ww prescott letter to W.C. White post 25
9. EGW "different God" post 26
10. SDa anti-trinity post 27
11. litch on trukey 28
12. famous quote 29
http://www.ellenwhite.org/myth7.htm

Myths about Ellen White:
Received Great Controversy in Vision


By D. Anderson


The Great Controversy is Ellen White's epic book depicting not only the past but also the future of Christianity. Among Adventists, few books are held in higher regard than the Great Controversy. Millions of copies of the book have been printed in a number of languages, and church members have followed Mrs. White's directive to distribute it throughout the world.
According to Adventist folklore, the Great Controversy originated in 1858, at Lovett's Grove, where Mrs. White was said to have been given a panoramic vision of the future. As the story goes, over a period of years Mrs. White wrote out portions of this great vision that has come to be known as the "great controversy" vision. These writings first appeared in print in 1858 under the title Spiritual Gifts (vol. 1).1 The third and fourth volumes of Spiritual Gifts appeared in 1864 and expanded upon the 1858 volume. Later, in 1884, these writings were expanded upon and republished as Spirit of Prophecy (vol. 4). Finally, in 1888, the book was once again expanded upon and reprinted under the title for which it is known today, the Great Controversy. The Great Controversy was revised once more in 1911, and it is this version that is sold today in Adventist bookstores across the world. The book predicts such things as the ecumenical movement, the rise of spiritualism, the papacy's takeover of the world, and the passing of national Sunday legislation.
Mrs. White assured her followers that this book came straight from God:

"The book The Great Controversy, I appreciate above silver or gold, and I greatly desire that it shall come before the people. While writing the manuscript of The Great Controversy, I was often conscious of the presence of the angels of God. And many times the scenes about which I was writing were presented to me anew in visions of the night, so that they were fresh and vivid in my mind." 2​

First-day Adventist H.L. Hastings Publishes Great Controversy BEFORE E.G. White's Vision!

Before Mrs. White's Lovett Grove vision, a first-day Adventist named H.L Hastings published a book entitled:

[SIZE=+1]THE GREAT CONTROVERSY[/SIZE] BETWEEN GOD AND MAN:
Its origin, progress, and termination
by Horace L. Hastings (Boston: 1858)​

On March 14, 1858, Ellen White was purported to have had her famous Lovett's Grove vision about "The Great Controversy". Interestingly enough, a mere four days later, on March 18, 1858, a review of Hastings' Great Controversy appeared in James White's Review magazine! In order to appear in print in the March 18 issues of the Review, the book had to have been purchased and read earlier in the year. It should be no surprise that the Whites had Hastings' book in their posession as Hastings was well-known and admired among the Adventists.3 Although James and Ellen travelled frequently during the first part of the year, it is very likely they obtained either a manuscript or an actual copy of Hastings' book either directly from Hastings or from another Adventist, perhaps one they met in their travels. By the fall, the Whites had published their own book dealing with the theme of the great controversy, Spiritual Gifts, volume 1.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Some researchers have concluded that Mrs. White did not use Hastings' book while developing her book because the words used are often quite different and Mrs. White often elaborated on many doctrines specific to the Seventh-day Adventist church.4 However, if one were to candidly examine both books, there are enough similarities to lead one to suspect that the Whites were quite familiar with Hastings' book. While the amount of plagiarized material is small, there is an astonishing similarity in the main themes, the topics and structure of the two books. It appears Mrs. White followed Hastings' Great Controversy as an outline or a guideline in developing her own Great Controversy. The following quotes are shown to illustrate how Mrs. White copied topics, themes, structure, and even plagiarized a few direct quotes from Hastings without giving him credit:
Chapter Title as it appears in Spiritual Gifts (Vol. 1) Topic Quote from Ellen White's Spiritual Gifts, (Vol. 1), 1858 Quote from H.L. Hastings' Great Controversy, 1858 Fall of Man Adam and Eve instructed by God: "I saw that the holy angels often visited the garden, and gave instruction to Adam and Eve concerning their employment, and also taught them concerning the rebellion of Satan and his fall." p. 20 "We are taught that our first parents received their instructions while in their state of innocency, and even after their transgression, directly from the divine legislator himself." p. 20 Paradise lost: "He [Satan] had been shut out of heaven, they out of Paradise." p. 22 "...sin that turned paradise into a desert. p. 17
The First Advent of Christ Angels announce first coming: "They [angels] triumphantly heralded the advent of the Son of God to a fallen world to accomplish the work of redemption..." p. 28 "...they [angels] sang...This was the Messiah's errand...to reconcile all things to God." p. 80 John the Baptist "Multitudes left the busy cities and villages, and flocked to the wilderness to hear the words of the wonderful, singular Prophet. John laid the axe at the root of the tree. He reproved sin fearless of consequences, and prepared the way for the Lamb of God." p. 30 "Multitudes heeded the proclamation, and were baptized of John in Jordan, confessing their sins..." "...a moral giant heralded the coming of the greater Proclaimer of the divine will, and exhorted the nation to repent, and by reformation, prepare for the approaching manifestation of a mightier one..." p. 81 The Ministry of Christ Hurling Christ over the precipice: "I was then shown that Satan and his angels were very busy during Christ's ministry, inspiring men with unbelief, hate and scorn. ... Again as the plain truth dropped from his holy lips, the multitude laid hold of him, and led him to the brow of a hill, intending to thrust him down." p. 36 "...filled with wrath, they thrust him out of the synagogue, and dragged him toward a frightful precipice, that they might hurl him down headlong and destroy him. They hated him without a cause." p. 82 The Trial of Christ Torture of Jesus: "They cruelly scourged him, and put an old purple, kingly robe upon him, and bound his sacred head with a crown of thorns. They put a reed in his hand, and mockingly bowed to him, and saluted him with, Hail king of the Jews! They then took the reed from his hand, and smote him with it upon the head..." "They covered his head with an old garment; blindfolded him, and then struck him in the face, and cried out, Prophesy unto us who it was that smote thee." p. 50,51 "They bound his temples with a twisted thorn. They beat him cruelly with their hands. They arrayed him in a gorgeous robe--blind-folded him, and bade him prophesy unto them. They drew his blood with the gory scourge. They gave him a reed for a sceptre, and cried in mockery, "Hail, King of the Jews." p. 83 The Crucifixion of Christ Jews revile Jesus: "As Jesus hung upon the cross, some who passed by reviled him, wagging their heads..." p. 59 "Jews derided him, Pharisees and priests wagged their heads contemptuously..." p. 83 The Resurrection Lying about the resurrection: "They [Jews] decided to hire the [Roman] soldiers to keep the matter secret." p. 68 "...both Jews and Romans agreed to lie about his resurrection..." p. 84 The Ascension of Christ Captives led to heaven: "Angels came to receive the King of glory, and to escort him triumphantly to heaven. After Jesus had blessed his disciples, he was parted from them, and taken up. And as he led the way upward, the multitude of captives who were raised at his resurrection followed." p. 77 "Earth rejected Christ, but heaven received him; and with him a glorious multitude of captives whom he had delivered from the grasp of death..." p. 85 Evil Counsels: "Satan counseled with his angels, and with bitter hatred against God's government..." p. 79 "Haughty and hardened, the kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers to counsel together, against the Lord..." p. 85 The Disciples of Christ Do not preach in Jesus' name: "...they beat them, and commanded them to speak no more in the name of Jesus." p. 85 "They straitly [sic] charged them, under grievous penalties, to cease to speak in the name of Jesus. They scourged them publicly." p. 88 The Great Apostasy Early persecution of Christians: "Notwithstanding the persecution and sufferings those Christians endured, they would not lower the standard. They kept their religion pure." p. 103 "Still, in all their persecutions, they trusted in the living God. They labored, and suffered reproach." p. 95 The Curse of the Jews: "The curse of God followed them, and they were a byword and a derision to the heathen and to so-called Christians. They were degraded, shunned, and detested, as if the brand of Cain were upon them. ... . I saw that God had forsaken the Jews as a nation; but that individuals among them will yet be converted..." Early Writings (Spiritual Gifts) p. 213 "[The Jews] have left their name for a curse to the world; have been a hissing and a byword among all nations... Yet if they continue not in unbelief, God is able to graft them in; and so...shall be saved." p. 93 The Mystery of Iniquity Bible under attack: "The will of God plainly revealed in his word, was covered up with error and tradition, which have been taught as the commandments of God." "The Bible was hated, and efforts were made to rid the earth of the precious word of God." p. 111, 109 "The truths of God were hidden beneath countless fables. The commandments of God were made void through man's tradition. The word of God was sealed, prohibited, perverted, and mutilated." p. 97 The Church and World United Professing Christ: "I saw that a very large company professed the name of Christ, but God does not recognize them as his. " p. 126 "A profession of allegiance to God is not enough to constitute a man a friend of God. The being called by the Christian name avails nothing." p. 109 Ministers preach smooth things: "The ministers preach smooth things to suit carnal professors." p. 127 "There are too many who have no higher calling than to minister thus to the comfort of the itching of the ears that wait upon their words." p. 125 Spiritualism Demonic instructions "I saw the rapping delusion. Satan has power to bring the appearance of forms before us purporting to be our relatives and friends that now sleep in Jesus. ...for the spirits of devils will yet appear to them, professing to be beloved friends and relatives, who will declare to them unscriptural doctrines." p. 173 "The demons of darkness are invoked, and their strange responses--a medley of falsehood, blasphemy, and folly--are received as revelations from celestial 'spheres' ... satanic revelations authorize adultery, fornication, and the countless abominations that are, with such witchcraft, 'the works of the flesh.'" p. 127 Covetousness Covetousness "[Satan said] They may profess what they please, only make them care more for money than the success of Christ's kingdom..." p. 179 "Sin is winked at that money may be gained. Worldlings are courted for their influence and their gold..." p. 126 Shaking Shaking God's people: "They will rise up against it [straight testimony], and this will cause a shaking among God's people. ... Some had been shaken out, and left by the way." pp. 184, 186 "This shaking will remove everything that can be removed, while the things that cannot be shaken, and the kingdom that cannot be moved, shall abide..." p. 145 Deliverance of the Saints Shouting Hallelujah: "At the end of every sentence the saints shouted, Glory! Hallelujah!" p. 205 "Much people cry Hallelujah...the saints of God rejoice..." p. 162 The Second Resurrection Satan's army attacks "Jesus closes the gates of the City, and this vast army surround it and place themselves in battle array... But fire from God out of heaven is rained upon them." p. 216, 217 "His [Satan's] hosts compass the camp of the saints about and the beloved city, and then, upon that countless throng...comes down the storm of sheeted flame." p. 165 Closing "...the great controversy was forever ended." p. 218 "The controversy is closed." p. 166

 

[Adventist Heretic]

The following detailed analysis further shows how each writer enunciated on some of the same themes and topics:

(ORDER, supplied)
Theme
Topic
Ellen White
H.L. Hastings

Noah and the Flood
Wickedness of the earth
1SG p. 66
p. 21

God calls Noah to preach
p. 69
p. 22

People ignored and mocked Noah
p. 70
pp. 22-23

Noah and animals enter ark
p. 72
p. 23

Dark clouds fill the sky
p. 73
p. 23

Floods from above and below
p. 73
p. 23

Lightening bolts flashed
p. 74
p. 24

Cities/Buildings destroyed
p. 74
p. 24

The lost were "wailing"
p. 74
p. 24

The "loftiest" points covered by water
p. 76
p. 24

God protected the ark
p. 75
p. 24
Babel
Wicked contregate in plain of Shinar
p. 91
p. 25

Tower of Babel built
p. 92
p. 25

God confueses the languages
p. 92
p. 26

Builders were unable to communicate
p. 92
p. 26
Abraham
Abram called to separate from wicked
p. 93
p. 27

Lord made promises to Abraham
p. 93
p. 27
The Exodus
Dwelled in the land of Goshen
3SG p. 177
p. 31

New king enslaves Israelites
p. 178
p. 31

Moses was born
p. 180
p. 32

Hidden in bulrushes
p. 180
p. 32

Educated with pharoahs
p. 183
p. 32

Dwelt in the desert
p. 187
p. 32

Moses and Aaron visit Pharoah
p. 197
p. 33

Pharoah refuses request
p. 198
p. 33

Pharoah increases burdens on slaves
p. 198
p. 33

Plagues fall
pp. 207-221
pp. 34-35

Passover observed
pp. 222-228
p. 36

Death wail heard at midnight
p. 229
p. 36

Pharoah releases captives
p. 229
p. 36

Camped by Red Sea
p. 230
p. 36

Pharoah pursues Israelites
p. 231
pp. 36-37

Moses parts the waters
p. 234
p. 37

Egyptian army destroyed
p. 235
p. 39

Israelites sing to the Lord
p. 236-238
pp. 40-41

Other nations are witness to the Exodus
p. 242
p. 42
Jesus
Angels announce Christ's birth
1SG p. 28
p. 80

John heralds Christ, baptizes people
p. 29
p. 81

Mob threatens to throw Jesus from hill
p. 36
p. 82

Was abused during the trial
p. 55
p. 83

Jesus was "delivered" to be crucified
p. 57
p. 83

Cross was laid on His shoulders
p. 58
p. 83

Nails hammered in
p. 59
p. 83

Hung between thieves
p. 59
p. 83

Given vinegar to drink
p. 60
p. 83

Guard placed at the tomb
p. 65
p. 83

Guards lied about resurrection
p. 68
p. 84

Returns to heaven with "captives"
p. 69
p. 85
Destruction of Jerusalem
Apostles preached to Jerusalem
GC88 p. 28
p. 88

God rejects Jewish nation
p. 29
p. 90

Christians evacuate Jerusalem
p. 30
p. 91

Rome lays seige to Jerusalem
p. 31
p. 91

Women ate their own children
p. 32
p. 92

City and temple destroyed
pp. 33-35
p. 92
Final judgment
Lord has a controversy with the nations
p. 656
p. 134

Slain shall cover the earth
p. 657
p. 134

Son of Man appears in clouds
p. 643
p. 143

Wicked turned to stubble
p. 673
p. 146

Lake of fire destroys wicked
p. 672
p. 165
New Earth
New Jerusalem descends
p. 663
p. 166

Tree of Life
p. 675
p. 166

No light is needed
p. 676
p. 166

Righteous unite in songs of praise
p. 678
p. 167

Sinners are no more
p. 678
p. 167
(1SG=Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, 3SG=Spiritual Gifts, vol. 3, GC88=Great Controversy, 1888 ed.)

 

[Adventist Heretic]

n conclusion, while there is only a small amount of direct plagiarism, and Mrs. White frequently expounded more than Hastings, research shows Mrs. White generally followed Hastings' themes and perhaps gleaned ideas for content and structure from his book.

Where did Mrs. White's get her Great Controversy vision? Was it from God? Or H.L. Hastings?
Hastings published several books between 1858 and 1864, and in 1864 he published another version of Great Controversy. Ironically, on that very same year, Ellen White published Spiritual Gifts, volumes 3 and 4, which are an expansion of her earlier book. What a coincidence! Again, the scope of topics covered, from creation to the end of time, and the themes are remarkably similar to Hastings' book, even though the words differ sometimes quite substantially.
There are a few instances where Hastings develops a thought in one of his books that is not found specifically in the Bible, and Mrs. White takes up the same thought and expands on it. Look at these examples:
Topic Not Found in Bible H.L. Hastings Ellen White, Spiritual Gifts vol. 3 The wicked ignore the entrance of animals into the Ark "The beasts of the earth and fowls of heaven, moved by a strange impulse, come and find refuge with the servant of the Lord. But the scoffing world pass heedlessly on." (Great Controversy, p. 23) "Notwithstanding the solemn exhibition they had witnessed of God's power--of the unnatural occurrence of the beasts' leaving the forests and fields, and going into the ark, and the angel of God clothed with brightness, and terrible in majesty, descending from Heaven and closing the door; yet they hardened their hearts, and continued to revel and sport over the signal manifestations of divine power." (p. 69) The curse did not change the appearance of the earth after Eden "...the curse has fallen, but still the earth retains its primitive form, and to a great extent, its pristine glory." (The Church not in Darkness (1864), p. 10) "The curse did not change at once the appearance of the earth. It was still rich in the bounty God had provided for it." (p. 61)
Hastings must have made an impression on Mrs. White, because much later in life, she makes a statement that is astoundingly similar to one made 45 years earlier by Hastings:
"...from our hearts the sad confession, that of the thousand millions of people [in] this rebellious world, probably not one in twenty are faithful followers of Jesus Christ." (Hastings, The Last Days (1864), p. 60) "It is a solemn statement that I make to the church, that not one in twenty whose names are registered upon the church books are prepared to close their earthly history, and would be as verily without God and without hope in the world as the common sinner." {White, General Conference Bulletin, July 1, 1900}


Whites offer their own "improved version" of Hastings' Great Controversy

In the review of Hastings' Great Controversy that appeared in the Review article the author (most likely James White, but possibly Uriah Smith) points out that the book needs some improvements:

"And while every one must close the volume with a vivid sense of the manner in which the controversy will close in the triumph of the power and justice of God, and the certainty of this issue, we could wish that the author had dwelt more at length on the points of man's rebellion, and the terms of reconciliation. When he speaks of the way we may approach to "a more glorious mercy-seat," of the position of Christ "in the heavenly places," and of the "ark of God's testament" seen in the temple of heaven, we could wish he had reminded the revolters of a certain law that reposes in that ark, beneath that mercy-seat, which is the constitution of God's government, and upon which hinges the whole controversy between him and man."5​

It was not long before James and Ellen had the opportunity to make the necessary improvements to Hastings' book. A mere six months after the book review appeared, Ellen published her own version of Hastings' book entitled Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1. This book later evolved into the Great Controversy.

Improvement #1 - The Law

In his review of Hastings' book James had lamented:

"we could wish he had reminded the revolters of a certain law that reposes in that ark."​

James and Ellen had the opportunity to improve on Hastings' lack of attention to the law when they published their own Great Controversy book. In it there is a whole chapter dedicated to the law:
==> Chapter 25, "God's Law Immutable
Improvement #2 - The Rebellion/Reconciliation

James had also expressed a wish that Hastings had spent more time...

"on the points of man's rebellion, and the terms of reconciliation."​

Mrs. White made up for these shortcomings when she published Great Controversy. It has two chapters dealing with these subjects:
==> Chapter 29, "The Origin of Evil"
==> Chapter 30, "Enmity Between Man and Satan"​

Of course, Mrs. White's version of the great controversy differed from Hastings' view. She incorporated her unique Seventh-day Adventist beliefs, such as Sunday observance being the mark of the beast. Did she get her unique beliefs from her Lovett's Grove vision?

Where did she get her unique beliefs about the Mark of the Beast?

The idea of Sunday observance being the Mark of the Beast was first advanced by Joseph Bates in the 1840s before he even met the Whites. The United States in prophecy, the "mark of the beast," the "image to the beast," had all come out earlier in James White's book Life Incidents, first published in 1868. Comparison shows that words, sentences, quotations, thoughts, ideas, structures, paragraphs, and even total pages were taken from it and put in Great Controversy.
Interestingly, much of Life Incidents was taken primarily from J. N. Andrews' book published in 1860 entitled The Three Messages of Revelation XIV, 6-12, and particularly The Third Angel's Message and The Two-Horned Beast. Thus, many of the predictions in the Great Controversy were in place PRIOR to Mrs. White's "great controversy" vision or the writing of her book. It appears the teachings in the Great Controversy came from the studies of Joseph Bates, and later, J. N. Andrews and Uriah Smith--not the visions of Ellen White. Perhaps these men are the real prophets in the SDA church.

Church leaders grapple with Great Controversy problems

At the 1919 Conference on the Spirit of Prophecy (the transcript of which mysteriously disappeared and did not surface until it was "discovered" hidden in a vault in 1974), church leaders discussed the book Great Controversy:

B. L. House:- As I understand it, elder J. N. Andrews prepared those historical quotations for the old edition [1888 Great Controversy], and Brother Robinson and Brother Crisler, Professor Prescott and others furnished the quotations for the new edition. Did she write the historical quotations in there? A.G. Daniells:- No. ...
W.W. Prescott:- You are touching exactly the experience through which I went, personally, because you all know that I contributed something toward the revision of Great Controversy. [SIZE=+1]I furnished considerable material[/SIZE] bearing upon that question. ... When I talked to W.C. White about it (and I do not know that he is an infallible authority}, he told me frankly that when they got out Great Controversy, if they did not find in her writings any thing on certain chapters to make the historical connections, [SIZE=+1]they took other books, like [Uriah Smith's] Daniel and the Revelation, and used portions of them[/SIZE]...
​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

[SIZE=+1]the Revelation, and used portions of them[/SIZE]... White Estate Admits Massive Copying "There was no question in Ellen G. White's mind about the over all inspiration of The Great Controversy, although possibly 50 percent or more of the material in the book was drawn from other sources."8 In 1974, SDA scholar Dr. Donald R. McAdams studied the Great Controversy and wrote:

"What we find when we examine the historical portions of the Great Controversy is that large sections are selective abridgements and adaptations of historians. Ellen White was not just borrowing paragraphs here and there that she ran across in her reading, but in fact following the historians page after page, leaving out much material, but using their sequence, some of their ideas, and often their words. In the examples I have examined I have found no historical fact in her text that is not in their text. The hand-written' manuscript on John Huss follows the historian so closely that it does not even seem to have gone through an intermediary stage, but rather from the historian's printed page to Mrs. White's manuscript, including historical errors and moral exhortations. The material taken from historians is not an insignificant part, but, if my samples are characteristic, a substantial part of the book."6​

Dr. McAdams casts considerable doubt on the myth that Ellen White saw the events of the Great Controversy in vision because some of the events she described did not take place the way she claimed:

"By more nearly discovering what actually did happen, it can be shown that Ellen, at times, described events inaccurately."7​

Dr. McAdams stated it best when he announced at the special 1980 meeting of SDA leaders in Glendale, California:

[SIZE=+1] "If every paragraph in the book Great Controversy, written by Ellen White, was properly footnoted, then every paragraph would have to be footnoted."[/SIZE]​

Conclusion

Please read the following quote carefully. It is one sentence from Hastings' book that is not found anywhere in Ellen White's Great Controversy:

"There is no other light than the Word of God, that sheds a gleam of radiance through the ages of primeval darkness; and none but this that can pierce with its resplendent ray the cloudy curtain that veils the mysterious future." (p. 15)​

Essentially, Hastings is saying, there is no "lesser light." There is one light, and only one light: the written Word of God, the Holy Bible. While many find the Great Controversy to be an interesting and thought-provoking book, it can hardly be considered an original work. All of the major themes in the book were developed earlier and written out by other authors, many of them non-Adventists. A considerable part of the book was actually supplied by W.W. Prescott and put together by editors. It is difficult, if not impossible, to point to any idea or historical fact that actually originated with Ellen White. The only conclusion that can be reached is that if Mrs. White did indeed receive a vision at Lovett's Grove in 1858, it contained no new concepts that had not already been written out by other Adventists and non-Adventists.
NOTES [SIZE=-1] 1. A slightly modified version of Spiritual Gifts volume 1 was published within the volume Early Writings, in 1882. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]2. Letter 56, 1911 (Colporteur Ministry, p. 128). It is easy to understand why Mrs. White appreciated the Great Controversy "above silver or gold." The sales of this book generated plenty of "silver and gold" to fill her coffers and those of her children. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]3. At her death Mrs. White had a copy of one of H.L. Hastings' books, "The Signs of the Times; or, A Glance at Christendom as It Is" (1863) in her personal library. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]4. Dr. Donald McAdams, on page 24 of his unpublished manuscript "Ellen G. White and the Protestant Historians: The Evidence from an Unpublished Manuscript on John Huss", admits "Hastings' books is similar to the short Spiritual Gifts volume", but he goes on to say "a careful comparison does not support the idea that her book is based on Hasings'." [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]5. Unsigned book review published in the March 18, 1858, issue of the Review, vol. 11, #18. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]6. Dr. Donald McAdams, unpublished manuscript "Ellen G. White and the Protestant Historians: The Evidence from an Unpublished Manuscript on John Huss", p. 19. See also, Donald McAdams, Shifting View of Inspiration. Spectrum, vol. 10, No. 4, March. 1980. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]7. Ibid., p. 44 [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]8. Robert Olson, "Ellen G. White's use of Historical Sources in The Great Controversy", Adventist Review, February 23, 1984.[/SIZE]

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Lets look at some problems
History or Her story?

Ellen G. White's Great Controversy Visions of Martin Luther Examined


By Radek Dobias

© 2002 Radek Dobias



Introduction

I think it is hardly possible to exaggerate the importance of Ellen G. White's "Great Controversy" and the role it has played in the Seventh-day Adventist theology. The book is the cornerstone of Adventist eschatology, much cherished by orthodox Seventh-day Adventists. When I was a Seventh-day Adventist, I remember we all anxiously turned to its pages to find out how "it will all really end". Nothing settled eschatological disagreements on Saturday mornings like a good quote from the pages of Ellen White's "Great Controversy". Ellen White herself values the work highly, while claiming direct divine inspiration for its content, as her own statements indicate:

• "The book The Great Controversy, I appreciate above silver or gold, and I greatly desire that it shall come before people. While writing the manuscript of The Great Controversy, I was often conscious of the presence of the angels of God. And many times the scenes about which I was writing were presented to me anew in visions of the night, so that they were fresh and vivid in my mind."1
• "God gave me the light contained in The Great Controversy and Patriarchs and Prophets and this light was needed to arouse the people to prepare for the great day of God, which is just before us. These books contain God's direct appeal to the people."2
• "Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, the scenes of the long-continued conflict between good and evil have been opened to the writer of these pages [The Great Controversy]."3
• "As the Spirit of God has opened to my mind the great truths of His Word, and the scenes of the past and the future, I have been bidden to make known to others that which has thus been revealed - to trace the history of the controversy in past ages..."4

It is clear that Ellen White claimed that her book The Great Controversy was written under the guidance of i) God, ii) Holy Spirit, and iii) angels of God. She claims that this guidance was manifested in her visions, in which the scenes of the past were presented to her exactly as they happened, so that "they were fresh and vivid" in her mind while she wrote the book.
As a Seventh-day Adventist, I believed her claims. All of them. I read The Great Controversy almost daily; its pages soon became black from underlining all statements that I considered important (which was most!). It was only after leaving Adventism that I was able to objectively restudy Ellen White's work, specifically her Great Controversy. To my shock, I discovered a confused, distorted, inaccurate, and biased image of history, a far outcry from the myth of "Sister White's" inspired visions that many Adventists are fed by their church!
It is in this article that I share some of my discoveries (tip of the iceberg!) about Ellen White's Great Controversy and her visions, focusing on her "inspired" account of Martin Luther's early life. In what follows, I will examine Ellen White's treatment of two important events in Martin Luther's life: his entrance to a cloister, and his journey to Rome.
Look at the facts and judge for yourself whether Ellen G. White's claims are true!
Why did Martin Luther enter a cloister?

[SIZE=+1]Her story[/SIZE]:​

"While one day examining the books in the library of the university, Luther discovered a Latin Bible. Such a book he had never before seen. He was ignorant even of its existence. He had heard portions of the Gospels and Epistles, which were read to the people at public worship, and he supposed that these were the entire Bible. Now, for the first time, he looked upon the whole of God's word. With mingled awe and wonder he turned the sacred pages; with quickened pulse and throbbing heart he read for himself the words of life, pausing now and then to exclaim: 'O that God would give me such a book for myself!'-- Ibid., b. 2, ch. 2. Angels of heaven were by his side, and rays of light from the throne of God revealed the treasures of truth to his understanding. He had ever feared to offend God, but now the deep conviction of his condition as a sinner took hold upon him as never before. An earnest desire to be free from sin and to find peace with God led him at last to enter a cloister and devote himself to a monastic life."5​

Clearly, Ellen White's view is that Martin Luther, through an illuminating Bible study, became convinced of sin and desired to find peace with God, he entered a cloister.

[SIZE=+1]History[/SIZE]:​

This is the first instance in the chapter that Ellen G. White shows she does not have a clue. Martin Luther himself tells a very different story of his own entrance into the cloister in his table talk of 1539!6Historian Richard Marius, the author of a highly acclaimed biography of Martin Luther, summarizes it:

"Everyone who knows anything about Luther knows the story of how he entered the monastery. It is found in his table talk of July 16, 1539, thirty- four years after the event. He remarked almost causally that fourteen days earlier had been the anniversary of the day he had been caught in a storm near Stotternheim, a village near Erfurt. In his terror before lightning, he cried out, "Help, St. Anne, I will become a monk."... Shortly after taking his vow, he regretted it..."7​

Ronald H. Bainton, specialist in Reformation history and perhaps the best known biographer of Martin Luther, says:

"The immediate occasion of his resolve to enter the cloister was the unexpected encounter with death on that sultry July day in 1505. He was then twenty-one and a student at the University of Erfurt. As he returned to school after a visit with his parents, sudden lightning struck him to earth. In that single flash he was the denouement of the drama of existence. There was God the all-terrible, Christ the inexplorable, and all the leering fiends springing from their lurking places in pond and wood that with sardonic cachinnations they might seize his shock of curly hair and bolt him to into hell. It was no wonder that he cried out to his father saint, patroness of miners, "St. Anne help me! I will become a monk.""8​

Martin Luther himself testifies that he entered the cloister because he made a vow to St. Anne, a Catholic saint, in a moment when he feared for his life, not as a result of Bible study as Ellen White says. If Luther entered the monastery as a result of an enlightening Bible study, why did he cry out to Saint Anne?

Questions for SDAs​

Wasn't Ellen presented with scenes of the past, exactly as they happened? If so, why was she so wrong about Luther's real reason?
Did not God give her visions just before she wrote them down so that they would be "fresh and vivid"?
Why was Ellen White's angelic guide clueless about Luther's vow and his real reason to enter the cloister?
Reading on, we will see that Ellen's cluelessness seems to be a pattern, rather than an exception.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Luther at the top of Pilate's stairs

Ellen G. White devotes a couple of pages to Martin Luther's visit to Rome early on his life. She describes Luther's experience at the top of Pilate's stairs as follows.

[SIZE=+1]Her story[/SIZE]:​

"By a recent decretal an indulgence had been promised by the pope to all who should ascend upon their knees 'Pilate's staircase,' said to have been descended by our Savior on leaving the Roman judgment hall and to have been miraculously conveyed from Jerusalem to Rome. Luther was one devoutly climbing these steps, when suddenly a voice like thunder seemed to say to him: 'The just shall live by faith.' Romans 1:17. He sprang to his feet and hastened from the place in shame and horror. That text never lost its power upon his soul. From that time he saw more clearly than ever before the fallacy of trusting to human works for salvation, and the necessity of constant faith in the merits of Christ. His eyes had been opened, and were never again to be closed, to the delusions of the papacy."9​

Let us be sure that we understand what Ellen White's vision revealed. Upon his visit to Rome, Martin Luther was climbing Pilate's stairs. Suddenly, a heavenly voice spoke to him, proclaiming the justification by faith, as stated in Romans 1:17. This made a very deep impression upon Luther's mind. He ran from the place in "shame and horror". His eyes were forever opened "to the delusions of the papacy".

[SIZE=+1]History[/SIZE]:​

Again, "Sister White" blundered. Martin Luther himself gives us a very different story, in volume 51 of his works, of what happened when he was climbing Pilate's stairs! In Luther own words, he did not hear any heavenly voice, but he exclaimed "Who knows whether it is so?"10!

Roland H. Bainton and Richard Marius summarize:​

"At the top Luther raised himself and exclaimed, not as the legend would have it, 'The just shall live by faith!' - he was not yet that far advanced. What he said was, 'Who knows whether it is so?'"11

"He [Luther] hoped to release the soul of his grandfather from purgatory. At the top Luther stood up and asked himself a question: "Who can know if it is so?'"12.​

Moreover, were Luther's eyes "opened, ...never again to be closed to the delusions of the papacy", as Ellen claims? Roland H. Bainton makes an interesting remark about Luther's spiritual search after his return from Rome:

"Luther probed every resource of contemporary Catholicism... He sought at the same time to explore other ways, and Catholicism had much more to offer."13​

Martin Brecht, the leading Lutheran scholar remarks in his nearly impeccable biography of Luther:

"...there were the riches of grace in which he participated in Rome, and because of them the positive impression predominated. Only later did the critical and completely negative evaluation of Roman experiences occur. But even then he would not have missed them."14​

We see that Luther's experience in Rome clearly did not turn him completely against the papacy. Rather, overall, it was more positive than negative. After his return from Rome, Luther still probed many resources of Catholicism! When in Rome, no heavenly voice spoke to him. Rather, his own doubting mind made him exclaim "Who knows whether it is so!".
Notice that Ellen White links Luther's discovery of justification by faith in Romans 1:17, his inner turning point, with experience at the top of Pilate's stairs. We know that Luther journeyed to Rome in November 151015. However, according to Martin Luther, his new understanding of Romans 1:17 happened in 1518-9, in his own words, when the text became "the open gate to paradise"!16 Ellen G. White missed the most important turning point in Luther's life by nearly a decade, placing it in a time when Luther still had a completely Catholic understanding of salvation (he understood righteousness by faith as both justification and sanctification, much as orthodox Adventists and modern Catholics understand it today).
Could Ellen G. White be more wrong? Notice, in her account, how she pretends to have been there, describing Luther's inner emotions of "shame and horror". What a "visionary"! She simply plagiarized legends about Luther's life that were popular in her own time, and peddled them in the name of God as sure inspired accounts given through "fresh and vivid" visions!17

Questions for SDAs​

Since Ellen G. White obtained her knowledge from visions given by God, how is it possible that her account of Martin Luther's life is filled with legends?​

Why does Ellen G. White given an account of things that she has seen in her visions but that never happened? How could she see things in vision given by God that never took place?​

Why does Martin Luther in Ellen White's vision hear the words that he never heard and does not speak the words that he did speak?​

Why is Ellen White so wrong about Luther's most important discovery (righteousness by faith)?​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Conclusion

In our brief journey, we have seen that Ellen White's "Great Controversy" is only her story, not history. It is filled with legends, inaccuracies, and myths. She has no clue about Martin Luther's life. None, about the most important events of his life. This is explained by the fact that she plagiarized Luther's biography from J. H. Merle D'Aubigne's History of Reformation18, a work that contains extensive historical errors and legends, and passed it on as given to her "by God in vision".​

Looking at the facts, can you continue to believe that her work is fully inspired, revealed, and endorsed by God?​

References​

1. Ellen White, Letter 56, 1911.
2. Ellen White, Manuscript 23, 1890.
3. Ellen White, The Great Controversy, Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1950, x.
4. Ibid., xi.
5. Ibid., 122-123.
6. D. Martin Luther's Werke: Kritishe Gesamtausgabe, Tischreden, Volume 4 (Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus Nachfolger, 1912-1921), # 4707.
7. Richard Marius, Martin Luther: The Christian between God and Death, Harvard University Press, 1999, 43.
8. Roland H. Bainton, Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther, Abingdon Press, 1950, 25.
9. Ellen White, The Great Controversy, 125.
10. Martin Luther's Works 51:89.
11. Bainton, 38.
12. Marius, 83.
13. Bainton, 40.
14. Martin Brecht, Martin Luther: His Road to Reformation (1483-1521), 104.
15. See Bainton's chronology in his biography, pages 12-14.
16. See Martin Brecht's discussion in his biography, section VI, chapter "The Inner Turning Point - the Reformatory Discovery".
17. It was Leopold von Ranke who carried on the legend that Luther heard a voice quoting Romans 1:17. Ellen White simply plagiarized this legend from D'Aubigne's book on history of reformation. See Marius' biography, page 498, footnote 20. See also Walter Rea's White Lie, chapter on Great Controversy.
18. See Walter Rea's WHITE LIE for extensive evidence of "Sister White's" plagiarism. Let the reader know that Ellen's little "disclaimer" in Introduction of "Great Controversy" about using the work of others does NOT appear in the original 1888 edition of the book.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Great Controversy Examined
The Interdicts of 1411 and 1412


Dieter Heimke

Translated from German to English by J. Krahne


When the Reformer John Huss worked in Bohemia, the following things happened:

"King Wenzel (Wenceslas) was extremely angry at the curia that all his efforts in behalf of Huss had been so cavalierly ignored. He deeply resented the aspersion of heresy thus cast on his country by the cardinal and his own archbishop. . . . The king now . . . issued an order commanding the stoppage of payments to . . . the priests of the cathedral, as well as to the pastors of the churches in Prague. He gave as his reason that they had spread lies about the realm. "By this time Zybenek (the archbishop) was so determined to exercise all his ecclesiastical powers that, being instigated to it by his advisors, he pronounced (on June 20) an Interdict over Prague and its environs for two miles around. The terrible weapon normally stopping all church services and ministrations such as baptisms, weddings, funerals, and granting of all sacraments, failed of effect. The king simply forbade its observance. Those priests and prelates who defied his order were deprived of their positions, which were then filled by such as were obedient to his will. The canons of St. Vitus fled and their places were taken by others. This obviously hopeless struggle continued to be waged by the archbishop for only two weeks. On July 3, he, along with the remaining prelates and priests who remained faithful to him. accepted the arbitration proffered him by the king."1
​

This quote is from Matthew Spinka's book, "John Huss: A Biography". Ron Graybill, former associate director of the Ellen White Estate, quotes from that source the publication "Historical Difficulties in the Great Controversy".2 It is therefore to be considered an authoritative publication of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The next year, 1412, the Pope issued an Interdict against Prague which was obeyed and caused such a turmoil that Huss had to leave the city. In December of 1412, he wrote in a letter:

"If I have withdrawn from the midst of you, it is to follow the precept and example of Jesus Christ, in order not to give room to the ill-minded to draw on themselves eternal condemnation, and in order not to be to the pious a cause of affliction and persecution. . ."​

This quote from Huss is found in Ellen G. White's Great Controversy on page 101 with the above description of the terrible effect of an Interdict, but it is described by her to be in the year 1411. That Hus wrote the letter in December, is clear from the sentence: "My beloved, the day is at hand, that we will remember the birth of our Lord."3
But in December 1411 there was no reason for Huss to write such a letter for his absence, because the Interdict from June 1411 was ineffective - a fact which no one disputes. The sequence of Ellen White's historical account is simply not correct. Ron Graybill then attempts to explain two points which are brought up in Adventist circles in attempting to save face for Ellen G. White:

1. 1 - She meant the Interdict from 1412 - which is impossible, because she unmistakeably spoke of two Interdicts.
2. 2 - She had given only a general description of the Interdicts - which is irrelevant, because the opposite happened in 1411.

Graybill simply drops both explanations as insufficient, and after painstaking research of the historical facts he admits:

"Thus we know, that Mrs. White's citations of this letter in his context is a historical error known as an anachronism."4​

How does this line up with Ellen G. White's claim that she had seen those historic events of the Great Controversy in vision? Well, Ron Graybill quotes her son William C. White who said his mother was shown in vision panoramic views of great events, but because of missing historical facts she failed to put the events in the proper perspective.
Graybill continues:

"Maybe Mrs. White saw an Interdict, yes, even an effective interdict. Perhaps she also saw Huss flee Prague. As she thought in extravisionary sources to locate this interdict and Huss' departure as to time and place, she used Wylie or Bonnechose. Unfortunately, these two historians had confused the consequences of the ineffective 1411 interdict with those of the effective interdict of 1412. She followed them in their account and was accordingly confused on the specific facts in this portion of her narrative."​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

contiuned

Then comes his follow-up in 4 segments:
" Following W.C. White's suggestions and the evidence before us then, we would conclude that The Great Controversy is not a book which is usable as an independent source of authority on matters relating to time, place, or the details of historical events. It may be that in some instances Mrs. White did indeed have visionary information on these matters, but she has not presented us with a book in which it is possible for us to distinguish the items drawn solely from historical sources and the material presented on the authority of vision.
"In what sense is The Great Controversy authoritative then? It gives us authoritative answers to the questions the author says in her introduction that she set out to answer. What was her objective in writing the book?
"To unfold the scenes of the great controversy between truth and error; to reveal the wiles of Satan, and the means by which he may be successfully resisted; to present a satisfactory solution of the great problem of evil, shedding such a light upon the origin and the final disposition of sin as to make fully manifest the justice and benevolence of God in all His dealings with His creatures; and to show the holy, unchanging nature of His law, is the object of this book. GC, p. xii.
"In dealing with these themes - themes far more significant than the question of where Huss was in the summer of 1411 - the Great Controversy is a crucial and authoritative source."5
By the way, Ron Graybill was not alone in his judgment on Ellen G. White. Already in 1975 Robert Olson, Director of the Ellen White Estate, had admitted:

"I accept Spinka's history of Huss as being more accurate than that of Wylie. This necessitates the conclusion that Mrs. White made several erroneous historical statements about Huss in the Great Controversy. "I accept the fact that Mrs. White followed Wylie closely - very closely - from Great Controversy page 97 all the way to page 110.
"It is difficult for me to believe that the Lord gave Mrs. White a vision or a series of visions which, for fourteen pages, coincided in so many details, errors and all, with Wylie."6
​

NOTES 1. Matthew Spinka, "John Huss: A Biography", (Princeton, 1968) pp. 124-125.
2. Ronald Graybill, Ph.D., "Historical Difficulties in the Great Controversy", published by the Ellen G. White Estate on January 30, 1978, and revised in June 1982, pages 3-4.
3. Graybill, p. 6 (not known by Ellen White).
4. Graybill, p. 6. Anachronism is defined by the Heritage Dictionary as follows: "The representation of someone as existing or something as happening in other than chronological, proper, or historical order."
5. Graybill, pp. 6,7.
6. Robert W. Olson, "Questions and Problems Pertaining to Mrs. White's Writings on John Huss", White Estate (1975), p. 4.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Great Controversy Errors Exposed

The Albigensians

Great Controversy chapters 6, 15


By Jeremy Graham and Dirk Anderson

In The Great Controversy Ellen White describes the Albingensians in glowing terms:

"Century after century the blood of the saints had been shed. While the Waldenses laid down their lives upon the mountains of Piedmont "for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ," similar witness to the truth had been borne by their brethren, the Albigenses of France. In the days of the Reformation its disciples had been put to death with horrible tortures." (p. 271) "Thus Rome decreed that the light of God's word should be extinguished and the people should be shut up in darkness. But Heaven had provided other agencies for the preservation of the church. Many of the Waldenses and Albigenses, driven by persecution from their homes in France and Italy, came to Bohemia. Though they dared not teach openly, they labored zealously in secret. Thus the true faith was preserved from century to century." (p. 97)
​

From these quotes we learn the following about the Albigensians:

1. They were "saints" who were a "witness to the truth"
2. They were an agency "provided" by "heaven" to preserve the church
3. They were instrumental in preserving faith "from century to century"

What is the Truth about the Albigensians?

"The Albigenses (so-called because they were most numerous near Albi, in Southern France), or Cathari (from the Greek word, katharoi, meaning pure ones), although claiming New Testament authority for their beliefs, were a heretical sect formed in the Roman Catholic Church during the twelfth century and resembling the Gnostics and Paulicians. Dualism was at the heart of their teachings--two gods, one evil and one good, matter being the essence of evil, etc. The evil god was the Jehovah of the Old Testament. With matter being evil, they, of course, rejected the incarnation of Christ; Christ, they taught, had no real body; it only appeared so. Since matter is evil, they rejected all the sacraments of the church; the one sacrament which they held to was the consolamentum--the giving of the Spirit by the laying of hands and the Gospel of John on the head. They were extremely ascetic, avoiding marriage with its fleshly and therefore evil pleasures, oaths, war, milk, meat, cheese, and eggs.(!) The use of anything material in worship was forbidden." (Baptists: Their Historical Relation to the Protestant Reformation And the Roman Catholic Church, by Fred G. Zaspel, 1985)​

The Encyclopedia adds the following:

"They believed that Jesus only seemed to have a human body. The Albigenses were extremely ascetic, abstaining from flesh in all its forms, including milk and cheese. They comprised two classes, believers and Perfect, the former much more numerous, making up a catechumenate not bound by the stricter rules observed by the Perfect. The Perfect were those who had received the sacrament of consolamentum, a kind of laying on of hands. The Albigenses held their clergy in high regard. An occasional practice was suicide, preferably by starvation; for if this life is essentially evil, its end is to be hastened." "In 1233, Pope Gregory IX established a system of legal investigation in Albigensian centers and put it into the hands of the Dominicans; this was the birth of the medieval Inquisition . After 100 years of the Inquisition, of tireless preaching by the friars, and of careful reform of the clergy, Albigensianism was dead." (Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, © 2003.)
​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

contiuned

Even the Adventist Review admits there are some issues with the Albigensians.

"I know people who, because of a few comments in Ellen White's book The Great Controversy, have a great fondness for the Albigensians (or Cathars), who were also considered heretics. Many were killed for their faith. These Cathars were very different from the Waldensians. They believed that Jesus was an angel, denied Jesus was really a man who died and was resurrected, and believed the Old Testament came from Satan. They discouraged marriage. They were in their day what David Koresh's Branch Davidians are in ours." (Adventist Review, Nov. 20, 2003, "One Person's Heretic Is the Next Person's Martyr", by Ed Christian)​

Was Mrs. White Wrong about the Albigensians?

We know the Albigenses did not preserve the truth "from century to century" because they were wiped out in 100 years. But even for that short period, were the Albigenses really a church established by heaven to preserve the truth?
First, they denied that Christ came in the flesh.

1 John 4:3 - And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. 2 John 1:7 - For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
​

Question #1: Why would heaven use antichrist as its agency to preserve the church? Second, they claimed the Jehovah of the Old Testament was the evil God and the Old Testament itself was from Satan.
Question #2: Were these "saints" really a "witness for the truth?"
Third, they avoided marriage and the eating of meat.

1 Timothy 4:1-3 - Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.​

Question #3: Why would heaven use a church that has departed from the faith as its agency to preserve the true faith?

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Great Controversy Examined
The Diet of Speyer, 1529


Dieter Heimke

Translated from German to English by J. Krahne



A Brief History of the Events Surrounding the Diet of Speyer


Ellen White's report about the Diet of Speyer, in 1529, raises serious questions. At that time the Evangelicals were first called PROTESTANTS. What transpired at the Diet is no secret. It is open to anyone who looks in the archives of the city of Speyer. E. Heuser reports in TheProtestation of Speyer:

"Eight years after Luther, at the Diet of Worms, spoke those most famous words: 'Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me. Amen!’, Emporer Charles V was no longer in Germany, but in his homeland of Spain, which was also his kingdom and he was their king long before the German electors made him their emporer."1​

It was at Worms where Charles V enacted the edict to stop Luther's teaching and put him and his followers under an "Acht" (to ban, outlaw). But the Evangelical electors ignored the ban, and the emporer was not in the right mood to perform the necessary steps to stop them, insofar as his relationship with the Pope was not the best at that time. He was at war with his Holiness and stormed the well armoured city of Rome in 1527.2 At that time the Pope became a prisoner when German soldiers, under the command of Georg of Frundsberg, stormed the Engelsburg.3
In the year of 1526, a Diet of Speyer was held--as was the next one in 1529--under the chairmanship of Charles V's brother Ferdinand, King of Bohemia and Hungary. At this Diet both parties, which had different religious opinions among their German electors and unions, were not going to settle any decisions, except for one: To produce an invitation to bring the Pope personally to Germany, and then in unity with him, call for a general Council. If that failed to work with the Pope, then a national Assembly would be called in a given German city, to stop the schism and unite Germany again into one doctrine, if possible. Then at that time, even the German Evangelical unions thought it possible and desirable to keep Germany united. Until a Council or Diet would come together, every Elector, Duke or other reigning prince should deal with their subordinates as they please, according to the Diet of Speyer in 1526, and ignore the Edict of Worms "as well as is possible in regard to God and the Emporer"4
In the meantime, the Pope and Emporer tried to forget their quarrels. The Pope demanded the complete termination of Lutherdom, but the Emporer was more willing to prevent a further spreading of the same. To fully prohibit was not very wise because of the acute danger of the Turks, and he was also depending on the favour and involvement of the Evangelical electors and cities.
For the final resolution in favour of the Emporer, seven points were presented at the Diet of Speyer in 1529.

"First was to arrange for a new Concilium, and in case it would not happen in the next two years, a general National Assembly should convene, in which all these matters should be decided. Second, those unions which had not yet changed anything, nor those who accepted the Reformation theory were forbidden to make any new changes. The third point dealt with the Holy Eucharist which nobody in the land should dare to touch.In the fourth article both parties should not abolish the mass, but rather be allowed to hear at all places. The fifth point ordered the punishment of the Anabaptists. The sixth point was related to the censorship of the books; nevertheless, after the "Nürnberger Abschied" it was left to the authorities. The last point dealt with the income of the individual provinces, and tough punishments for those who tried to confiscate them. This point tried to protect those episcopals, orders, monasteries etc. which had been confiscated in the past."5​

Of course, there was quite some opposition of the Evangelical authorities and cities against those points, because they tried to take away their freedoms which they had enjoyed since 1526. In a writing of Protest which was directed at the Emporer, which A. Jung brings up in the original wording, the Evangelicals claimed religious liberty for themselves. The shortest ones they dealt with were points 5 and 6, writing only one sentence:

"So we want, concerning the points of re-baptism and print, to be understood by all that we are in harmony with the Diet and want to keep it that way."​

To clear away all the dust, it means nothing else than that the undersigned of the Protestation agreed with the persecution of the Anabaptists and book censorship and wanted it kept that way.
Also, besides their own communion service they would not allow celebrating the Catholic mass in their own territoty. It would not promote unity nor peace.6
We see here already the first effects of Luther's principles after 1526, that the authorities decide in matters of religion in favor of their subordinates and not for the individual. Right there was founded the protestant State-Church and it was ruled with state power almost as sovereign as the catholic Church. Anyone who was not a Catholic or Evangelical was open for persecution.
From the proceeding protocols of Speyer it is very clear that it was all about the Evangelical cities securing their own rights according to the teachings of Luther and Zwingli, but that all new doctrines, sects and Anabaptists should be prohibited.7
While they claimed for themselves religious freedom, at the Diet of Speyer the Catholics and Protestants decided in unison for the suppression of "sects" and "heretics." Everything that was called "Church" rallied together in a war of annihilation against those religious groups which stood outside, and a witchhunt started against all those who were called Anabaptists or the like.8

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Examinging Ellen White's Position on the Diet of Speyer

Now there is only one question left which contrasts our position on Church and State on the one side, and baptism by faith and the Sabbath on the other side. How we are we going to judge the Diet of Speyer - positive or negative? Ellen G. White's position was as follows:

"One of the noblest testimonies ever uttered for the Reformation was the Protest offered by the Christian princes of Germany at the Diet of Speyer in 1529. The courage, faith, and the firmness of those men of God gained for succeeding ages liberty of thought and of concience. Their Protest gave to the reformed church the name of Protestant; its principles are "the very essence of Protestantism."9 "The principles contained in this celebtated Protest . . . constitute the very essence of Protestantism. Now this Protest opposes two abuses of man in matters of faith: the first is the intrusion of the evil magistrate, and the second the arbitrary authority of the church. The Protest of Spires was a solemn witness against religious intolerance, and an assertion of the right of all men to worship God according to the dictates of their own consciences."10
​

No wonder that Ellen G. White, from the time of the Reformation forward, looked upon the Protestants as the true church, instead of looking to the persecuted ones like the Anabaptists, Sabbathkeepers, etc. The whole of Great Controversy has been influenced by that mindset.
On another occasion she had this to say:

"The will of God, so plainly revealed in His Word, was covered up with errors and traditions, which have been taught as the commandments of God. Although this heaven-daring deception will be suffered to be carried on until the second appearing of Jesus, yet through all this time of error and deception, God has not been left without witness. Amid the darkness and persecution of the church there have always been true and faithful ones who kept all of God's commandments."11​

Instead of Seventh Day Baptists and similar groups we read in Great Controversy of Wesley and other Sunday keepers. This is not astonishing, because she herself came from the Millerite movement, which originated among Sunday-worshipping groups, not Seventh Day Baptists.
The Diet of Speyer is, of course, held in high esteem by Protestants. Certainly Ellen G. White relied too much on history writers - as was the case with the Interdicts of 1411-1412. But in this case, 300 years of Church History are at stake and not one year as was in the case of the Interdicts. It is inconceivable how in her representation of the Great Controversy between Light and Darkness she chould change the facts of history and still claim for herself heavenly inspiration.12
At age 77 she was still convinced that she was the "greatest." In her letter to her grand-daughter Mabel she wrote the following:

"While I am able to do this work, the people must have these things to revive past history, that they may see that there is one straight chain of truth, without one heretical sentence, in that which I have written. This, I am instructed, is to be a living letter to all in regard to my faith."12​

NOTES 1. E. Heuser, The Protestation of Speyer, Prologue.
2. The campaign was carried out with the help of his Konnetabel Bourbon.
3. This war campaign of Charles V became necessary because Pope Clemens VII was constantly supporting King Franz I of France in his fight against the emporer. In fact, the Pope even made a pact with this king in 1527 against Charles V.
4. Heuser, p. 1-2.
5. A. Jung describes the 7 points in "Beiträge zur Geschichte der Reformation" first section: History of the Diet in Speyer 1529, with an appendix of 56 files, among it the "Protestation of 1529" (Strassburg and Leipzig, 1830) on pages 21-22.
6. Ibid., pages 99-100.
7. Compare by A. Jung, pages 30, 55, 86, 87. This also is confirmed by Samuel H. Geiser in Die Taufgesinnten Gemeinden im Rahmen der allge-meinen Kirchengeschichte (2nd Edition, 1971).
8. Jung, page 89.
9. D'Aubigne, book 13, chapter 6 cited by Ellen White in Great Controversy, p. 197.
10. Ellen G. White, Great Controversy, pp. 203-204.
11. Ellen G. White, Early Writings, p. 216.
12. Ellen G. White, Letter 329 A, 1905

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Great Controversy Errors Exposed

3.5 Years of French Revolution and Other Statements Incorrect


Harold Snide

Editor's Note: The following quotes were extracted from The Development of My Ideas Concerning the Divine Inspiration of Mrs. E. G. White: A Personal History, written by Harold Snide in 1950. Thanks to http://www.ex-sda.com for making this material available on the internet.


French Revolution Lasted 3.5 Years?

This subject appealed to me particularly because of my interest in the prophecy of Revelation 11 about the war on the "two witnesses," especially the time prophecy of "three days and an half" (verse 11) of which the statement is made in Great Controversy:

It was in 1793 that the decrees which abolished the Christian religion and set aside the Bible, passed the French Assembly. Three years and a half later a resolution rescinding these decrees, thus granting toleration to the Scriptures, was adopted by the same body. (GC 287)​

I found that the facts were not as stated in Great Controversy.
Allowing these three days and a half to have their symbolic significance of three years and a half, they are sometimes begun with the events of November 1793. And truly the French government did make war on Christianity and on the Bible. The problem from a historical standpoint is to find three and one half years during which God's Word remained dead as a result of this government action, and after which period of three years and a half, the Bible was unusually exalted. Eschewing any detailed exegesis of the prophecy, and limiting our study to the strictly historical, we shall find no such period of three and a half years in the events of Revolutionary France. We shall find that the event usually suggested as terminating the period, either did not occur at the time indicated, or else was an affair of minor significance. Furthermore, we shall discover that the intense antagonism to God and His Holy Book did not last nearly so long as three and a half years but ended after a few months. A simple narration of the principal events of the Revolution, involving religion and the church, will make this all very clear.
The worship of Reason ... began early in November 1793. It was November 26 when the Council of the Commune outlawed all other religions. Previous acts of the revolutionary government had assured nominal liberty to worship to all; and just nine days after the Council of the Commune outlawed Christianity, the Convention, a superior governmental body, forbade violence contrary to liberty of worship. And on May 9, 1784, the Convention under the influence of Robespierre, decreed the worship of the Supreme Being. The government support of any worship was abolished September 20, 1794, without much discussion. This automatically brought a considerable degree of religious liberty. It is true that the non-juring priests still suffered some persecution, but this was far more from political than from religious animosity.
On February 21, 1795, Biossy d'Anglas made a speech and a motion for complete separation of Church and State. This was passed, allowing any kind of religious worship throughout France, but with some restrictions as to place, advertising, endowments, etc. The refractory clergy were still considered criminal, but this was a political matter, and could hardly be considered the death of God's Two Witnesses. In the provinces there was much delay and opposition by local officials in permitting the liberty granted by the Convention.
A further attempt was made in late 1794 and early 1795 to revive interest in the tenth-day festivals in the hope of competing with Christianity and its weekly Lord's Day; but this effort was a ludicrous and dismal failure.
A new constitution was demanded to replace that of 1793. Its formation was in the hands of comparatively moderate men. Separation of Church and State and freedom of worship were incorporated in this new constitution. It was adopted August 17, 1795. Thus we see that in less than six months the atheistic enactment of November 26, 1793, was abrogated; and in less than two years there was actually greater religious freedom guaranteed on a fundamental legal basis, than existed prior to the outbreak of atheism. The "Two Witnesses" just simply did not stay "dead" three and a half years.
Moreover, we can discover no adequately significant event coming even approximately three and a half years after the atheistic supremacy, to mark the close of the period. Three and a half years from November 1793, would bring us to the spring of 1797. It has been asserted that the Convention then repudiated its atheistic pronouncement. History shows no such action. In the first place, the Directory was in power, not the Convention, in 1797. Furthermore, the atheistic intolerance had spent its force and had been repudiated by decree and by the new constitution of 1795, so this work did not remain to be done in 1797.
Others take an earnest speech by Camille Jordan, June 17, 1797, as the event closing the three and a half days. On the contrary, this speech, instead of raising the "Two Witnesses," came at a time when they had been much alive for over a year; it dealt with minor phases of religious liberty such as the privilege of ringing church bells, and it failed in its object.
Aulard (Vol. 17, p. 12) summarizes the incident thus:

Jordan, in a fulsomely sentimental and pseudo-pathetical speech, depicts all France as desolated by the loss of her church bells. He earns the nickname of Bell-Jordan (Jordan Carillon), and his campaign fails.​

Mistaken about Miller's Views

In Great Controversy, edition of 1911, at the bottom of page 324, begins this sentence:

Miller accepted the generally received view, that in the Christian age the earth is the sanctuary.​

This is stated in explanation of how Miller arrived at his views of prophecy, preparatory to preaching them. William Miller's published lectures show he did not believe that the sanctuary was the earth, but rather he believed that it was the church. He says:

"Then shall the sanctuary be cleansed or justified," means the true sanctuary which God has built of lively stones to his own acceptance, through Christ, of which the temple of Jerusalem was but a type, the shadows having long since fled away. Miller's Lectures, edition 1842, p. 41.​

Again on this and the following page he says:

There is not a word in the prophets or apostles, after Zerubbabel built the second temple, that a third one would ever be built; except the one which cometh down from heaven, which is a spiritual one, and which is the mother of us all, (Jew and Gentile) and which is free, and when that New Jerusalem is perfected, then shall we be cleansed and justified... We see by these texts ... that the spiritual sanctuary will not be cleansed until Christ's second coming; and then all Israel shall be raised, judged, and justified in his sight.​

Similar references are to be found also on pages 156 and 281. Some weeks after the spring equinox, 1844, one of the times set for the Advent, Miller seems once to have referred to the sanctuary as "the whole earth" (Sylvester Bliss, Memoirs of William Miller, pp. 256-260); but this is not consistent with his general teaching, and is too late to sustain Mrs. White's statement of his early views.
Waldenses First to Obtain Scriptures?

In Great Controversy, edition of 1887, page 70, we read:

The Waldenses were the first of all the peoples of Europe to obtain a translation of the Scriptures.​

This occurred about the year 1180. According to I. M. Price, The Ancestry of Our English Bible, there were at least two earlier European versions: the Gothic in the fourth century, and the Slavonic. "Some of the manuscripts of this version date from the tenth or eleventh century" (p. 104).

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Page 1



W. W. PRESCOTT AND THE 1911 EDITION OF
The Great Controversy

by Arthur L. White

[Return to the Homepage]
[Return to the Issues and Answers page]


The Documented Facts in the Case
History of the 1911 Edition
The Prescott Report and How Employed: 1-105
C. C. Crisler's Expressions of Approval and Satisfaction with the 1888 Edition of The Great Controversy
A Postscript --An Observation on W. W. Prescott's Use of The Writings of Others
Footnotes


At a meeting of the Bible and history teachers held in Washington, D. C., on August 1, 1919, (following the Bible Conference), Elder W. W. Prescott declared:

I contributed something toward the revision of Great Controversy. I furnished considerable material bearing upon that question.--"Minutes of the 1919 Meeting of Bible and History Teachers,"
p. 121. (Published in Spectrum, volume 10, No. 1, page 54, column 2.)​

Dr. Desmond Ford in his 991-page document states that many of The Great Controversy pages were changed because of the Prescott criticisms and suggestions, implying a strong Prescott influence in what is said to be a revision of the book. One gains the impression from these two witnesses that there were very significant and rather sweeping revisions of the book in response to the Prescott input.
The facts are that the Prescott suggestions which would have resulted in sweeping changes in the book were, after careful consideration, rejected outright. Only a little more than half of the 105 suggestions were accepted and a large part of these related to precision of expression or called for supporting references or Appendix Note explanations.
The facts fail to sustain the assertions of either Prescott or Ford, but very few, if any, researchers of this day have gone to the trouble to ascertain just what the facts are. Only in so doing can the truth be known.
This paper is dedicated to such an investigation. To assure the reader of a fair and correct evaluation, the Prescott suggestions, as conveyed in his letter to W. C. White on April 26, 1910, are presented in

Page 2

toto. In reporting on the response to these suggestions, the contemporary records have been summoned and where changes were made in the text of the book, the 1888 reading is presented, followed by the wording in the 1911 edition. Only in this way is it possible to convey just what was done and why. The reader may thus judge the number and weight of the changes made in response to the Prescott input.

The Documented Facts in the Case

[Top of Document]

In July, 1911, a new edition of Great Controversy came from the presses of the Pacific Press and the Review and Herald. It is often spoken of as the 1911 "revision" of The Great Controversy. The term revision is much too broad for what was actually done. The word "refinement" would be more in keeping with both what was intended by the author and her staff at Elmshaven and what actually took place. While the work was in progress, workers involved made it clear that the book was not being revised. The word "revision," in the interest of accuracy, was studiously avoided, and rightly so. C. C. Crisler, writing to H. C. Lacey, September 20, 1910, said: "No revision of the text has been attempted."
Not only have the terms used in reference to the 1911 edition of The Great Controversy been used loosely--and the White Estate is not guiltless in this respect--but at times very inaccurate statements have been made as to the book and the work done on it. This is clearly evidenced in the minutes of the 1919 Conference of Bible and History Teachers.

History of the 1911 Edition

[Top of Document]

On January 5, 1910, C. H. Jones, manager of the Pacific Press wrote to W. C. White concerning The Great Controversy as follows:

It will be necessary to print another edition of this book on or before July, 1910. You are aware that the plates are worn out. New plates ought to be made before printing another edition.

​

Page 3

​

This set in motion plans for resetting the type and the making of new printing plates. The work was entered upon with no expectation of any alteration of the text. It was merely a routine undertaking, but embodying plans to improve the illustrations, et cetera. Type-setting and plate making commenced immediately. Ellen White informs us, however, of her attitude toward the project:

When I learned that The Great Controversy must be reset, I determined that we would have everything closely examined, to see if the truths it contained were stated in the very best manner, to convince those not of our faith that the Lord had guided and sustained me in the writing of its pages.-- EGW to FMW, July 25, 1911.​

This, together with a long-standing request that the historical quotations in the book be properly credited, prompted W. C. White to call a halt in the operation. The considerations led him to take up correspondence with the book committees of both the Pacific Press and the Review and Herald and to confer with several individuals opening the way for suggestions relating to the new reset book.
One of the individuals W. C. White conferred with was Professor W. W. Prescott. He did so in connection with a trip to Washington in early April, 1910. Prescott was then editor of The Protestant Magazineand as The Great Controversy had considerable to say about the Roman Catholic Church, it was logical that he should be asked to look the book through, especially in the light of Ellen White's desire to "have everything closely examined, to see if the truths it contained were stated in the very best manner." Prescott, with the views that he held in regard to inspiration,[SIZE=-1]1 [/SIZE]was reluctant to do as he was requested, but he accepted the assignment and in the matter of two

Page 4

or three weeks submitted his report to W. C. White. This was in the form of a 39-page, double-spaced letter, dated April 26, 1910.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

The Prescott Report and How Employed

[Top of Document]

We shall quote all of the 39-page Prescott letter to W. C. White in which he renders his report. In doing so, we shall intersperse his suggestions with the response of Ellen White and the Elmshaven staff.
Prescott refers to W. C. White's request given orally by W. C. White while he was in Washington in early April. The White Estate files fail to disclose a W. C. White letter to Prescott. For the sake of convenience, the points made by Prescott are numbered. He writes:

My Dear Brother:​

In harmony with your urgent request, I have taken a little time to go through The Great Controversy, and to note some of the things which seemed to me to indicate the need of a revision. Inasmuch as the book covers the period beginning with the destruction of Jerusalem, and ending with the coming of the Lord and the new earth, it could hardly be expected that I should be able to deal in any way exhaustively with the facts of history which are treated upon in this book. I can only notice such matters, and make such suggestions, as are within the range of my reading.​

1.​

There is one general feature of the book to which I will call attention without attempting to refer definitely to each case, as this would require much space, and involve much repetition. Throughout the book there are very many quotations, both from other writers and from verbal conversations which ought to be accurate, and which I think ought to
​

Page 5​

have in nearly all cases suitable references. It is very difficult now, however, to locate these quotations, as oftentimes there is no hint which would enable one to look them up. I shall call attention to some which I have been able to locate, and suggest the need of much work in this direction. The inaccuracies which I have found in the few which I have looked up, suggest this. [Variant translations contributed to the appearance of inaccuracies.]
​

I will now deal with different places throughout the book which seem to need attention. The edition which I have used in making this criticism is the Eleventh edition, revised and enlarged, published by the Pacific Press in 1889.​

2. Page 24:--It is stated that the temple "was rebuilt about five hundred years bfore the birth of Christ." On the insert page following, the date of rebuilding is given as B. C. 516. Smith's Bible Dictionary gives it "Cir 520 B. C."​

Response: Negative. Text left unchanged. The word "about" allows some leeway.​

3. Page 26: The setting up of the "idolatrous standards of the Romans" just outside the city walls is stated to be the signal referred to by Christ for the flight of the disciples; but on page 31, the flight of the disciples is made to be after "the retreat of Cestius."​

Response: Negative. No change in text.​

4. Page 28: The period between the doom of Jerusalem as pronounced by Christ and the overthrow of the city is said to be "forty years." As the city was overthrown A. D. 70, if this period is exact, it would make the time for his pronouncing the doom A. D. 30, and consequently, His crucifixion in the same year; but in other places in the book, the crucifixion is placed in A. D. 31.​

Response: Criticism accepted. Text changed in the interest of precision.​

1888 book reads: "For forty years after the doom of Jerusalem had been pronounced by Christ Himself, the Lord delayed His judgments upon the city and the nation."​

1911 book reads: "For nearly forty years after the doom of Jerusalem had been pronounced by Christ," et cetera. (Page 27).​

5. Page 31: After speaking of the retreat of Cestius, it says: "Terrible were the calamities that fell upon Jerusalem when the siege was resumed by Titus." The reader who is not informed concerning the history of this period would probably conclude that Titus immediately succeeded

​

Page 6

​

Cestius in the command of the Roman forces, as no hint is given of the campaign under Vespasian, the father of Titus.​

Response: Negative. No change made.​

6. Page 33: The efforts of Titus to save the temple are said to have been futile, because "One greater than he had declared that not one stone was to be left upon another." Does an event happen because it has been foretold by prophecy, or does the prophecy foretell events which happen for other reasons?​

Response: Negative. Criticism ignored. No change made.​

7. Page 43: Of the idolaters who united with the church it is said that "they still clung to their idolatry, only changing the objects of their worship to images of Jesus, and even of Mary and the saints." My understanding is that these idolaters were induced to unite with the church by an accommodation of the Christian doctrine to their beliefs and modes of worship, and that therefore they were brought into the church on the basis of the worship of images.​

Response: Negative. No change made.​

8. Page 50: It is declared that "the pope has arrogated the very titles of Deity. He styles himself 'Lord God the Pope.' " The definite reference for this ought surely to be given, if such instance can be found: if no such instance can be found, it does not seem proper to make this assertion. In all my reading I have not found one such instance, although I have found instances where others have applied this term to the pope.​

Response: Criticism accepted. The suggestion led to a careful investigation by the staff at Elmshaven and an extended outreach. While there were published works making this assertion, no statement was found in authoritative Catholic sources. Wording changed for accuracy of expression:​

1888 book read: "It is one of the leading doctrines of Romanism that the pope is the visible head of the universal church of Christ, invested with supreme authority over bishops and pastors in all parts of the world. More than this, the pope has arrogated the very titles of Deity. He styles himself 'Lord God the Pope,' assumes infallibility, and demands that all men pay him homage."​

1911 book reads: "More than this, the pope has been given the very titles of Deity. He has been styled 'Lord God the Pope,' and and has been declared infallible. He demands the homage of all men." An Appendix note was added giving Roman Catholic sources on the title of the pope.

​

Page 7

​

9. Page 52: At least the vital portion of the decree of the council which "finally established this system of idolatry" ought to be cited, either here or in the Appendix. This is a serious charge, and ought to be substantiated.​

Response: Criticism accepted. Documentary support given.​

1888 book read: "To afford converts from heathenism a substitute for the worship of idols, and thus to promote their nominal acceptance of Christianity, the adoration of images and relics was gradually introduced into the Christian worship. The decree of a general council finally established this system of idolatry."​

A footnote reads: "Second Council of Nice, A. D. 787."​

The 1911 edition uses the statement unchanged. Supporting documentation is provided in an extensive Appendix note on pages 679 to 680, thus carrying out more fully than did the 1888 book the call for documentation.​

10. Page 52: It is said: "Satan tampered with the fourth commandment also." In other places the change of this commandment is referred directly to the pope or the papacy.​

Response: Negative. This rather quibbling criticism was ignored, for none could misunderstand the intent of the author, who elsewhere in the book attributed the change to the papacy under the influence of Satan.​

11. Page 52: Beginning at the bottom of the page this statement is found: "While Christians continued to observe the Sunday as a joyous festival, he led them . . . to make the Sabbath a fast."​

On page 53, it says: "But while Christians were gradually led to regard Sunday as possessing a degree of sacredness, they still held the true Sabbath as the holy of the Lord."​

It seems to me that in both cases the word "Christians" should be qualified by some word limiting its application. As they now stand, these expressions seem too broad.​

The same suggestion applies to the use of the word "Christians: on page 54, eighth line from the bottom.​

Response: Page 52: Criticism accepted. Text changed in the interests of precision. 1888 book read: "While Christians continued to observe Sunday as a joyous festival," et cetera.

​

Page 8

​

1911 edition wording reads: "While Christians generally continued to observe Sunday as a joyous festival," et cetera.​

Response: Page 53: Affirmative. Text changed.​

1888 book read: "But while Christians were gradually led to regard Sunday as possessing a degree of sacredness," et cetera.​

1911 edition wording reads: "But while many God-fearing Christians were gradually led to regard Sunday," et cetera. Response: Page 54: Negative.
1888 book read: "Christians were forced to choose, either to yield their integrity and accept the papal ceremonies," et cetera.
Wording left unchanged.
12. Page 54: The argument in the last paragraph of this page would seem to favor commencing the 1260 years with the decree of Justinian in 533, as it says: "The bishop of Rome was declared to be the head over the entire church." And immediately following it says: "And now began the 1260 years." In various other places in the book, which will be noted later the 1260-year period is definitely stated to begin in 538.
Response: Negative. Implication calling for a change was rejected. No change was made.
13. Page 56: In the second paragraph I find this statement:
"About the close of the eighth century, papists put forth the claim that in the first ages of the church the bishops of Rome possessed the same spiritual power which they now assumed. To establish this claim, some means must be employed to give it a show of authority; and this was readily suggested by the father of lies. Ancient writings were forged by monks. Decrees of councils before unheard of were discovered," et cetera.
The only thing in the history of the papacy to which this can possibly refer would be the forging of the pseudo-Isidorian decretals; but these were not brought forward until the middle of the ninth century; and Pope Nicholas I who filled the pontifical chair from 858 to 867, was the first pope to make use of these forged writings in order to establish the authority of the papacy. Of course it does not say in this paragraph that these writings were forged in the eighth century, but to one acquainted with the facts the matter does not seem to be clearly handled.
Response: Criticism rejected. No change made.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Page 9

14. Page 57: These two statements are found: "Another step in the papal assumption was taken, when in the eleventh century, Pope Gregory VII proclaimed the perfection of the Romish church."
"The proud pontiff next claimed the power to depose emperors," et cetera.
The natural inference from these statements would be that these two claims were put forth at different times; but both of them are found in one document, namely, "The Dictates of Hildebrand," a document, which presents in a summarized form the leading claims and teachings of Gregory VII. It is of course, barely possible that these claims were originally made at different times; but, as they now appear in ecclesiastical history, they are found in the same document. This document will be found in Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, book 3, cent. 11, part 2, chapter 2, paragraph 9, Note 1.
Response: Criticism accepted. A change was made in the text.
The word "also" was substituted for the word "next" to more precisely indicate the time relationships. An Appendix note was added on the "dictates of Hildebrand."
15. Page 59: Purgatory is defined as "A place of torment, in which the souls of such as have not merited eternal damnation are to suffer punishment for their sins." Purgatory is thus defined in Catholic Belief, page 196:
"Purgatory is a state of suffering after this life, in which those souls are for a time detained, who depart this life after their deadly sins have been remitted as to the stain and guilt, and as to the everlasting pain that was due them, but who have on account of those sins still some debt of temporal punishment to pay; as also those souls which leave this world guilty only of venial sins."
Response: Negative as to a change. An Appendix note was added quoting Catholic sources and giving many reference to sources.
16. Page 59: The doctrine of indulgences is made to mean "full remission of sins, past, present, and future." But in Catholic Belief, page 194, we find this:
"It is a pity that many Protestants should be so ill-informed about the doctrine of Indulgences as to suppose that it means forgiveness of a sin, or a permission to commit a sin.
"By an indulgence is meant not the forgiveness of a sin, or a permission to commit a sin, but the remission, through the merits of the whole or part of the debt of temporal punishment due to a sin, the guilt and everlasting punishment of which have, through the merits of Jesus Christ, been already forgiven in the sacrament of Penance."

​

Page 10

There is no doubt that this teaching of the church has been perverted, and practically made to mean in many instances the forgiveness of sin, or possibly the permission to commit sin; but this is not the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Would it not be proper to make this distinction?
Response: Negative. No change was made. An Appendix note was added, citing Catholic sources.
17. Page 59: It is said that "all Christians" were compelled to believe in the "idolatrous sacrifice of the mass." The expression "all Christians" seems rather a broad one here.
Response: Criticism accepted. Wording changed by deletion of the word "all" making the sentence read "Christians were required, on pain of death, to avow their faith in this horrible, Heaven-insulting heresy."
18. Page 60: The expression "Babylon the Great" is plainly applied here to the Roman church; but on page 383, it is declared that Babylon of Revelation "cannot refer to the Romish church." Are there two interpretations of Babylon, one for Revelation 14, and one for Revelation 17?
Response: Criticism considered. No change here. See page 383 for addition of the word "alone."
19. Page 60: The expression "The noontide of the papacy was the world's moral midnight" ought to be changed back into Wiley's original form of expression quoted.
Response: Criticism accepted. Wording changed to harmonize with Wiley.
1888 book read: "The noontide of the papacy was the world's moral midnight."
1911 edition wording reads: "The noon of the papacy was the midnight of the world," and the reference given.
20. Page 61: In the expression "Everything heretical, whether persons or writings, was destroyed." The statement seems overdrawn. Both heretics and heretical writings survived that period.
Response: Criticism accepted. Wording changed.
1888 book read: "Everything heretical, whether persons or writings, was destroyed."
1911 edition reads: "Everything heretical, whether persons or writings, she sought to destory."

​

Page 11

21. Page 61: "Papal councils decreed that books and writings containing such records (of Rome's cruelty) should be committed to the flames." Reference ought to be made to one or more councils, and a brief quotation from the decrees given.
Response: Negative. No change made.
22. Page 62: At the bottom of the page it reads: "But Rome had fixed her eyes on Britain, and resolved to bring it under her supremacy." The facts as given in history are these: While walking through the slave market in Rome one day, Gregory the Great saw some youths who attracted his attention. On inquiry he learned that they came from Britain. He was impressed with the beauty of their form and appearance, and thought that such a people ought to receive Christianity; and therefore sent Augustine, with about forty monks, to preach the gospel to them. I do not find anything in the history which indicates that Gregory knew of this country and determined to bring them under his pontifical power before he saw those young men in the slave market.
Response: Negative. No change made.
23. Page 63: The quotation put in the mouth of "the Romish leader," is not the same as that found in the Historian's History of the World, volume 18, pages 44, 45.
Response: Negative. No change made.
24. Page 64: The expression "Those humble peasants . . . had not by themselves arrived at the truth in opposition to the dogmas and heresies of the apostate church," does not clearly express the writer's idea. It should read:
"Had not, without the assistance of others," or "Had not themselves first arrived at the truth." What follows shows that they were simply defending the faith of their fathers.
Response: Negative. No change made.
25. Page 65: This statement is found: "Amid the prevailing error and superstition, many, even of the true people of God, became so bewildered that while they observed the Sabbath, they refrained from labor also on the Sunday."
With this compare the statement in Testimony, volume 9, page 232:
"The light given me by the Lord at the time when we were expecting just such a crisis as you seem to be approaching was, that when the people were moved by a power from beneath to enforce Sunday observance, Seventh-day Adventists were to show their wisdom by refraining from their ordinary work on that day, devoting it to missionary effort."

​

Page 12

Response: Negative. No change made.
26. Page 65: The statement reads: "The Waldenses were the first of all the people of Europe to obtain a translation of the Holy Scriptures."
Ridpath, History of the World, Volume 2, page 42, says:
"For seven years Ulfilas labored assiduously at the great task (translating the Bible) which he had undertaken. At the end of that time the whole Bible, with the exception perhaps of the Book of Kings had been translated into the vernacular . . . The achievement of Ulfilas requires a more especial attention for the reason that the Gothic Bible thus produced was the first Bible ever written in a Teutonic language."
It would seem to me that this translation made by Ulfilas gave to the Goths the first translation of the Holy Scriptures.
Response: Criticism accepted. Wording changed.
1888 book read: "The Waldenses were the first of all the peoples of Europe to obtain a translation of the Holy Scriptures."
1911 edition reads: "The Waldenses were among the first of the peoples of Europe to obtain a translation of the Holy Scriptures." See Appendix. An Appendix note was added giving details and references to historical sources.
27. Page 76: Some portion of the bull from Innocent VIII, to which reference is made, ought to be quoted, with proper reference.
Response: Criticism accepted. Appendix note added giving references.
28. Page 77: Some of the provisions of this bull are given, however, the language of another, but without any reference as authority for the translation.
Response: Criticism accepted. Appendix note with references added.
29. Page 79: In view of what has been stated concerning the translation of the Bible by Bishop Ulfilas, is it proper to say that "except among the Waldenses the Word of God had for ages been locked up in lanaguages known only to the learned?
Response: Negative. No change in text made.
30. Page 82: A quotation of very severe import is credited to "one of the early fathers of the Romish Church." This reference does not seem definite enough to warrant the use of the quotation. The same seems

​

Page 13

true of the quotation from Luther, found on the same page.
Response: Negative on the first suggestion. Source probably unknown.
In the second instance, affirmative, with footnote credit given to the reference for Luther's statement.
31. Page 84: At the top of the page the question of "purchasing forgiveness with money" is suggested, and in the same paragraph there is a quotation for which no reference is given.
Response: Criticism accepted. Appendix note added.
32. Page 85: A quotation is given from one of the tracts of Wycliffe, for which no reference is given. This matter, found in Neander, volume 5, of the five-volume edition, page 137, runs thus: (Paragraph quoted.)
In Neander this quotation is credited to Lewis's History of the Life and Sufferings of J. Wiclif, page 32 (n. ed. 37).
Response: Criticism accepted. Original wording retained, footnote reference added.
33. Page 85: Three bulls are mentioned, "all commanding immediate and decisive measures to silence the teacher of heresy." Would it be possible to mention these bulls, or give some reference to where they may be found?
Response: Criticism accepted. Appendix note giving reference added.
34. Page 86: The expression, "Two conflicting powers, each professedly infallible, now claimed obedience," raises the question of the proper use of the word "infallible." According to Roman Catholic doctrine, infallibility does not apply to the pope as a temporal king, as a private person, as a writer on general themes, or as a speaker; but merely refers to his utterances when made ex-cathedra in defining the belief of the church. See Faith of Our Fathers by Cardinal Gibbons, page 145, and following. From the Catholic standpoint the doctrine of infallibility is not impaired by the fact of there being two rival popes at the same time.
Response: Negative. No change made.
35. Page 88: The quotation from Wycliffe in the first line, "But live and declare the evil deeds of the friars," reads in Green's History of England, "but live and again declare the works of the friars."
Response: Criticism accepted. Sentence corrected to read: "I shall not die, but live, and again declare the evil deeds of the friars." Footnote reference given to D'Aubigne.

​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Page 14

36. Page 97: Two statements are put into the mouth of Gregory VII, for which no reference is given. As these are very important pronouncements, they ought to have proper authority back of them. The same is true of the decree mentioned in the last line of the same page.
Response: Affirmative on the first suggestion:
1888 book read: "The pope declared that 'God was pleased that His worship should be celebrated in an unknown tongue, and that a neglect of this rule had given rise to many evils and heresies."
1911 Edition corrected according to Wylie, to read: "The pope declared that 'it was pleasing to the Omnipotent that His worship should be celebrated in an unknown language, and that many evils and heresies had arisen from not observing this rule.'" (Footnote reference to Wylie given.)
On the second suggestion regarding the wording which reads: "After a time it was decreed that all who departed from the Romish worship should be burned." The 1888 book carries no reference nor is reference given in the 1911 edition.
37. Page 103: It is declared that "all the gifts, offices, and blessings of the church were offered for sale. The word "all" makes this a very broad statement.
Response: Criticism accepted. The word "all" was deleted making the 1911 edition read: "Of course money must be had; and to procure this, the gifts, offices, and blessings of the church were offered for sale. An Appendix note was added referring to "Indulgences."
38. Page 104: It is said that the Council of Constance "was called, at the desire of Emperor Sigismund, by one of the three rival popes, John XXIII," This matter seems to be presented in a somewhat different light by Bower in his History of the Popes, under "John XXIII, the two hundred and fourth bishop of Rome." In the three-volume edition of Bower, this matter is found in volume 3, pages 175, 176.
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
39. Page 106: In speaking of the treatment of Huss and his imprisonment, it says: "The pope, however, profiting little by his perfidy, was soon after committed to the same prison."
From this statement, in connection with the preceding paragraph, it would appear that the pope was cast into the same prison in which Huss was first incarcerated. Bower, however, presents the matter in a different way, as will be seen by reading his account of the imprisonment of John XXIII in the same edition, on page 188.

​

Page 15

Response: Criticism accepted, but changing the text to agree with Bonnechose.
1888 book read: "The reformer was in a short time arrested, by order of the pope and cardinals, and thrust into a loathsome dungeon. The pope, however, profiting little by his perfidy, was soon after committed to the same prison."
1911 Edition was changed to read, and in so doing following Bonnechose, volume 1, page 247: "The Reformer was in a short time arrested, by order of the pope and cardinals, and thrust into a loathsome dungeon. Later he was transferred to a strong castle across the Rhine, and there kept a prisoner. The pope, profiting little by his perfidy, was soon after committed to the same prison."
40. Page 107: The words in italics [in the 1888 book], and quoted, being of so much importance and involving so serious a charge against the papacy, ought to have a proper reference for them.
Response: Criticism accepted. Wording corrected to that of L'Enfant in History of the Council of Constance, volume 1, page 516.
1888 book read: "They brought forward arguments of great length to prove that he was 'perfectly at liberty not to keep faith with a heretic,' and that the council, being above the emperor, 'could free him from his word.' Thus they prevailed."
1911 edition wording reads: "They brought forward arguments of great length to prove that 'faith ought not to be kept with heretics, nor persons suspected of heresy, though they are furnished with safe-conducts from the emperor and kings.'" Footnote reference given Lenfant, History of the Council of Constance, volume 1, page 516.
41. Page 116: To supply what was needed for a crusade, it is stated that "In all the papal countries of Europe, men, money, and munitions of war were raised." The word "all" makes this statement a very broad one.
Response: Negative. No change in text made.
42. Page 122: The statement concerning Luther's discovery of the Bible would be more definite if it should read: "While one day examining the books of the library of the University of Erfurth."
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
43. Page 128: The expression "A salvation that could be bought with money," raises the same question as to the meaning of indulgences. There is little if any doubt, that Tetzel represented his indulgences as being the same as forgiveness of sin; but would it not be fair to the Roman

​

Page 16

Catholic Church to say that this was not their official teaching?
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.
44. Page 129: The quotation from Tetzel at the top of the page, if authoritative, ought to have suitable reference.
Response: Criticism accepted. Footnote reference to D'Aubigne given.
45. Page 160: The answer of Luther as here quoted varies somewhat from the language given by D'Aubigne, book 7, chapter 8, which runs thus: (Paragraph quoted).
Response: Criticism accepted.
1888 book read: "The reformer answered: 'Since your most serene majesty and the princes require a simple, clear, and direct answer, I will give one, and it is this:'" et cetera. The quotation closes with the words, "Here I take my stand; I cannot do otherwise. God be my help! Amen.'"
1911 edition changed to present the quotation from D'Aubigne. It was a matter of quoting from one translation or another, and the one used closes with the familiar words, "Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me. Amen."
The one used, was not the one suggested by Prescott, but the one approved by D'Aubigne and followed consistently in the 1911 edition. It closes with the familiar words, "Here I stand, I can do no other; may God help me. Amen."
46. Pages 202 and 203: The Protest at the Diet of Spires, as here quoted, does not agree with the same Protest as found in D'Aubigne, book 13, chapter 6.
Response: Criticism accepted. The translation approved by D'Aubigne, was employed which called for some change in wording. The reference was given.
47. Page 209: At the top of the page is this statement: "One of the principles most firmly maintained by Luther was that there should be no resort to secular power in support of the Reformation, and no appeal to arms for its defense."
This is true, but it is also true that, as the Reformation progressed in later years, Luther argued in favor of the use of the secular power to suppress heretical and fanatical teaching.
Response: Negative. No change made.

​

Page 17

48. Page 234: The statement at the bottom of the page concerning the nature of Jesuitism is very broad and very strong. According to this statement, Satan himself could not possibly be any worse. The same is true of the further description on page 235.
Response: Criticism accepted as to precision of statement, but argument well supported by an extended Appendix note, quoting and giving references.
1888 book read: "Cut off from every earthly tie and human interest, dead to the claims of natural affection, reason and conscience wholly silenced, they knew no rule, no tie, but that of their order, and no duty but to extend its power."
1911 edition wording reads: "Cut off from earthly ties and human interests, dead to the claims of natural affection, reason and conscience wholly silenced, they knew no rule, no tie, but that of their order, and no duty but to extend its power." See Appendix.
49. Page 235: The bull mentioned which reestablished the Inquisition ought to be definitely located.
Response: Criticism accepted. Appendix note with references added.
50. Page 261: The quotation concerning the assumptions of the pope are evidently taken from Facts for the Times. (An S. D. A. publication). After a long search, I have found the quotation to the effect that the pope "can dispense above the law," et cetera; but it is what is called an authoritative gloss upon the canon law, and not a direct utterance of the pope. The second quotation, "He can pronounce sentences and judgments," et cetera, I have been unable to locate. I do not think it wise to use these quotations, unless we can give very definite reference for them, as I fully expect that we shall be called to strict account for all these statements at some time in the future.
Response: Affirmative. The discussion is not of the papacy, but the quotation was used as illustrating a point that God's law was not binding. See paragraph which precedes the paragraph in question, for proper setting. The quotation questioned was not used, but the principles involved were stated without supporting quotation involving the papacy was used.
1888 book read: "This monstrous doctrine is essentially the same as the Romish claim that 'the pope can dispense above the law, and of wrong make right, by correcting and changing laws;' that 'he can pronounce sentences and judgments in contradiction. . . to the law of God and man.' Both reveal the inspiration of the same master-spirit,--of him who, even among the sinless inhabitants of Heaven, began his work of seeking to break down the righteous restraints of the law of God."
1911 edition wording reads: "These monstrous doctrines are essentially the same as the later teaching of popular educators and theologians,

​

Page 18

--that there is no unchangeable divine law as the standard of right, but that the standard of morality is indicated by society itself, and has constantly been subject to change. All these ideas are inspired by the same master-spirit,--by him who, even among the sinless inhabitants of heaven, began his work of seeking to break down the righteous restraints of the law of God."
51. Page 266: In the first paragraph, "the holy city," mentioned in Revelation 11:2, is interpreted to mean [the true church,] but on page 427, the holy city is made to be the bride, and the virgins to represent the church. Note the full argument on page 427.
Response: Criticism considered. Issue at this point eliminated by the deletion of bracketed phrase, "the true church."
1888 book read: "Said the angel of the Lord: 'The holy city [the true church] shall they tread under foot forty and two months.'"
1911 edition wording reads: "Said the angel of the Lord: 'The holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.'"
52. Page 266: The 1260 years of papal supremacy are made to commence "with the establishment of the papacy in A. D. 538," and to terminate in 1798. It does not seem to be in harmony with history to say that the papacy was established at this time, and the whole question of the proper application of 1260 years needs reconsideration and a new interpretation made.
Response: Criticism considered and with no departure from the beginning and ending dates of the 1260 years, the phrase, "with the establishment of the papacy," was deleted.
1888 book read: "The 1260 years of papal supremacy began with the establishment of the papacy in A. D. 538, and would therefore terminate in 1798."
1911 edition wording reads: "The 1260 years of papal supremacy began in A. D. 538, and would therefore terminate in 1798." See Appendix note.
53. Page 267: The statement that "through the influence of the Reformation, the persecution was brought to an end prior to 1798," seems a very loose one, in view of the fact that the Reformation occured nearly four centuries before the date mentioned here.
Response: Negative, no change made.
54. Page 268: In the last paragraph, it is assumed that the 1260 years ended in 1798.
Response: Negative. No change in text.

​

Page 19

55. Page 269: Reference is again made to the year 1798, on the basis of its being the date for the end of the 1260 years. On the same page the French Revolution is called "the Revolution of 1793;" but at the top of page 282, it is said:
"At the opening of the Revolution, by a concession of the kind, the people were granted a representation exceeding that of the nobles and the clergy combined."
This concession was made at the convocation of the States-General in 1789, which would, according to this statement, then be the opening of the Revolution. This is historically correct. But the Revolution could then not properly be spoken of as "the Revolution of 1793."
Response: Negative. No change.
56. Page 271: When we think of the persecutions carried on by the papacy under the inquisition in Spain and in other countries, it seems a little strong to say that: "In no land (other than France) had the spirit of enmity against Christ been more strikingly displayed."
Response: Negative. No change made in the text.

​

 

[Adventist Heretic]

57. Page 272: In the middle of the page, the statement is made that: "The great bell of the palace, tolling at the dead of night, was a signal for the slaughter."
All the histories dealing with the French Revolution which I have been able to consult, state that it was the original plan to toll the bell of the palace as the signal, but owing to special circumstances, the signal was given by ringing the bell of the church of St. Germain l'Auxerrois.
Response: Negative. It was found that historians differed on this point. See A. L. White in The Ellen G. White Writings, p. 32, for documentation. It was not Ellen White's mission to correct historians. A bell rang signaling the massacre. The wording was adjusted to avoid the point of which one.
1888 book read: "The great bell of the palace, tolling at dead of night, was a signal for the slaughter."
1911 edition was changed to read: "A bell, tolling at dead of night, was a signal for the slaughter."
57a. Page 272: On the same page the number that perished throughout France is stated to be "seventy thousand." The estimates vary from fifty to one hundred thousand. Would it not be better to say "about seventy thousand?"
Response: Negative. No change made.

Page 20

57b. Page 272: On the same page, a quotation is given concerning Pope Gregory's reception of the news of the massacre. In view of the fact that Roman Catholics dispute this whole ground, ought there not to be some authoritative reference for this paragraph concerning the reception of the news in Rome?
Response: Criticism accepted. Footnote reference supplied.
58: Page 273: It is stated that "Bibles were collected and publicly burned with every possible manifestation of scorn;" and on pages 286 and 287, reference is made to a decree passed in 1793, prohibiting the Bible, and the rescinding of the same decree three years and a half later. Both of these statements appear to have been taken directly from Thoughts on Revelation; and the statement concerning the decree suppressing the Bible, as found in Thoughts on Revelation, is taken verbatim, but without credit, from an article by George Storrs, one of the early Adventist writers.
Two or three of us have made a very careful search of all the histories of the French Revolution to be found in the Congressional Library, in an effort to find some authority for this statement concerning this decree suppressing the Bible; but thus far we have been utterly unable to find any reference to any such action. Of course, if this cannot be established, it will affect quite a number of paragraphs based upon this statement.
Response: The challenge of the criticism was accepted. Considerable careful research in the libraries in both Europe and America did yield supporting evidence for the The Great Controversy statement in its broader terms, but did not yield a specific action of the French Assembly in 1793, edicts abolishing the Bible, and then three and a half years later restoring it to favor. Painstaking research failed to disclose such specific legislation, but edicts were found that did so in effect. C. C. Crisler, Ellen White's leading secretary working on the 1911 edition of The Great Controversy, found that one of the British lords, in a debate in Parliament, as it opened in January, 1794, declared after reading at length from French documents, that "the Old and New Testament were publicly burnt, as prohibited books."
1888 book read: "The atheistical power that ruled in France during the Revolution and the reign of terror, did wage such a war upon the Bible as the world had never witnessed. The Word of God was prohibited by the national assembly. Bibles were collected and publicly burned with every possible manifestation of scorn. The law of God was trampled under foot. The institutions of the Bible were abolished."
1911 edition reads: "The atheistical power that ruled in France during the Revolution and the Reign of Terror, did wage such a war against God and His holy word as the world had never witnessed. The worship of the Deity was abolished by the National Assembly.

​

Page 21

Bibles were collected and publicly burned with every possible manifestation of scorn. The law of God was trampled under foot."
Pages 286, 287:
1888 book read: "It was in 1793 that the decree which prohibited the Bible passed the French Assembly. Three years and a half later a resolution rescinding the decree, and granting toleration to the Scriptures, was adopted by the same body."
1911 edition reads: "It was in 1793 that the decrees which abolished the Christian religion and set aside the Bible, passed the French Assembly. Three years and a half later a resolution rescinding these decrees, thus granting toleration to the Scriptures, was adopted by the same body."
59. Page 276: A quotation is made, beginning, "the popular society of the museum entered the hall," et cetera, which is also found in Thoughts on Daniel(Notes on Daniel 11:38), where it is credited to Scott's Life of Napoleon, without any page being given. It seems to me that the expression, "the popular society of the museum" must be a mistranslation of the French name of some society of that period.
Response: Criticism accepted. Some change made in writing:
1888 book read: "This was followed, not long afterward, by the public burning of the Bible. And 'the popular society of the museum entered the hall of the municipality, exclaiming, Vive la Raison! and carrying on the top of a pole the half-burned remains of several books.'"
1911 edition reads: "This was followed, not long afterward, by the public burning of the Bible. On one occasion 'the Popular Society of the Museum' entered the hall of the municipality, exclaiming 'Vive la Raison!' and carrying on the top of a pole the half-burned remains of several books."
59a. Page 276: And the expression "the breviaries of the Old and New Testaments," should read, "the breviaries and the Old and New Testaments."
Response: Affirmative. The text in the 1911 edition reads: "among others breviaries, missals, and the Old and New Testaments, which 'expiated in a great fire.'"

​

Page 22

60. Page 277: The words put into the mouth of the pope as spoken to the regent of France ought surely to be authoritatively located. And the same is true as to the words of "a papist dignitary."
Response: Criticism accepted. Footnote references given and wording of quotation changed to harmonize with accepted D' Aubigne wording.
1888 book read: "Rome was not slow to inflame their jealous fears. Said the pope to the regent of France in 1523: 'This mania [Protestantism] will not only destroy religion, but all principalities, nobilities, laws, orders, and ranks besides.' A few years later a papist dignitary warned the king, 'If you wish to preserve your sovereign rights intact; if you wish to keep the nations submitted to you in tranquility, manfully defend the Catholic faith, and subdue all its enemies by your arms.'"
1911 edition reads: "Rome was not slow to inflame their jealous fears. Said the pope to the regent of France in 1525: 'This mania [Protestantism] will not only confound and destroy religion, but all principalities, nobility, laws, orders, and ranks besides.' A few years later a papal nuncio warned the king: 'Sire, be not deceived. The Protestants will upset all civil as well as religious order. . . . The throne is in as much danger as the altar. . . . The introduction of a new religion must necessarily introduce a new government.'"
61. Page 282: There appears on this page this statement: "The war against the Bible inaugurated an era which stands in the world's history as 'The Reign of Terror.'"
The whole outbreak of the French Revolution is interpreted in this chapter as being a war against the Bible; but the histories of that period represent this outbreak as being a protest against the arbitrary authority of both state and church. In harmony with this idea is the fact that the king was beheaded previous to the inauguration of the Reign of Terror, and before the worship of the Goddess of Reason was established.
Response: Negative. No change made.
62.Page 284: It is stated that "in the short space of ten years, millions of human beings perished." When used in this way, "millions" would be taken to mean several millions, and it is a question whether so broad an expression is warranted.
Response: Criticism accepted, and the word "multitudes" was substituted for "millions."
63. Page 285: At the bottom of the page reference is made to the decree prohibiting the Bible, to which attention has already been called.

​