Ellen White and Marital Excess

By Dirk Anderson, last updated Apr. 2025

If you are a child, this page is NOT for you! Click here to go back

 

The ancient Hebrews, and the first-century followers of Jesus, considered sex within marriage as good and natural. The Apostle Paul affirmed the goodness of marriage and the proper place of sexual intimacy within it (1 Cor 7). In the early Christian church, marriage was honored, and sexual union was not associated with sin. So what changed?

Clement of Alexandria was a significant early Christian theologian who, influenced by Stoic and Platonic philosophy, began promoting a restrictive view of human sexuality. In his major works, particularly "The Paedagogus" (The Instructor, 198 A.D.) and "Stromata" (Miscellanies, ~200 A.D.), he condemned pleasure-seeking in sexual acts, even within marriage. For Clement, the sole legitimate purpose of sexual intercourse within marriage was procreation. He believed that any deviation from this purpose was a misuse of the divinely intended function of the sexual organs. Drawing on pagan philosophical ideas prevalent at the time, Clement considered any sexual act that did not aim at procreation to be "against nature."

Clement's pagan-informed philosophy gradually began seeping into the Church. Another early Christian influencer to adopt the anti-sex perspective was Saint Augustine (354–430 AD). Before becoming a Christian, Augustine was part of the Manichaean religion, which taught that all physical pleasure was corrupt. Even after converting, Augustine retained his former belief that sexual desire was tainted by sin, even within marriage. He believed that marital sex was only free of sin if it was purely for the purpose of procreation.¹

This laid the groundwork for centuries of stricter and more negative teachings about sex. In the 6th century, Pope Gregory the Great (c. 540–604) added further restrictions. He taught that married couples should not have sex on Sundays, during Lent, or in the weeks leading up to major holy days like Christmas.² These rules, taken together, added up to over 100 days a year when sex was considered off-limits for married couples.

Eventually, the Church officially adopted the practice of requiring priests to remain celibate. While this was not universally enforced in the early centuries, it became Church law in the 12th century, partly under the belief that those who abstained from sex were more spiritually pure.³

Perhaps the most influential theologian in shaping the Church's long-term sexual ethics was Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). Aquinas taught that the only moral purpose for sex was to produce children. Any other sexual activity—even between a husband and wife—was considered sinful if it was done for pleasure alone.⁴ He also condemned masturbation, oral sex, and any sexual expression that did not lead to procreation. His views were deeply influential, and they shaped Church teaching for centuries.

Finally, the Catholic Council of Trent (1545–1563) heavily stressed that procreation was the central aim of sexual activity within marriage. This stance cast a shadow on marital sex for pleasure within the Catholic Church.⁵

Protestant Reformation Reverses False Views on Marital Excess

One of the major shifts during the Protestant Reformation was the recovery of a positive and biblical view of marriage and sexuality. Reformers like Martin Luther and John Calvin challenged the Catholic Church's teachings that treated sex as something shameful or inherently sinful. Luther married a former nun, Katharina von Bora, in 1525, making a bold declaration, that marriage, including sexual intimacy within it, was not only acceptable but good. Luther saw marriage as a gift from God and considered sexual union within marriage to be a healthy, even sacred, part of life.⁶

The Reformers went back to Scripture, especially the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), which celebrates marital love and intimacy. They taught the biblical view that sex in marriage was not only for procreation but also for mutual joy, comfort, and love between spouses. They firmly rejected the idea that sex within marriage was dirty or shameful. This was a dramatic shift from the teachings of Augustine and Aquinas, who emphasized restraint and saw sexual desire as inherently dangerous, even within marriage.

Protestants also generally abandoned some of the more extreme restrictions imposed by the medieval Church, such as forbidding sex during certain days or seasons. Likewise, they ended the Catholic tradition of micromanaging sexual behavior within marriage. The Reformation helped remove centuries of guilt and suspicion surrounding marital intimacy. They redefined sexuality not as a threat to holiness, but as part of God's created order.

Ellen White Reverses the Protestant Reformation's Progress on Marital Sex

Ellen G. White, prophetess of the Seventh-day Adventist [SDA] Church, reversed the Protestant Reformation by reintroducing neo-pagan, anti-sexual attitudes into her sect. She taught her followers that fulfilling sexual desires and passions in marriage was morally degrading and physically harmful.

Her anti-reforms strongly resembled pre-Reformation Catholicism in its suspicion of sexual activity outside of procreation. She taught that frequent sex within marriage weakened vital energies, harmed the nervous system, and could cause mental and physical illness. She frequently warned against normal human sexual desires, describing them as animal passions or animal propensities. She sounded an alarm against masturbation and cautioned couples regarding the frequency of sexual intercourse during marriage. For example, in 1888 she wrote:

The animal passions, cherished and indulged, become very strong in this age, and untold evils in the marriage life are the sure results. In the place of the mind being developed and having the controlling power, the animal propensities rule over the higher and nobler powers until they are brought into subjection to the animal propensities. What is the result? Women's delicate organs are worn out and become diseased; childbearing is no more safe; sexual privileges are abused. Men are corrupting their own bodies, and the wife has become a bed servant to their inordinate, base lusts, until there is no fear of God before their eyes. To indulge impulse that degrades both body and soul is the order of the marriage life, and what is the sure result? The most terrible, painful diseases are brought upon women, and the curse of God rests upon men and women in loathsome diseases...⁷

Thus, Mrs. White taught that when married partners indulged in sex, it brought terrible diseases, corruption, degradation of body and soul, and the curse of God!

Ellen White introduced eugenic thinking (the belief in a genetic link between "immoral" sex and "degenerate" offspring) and entrenched shame as a central element of sexual ethics. She warned married couples that if they indulged their passionate desires and a child was born as a result of that indulgence, that child's moral character would be ruined.

Let the husband and wife in their marriage relations...consider the cost of every indulgence in intemperance and sensualism. These indulgences do not increase love, nor ennoble and elevate. Those who will indulge the animal passions and gratify lust will surely stamp upon their offspring the debasing practices, the grossness of their own physical and moral defilement. ... Very much depends upon the parents. It lies with them whether they will bring into the world children who will prove a blessing or a curse.⁸

Thus, even when procreating, parents must strive to have no sensual or lustful thoughts during the act, else they would curse the world with their gross, morally and physically defiled offspring!

Like Augustine before her, White's theology of sexuality was rooted in fear, guilt, and bodily mistrust, not in a joyful affirmation of God's creation. This had the effect of reversing the liberating theology of Protestant reformers, pushing her sect back several centuries into a mindset not too dissimilar from that of the Catholic Church.

Sex Drains Vital Force?

To understand what Ellen White taught about "Marital Excess" one must first understand the nineteenth century concept of vital force. Ronald Numbers explains how vital force supposedly worked:

According to Adventist pioneer John Loughborough, vital force was 'that power placed in the human body, at its birth, which will enable the body, under favorable circumstances, to live to a certain age.' Since the initial endowment was limited, and since each sexual act used up an irreplenishable amount, it behooved those who coveted a long life to keep their sexual activities to a minimum.⁹

Mrs. White most likely acquired her knowledge of vital force from other popular health reformers of her day, such as Horace Mann, whose writings on vital force closely resemble hers:

Popular health lecturers, such as minister Sylvester Graham, phrenologist O.S Fowler, doctors James Caleb Jackson and R.T. Trall, and SDA physician John Harvey Kellogg, taught that humans had a store of "vital force" that was deposited in them at birth. This vital energy could never be replenished. When it came to draining vital force, the sex act was widely regarded as having the highest "expenditure of nervous or vital energy."¹²

Graham believed that indulgence in sensual pleasures, including excessive sexual activity, could lead to physical and moral degeneration. According to the reformers, when vital energy was depleted, individuals would start suffering from various diseases, eventually resulting in an early death. To retain this vital energy, they advised couples to have sex as infrequently as possible. They advocated avoiding marital excess and masturbation.

Dr. Jackson, from whom Mrs. White received her "health message," warned in 1862 that "sexual excess" could drain "vital energy" resulting in disease.¹³ He believed the sex act would tax "the nervous system," subjecting the parents to an "extraordinary expenditure of force" that could "only be justified" if the parents were attempting to produce children.¹⁴

Physician E.P. Miller also viewed sexual activity as particularly draining on vital force. In his book Abuses of the Sexual Function, found in Ellen G. White's library, Miller devoted a chapter to the dangers of marital excess. Miller's views are strikingly similar to White's pronouncements, such as her 1897 statement that children conceived during passionate intercourse would inherit that inclination. He similarly taught that parents engaging in "sexual indulgence" would produce children with "dwarfed, deformed, and diseased bodies, and weakened, shattered minds," and that offspring conceived out of mutual craving would inherit their parents' supposed corruption.¹⁵

Ellen White adopted the vital force doctrine and repeated it frequently in her writings. For example:

God has endowed us with a certain amount of vital force. ... If we carefully preserve the life force, and keep the delicate mechanism of the body in order, the result is health; but if the vital force is too rapidly exhausted, the nervous system borrows power for present use from its resources of strength, and when one organ is injured, all are affected.¹⁶

Continence

In the 19th century, sexual "continence" was considered a virtue to many health reformers. It involved abstaining from intercourse entirely, or practicing moderation in sexual relations. For example, Orson Fowler pointed to the animal world as evidence that individual should practice "continence, except for propagation."¹⁷

Kellogg, whom Ellen White lovingly called the "Lord's physician," also warned against masturbation and marital excess, believing sexual activity would deplete the body's vital energies. In his writings, Kellogg emphasized the importance of sexual continence—entire restraint from sexual indulgence under all circumstances—promoting measures to suppress sexual desire and arousal, such as a bland, vegetarian diet without alcohol, condiments, coffee, or tea.

During the Puritanical era of the 19th century, the ideal spiritual woman manifested little interest in sexuality. Writing in 1871, German neurologist Richard von Krafft-Ebing pronounced, "Woman, ...if physically and mentally normal, and properly educated, has but little sensual desire." Kellogg apparently agreed, writing:

I should say that the majority of women, happily for them, are not very much troubled with sexual feeling of any kind. ... The best mothers, wives, and managers of households know little or nothing of sexual indulgences. Love of home, of children, of domestic duties, are the only passions they feel. As a general rule, a modest woman seldom desires any sexual gratification for herself.¹⁸

As an example of sexual continence, he did not have sex with his own wife. He wrote in 1877:

      The reproductive act is the most exhaustive of all vital acts.¹⁹

Mrs. White Warned Against Marital Excess

In her 100,000 pages of writing, Sister White never made a single positive statement about sex. For her, sex was an activity of the flesh that drained vital force from the body. Below, Mrs. White warns that God will hold marriage partners accountable for expending their vital energy:

They do not see that God requires them to control their married lives from any excesses. But very few feel it to be a religious duty to govern their passions. They have united themselves in marriage to the object of their choice, and therefore reason that marriage sanctifies the indulgence of the baser passions. Even men and women professing godliness give loose rein to their lustful passions, and have no thought that God holds them accountable for the expenditure of vital energy, which weakens their hold on life and enervates the entire system.

The brain nerve-power is squandered by men and women because called into unnatural action to gratify base passions; and this hideous monster, base, low passion; assumes the delicate name of love.²⁰

Mrs. White taught that sexual excess would destroy a believer's spiritual life:

Sexual excess will effectually destroy a love for devotional exercises, will take from the brain the substance needed to nourish the system, and will most effectively exhaust the vitality. No woman should aid her husband in this work of self-destruction.²¹

Mrs. White urged wives to restrain the desires of their husbands, warning them that they will be held accountable on judgment day for "sexual excess":

It is not pure, holy love which leads the wife to gratify the animal propensities of her husband at the expense of health and life. If she possesses true love and wisdom, she will seek to divert his mind from the gratification of lustful passions to high and spiritual themes by dwelling upon interesting spiritual subjects. It may be necessary to humbly and affectionately urge, even at the risk of his displeasure, that she cannot debase her body by yielding to sexual excess. ... The power of influence can be great to lead the mind to high and noble themes, above the low, sensual indulgences for which the heart unrenewed by grace naturally seeks. If the wife feels that in order to please her husband she must come down to his standard, when animal passion is the principal basis of his love and controls his actions, she displeases God; for she fails to exert a sanctifying influence upon her husband. If she feels that she must submit to his animal passions without a word of remonstrance, she does not understand her duty to him nor to her God.

Let the Christian wife refrain, both in word and act, from exciting the animal passions of her husband.²²

She wrote that praying men who commit the terrible sin of marital excess will not go to heaven:

Many professed Christians are suffering with paralysis of nerve and brain because of their intemperance in this direction [marital excess]. Rottenness is in the bones and marrow of many who are regarded as good men, who pray and weep, and who stand in high places, but whose polluted carcasses will never pass the portals of the heavenly city.²³

Envision the oppressive weight of fear that descended upon Mrs. White's followers upon reading such terrifying warnings. The marital bed, meant for innocent pleasure and connection, transformed into a site of potential danger, each act of intimacy fraught with the threat of draining vital life force. Bound by White's pronouncements, countless SDA couples likely lived under a self-imposed regime of sexual restriction, tragically forfeiting the innocent joys God intended for their union. Instead, a shadow of fear and dread darkened the very expression of love the Creator had so generously provided.

White Contradicts the Bible

Mrs. White encouraged the SDA wife to refrain from anything that might arouse her husband. She is told to reject her husband's sexual advances by manipulative means, such as diverting his mind to discuss spiritual subjects. If that fails, she needs to verbally reject her husband's advances in order to fulfill her duty to her husband and to God. In other words, Mrs. White twists the Word of God to say the opposite of what it actually says. She claims a wife fulfills "her duty" by using manipulation to avoid her husband's desire for sex or by outright rejecting his advances. Meanwhile, the Bible says:

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control (1 Cor. 7:3-5 NIV).

Paul, writing Spirit-breathed words, makes no mention of "vital energy" drainage as being a valid reason to avoid having sex. Certainly, if sex was dangerous to spiritual life, Paul would have warned couples about "sexual excess." No one was more interested in guarding spiritual life than Paul was. However, Paul says the direct opposite of Ellen White. Paul says the wife must yield to her husband in order to fulfill her marital duty. Ellen White says the wife should not yield to her husband in order to fulfill her duty. They both cannot be right! Either the Bible is true and Ellen White is a false teacher, or the Bible is false. Which is it?

Does Refraining from Sex Boost One's Spirituality?

Ellen White's teaching suggests that abstaining from marital sex promotes holiness, but the reality is often the opposite. Suppressing natural sexual desires for one's spouse over extended periods can intensify lust, creating a greater vulnerability to temptation. Paul, in contrast, advocates for regular sexual intimacy within marriage as a safeguard against Satan. He permits abstinence only for brief periods dedicated to prayer. This stands in stark opposition to White's model, which envisions a marriage where wives routinely withhold intimacy to preserve "vital force" and control "animal passions."

How Frequent Is Excessive?

While proponents of Ellen White often sidestep her Bible contradictions and her advocacy of the pseudoscientific "vital force" doctrine, they frequently center their defense on the ambiguity of her term "excess." Is it really as ambiguous as they claim? To truly understand her concept of "excess," one must examine how the term "marital excess" was employed by the contemporary health reformers who significantly influenced her health teachings.

• Sylvester Graham advocated for abstinence from sexual intercourse except for procreation, viewing celibacy as conducive to physical and spiritual health. In 1834, he permitted a maximum of once a month.²⁴
• O.S. Fowler, phrenologist, viewed the sexual act as an "immense vital drain," that couples must "partake rarely," otherwise they will exhaust their vital powers. He personally favored sex for procreation only. He stated, "to indulge, even in wedlock, as often as the moon quarters, is gradual but effectual destruction of both soul and body."²⁵ Since the moon quarters every seven-and-a-half days, Fowler was saying that engaging in sex at a frequency of once a week was too frequent! Supposedly, those high frequencies would destroy the body!
• Jackson believed that if an individual engaged in sex "twice a week or even once a week," it would impair vigor and induce "disease."²⁶
• William Alcott believed monthly was a reasonable frequency, and believed frequencies of more than twice a week for an active person, or more than once a month for a sedentary person, could damage the health.²⁷
• Kellogg seemed to agree with Graham by suggesting marriage partners "limit indulgence to the number of months in the year."²⁸

Kellogg considered daily sex to be dangerous for both partners:

Another case came under our observation in which the patient, a man, confessed to having indulged every night for twenty years. We did not wonder that at forty he was a complete physical wreck.²⁹

The Whites seem to have agreed with Fowler's frequency for they reprinted his advice in an expanded version of Mrs. White's 1864 book on masturbation, Appeal to Mothers, which was republished in 1870 under the title Solemn Appeal Relative to Solitary Vice, and the Abuses and Excesses of the Marriage Relation.

Scientific research has shown that most married couples engage in sexual activity between 1 and 5 times per week. This is far in excess of the frequency advocated in Solemn Appeal.

Science Proves White Wrong

Contrary to Mrs. White's testimonies, scientific research has shown that men and women who engage in more frequent sexual activity generally live longer than those with less frequent sexual activity. According to Drs. Michael Roizen and Mehmet Oz:

Men who have sex three times a week can decrease their risk of heart attack and stroke by 50 percent...³⁰

The Caerphilly study from Great Britain suggests that men who have intimate relations more than once-a-week have lower rates of mortality. After analyzing the death rates of nearly 1,000 men ages 45 to 59, researchers concluded that men who have more sex seem to live longer. According to the study, having regular marital relations reduces the risk of death by about half.

This analysis was part of a long-term study of chronic disease in which scientists assessed the existence of heart disease in the participants, and also asked them how often they had marital relations. Ten years later, the number of deaths was correlated with the reported frequency of intercourse. Men who said they had sex twice a week had a risk of dying half that of those who said they had sex once a month. Other scientific studies have substantiated this research.³²

Mrs. White was particularly concerned about sexual excess draining vital force from females, but researchers from Walden University analyzed 14,542 American adults and found that females who had sex infrequently (less than once per week) had "three times increased overall mortality."³³ Another study reported that "decreased sexual activity was related to adverse health outcomes for both men and women."³⁴ Another study found links between increased sexual frequency and decreases in all measures of mortality.³⁵

In conclusion, there is no credible scientific evidence to support the idea that normal, consensual sexual activity within marriage leads to physical or mental decay. While sexual health requires responsibility, the act of intimacy itself is not harmful. Modern medicine attributes diseases to biological and environmental causes, not divine punishment or "excess" activity between spouses. Ellen White’s claims about marital sex reflect outdated and scientifically baseless moralism, not medical truth. Her views pathologize normal human desire and promote fear, guilt, and misinformation. A healthy, biblical view of sexuality affirms love, trust, and mutual care, not shame and superstition.

Mrs. White Preferred Celibacy

Given Ellen White's belief that intimate marital relations aroused "base passions," her advocacy for celibacy, especially among church workers, is understandable. She likely reasoned that not only would such relations ignite these "base passions," but the resulting children would also divert church workers from their religious mission. In 1895, Mrs. White wrote:

The time has come when a sterile condition is not the worst condition to be in.³⁶

When a missionary couple had children, Mrs. White blasted them with a vicious testimony, writing:

I was shown that Brother and Sister Van Horn had departed from God's counsel in bringing into the world children. God required all there was of them in His work and both could have done a good work for the Master, but the enemy came in and his counsel was followed, and the cause of God was robbed of the attention it should have had... The time has come when, in one sense, they that have wives be as though they had none.³⁷

In another letter she wrote of another missionary couple:

How much better would have been the influence of both if they had not married, but both have devoted their interests to God's cause; and after they were married, how much better for them to have thoroughly considered the situation and decided that God should have all the powers He had given them in the work of saving souls.³⁸

Mrs. White, convinced of the immediate return of Christ, warned that children would soon be taken from their parents by death. Apparently, this is yet another reason not to engage in marital relations:

Parents give but little attention to them, and in the near future they will be removed by death. Woe unto them that be with child, and give suck in these days, and if our workers were walking close with God, they would feel that it is no matter of rejoicing to bring a child into the world. A blessing is pronounced upon the eunuchs who keep the Lord's Sabbath.³⁹

Later in life, even Ellen White realized her pro-celibacy stance was problematic and seems to backpedal away from it. In a private letter to A.T. Jones in 1894, Mrs. White writes about some young, unmarried "devoted workers" who tried to live "without exciting their carnal propensities," and were "overcome," resulting in several couples needing to rush into marriage.⁴⁰

Parents Indulging in Sex Will Debase Their Children?

As noted earlier, Mrs. White cautioned that those who indulge in sex will curse their children:

These indulgences do not increase love, nor ennoble and elevate. Those who will indulge the animal passions and gratify lust will surely stamp upon their offspring the debasing practices, the grossness of their own physical and moral defilement. ... It lies with them whether they will bring into the world children who will prove a blessing or a curse.⁴¹

There is no scientific evidence that moral traits or behavioral choices like "lust" can be biologically imprinted onto children through conception. Behavioral habits and moral choices are shaped primarily by upbringing, environment, and personal development, not parental sexual conduct. Mrs. White's statement about children being preordained to be good or evil based on their parents’ sexual choices echoes of outdated eugenic ideas, not science.

Mrs. White claims sexual "indulgences" do not increase love, but the opposite is true. Healthy sexual expression within a loving, consensual relationship has been shown to strengthen emotional bonds, increase intimacy, and improve psychological well-being. Studies in psychology and relationship science have shown that sexual satisfaction is often correlated with relationship satisfaction, trust, and emotional intimacy, not degradation or moral decline.

According to scientific research, making love can increase feelings of love, primarily due to the release of oxytocin, often called the "love hormone," during sexual activity, which promotes feelings of bonding, affection, and trust between partners. Research has demonstrated that sex increases feelings of affection and connection between couples:⁴²

• "Sex can help strengthen and sustain the bond that you have with your partner and enhance the level of intimacy that you share."
• "Couples with higher sexual frequency tend to report higher levels of overall satisfaction with the relationship and more affection."
• "The release of oxytocin and other hormones also helps to enhance the emotional bonding between partners."

No Divine Insight On This One

Ellen White's marital excess statements are scientifically inaccurate and rooted in a moralistic and eugenic framework. They falsely attribute negative moral and physical traits to normal human sexual behavior and confuses ethical judgment with biology.

Most SDA apologists now admit that Mrs. White copied her health reforms from other health reformers of her day. However, some argue that Mrs. White was given supernatural insight as to which reforms to plagiarize and which to discard. Not so! The vital force teaching is a complete farce, and yet it became the core of Ellen White's health teachings. All her nonsensical teachings about marital excess, masturbation, and a bland vegan diet, all center around the notion that the sexual act drains vital force from the body. Science has proven this to be false. Whichever angels advised Mrs. White to plagiarize false notions about vital force and marital excess into her writings were certainly not God's angels.

The Case of William Farnsworth

William Farnsworth was an SDA pioneer who had plenty of marital activity, producing 22 children. In 1868, Farnsworth endured a bitter rebuke from Sister White who warned him against gratifying "his appetite, his lustful passions."²⁷ Wisely, Farnsworth ignored her false testimony and kept having children. What effect did all this drainage of vital force have upon him and his children? Nearly all the his children lived long and healthy lives:

• John - 84
• Stephen - 78
• George - 88
• Sarah - 79
• Eugene - 87
• Augustus - 87
• Imogene - 62
• Loretta - 76
• Orville - 88
• Irvin - 43
• Elmer - 72
• Alton - 93
• Melbourne - 46 (died of TB)
• Nellie - 78
• Ernest - 101
• Merton - 76

Time has proven that Farnsworth was right to ignore the misguided false testimony of Ellen White. Despite having plenty of marital excess, Farnsworth died from old age, not disease, at the ripe age of 81. His second wife, Cynthia Stowell, whom Mrs. White claimed was being robbed of her vitality, lived to the age of 88 years. Both of them lived far longer than the average life span in America in that era. They stand as living testimonies that Ellen White's depraved teachings were false.

Conclusion

In her 100,000 pages of writings, Ellen White never quotes 1 Corinthians 7:3-5. Her teachings on marital excess directly contradict this passage. Instead of acknowledging Paul's writings to be the final word on the subject, she contradicts Paul. This is a sign of a false prophet:

If any man [or woman] think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. (1 Cor. 14:37)

True prophets of God acknowledge Paul's commandments, such as 1 Corinthians 7:3-5, are God's commandments, whereas false prophets contradict them.

In addition to defying Scripture, Ellen White's writings on marital excess defy both science and common sense. Thankfully, most modern SDAs ignore her health counsel, realizing many of her outdated prohibitions have been debunked by modern science. For the few SDAs who took her admonitions to heart, thinking she was the Spirit of Prophecy with a message from God for the last days, they likely attempted to restrict their sex lives, deluded into thinking they were somehow pleasing God by saving their vital energy. No wonder this sect has been labeled SADventists! If Ellen White's counsels were seriously carried out, it may have caused SDA married couples to unnecessarily restrict their sex lives, resulting in them living shorter, less-satisfying lives. That is the legacy of a false prophet.

“Indeed, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” declares the Lord. “They tell them and lead my people astray with their reckless lies, yet I did not send or appoint them. They do not benefit these people in the least,” declares the Lord. (Jer 23:32 NIV)

See also

• Solitary Vice
• Marital Excess and Mrs. White
• Animal Passions

Citations

1. Augustine of Hippo, Confessions and The City of God; see also Peter Brown, The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (Columbia University Press, 1988).

2. John T. Noonan, Contraception: A History of Its Treatment by the Catholic Theologians and Canonists (Belknap Press, 1986).

3. Gary Wills, Why Priests? A Failed Tradition (Viking, 2013), chapter 3.

4. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 154; for commentary, see Margaret R. Miles, Carnal Knowing: Female Nakedness and Religious Meaning in the Christian West (Beacon Press, 1989).

5. Council of Trent (1545–1563), various sessions on marriage and sexuality; for overview, see Elizabeth A. Clark, Sexuality and Gender in Early Christianity (Fortress Press, 1991). This was also when the Church began strictly forbidding practices like masturbation—something that earlier Christian thinkers had not universally condemned.

6. Martin Luther, The Estate of Marriage (1522); see also Lyndal Roper, Martin Luther: Renegade and Prophet (Random House, 2016).

7. Ellen White, Manuscript 14, 1888 (4MR 378).

8. Ellen White, Manuscript 3, 1897 (4MR 379).

9. Ronald Numbers, Ph.D., Prophetess of Health, (NY: Harper & Row, 1976), 154.

10. Ellen White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 4 (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1885), 29.

11. Horace Mann, Dedicatory and Inaugural Address (1853).

12. R.T. Trall, The Hydropathic Encyclopedia, vol. II (1854), 445, quoting Organic Laws, by J. Bradford Sax.

13. James C. Jackson, Consumption: How to Prevent It, and How to Cure It (Boston: B.L. Emerson, 1862), 70.

14. James C. Jackson, The Sexual Organism and Its Healthful Management (Boston: B. Leverett Emerson, 1862), 258.

15. E.P. Miller, Treatise on the Cause of Exhausted Vitality; Or, Abuses of the Sexual Function (NY, 1867), 79-85. Miller wrote on page 83: "Very many of the sickly, puny, scrofulous children whom we daily see are the offspring of parents who are addicted to matrimonial excesses." Miller wrote on pages 84-85:

Many a child is born who was begotten of lust and not of love ! at a time, too, when neither parent had any desire for offspring, but came together for the sole purpose of gratifying an abnormal craving which should have been restrained. ... And what must be the effect of such a course of action upon the forming child? If the fountain is corrupt, can the stream which flows there from be other than impure?

16. Ellen White, Ministry of Healing, (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1905), 234.

17. O.S. Fowler, Creative and Sexual Science: Or, Manhood, Womanhood, and Their Mutual Interactions; Love its Laws, Power, Etc.; Selection, or Mutual Adaption; Courtship, Married Life, and Perfect Children..., (Toronto: C.R. Parish and Co., 1870), 693.

18. J.H. Kellogg, Plain Facts for Old and Young, (Burlington, Iowa: Segner & Condit, 1877), 119.

19. Ibid., 473.

20. Ellen White, Testimonies, vol. 4, 472; Solemn Appeal Relative to Solitary Vice, and the Abuses and Excesses of the Marriage Relation (Battle Creek, MI: Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1870), 171.

21. White, A Solemn Appeal, 176.

22. Ibid., 170. Ellen White, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 2 (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1885), 477.

23. White, Testimonies, vol. 2, 477.

24. Sylvester Graham, Lecture to Young Men, on Chastity, 83, 144-148 (1834).

25. O.S. Fowler, Sexuality Restored, and Warning and Advice to Youth Against Perverted Amativeness: Including Its Prevention and Remedies, as Taught by Phrenology and Physiology (Boston: 1870), 52, 60. O.S. Fowler, Hereditary Descent: Its Laws and Facts Illustrated and Applied to the Improvement of Mankind, (NY: self-published, 1843), 206.

26. Jackson, Sexual Organism, 258.

27. William Alcott, The Physiology of Marriage, (Boston: John P. Jewett & Co., 1856), 115-116, 120;

28. Kellogg, 487.

29. Kellogg, 468.

30. Imaeyen Ibanga, "Best Reason to Have Sex: Your Health", March 9, 2008, ABC News, Good Morning America, On Call, https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/story?id=7037716&page=1.

31. "Seks itu Nikmat dan Sehat," https://www.tempo.co.id/kliniknet/artikel/05042001-1.htm.

32. For further study see Michael F. Roizen, M.D., Real Age, (New York: HarperCollins, 1999) 131.

33. S. Banerjee S, P. Anderson P, and W.S. Davis, "Connection Between Depression, Sexual Frequency, and All-cause Mortality: Findings from a Nationally Representative Study," Journal of Psychosexual Health 6(1) (2024):35-44. doi:10.1177/26318318241256455.

34. S.E. Jackson SE, et al., "Declines in Sexual Activity and Function Predict Incident Health Problems in Older Adults: Prospective Findings from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, Arch Sex Behav. 49(3) (2020):929–940.

35. C. Cao, L. Yang, T. Xu, et al., "Trends in Sexual Activity and Associations with All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality among US Adults, J Sex Med. 17(10) (2020):1903–1913.

36. Ellen White, Letter 15, 1895.

37. Ellen White, MS 34, 1885.

38. Ellen White, letter written from Europe in 1888, as quoted in "Counsels Regarding Parenthood" (DF 360A), a document produced by the Ellen G. White Estate.

39. Ibid.

40. Ellen White, Letter 103 to A.T. Jones, Mar. 15, 1894. Released in 1989.

41. Ellen White, Manuscript 3, 1897, 13, 14

42. Dawn Ferrara, "Love and Sex: How and Why the Fit Matters," Calmerry (Mar. 22, 2023).

43. Ellen White, Letter 203, 1903.