A Statement of Relationship by F. M. W.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Oct 30, 1913

A Statement of Relationship

By F. M. W.

OUR readers for the most part are acquainted with the reasons which led the Seventh-day Adventist denomination several years ago to withdraw its active support from the Battle Creek Sanitarium. It was strongly felt that those directly responsible for the management of the institution had adopted certain principles and views which were diametrically opposed to those held by the denomination. For that reason it was not considered in harmony with the aims of this movement, nor for the good of our young people, to recommend them to go to that institution to receive their education. Some have questioned of late if the situation has not changed, and if it is not entirely consistent now for our young people to enter that institution for their training.

As indicating the present attitude of the management of the Battle Creek Sanitarium toward Seventh-day Adventists and the doctrines which they hold, we present herewith a statement taken from the Battle Creek Idea of Sept. 15, 1913. This journal is issued in the direct interests of the Battle Creek Sanitarium and the principles for which that institution stands. The number in question contains “A Lecture on the Battle Creek System, by the Rt. Hon. Sir Horace Plunkett.” Among other things Mr. Plunkett says:— In 1866 a little band of altruists purchased a small two-story farmhouse in a grove on the edge of the then-unknown village of Battle Creek, and opened a water-cure under the name of The Health Reform Institute. The founders were Seventh-day Adventists—their successors still, as the uninitiated would say, keep Sunday on Saturday; but otherwise the sect, whatever its views or practises, has no connection whatever with the administration or procedure of the Battle Creek Sanitarium.

Following these remarks of Mr. Plunkett is inserted a statement, in brackets, by the editor of the paper, which presumably correctly expresses the attitude of the management of the Battle Creek Sanitarium. It reads as follows:—

The institution was from the start a private enterprise, and was never under the control of any denomination or sect, though for some years affiliated with the church and its founders. All such affiliation ceased years ago. The management have no connection with the religious organization referred to, and no sympathy with the fanatical beliefs and practises which pertain to it. Neither has the Battle Creek Sanitarium any connection whatever with the numerous small religio-medico-sectarian institutions established by this sect in various parts of the world. The prestige of the Battle Creek System has suffered greatly because of the unauthorised claims of these church-controlled concerns. Hence this explanatory note.

It is not our purpose to enter into any discussion regarding the establishment of the Battle Creek Sanitarium, or the extent to which the denomination was responsible for its establishment, nor do we desire to revive any controversy over the question. We call attention to this statement in the official organ of the Battle Creek Sanitarium, in order that our people may have a clear understanding of the situation as it exists today.

In the light of this statement, is any argument necessary to demonstrate to our brethren and sisters the danger which confronts believers in this message who may go to that institution for training? Should our sanitariums seek affiliation with the Battle Creek Sanitarium in the light of this estimate of their work by the management of that institution? Surely these are not debatable questions. Loyalty to this movement and to the principles it represents admits of no equivocal position.

We have no controversy with the personnel of the management of the Battle Creek Sanitarium. We do not even know who constitute the present board of management. We doubt not but that connected with the institution are Christian men and women. Some of its workers we regard as personal friends. We believe, however, that in justice to our readers, and as a safeguard to our people who may not understand the situation, all should clearly recognize that the

management of the Battle Creek Sanitarium, by their own public announcement, “have no connection with the religious organization referred to [Seventh-day Adventists], and no sympathy with [what they are pleased to designate] the fanatical beliefs and practises which pertain to it.” F. M. W.