Lightning and thunder continue to crackle in the saga of a particular North American Adventist congregation, whose senior pastor has now been placed on administrative leave and one of whose leading elders is facing a growing ban throughout the denomination on his pulpit ministry. Certain ones have sought to portray these individuals, and perhaps others, as martyrs for the sake of conscience.
Sadly, the crux of the issue is notably simpler—disobedience to the inspired counsel of Ellen G. White. The two points on which this departure from prophetic guidance has occurred will be addressed below.
Tithes and Offerings as Weapons of Protest
Recently this website published an article which asked, “Should Tithes and Offerings Serve as Weapons of Protest?” [1]. We continue to recommend this article to all our readers, with the evidence it cites from the writings of Ellen White which answers the above question decidedly in the negative. Unfortunately, certain ones who profess faithfulness to the Spirit of Prophecy writings seem unwilling to consider the very strong admonitions in those writings against the diversion of tithe as a means of effecting reformatory change within the church. We will review this evidence shortly, in comparison with inspired evidence cited by others as supposedly advocating a more flexible position.
Following are a cluster of Ellen White statements listed in a recent article [2], allegedly in support of the possible diversion of tithe for reasons of protest against wrongful ideas or practices within the church:
The churches must arouse. The members must awake out of sleep and begin to inquire, How is the money which we put into the treasury being used? The Lord desires that a close search be made [##3|Ellen G. White, The Kress Collection, p. 120.##].
It would be poor policy to support from the treasury of God those who really mar and injure His work, and who are constantly lowering the standard of Christianity [##4|——Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 553.##].
Do not worry lest some means shall go direct to those who are trying to do missionary work in a quiet and effective way. All the means is not to be handled by one agency or organization [##5|——Spaulding-Magan Collection, p. 421.##].
The arrangement that all moneys must go through Battle Creek and under the control of the few men in that place is a wrong way of managing. There are altogether too many weighty responsibilities given to a few men, and some do not make God their counselor [##6|——Testimonies to Ministers, p. 321.##].
God alone, by the quickening, vivifying influence of His Holy Spirit, can enable men to distinguish between the sacred and the common. God alone can make men understand that working on regular lines has led to irregular practices. God alone can make men's minds as they should be. The time has come when we should hear less in favor of the regular lines. If we can get away from the regular lines into something which, though irregular, is after God's order, it may cut away something of the irregular working which has led away from Bible principles [##7|——Manuscript Releases, vol. 20, pp. 142-143.##].
A straightforward reading of the above statements offers no credence to the theory that Ellen White is suggesting the appropriation of tithes and offerings by individual church members based on their own judgment, or that tithe should be given to entities unaccountable to the organized body of believers. While Ellen White strongly urged that varying layers of authority and diversity of method within the church organization be pursued and encouraged, she was equally clear that “we want to hold the lines evenly, that there shall be no breaking down of the system of organization and order that has been built up by wise, careful labor” [##8|——Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 258.##].
What is more, nothing in the above statements encourages or justifies the establishment of independent organizations for the purpose of deciding which segments of the denomination are titheworthy and which are not. Accountability is most definitely enjoined in the above statements, but not outside the guardrails of the organized body.
The only way to correctly understand inspired counsels, whether from the Bible and/or the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, is by viewing all of them alongside each other. In my former article on this subject [9] we examined two very strong Ellen White statements which warn against using tithe as a weapon of protest against wrong ideas or practices within the church:
Some have been dissatisfied, and have said, “I will no longer pay my tithe; for I have no confidence in the way things are managed at the heart of the work.” But will you rob God because you think the management of the work is not right? Make your complaint, plainly and openly, in the right spirit, to the proper ones. Send in your petitions for things to be adjusted and set in order; but do not withdraw from the work of God, and prove unfaithful, because others are not doing right [##10|White, Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 249.##].
The tithes and offerings are not the property of any man, but are to be used in doing a certain work for God. Unworthy ministers may receive some of the means thus used, but dare any one, because of this, withhold from the treasury, and brave the curse of God? I dare not. I pay my tithes gladly and freely, saying as did David, “Of Thine own have we given Thee.” . . . If the Conference business is not managed according to the order of the Lord, that is the sin of the erring ones. The Lord will not hold you responsible for it, if you do what you can to correct the evil. But do not commit sin yourselves by withholding from God His own property [##11|——Sermons and Talks, vol. 2, pp. 74-75.##].
A more recent article cites the first of the above statements as rebuking persons who supposedly were “too quick to withhold their tithe when things have not gone as well as they expect” [12]. But the statement says nothing about being “too quick” in deciding what to do with one’s tithe in the situation being described. Rather, Ellen White says quite plainly that while pursuing accountability within the church structure is imperative for faithful believers, the withholding or diverting of tithe is not a rightful measure for individuals to employ as a corrective remedy for doctrinal or moral error within the denomination.
The article cited above [13], like so many seeking to justify alternative uses of tithe money, quotes from Ellen White’s letter to one Elder Watson, then-president of the Colorado Conference, regarding her practice of sending tithe to ministers whose needs were being neglected by the organized body [##14|White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, pp. 99-100.##]. But first of all, this is God’s prophet speaking of practices she was authorized to carry out by God Himself. She writes in the Watson letter:
It has been presented to me for years that my tithe was to be appropriated by myself to aid the white and colored ministers who were neglected and did not receive sufficient properly to support their families [##15|——Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, p. 99.##].
But it is clear that while God gave her specific instruction regarding particular situations of need, she wasn’t recommending this as a general practice among believers, as she wrote in this very context: “I would not advise that anyone should make a practice of gathering up tithe money” [##16|——Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, p. 100.##]. In addition, she warns her readers: “No man should give notoriety to the fact that in special cases the tithe is used in that way” [##17|——Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, p. 100.##]. She goes on to say:
If there have been cases where our sisters have appropriated their tithe to the support of the ministers working for the colored people in the South, let every man, if he is wise, hold his peace [##18|——Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, p. 99.##].
She continues by repeating her caution that such appropriation of tithe outside of regular channels “is not a matter that should be commented upon, for it will necessitate my making known these matters, which I do not desire to do, because it is not best” [##19|——Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, p. 100.##].
What is more, it is again noteworthy that this practice on Ellen White’s part was not a gesture of protest against wrongdoing in the church, but rather, a means of supporting individuals who for various reasons were not receiving support from regular church channels. Her counsel that such a practice on her part and that of others should not be given “notoriety” [##20|——Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, p. 99.##] is equally significant. What Ellen White and others were doing in this situation was unique, and God’s instruction that the needs of certain ones be met in this manner was not to be broadcast publicly or made a general model for the giving practices of others.
The article in question leaves entirely unmentioned the clarifying portions of the Watson letter noted above, leaving illegitimately open the possible use of tithe as a boycott tool. But when the totality of Ellen White’s counsel on this issue is considered, the issue is neither nuanced nor complicated in any way. Tragically, the article replaces the inspired discernment of God’s prophet with its own fallible reasoning, implying that Ellen White couldn’t possibly have foreseen the issues confronted by the church today:
The seriousness of the situation in Ellen White’s day which prompted her to divert tithe from the regular lines was actually quite mild compared to the present situation. They didn’t have the open abandonment of the Third Angel’s message in favor of social justice and alignment with the degraded culture of our time. They didn’t have church leaders advocating acceptance of sexual perversion and sodomy. They didn’t have educational leaders denying the literal six-day creation, or PARL leaders in cahoots with the United Nations and the corrupt WHO (which also supports LGBTQ). They didn’t have the irreverent worship styles and worldly music or rampant spiritualism as we have in spiritual formation and mysticism in our midst. These things were unimaginable in her day [21].
However, Ellen White assures us, under divine inspiration:
Not one cloud has fallen upon the church that God has not prepared for; not one opposing force has risen to counterwork the work of God but He has foreseen. All has taken place as He has predicted through His prophets [##22|White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 108.##].
As in so much of the religious dialogue now heard in contemporary Adventism, we are faced with a choice between frail mortal perceptions and the divinely imparted wisdom of the inspired pen.
The Mingling of Strange and Sacred Fire
The above quote from the article in question leads directly into the next big problem with the congregation in focus and the leaders thereof, who presently face disciplinary measures from church authorities within their territory. Irreverent worship styles, spiritualism, the LGBT lifestyle, the denial of the Biblical creation story, and other departures from Biblical integrity in the contemporary church represent legitimate reasons for concern (though not tithe diversion) on the part of the striving faithful. But the sacrilegious mingling of these concerns with secular political agendas and biases offers—together with the wrongful suggestion of tithe diversion—compelling justification for curtailing the exposure of God’s people to the ministry of these men.
Unending rants against “social justice,” the United Nations, the World Health Organization, climate change, together with specific political figures whose policies they despise, have saturated the sermons and articles by these individuals and their supporters in contemporary Adventism. These folks claim to believe the Spirit of Prophecy, yet Ellen White declares as follows regarding political screeds from our ministers in the sacred desk:
The tithe should not be used to pay any one for speechifying on political questions. Every teacher, minister, or leader in our ranks who is stirred with a desire to ventilate his opinions on political questions, should be converted by a belief in the truth, or give up his work [##23|——Gospel Workers, p. 393.##].
It helps to remember that this counsel was given to the church at the time when America was deeply divided over the gold-and-silver currency debate, noted specifically by Ellen White in another statement to our ministers written at the same time [##24|——Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 331-332.##]. It was during this time that William Jennings Bryan won the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination with the stirring appeal that “you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.” Like many today who oppose progressive politics, some of Bryan’s opponents associated his views with Marxism, socialism, and communism [##25|Michael Kazin, A Godly Hero: The Life of William Jennings Bryan (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006), p. 267.##]. But unlike those in Adventism today who fling these labels against certain ideologies in our contemporary culture, Ellen White urged that such differences not be permitted to divide God’s people.
It is sad to have to report that students from Andrews University have spoken of their discomfort in attending this particular congregation because of the political tone heard so often from the pulpit.
Along similar lines, it should be noted that the congregation at the heart of this controversy went so far as to welcome to its platform an ex-Seventh-day Adventist, one Matthew Staver, the now-retired dean of the school of law at the infamous Liberty University, founded decades ago by Moral Majority leader Jerry Falwell [26]. The idea that anyone even remotely connected with an institution so central to the launching of the Religious Right and its goals of consolidating church and state should be invited to a Seventh-day Adventist rostrum, is scandalous in the extreme. And this man is an ex-Adventist, no less, a class of persons expressly prohibited by the Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual from occupying the pulpits of our congregations [##27|Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual, 2022 edition, p. 126.##].
The blending of conservative Biblical Seventh-day Adventist teachings with conservative secular politics is another case of strange fire being offered before the God of heaven (Lev. 10:1). While each of us has the right to hold our respective opinions relative to government and politics, the inspired warnings noted above are clear beyond misunderstanding that such opinions do not belong in the sacred desk. The violation of this counsel by the leaders of the congregation in question is clearly, according to the counsels we have reviewed, just cause for disciplinary action of the sort now in progress.
Conclusion
If there has been any shortcoming with the prosecution of the disciplinary measures in question, it is that the aforementioned disregard of inspired counsel by the persons in question has not been publicly noted as it should be. Put simply, the problem in this controversy has been disobedience to prophetic counsel relative both to tithe usage and secular political involvement, together with culture-war distractions such as vaccine mandates and knee-jerk revulsion of civil government and anything smacking of “globalism.” The greatest lesson to be learned from this sad affair is the imperative of staying solely within the inspired guardrails and not permitting worldly agendas—whatever label they wear—to divert our focus.
REFERENCES
1. Kevin D. Paulson, “Should Tithes and Offerings Serve as Weapons of Protest?” ADvindicate, Sept. 5, 2024 https://advindicate.com/articles/draft1-9ek5h-yyxsc-xjn22-6c4dg-3l78d-gfmye
2. Gerry Wagoner, “Mark Howard’s Broadside Video against Vine & Kelly,” Fulcrum7, Jan. 1, 2025 https://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2025/1/1/mark-howards-attack-video-on-vine-amp-kelly
3. Ellen G. White, The Kress Collection, p. 120.
4. ----Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 553.
5. ----Spaulding-Magan Collection, p. 421.
6. ----Testimonies to Ministers, p. 321.
7. ----Manuscript Releases, vol. 20, pp. 142-143.
8. ----Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 258.
9. Paulson, “Should Tithes and Offerings Serve as Weapons of Protest?” ADvindicate, Sept. 5, 2024 https://advindicate.com/articles/draft1-9ek5h-yyxsc-xjn22-6c4dg-3l78d-gfmye
10. White, Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 249.
11. ----Sermons and Talks, vol. 2, pp. 74-75.
12. Wagoner, “Mark Howard’s Broadside Video against Vine & Kelly,” Fulcrum7, Jan. 1, 2025 https://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2025/1/1/mark-howards-attack-video-on-vine-amp-kelly
13. Ibid.
14. White, Manuscript Releases, vol. 2, pp. 99-100.
15. Ibid, p. 99.
16. Ibid, p. 100.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid, p. 99.
19. Ibid, p. 100.
20. Ibid, p. 99.
21. Wagoner, “Mark Howard’s Broadside Video against Vine & Kelly,” Fulcrum7, Jan. 1, 2025 https://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2025/1/1/mark-howards-attack-video-on-vine-amp-kelly
22. White, Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 108.
23. ----Gospel Workers, p. 393.
24. ----Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 331-332.
25. Michael Kazin, A Godly Hero: The Life of William Jennings Bryan (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006), p. 267.
26. Davina Peters, “A Canadian Reviews The Village Church Religious Liberty Sabbath,” Fulcrum7, Jan. 20, 2022 https://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2022/1/20/a-review-of-the-village-church-religious-liberty-sabbath-from-new-zealand
27. Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual, 2022 edition, p. 126.
Pastor Kevin Paulson holds a Bachelor’s degree in theology from Pacific Union College, a Master of Arts in systematic theology from Loma Linda University, and a Master of Divinity from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University. He served the Greater New York Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for ten years as a Bible instructor, evangelist, and local pastor. He writes regularly for Liberty magazine and does script writing for various evangelistic ministries within the denomination. He continues to hold evangelistic and revival meetings throughout the North American Division and beyond, and is a sought-after seminar speaker relative to current issues in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He presently resides in Berrien Springs, Michigan