I began working on this essay after I read a quotation by Ellen White that appeared on Facebook (declaring that drinking tea and coffee is a sin that injures the soul).
Ever since Jesus returned to heaven, Christians seem to have been holding a centuries-long committee meeting over what a “good believer” should or shouldn’t do, eat or drink. And judging by the number of rules we’ve accumulated along the way, the agenda is nowhere near finished.
Somewhere along the way, even a simple cup of tea or coffee became a matter of spiritual concern.
In 1896, Ellen G. White made the following declaration:
“Tea and coffee drinking is a sin, an injurious indulgence, which, like other evils, injures the soul. These darling idols create an excitement, a morbid action of the nervous system; and after the immediate influence of the stimulants is gone, it lets down below par just to that degree that its stimulating properties elevated above par.”¹
I know that tea and coffee can have unpleasant effects. Excess caffeine can make me feel jittery, and interfere with my ability to sleep. I’ve tried tea and coffee, discovering that to sleep well at night, it’s best to limit myself to a cup first thing in the morning. So I’m certainly not arguing that Ellen White was wrong to caution people about stimulating effects.
I agree with much of what she said on the subject. What I question is her claim that her instruction came directly from God, and more particularly her declaration that drinking tea and coffee is evil, a sin that injures the soul. There is a considerable difference between offering common health advice and presenting that advice as a divine command.
Ellen White was writing during a period of widespread concern about stimulants, narcotics, alcohol and dietary habits. Several prominent American health reformers were advocating these ideas long before Ellen White began to write about health and diet.
Joseph Bates, one of the founding figures of Seventh-day Adventism, had abandoned alcohol, tobacco, tea and coffee long before White’s health reform vision of 1863. By 1843, he had also adopted a vegetarian diet. His convictions were shaped by his own experiences and the wider American health reform movement, including the prominent teachings of Sylvester Graham.
Ellen and James White knew Bates well and were already influenced by his biblical arguments concerning the Sabbath. Although we cannot establish how much his dietary convictions influenced Ellen White, it is significant that many of the health principles she later attributed to divine revelation were already practised and advocated by people within her own religious circle.
There is an important admission from Ellen White herself in the Review and Herald of 8 October 1867. Ellen White claimed that she had written her health reform articles before reading the works of physicians such as Dr Russell Trall and Dr James Caleb Jackson. And, even though she had previously stayed at Dr Jackson’s health retreat and attended his daily lectures, she expressed surprise at claims her teachings aligned with those of contemporary health reformers. She subsequently incorporated material from their publications into her own writings.3
In the same Review article, Ellen White claimed that her health reform teachings had originated in a vision on 6 June 1863, at Otsego, Michigan. Despite having the relevant books in her library, she said she had written out her views before reading the works of others, lest anyone suggest she had received her knowledge from physicians rather than from God.
Ellen White was not merely saying that she agreed with the books and lectures of contemporary health reformers, she was saying that her health teachings had been independently revealed to her by God.
This raises an interesting question.
Why would God need to reveal to Ellen White information that many other people had already published and whose ideas were practiced widely?
It is possible that she genuinely believed God had confirmed these principles through her visions. Believing something came from God and establishing that it actually did are two different things.
If Ellen G. White had written:
“I agree that tea and coffee are unhealthy, and I encourage people to avoid them”, readers could investigate and accept or reject her advice.
The problem lies in the fact that Ellen White went beyond describing the physical effects of tea and coffee when she declared that drinking them was sinful and injurious to the soul.
One point worth thinking about is whether financial and rhetorical factors have shaped the reception of Ellen White’s work. Ellen White received royalties from the sale of her numerous books, and her published articles. Her correspondence shows that she took a detailed interest in the financial arrangements surrounding their publication. Whether financial considerations influenced her claims of divine revelation is something we cannot directly establish. However, it is reasonable to consider whether presenting health advice as a message from God gave her writings an authority, influence, and readership that ordinary health reform publications did not enjoy. For Adventists who accept the prophetic calling of Ellen White, her advice was no longer simply an opinion to consider, but instruction carrying the authority of God Himself.
The Apostle Paul had something interesting to say about Christians judging one another over what they choose to eat. Writing to the believers in Rome, he recognised that people held different convictions about food, but rather than insist that everyone follow the same dietary rules, he urged them to respect one another’s choices, and refrain from passing judgement. The principle embodied in his words is worth considering in light of Ellen White’s declaration that drinking tea and coffee is a sin.
Romans 14:1–3 (NKJV)
Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him.
Two additional verses from Paul help to frame this issue: Romans 14:17, which reminds us that the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, and Colossians 2:16, which warns us not to let anyone judge us with regard to food or drink.
Maybe it’s time to learn how to distinguish between sound health advice, personal convictions and religious obligations. They are not the same. If the Bible is indeed the standard by which all teaching must be tested, should we not be prepared to examine Ellen White’s statements critically, rather than assuming that a claim of divine inspiration settles the matter?
Can something be unhealthy without being sinful? Of course it can. And something can be beneficial without being a specific divine command. Every good thing ultimately comes from God, but that doesn’t mean every piece of sound health advice needs to have originated in a vision.
Perhaps we could take Paul’s advice in Romans 14 a little more seriously, respecting one another’s choices rather than judging what someone else chooses to eat or drink. Enjoying a cup of tea or coffee shouldn’t become a test of someone’s relationship with God.
References
1. E.G. White, Manuscript 44, 1896; Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 425.3. ↩
2. Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, 8 October 1867, Question Number One, Answer. ↩
3. Ellen G. White, “Questions and Answers,” Review and Herald, 8 October 1867, paragraph 3. ↩
Leave a Reply