1. Did Mrs. White ever use quotations from the Apocrypha in the text of her writings, or cite them in footnotes?
2. Also, what was the relation of the Christian world to the Apocryphal books in the early days of this movement?
Those who have spent years studying and indexing the writings of Ellen G. White, state that she never introduced passages from the Apocryphal works into her testimonies, articles, or books, nor did she ever cite them in her footnotes. The groundless impression of some that she did,—and especially the charge of critics to this effect,—springs, doubtless, from one instance, to be noted below, wherein James White expressly states that he supplied such footnote references. This was in a reprint of two of the earliest messages written by Sister White, which were incorporated in a pamphlet of twenty-four pages entitled, "A Word to the Little Flock," prepared largely by Brother White, and published in 1847.
This booklet, it should be particularly observed, is nowhere alluded to or listed by Ellen G. White as one of her productions, nor as one for which she was responsible. It was a James White publication, in which he incorporated three of Mrs. White's brief, early messages. It is significant that "A Word to the Little Flock" was not advertised in the Present Truth or the Advent Review, and when the edition was exhausted, that it was not reprinted. To two of Mrs. White's testimonies, quoted on pages 14-20, James White appended eighty-four Scripture references, together with six references to Second Esdras—one of the Apocryphal books. This is, we understand, the only instance of its kind, and as will be observed, occurred just three years after the prophetic gift was first manifest near the close of 1844, and when the relationship of the church thereto was not as yet clearly understood or defined.
The special article in question—a record of Mrs. White's first vision—was originally published in 1846 in the Day-Star of January 24, issued at Cincinnati, Ohio. This was one of the several advent papers published following the 1844 disappointment. In that original document sent to the editor by Sister White (then Ellen G. Harmon), and published by him in the Day-Star, there were absolutely no footnotes of any description—no citations even to Scripture, much less to the Apocrypha. But James White, in incorporating these testimonies into his pamphlet, which, aside from the quotations from Mrs. White, was filled largely with articles written by himself, and one by Joseph Bates, specifically states:
"The following vision was published in the Day-Star, more than a year ago. By the request of friends, it is republished in this little work, with Scripture references, for the benefit of the little flock."—Page 13.
This clearly explains the appearance of the footnote references. Sister White was not responsible for these references that were appended by her husband, and which included citations to the Apocrypha. They were not in the original printing in the Day-Star, which is accessible at a nationally known Historical Society Library. This is a matter of certainty, as we have photostatic copies of the articles in our possession.
Expressions in Sister White's message depicting the journey of the people of God to the New Jerusalem, and the glories of the Holy City, doubtless reminded Brother White of certain somewhat similar expressions he had read in the Apocrypha, which, in those days, was to be found in most family Bibles. So he noted them at the bottom of the pages, as heretofore stated. The remoteness in similarity, however, between Mrs. White's words and the actual expressions in the six references to the Apocrypha cited by James White in his footnotes, will be apparent from a comparison. In most instances the context shows there was but slight paralleling of thought. Furthermore, many phrases in the Apocrypha are quite similar to expressions found in the Book of Revelation.
When, however, in 1851 Sister White included these testimonies in her first authorized book, "Christian Experience and Views," (now part of "Early Writings," pp. 1-83, ed. 1925), they were placed on pages 9-19, and, as would be expected, without any footnote references. Furthermore, in the four-page Review and Herald Extra of July 21, 1851, which circulated just among believers in the visions, and which antedated "Christian Experience" by some months, no footnote references appear. This rare document, the property of one of our ministers, has likewise been personally scrutinized, and we have photographs of the four pages with these identical articles in our possession. Thus
Dear Fellow Minister and Associate Workers:
I welcome the opportunity offered by the editors of the Ministry, of speaking more freely and frankly to you of the interests of the church, especially just now when the work of God is pushing forth so vigorously and rapidly under conditions more trying than the message of truth in modern times has ever experienced.
Had we known three years ago of the financial reverses to come to all the world, we would probably have expected large retrenchments in our work in every land. During the past three years the income to the movement has been reduced from one third to one half, and in some fields even more. The fifth cut in appropriations at the recent Spring Council brings the combined cuts in three years—reckoned, of course, on different bases—up to 40 per cent. It was with great reluctance that the last cut of 10 per cent was made. With it went another cut in wages of 10 per cent for workers both in home and foreign fields. We know that with many workers this further cut in salary means a real hardship, and raises problems extremely difficult to solve.
The General Conference stands for a living wage. We believe that workers should be so paid that they can give their energies unreservedly to the work without having the perplexities of reduced wages to embarrass them. But how can we hold wages up when there are not funds with which to do it? We must not plunge the cause into debt; we did not wish to discharge faithful, successful workers; so the only way possible was to return to the plan of the early days of the work and give to the workers in proportion as the funds will permit.
It was also with great reluctance that we cut the allowance of our sustentation beneficiaries, for we know it will bring distress and perplexity to many sick and aged workers. We had held back in making this reduction, hoping there might be a change in the financial trend, but it did not come. After this cut in salary and sustentation allowance, we face, unless conditions change, a deficit at the end of 1933 of more than a quarter million dollars.
We do thank God for the spirit of loyalty manifested by our workers generally, including the sustentation beneficiaries. It must be the spirit of Christ in their hearts enabling them to bear uncomplainingly the hardships these cuts in wages entail.
The Lord is testing our measure of love for Him in the difficulties His work imposes upon us. It is only through trial that the measure of our love for God is made manifest. God measured His love for us in the gift of His Son, as it is written, "God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son," and that Son gave His life for us. We may feel that shortly both before and after the publication of "A Word to the Little Flock," in 1847, Mrs. White's messages appear as she sent them out without any footnote references whatsoever. These positive assertions spring, therefore, not from mere pious beliefs or a general understanding, but from documentary proof which can be adduced whenever required.
Then we come in further reprints to "Spiritual Gifts," Volume II, pages 30-35 and 52-55, and first published in 1860 (which was later the present "Early Writings," with these testimonies reprinted on pages 9-15 and 25-28 of the 1882 edition, and pages 13-20 and 32-35 of the 1925 edition), in which Mrs. White continued to ignore all those added footnote references. So she uniformly and invariably reprinted them without any such citations., as in the original printing. This is complete and irrefutable evidence that Mrs. White did not insert nor approve these footnote references to the Apocrypha. Thus the matter stands, stripped of all mystery, or implication of Sister White.
but very recently bestowed upon the Lord's chosen messenger, and the relationship of the "little flock" thereto was not very clearly defined nor understood at the time. In fact, James White's statement on page 13 is an appeal to the advent believers to give them unbiased consideration. He alludes to "prejudice in many minds upon the subject," and acknowledges that belief in spiritual gifts is "a very unpopular position." But he appeals to all to candidly read, consider, and accept.
Though most clearly not a part of the Sacred Canon, the Apocryphal writings were not vicious. And while the bulk of their content is fanciful and legendary, nevertheless portions contained many excellent maxims and truths. The Maccabees, for example, contain much valuable and authentic history. These facts are responsible for its retention for centuries as a sort of appendix within the covers of the Sacred Word circulated among Protestants. The entire Roman Catholic Church, of course, accepts the Apocrypha as authoritative along with the Canon recognized by Protestants.
The fourteen books of the Apocrypha are to be found mixed indiscriminately among the inspired books of the Old Testament in the oldest copies of the Septuagint now available. No living person knows when or by whom they were written, or when they were first added to the books of the Bible; but they were extant as early as the Council of Laodicea, about 363 A. n. The first Protestant Bible printed in English, the "Coverdale," of 1535, contained them, together with the succeeding ones, including the Authorized Version of 1611.* The Catholic Douay-Rheimish Version of 1610, of course, includes them. The first edition to divide the Bible into verses, and to use italics to indicate words which were supplied, was the first to omit the Apocryphal books since their inclusion in the Septuagint about the fourth century A. D. But they continued to be printed in most of the leading Protestant versions until a century ago.
L. E. F.
*"The various Continental and English versions of the Bible then being made likewise placed them [the Apocryphal books] by themselves apart from the acknowledged books, as a kind of appendix. For example, the Zurich Bible of 1529, the French Bible of 1535, Coverdale's English tr. of 1536, Matthews of 1537, the second ed. of the Great Bible, 1540, the Bishops' of 1568, and the AV of 1611. The first Eng. version to omit them altogether was an ed. of King James' Version published in 1629 ;** but the custom of printing them by themselves between the OT and the NT, continued until 1825, when the Edinburgh Committee of the British and Foreign Bible Society protested that the Society should no longer translate these Apocryphal writings and send them to the heathen. The Society finally yielded and decided to exclude them (May 3, 1827). Since then, Protestants in Great Britain and America have given up the practice of publishing the Apoc. as part of Sacred Scripture."—International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, p, 562.
**In a letter from the British and Foreign Bible Society, dated March 9, 1933, it is stated: "According to our Historical Catalogue of Printed Bibles, Harlow & Motile, the first English Bible to deliberately omit the Apocrypha is the 1640 published at Amsterdam.
"There is a Preface in the book referring to their omission.
"Certainly the Apocrypha is not included in the 1629 Bible to which you refer, but this does not appear to have been intentional, as a full list of the Apocryphal books is given on the contents page to the book. I have also looked at the Bible, which is rather a rare edition, and find that the last folio of the O.T. is Ff2, and the first folio of the N.T. Nn2 showing that the intervening sheets containing the Apocrypha were certainly printed for the book. This Bible is described in our catalogue as 'Wants . . Apocrypha.' "
