A Little History on Canright
Canright's Own Testimony Validating Mrs. White
Butler's Testimony on Canright's defection
Canright's Secretary's Testimony
D.W. Reavis' Testimony


Many of the arguments we hear against Adventism, especially the ones against Ellen White, originate from two books written by Dudley Canright. His book, "Seventh- day Adventism Renounced" was printed in 1889, and the second book, "The Life of Mrs. E.G.White", was published after the authors death, in 1919. These books have been, and are presently used to dissuade interested inquirers, from accepting Adventism.

It may be of interest to find out who this man was, who devoted his energies to destroying Adventism.

Mr. Canright was a Seventh-day Adventist for 28 years. He was a powerful preacher, especially skilled in debate. He could back anyone into a corner when defending Adventist doctrine! In fact, debating was something he thoroughly enjoyed. Canright was also a very successful evangelist for the Adventist church and filled executive and other positions in the church as well.

No one knew Dudley Canright better than Elder George Butler who worked closely with him. They often traveled together, did evangelism together and spent considerable time together. Writing some years later Elder Butler says:

"Some twenty-eight years ago, D.M. Canright embraced the views of Seventh-day Adventists. For several years he labored to acquire some necessary education, and soon after commenced to preach their doctrines. He was blessed with a good degree of earnestness, and ability, and with ambition to succeed, and he had excellent success in his labors, and was considered for many years a growing man in the denomination. He had a strong taste for debates and controversy, and applied himself especially to them, and had good success in them. These qualities always attract attention, and they gave him quite a prominence. For a dozen years his labors were valuable to this cause, and he traveled extensively in different States and Conferences. He then had quite fully the confidence of our people.

"Elder Canright's good opinion of his own abilities had, during the meantime become quite pronounced. He was never noted for patience, forbearance, or special regard for the opinions of others. He was a person who formed his conclusions remarkably quick, and was inclined to be rash; and though in the main genial, pleasant, frank companion, yet his desire to have his own way sometimes got him into trouble.

He never could bear reproof with patience, or feel composed when his way was crossed. When he came to mingle in important matters with brethren in prominent positions, these and other traits naturally got him into trouble. . . Elder Canright had little respect for anyone's opinion except as it coincided with his own. He always hated reproof, hence bore it like a fractious child.

"On such occasions the Elder (Canright) was immediately greatly troubled with doubts. When everything went pleasantly, he could usually see things with clearness. When he was "abused," as he always thought he was when things did not go to suit him, the evidences of our faith began immediately to grow dim. Dark clouds of unbelief floated over his mental sky, and he felt that everything was going by the board. Here was his special weakness. He is a strong man in certain directions when all goes smoothly, but very weak in adversity. He failed to "endure hardness as a good soldier of Jesus Christ". He was good in a fight, and appeared at best advantage when in a hot debate. This was his forte. But when things apparently were against him, he seemed to have no staying, recuperative qualities.

"These weaknesses began to manifest themselves as far back as 1870. In the last of December of that year he held a debate with Elder Johnson, Presbyterian, in Monroe, Iowa. The writer (Butler) was present. Elder Canright was not feeling in good spirits though he presented his arguments quite clearly and met with success. The night following the debate I occupied a room with him, I was greatly astonished to find him under powerful temptations to give up religion and the Bible, and become an absolute infidel. I laboured with him all night long; neither of us slept a wink. In the morning he seemed more calm, and a few weeks later he came to the GC at Battle Creek, and made some confession of his feelings." R&H Extra, Dec. 1887

All through his ministry he swung like a yo-yo from heights of success in the work of the church to depths of doubt and resentment against other leaders. Several times he quite preaching and sunk into depressions, but the Adventist brethren would labor earnestly to help him. He would then confess his great darkness of mind which he had felt and publicly take his stand once more.

In September 13, 1881 this article appeared in the Review and heral, by Dudley Canright:

About a year ago I became wholly discouraged. It seemed to me that my work amounted to nothing, and that I might as well give up..

I passed four months in this way. I looked in every direction to see if there was not some mistake in our doctrine, or if I could not go some other way. But I could not see why, according to the Bible, the great pillars of our faith were not sound...

I freely talked over with Eld. Butler, Bro. and Sr. White, and others about my difficulties and trials, They did all they could, and all I could ask, to assist me.

As I took hold again to labor, and tried to look on the side of courage and faith in the work, I found my difficulties disappearing, and my former confidence in the message reviving, till now I feel clear and settled in the work again.

The Review and Herald of Oct. 7, 1884 has a similar story. There we again read an article by Canright confessing the "opening my heart to doubts...greatly humbled...felt in my heart the most remarkable change that I ever experienced in all my life. ..Light and faith came into my soul, and I felt that God had given me another heart....I want to say to all my friends everywhere that now I not only accept but believe the testimonies to be from God."

And in the same Review and Herald EGW writes:

"I could but make melody to God in my heart every moment as I considered the work that had been wrought so wonderfully in this case. Elder Canright saved to the cause! His precious family led into the ways fo truth and righteousness! I said in my heart, as I looked upon them. Saved, saved from ruin! I do rejoice, I do praise the Lord."

He Himself wrote an article in 1885, after one of his bouts with depression, entitled "To Those in Doubting Castle" where he builds on John Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress" and recounts his own experience and give counsel.

He wrote:

"Among the most dangerous of the places which pilgrims had to pass in the days of Bunyan was Doubting Castle. Many a poor pilgrim was caught on these grounds, shut up in this terrible old castle, and finally destroyed by the keeper, Giant Despair. But some were finally lucky enough to make their escape...

Twenty-five years ago I embraced this message. The complete system of truth which it presented seemed to me something wonderful and very glorious. ..It filled my heart with gladness and peace. But at length things came up which threw me into doubt on some points, and finally were the occasion of my ceasing to preach the message.

"I wish to give a few of the reasons why I still think that the work is all right, that the Lord is in it, and that these doubts are not well founded. . I firmly believe that the truth of our message can be just as clearly proved --- They (doubters) let a few light objections on one side outweigh a mountain of truth on the other. . .

"Look at the grand truths which our people hold, --the new earth, the beautiful city, the resurrection, the real life hereafter, the literal coming of christ, the sleep of the dead, the destruction of sin and sinners, the law of God, all those grand lines of prophecy unmistakably pointing to the end near. ..Can you once more have confidence in intangible spirits, eternal hell, sprinkling for baptism, Sunday Sabbath, or the millennium? Pshaw! Strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel?

"The real trouble lies close at home, in a proud, unconverted heart, a lack of real humility, an unwillingness to submit to God's way of finding the truth." (R&H February 10,1885)

Four times Canright fell out with his brethren and returned in repentance. However, when he went out the fifth time, about 1886, he began to publish attacks upon Seventh-day Adventist teaching and upon the Spirit of prophecy as manifested through Ellen White.

During the 1884 "confession" he had declared:

I will never do this backing up anymore; and I believe that if I ever go back from this I am lost. RH Dec. 2, 1884

Yet just a couple years later he did leave, and this time for good.

George Butler's Testimony on the Defection of Canright

"Canright thought, he was going to preach good revival discourses and would never do anthing that Snook and Brinkerhoff did, and was going to be awfully good.

His farewell remarks up at Otsego, which I went up there purposely to hear, when he talked half or three quarters of any hour. The tears ran down his face as he told what he was going to do. he felt it just as clearly and fully as a man could, and thought he was going to be awfully good.

But when he got over into the Baptist church; withdrew; and the Spirit of God ceased its influence upon him largely, he became the most bitter, wicked antagonist we have ever had since the Denomination started. his book against Seventh-day Adventists is full of sneaking falsehoods. I do not say that he realizes they are such, but they are such. They are perversions of truth.

I pity the man, from the bottom of my soul, when I thing of what he is coming to, and where he has brought himself. But a man can no more control himself, after he goes off there and takes his stand away from the truths he has well known, than a man could in a boat a few rods above Niagara Falls.

I say this to you, doctor, just as much as I do to anybody. There is a border line which, if a man crosses, he puts himself on the enemy's ground, and if you cross it, or any other man crosses it, he will put himself under the greatest possible disadvantage, where it will be just morally out of the question for him to keep from going clear overboard.

G.I. Butler letter to J.H.Kellogg, June 9, 1904. (Italics supplied)

Writes W.A. Spicer in the R&H April 29, 1926:
"When first he (Canright) engaged in this opposing work, it was thought by ministers of some of the churches that now they had a champion who could answer Seventh-day Adventists. He was called to the Pacific Coast to begin a campaign against Seventh-day Adventists. However, very quickly the ministers of other denominations found that they had made a mistake. The moment our brethren declared the plain word of the Lord, our former associate found himself helpless.

"The public did not appreciate his representation of Seventh-day Adventists, whom they knew to be generally earnest, conscientious, God-fearing Christians, good neighbors and good citizens. Many of the public did not appreciate the spirit of the attacks upon Sister White whom they knew by her writings, and some of them by her life, to be an earnest Christian woman...As I can recall, Canright was never commissioned again by the churches to conduct any general public campaign of opposition to Seventh-day Adventists."

"His writings, however, have been freely used by various religious leaders. ...It was announced in a local paper that ministers of various churches had met together in consultation, and had decided, in effect, that the works of the Reverend Canright were the best material with which to confute the teachings of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.. ...In due course the books arrived. One, who had formerly been a Seventh-day Adventist, had filled a book with objections against the Adventist teachings. He knew well where to find these arguments, for he had often answered them himself. He had gathered together a collection of mutually contradictory arguments. His attack upon Seventh-day Adventists was also an attack upon fundamental items in the historic creed of most of the Protestant bodies. But that did not matter, for he was attacking Seventh-day Adventists."

In the "Healdsburg Enterprise, March 9, 1889, a person can read a report of one Canright's debates. Formerly he very successfully debated FOR Adventist truth, now he placed himself on the opposing side.

His part (Canright's part) in the debate was simply a rehash or repetition of what he had already said in his previous course of lectures. At the close of these lectures the Pastors' Union..would better have allowed him to depart. The debate added nothing to the evidence against the Adventists. It merely gave THEM (SDA's) an opportunity to reply upon them...(Mr. Canright had written Pastor's Union that the Adventists would not meet him in debate.) The Adventists did accept the challenge...

Seventh-day Adventists dealt with Canright's accusations. The book In Defense of the Faith later reprinted under the title Reply to Canright by W.H. Branson, is a standard work that answers the arguments contained in Canright's books.

What lead Canright down this path?
Canright's biggest problem was pride.

Drury W. Reevis, while still a young man, worked with Canright, while Canright was president of the Ohio Conference. In his book "I Remember" Reevis wrote that Canright was efficient, congenial, fair and a wonderful help to him, but he also mentions:

The elder was remarkably bright, and grew rapidly from his humble beginning, through the blessing of God and the power of the message he proclaimed with Heaven-bestowed ability. he was so greatly admired and openly praised by our workers and the laity, that he finally reached the conclusion he had inherent ability--that the message he was proclaiming was a hindrance to him rather than the exclusive source of his power.

"His estrangement began and developed through harboring that greatest seductive thing that finds its way into some human hearts, which I name an abnormal desire to be great, not ngreat in the true meaning of the word, but great only in the estimation of people--to be popular. p. 117

Elder E.R. Potter, a minister in Michigan reports:

"I will tell you one thing. Just before he left the denomination Eld. Canright came to the 1886 Mich. Camp meeting with his team and I took care of his horses. On that occasion my cousin said, "If I am not elected president of the Conference at this meeting I am not going to preach for them any more." — George Butler, not Canright, was elected president of the Michigan Conference.

Ellen White wrote him letters warning him of his pride (3T 304-329, 2SM 162-170, 5T 516-520) Canright confessed that for years he harbored bitter feelings toward Mrs. White because of these testimonies he had received from her.

Canright left the SDA church and joined the Baptist Church for thirty two years. He worked as a pastor for 15 months in one church and two and half years in another, yet the Baptists never did trust him with any real responsibilities.

From this time on — he no longer worked in a strong ministering capacity, his recognition and applause came only when he tore down the church which had nurtured him.

Canright's life from this point, reveals the life of a tormented soul. — a dual personality — a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde -- the avid opponent of Adventism, maintaining a strong front of opposition before the public on one hand, but on the other hand there was the haunted soul of a man who called the Adventists "our people" and revealed great agony of soul over the course he had taken.

Strangely the chief mourner at Ellen White’s funeral was Dudley Canright himself.

It was July 24, 1915 when the woman who had counseled, prayed, and worked with D. Canright lay in her casket in Battle Creek. Canright, with his brother Jasper, attended. G.B. Thompson, who served as honor guard at the funeral told of Mr. Canright’s uncontrollable grief, which marked him to people who did not know him as the chief mourner at the bier.

Canright made two trips to view Ellen in her casket. With tears rolling down his cheeks he said brokenly, “There is a noble Christian woman gone.”
W.A.Spicer, reports the same in "The Spirit of Prophecy in the Advent Movement," p. 127

Though he returned to his bitter work, Elder Canright found that instead of the public following he so craved, people seemed to lose confidence in him. His preaching had grown stale, His evangelistic fire was gone. His financial support uncertain, he died a poor, almost forgotten man.

Now, in our present day, his works are being resurrected by the enemies of Adventism. His books are used to "denounce Adventism", Yet, we should look a little more at his life and the sad ending, before we share his bitterness with the world.

Canright's Own Testimony Validating Mrs. White

I want to share what Canright wrote before he went off on his destructive mission, for it makes interesting reading. His calm, logical presentations based on personal knowledge stands in bold contrast to his erratic and at times irresponsible declarations after he severed connections with Adventism.

Just read what he said about Ellen White

“As to the Christian character of Sr. White, I beg leave to say that I think I know something about it. I have been acquainted with Sr. White for eighteen years, more than half the history of our people. I have been in their family time and again, sometimes weeks at a time. They have been in our house and family many time. I have traveled with them almost everywhere; have been with them in private and in public, in meeting and out of meeting, . . .

I know Sr. White to be an unassuming, modest, kind-hearted, noble woman. These traits in her character are not simply put on and cultivated, but they spring gracefully and easily from her natural disposition. She is not self-conceited, self-righteous, and self-important, as fanatics always are. . . .

I have found Sr. White the reverse of all this. Any one, the poorest and the humblest, can go to her freely for advice and comfort without being repulsed. She is ever looking after the needy, the destitute, and the suffering, providing for them, and pleading their case. I have never formed an acquaintance with any persons who so constantly have the fear of God before them. Nothing is undertaken without earnest prayer to God. . .

I have read all her testimonies through and through, . . .I have never been able to find one immoral sentence in the whole of them, or anything that is not strictly pure and Christian: nothing that leads away from the Bible, or from Christ; but there I find the most earnest appeals to obey God, to love Jesus, to believe the Scriptures and to search them constantly. . . .

Dudley Canright April 26, 1877 Review and Herald.

Why did he then write such hateful things about her in His books? Things like declaring her insane, deceptive, hysterical, etc.. Yes, she was of frail health, when she was first called of God, but that does not make her insane!

Yet Canright lashes out against her:

"At one time she did become insane for two weeks as she writes herself in 2SG page 51
Let's look at the situation as it really was.
She writes about some fanatical men who were preaching that honest, precious souls had been rejected by God. These leaders were leading "to corruption instead of purity and holiness." She was sent to "give them a message" and they turned on her. The fanatism seemed to be taking over. The innocent suffered. The leaders of the movement labored with some success to turn even her relatives against her. They circulated falsehoods about her. Discouragement took hold on her and she sank into deep depression for two weeks. Prayer prevailed. And she saw that human influence should never afflict her again in like manner.. She was to depend totally upon God.

But Canright continues to declare her "insane" even though his earlier testimony confirms her to be a real Christian woman.
Now he describes the same person very differently. He says:

"This is charcteristic of hysterical females, as all know who have seen them." "It is simply her hysterical imagination, nothing more" "Hysterical persons are given to exaggeration and deception" (p.155-156 SDA Renounced)

One problem with his tirade. He quotes her references to "fainting like one dead" when visions came, as evidence of her being "hysterical". Yet ignores the same language in the Biblical records of men who went into vision.

"I Daniel was exhausted and lay ill for several days." Dan. 8:27
"I had no strength left, my face turned deathly pale and I was helpless." Dan. 10:8
"My strength is gone, and neither is there breath left in me." Dan.10:17 "When I saw Him I fell at his feet as dead." Rev. 1:17
This is the account of men in Biblical days who were in prayer and the Lord gave them a vision. Yet, Canright takes all the references of "weakness" during a vision and says this is proof the person was simply hysterical.

Now can we see a difference in Canright's description of EGW as a person in tune with Christ, in the former quote, to the hateful twisted picture in his books?

Interestingly, Canright also uses the fact that God did not "pour" all truth into the SDA church through EGW as evidence that she was not inspired. But we know God led the SDA pioneers step by step through thorough Bible Study to build the SDA doctrines firmly upon Bible Study. Adventist doctrines ARE BIBLICAL originated and based, they did not come from "hidden plates" or any such thing. They came from Bible study. God used EGW in confirming or revealing new insights into truth each step of the way. But Canright uses this Biblical based, scriptural searching, progressive revelation, as evidence that EGW was not inspired at all or she would have known "ALL THINGS" from the beginning. Example: (Why didn't she know from the start that the Sabbath is from sundown to sundown, not from six to six and allow the eleven years of sabbath breaking) "A poor leader she", he mocks. (page 147 SDA Renounced)

He then attacks Adventists from the other side, saying EGW is their Bible, more infallible then the pope, (157) even though TRUTH CAME PROGRESSIVE through earnest Bible study. All SDA Doctrines were established by Bible study, not by visions. They are solidly based upon the BIBLE! This of course, Canright seems to deny.

His books are full of a twisted bits and pieces to misrepresent Adventism. He misrepresents the life of EGW, even the meaning of inspiration. The basic misrepresentations are built on the false premise of what a prophet is-- a prophet is a human being, to Whom God reveals certain things according to His purposes, a prophet is not a divine, all knowing being, who has reached perfection in all things. No prophet has ever been perfect. They are human beings, through whom God sends messages. The messages from God are infallible, but the prophet is not infallible. Often the prophet him/herself doesn't full understand "the vision". (See Daniel 7:28, 8:27)

Canright has many misrepresentations. To expose his misrepresentations would take another book! And as mentioned earlier, such books have been written.

Canright's Secretary's Testimony

Carrie Johnson was asked to help Canright in 1913 while she was a student in Battle Creek. This was about the time Canright's wife died. Canright was in mourning, and even though he had a home in Grand Rapids, and went there to "maintain" it fairly regularly, he seemed not to want to live there. He was given a key to the basement of the Baptist church if he wanted to use that, but preferred to stay around the sanitarium in Battle Creek.
The Adventists were actually quite helpful to him, but neither side was too keen on telling the world about that.
Carrie Johnson wrote of her experience as Canright's secretary:

I was first introduced to Mr. Canright January 2, 1913....After being sworn to secrecy, I was told that I was to work for this former prominent Seventh-day Adventist minister....I would be his last secretary....

His daily dictation was divided into two main parts; The answering of personal letters he had received, and the dictation of portions of the manuscripts for his books.....

At the time I became his secretary his book on "The Lord's Day" was nearly complete. He had prepared this as "an answer to Seventh-day Adventism" on the subject of the seventh-day Sabbath. At the same time he was revising the introductory material for a new printing of his book "Seventh-day Adventism Renounced."... His main bookwork was the dictating of the chapters for the volume "Life of Mrs. E.G. White", this was not a biography, but an attack to "expose" her.

I learned...of an eye ailment...diagnosed as tic douloureux...I gathered he underwent surgery without the comfort of any assurance he would awaken from anesthetic and in this tortured situation extreme mental depression intensified in his mind. ...He craved the warmth of companionship of his former SDA associates, yet he seemed incapable of ceasing to fight their beliefs and teachings....

When he was dictating personal letters, I usually sat opposite his desk. At such time he was calm, composed, and had a note of assurance in his voice. ....But when he returned to his work on the "Life of Mrs. E.G.White", he would become agitated, pace the floor, and his words would be harsh, vindictive, belligerent, and unreasonable.

I would see him him on a number of occasions, when he would come, as it were, to a climax in his dictating on the life of Mrs. White, totally exhausted, tears flowing from his good eye as well as from the open socket while he wept bitterly. At such time I have seen him drop in his chair by his desk, and momentarily bury his face in his arms on the desk. Then as he swung his left arm in a gesture of utter despair, he would exclaim with three inflections, each more pathetic than the one before, "I'm a lost man!" I'm a lost man! I'm a lost man!" Frequently he would add, "She was a good woman! I am gone! gone! gone!"

It was almost more than I could take. As a result I decided to take his dictation with my back turned to him....I often witnessed and heard the bitter lamentations he uttered at times. Then I would see his mood change. Sometimes this would take place within minutes, and the same old belligerent attitude would be manifested again.....

One day he dictated the following statement to me, which eventually appeared in his book "Life of Mrs. E.G.White:
"Adventists have continued to report that I have regretted leaving them, have tried to get back again, have repudiated my book which I wrote and have confessed that I am now a lost man. There has never been a word of truth in any of these reports."

It seemed strange to me that he should write vehement denials for the press, when I daily witnessed in private the very things he publicly denied.
Carrie Johnson "I was Canright's Secretary" pp.120, 134-135

D.W. Reavis' Testimony

While Elder Canright was serving in the Ohio SDA Conference in executive capacity, he became acquainted with Drury Reavis, a young man just out of Battle Creek College, called to work in that conference.

In his book, “I Remember” Reavis writes:

“I felt highly honored by being selected by Elder Canright to do special Sabbath school work in Ohio. This appointment proved to be the beginning of a very close, mutual, friendly association. .. Elder Canright talked freely with me about everything in which he was interested, about personal difficulties, about his past trials . . .future hopes. . . .”

“I found Elder Canright, who was then regarded as one of our most efficient ministers, to be a most congenial man. . .the power of the message he proclaimed with Heaven-bestowed ability. He was so greatly admired and openly praised by our workers and the laity, that he finally reached the conclusion he had inherent ability and that the message he was proclaiming was hindrance to him rather than the exclusive source of his power.”

Canright had a throat problem because of bad habits of speaking so he along with Reavis went to Chicago to study elocution at Hamill’s school in 1880. (He was still an SDA leader at this time)

Reavis writes:

“I became his critic as he lectured, upon invitation, through the influence of the School of Oratory, in many of the largest popular churches in Chicago. . .In these lectures he applied the oratorical principles taught in the school, and needed a critic versed in these principles. . .he selected the largest and most popular churches. . .

“On Sunday night , in the largest church of the West Side, he spoke on ‘The Saints inheritance’ to more than 3000 people and I took a seat in the gallery directly in front of him, to see every gesture and to hear every tone. . .but that was as far as I got . . .for he so quickly and eloquently launched into this, his favorite theme, that I, with the entire congregation, became entirely absorbed in the Biblical facts he was so convincingly presenting.. . .

“After. . .the many people crowding around him, complimenting and thanking him for his masterly discourse. On all sides I could hear people saying it was the most wonderful sermon they had ever heard. I knew it was not the oratorical manner of the deliver, but the Bible truth clearly and feeelingly presented, that had appealed to the people - the power was in that timely message.. . . I saw that the power was all in the truth, not in the speaker.

“After a long time we were alone, and we went into a beautiful city park. . .sat down to talk the occasion over and for me to deliver my criticisms. I had none for the elder. I frankly confessed that I became so completely carried away with the soul-inspiring Biblical subject I did not think once of the oratorical rules. . .

‘D.W. (Reeves) I believe I could become a great man were it not for our unpopular message.’

“I was shocked to hear a great preacher make such a statement; . . .
Then I got up and stepped in front of the elder and said with much feeling.

‘D.M. (Canright) , the message made you all you are, and the day you leave it, you will retrace your steps back to where it found you.”

But in his mind the die was evidently cast. The decision had doubtless been secretly made in his mind for some time, but had not before been expressed in words.”

Reavis also shares his last interview with Canright many years later:

“All those years intervening between the time of our Chicago association in 1880 and 1903, I occasionally corresponded with Elder Canright, . . .I finally prevailed upon him to attend a general meeting of our worker in Battle Creek in 1903. . .All through the meetings he would laugh with his eyes full of tears. The poor man seemed to exist simultaneously in two distinct parts - uncontrollable joy and relentless grief.

“We went back in a dark storeroom alone to have a talk, and we spent a long time there in this last personal, heart-to-heart visit. I reminded him of what I had told him years before in Chicago and he frankly admitted that what I predicted had come to pass, and that he wished the past could be blotted out and that he was back in our work just as he was at the beginning. Before any ruinous thought of himself had entered his heart.

“I tried to get him to say to the workers what he had said to me. . .
I never heard any one weep and moan in such deep contrition as that man, once a leading light in our message, did. It was heartbreaking even to hear him. He said he wished he could come back to the fold as I suggested, but after long, heartbreaking moans and weeping, he said:
‘I would be glad to come back, but I can’t! It’s too late! I am forever gone! GONE!” As he wept on my shoulder, he thanked me for all I had tried to do to save him from that sad hour.

He said,

The man who wrote this....

"Look at the grand truths which our people hold, --the new earth, the beautiful city, the resurrection, the real life hereafter, the literal coming of Christ, the sleep of the dead, the destruction of sin and sinners, the law of God, all those grand lines of prophecy unmistakably pointing to the end near. ..Can you once more have confidence in intangible spirits, eternal hell, sprinkling for baptism, Sunday Sabbath, or the millennium? Pshaw! Strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel?

"The real trouble lies close at home, in a proud, unconverted heart, a lack of real humility, an unwillingness to submit to God's way of finding the truth." (R&H February 10,1885)

..later turned against most of the message he called grand, and used his mind to try and destroy it!

Main Page for articles about Ellen White

Return to Home page