The Reopening of Battle Creek College
By Editor
THERE will be found in another part of this paper an article signed by Brethren A. T. Jones, E. A. Sutherland, P. T. Magan, E. D. Kirby, and J. H. Kellogg which presents the views of these brethren concerning the reopening of Battle Creek College. This is the article which was mentioned in our note two weeks ago, and which has been delayed through no fault of the editor. We deem it proper to give some space to a consideration of the explanation offered for the action taken, and to lay before the readers of the REVIEW some further instruction from Sister White bearing upon this whole matter. In order to have a clear understanding of the real questions at issue it will be necessary to review briefly some of the experiences of the recent past. Much instruction has been given concerning the work in Battle Creek, and those in responsible positions have been repeatedly warned against the policy of centering so many interests there. About ten years ago these words were written by Sister White:— God expects practical work in getting out of Battle Creek. Too many are there now, and too many interests are being piled up in Battle Creek. Were these interests divided and located in other cities, where the light and knowledge might bless other localities, it would be in God's order. The Lord does not want a second Jerusalem in Battle Creek. There will have to be strong reformations and transformations and transferring of facilities and institutions if the will of God is done. At the last General Conference, in an address on “Our Duty to Leave Battle Creek,” General Conference Bulletin, pages 84-88, Sister White spoke thus:— For years the warning has been given to our people, Get out of Battle Creek. But because of the many interests established there, it was convenient to remain, and men could not see why they should move. . . . Will those who have collected in Battle Creek hear the voice speaking to them, and understand that they are to scatter out into different places, where they can spread abroad a knowledge of the truth, and where they can gain an experience different from the experience that they have been gaining? . . . God would not have let the fire go through our institutions in Battle Creek without a reason. Are you going to pass by the providence of God, without finding out what it means? God wants us to study into this matter, and to build upon a foundation in which all can have the utmost confidence. Under date of April 16, 1903, Sister White addressed the following instruction “To those in council at Battle Creek”:— Many plans have been devised that God has not ordained. The root from which these plans have sprung is the mind of finite man. God's watchmen have been blind. They should have been wide awake to see that one man's mind, one man's judgment, was becoming a power that God could not, and would not, indorse. To invest one man or a few men with so much power and responsibility is not in accordance with God's way of working. There must be a reorganization. Supreme power must not be vested in a group of men connected with a few large institutions. At the General Conference of 1901 the light was given, Divide the General Conference into union conferences. Let there be fewer responsibilities centered in one place. Let the work of printing our publications be divided. The principles that apply to the publishing work apply also to the sanitarium work. Students should not be crowded into Battle Creek to receive an education in medical missionary lines. It is not best to gather together in one institution so large a company of people as have been gathered together in the Battle Creek Sanitarium. Let medical missionary plants be made in many places. The youth who desire to become medical missionaries should not be brought in large numbers to Battle Creek. Provision should be made that they may receive an education out of and away from Battle Creek, in places where there is a different religious atmosphere. By fire the Lord removed the great argument in favor of gathering many students to Battle Creek. He swept away the Sanitarium to prevent the carrying out of the idea that Battle Creek was to be the great center for the training of medical students. To carry out this idea would be out of harmony with the work for these last days and with the plans of the Lord. God works by means of instruments, or second causes. He uses the gospel ministry, medical missionary work, and the publications containing present truth to impress hearts. All are made effectual by means of faith. As the truth is heard or read, the Holy Spirit sends it home to those who hear and read with an earnest desire to know what is right. The gospel ministry, medical missionary work, and our publications are God's agencies. One is not to supersede the other. But you have sought to make the medical missionary work the whole body, instead of the arm and hand. Let the living gospel be taught in our schools. Let students be educated in its principles, that they may be prepared to impart the truth to others. Let them learn to minister to the spiritual and physical needs of those whom they will meet in their work. By the ministry of the word the gospel is preached: by medical missionary work the gospel is practiced. The gospel is bound up with medical missionary work. Neither is to stand alone, bound up in itself. The workers in each are to labor unselfishly and unitedly, striving to save sinners. It was in order to carry out the principles involved in such Testimonies as these, many of which were written, that the Battle Creek College was removed from Battle Creek to Berrien Springs in 1901, and just recently the offices of the General Conference and Mission Board have been removed to Washington, and a new corporation has been formed to carry on the publishing work here which was formerly carried on in Battle Creek. Now just as this “practical work in getting out of Battle Creek” is being done, in harmony with the whole trend of these warnings and entreaties to scatter out and establish centers in other places, there comes the announcement of the reopening of Battle Creek College. And if the reasons given in the article printed elsewhere are really sound and justify this action, then it is evident that it was a mistake to close the College at all, inasmuch as the Sanitarium and its allied institutions were in Battle Creek in 1901 as well as in 1903. And if the counsel to remove the College in 1901 was of the Lord, then surely there must be some other way of meeting conditions which have arisen since than by reopening the same institution in the same buildings and under the direction of the same Board of Trustees. It is stated by these brethren that at a conference which they held in the summer of 1901, soon after the closing of Battle Creek College, the possibility of being compelled “to provide a legal educational body which could be recognized by the authorities” was fully discussed, and “it was agreed that this should be done. In fact, it was expected at the time that it would be done.” And from this the conclusion is drawn that “there is no occasion that anyone should take alarm, or to suppose that there is any lack of faith on the part of anybody, or that any new or unexpected thing is being done.” But in the article printed in the REVIEW of May 26, signed by three of these same brethren, from which we quoted in our5issue of August 4, it was especially emphasized that Battle Creek College was removed from Battle Creek by the unanimous vote of the Trustees, which vote was indorsed by many stockholders, the whole General Conference delegation in General Conference assembled, and the large number of representative people present at the General Conference of 1901, “so that neither by the Board, nor by the stockholders, nor by the General Conference delegation, nor by the whole congregation, which was largely representative of the whole denomination, was there a single opposing vote, nor dissenting voice.” It therefore seems to us that it was not in the province of four or five persons in a private conference to agree to a course of action which would seem in so large a degree to nullify the former action at the General Conference. It is certain that neither the former stockholders, nor the General Conference delegation, nor the people at large have been consulted in this matter, and it has come to them all as an unpleasant surprise, so far as we hear any expression of feeling concerning it. Furthermore, we call attention to the significant fact that “by fire the Lord removed the great argument in favor of gathering many students to Battle Creek. He swept away the Sanitarium to prevent the carrying out of the idea that Battle Creek was to be the great center for the training of medical students.” If in the rebuilding of the Sanitarium a situation has been created which seems to call for a large number of young people to come to Battle Creek to act as nurses and helpers, and to be trained as medical missionaries, this constitutes no good reason for going still further in the same direction by providing special educational facilities for them. The course of reasoning followed in the article seems plausible, but to us it is not convincing. By the same kind of reasoning we could make of none effect the plainest instruction, when it interferes with plans which we desire to carry out. We do not regard it as safe ground upon which to stand. There is no need of so much explanation to justify our course when we follow the plain counsel of the Lord. As a fitting conclusion to this article we will quote the following paragraphs from two recent communications from Sister White, one of which is dated August 3 and the other August 4:— I am very sorry to hear that there is a plan to reopen Battle Creek College. To establish a college in Battle Creek, after such plain warnings have been given against doing this would be to make a great mistake. There are many young men and young women among us who, if inducements are held out, would naturally be inclined to take several years' course of study at Battle Creek. But will it pay? Has not the Lord some practical work to do in missionary lines? Manly young men will be needed to enter the printing office when it is established in Washington, to learn the printer's trade. Our publications are to be prepared to go forth to the world. Canvassers are to be educated to take up the work of circulating these publications. Our books and papers are to go to places that are still in the darkness of error. The Lord calls upon young men to enter our schools. Schools are to be established in which our youth can receive an education that will prepare them to go forth to do evangelical and medical missionary work. Let these schools be established out of the cities. . . . A school such as has been planned for should be in some place where the students would not be closely associated with the large numbers who are expected to patronize the Sanitarium at Battle Creek. It is not wise to plan to maintain such a school in a place where a worldly element prevails to so great an extent as to counterwork that which the Lord has outlined should be done for our youth in our educational institutions. So many youth should not be brought together in Battle Creek. The Lord presented to us the reasons for removing the College from Battle Creek. This instruction should now be searched out and studied by those who are planning to organize another educational institution there. Let the light already given shine forth in its purity and beauty, that God's name may be glorified. After giving the matter the most careful consideration we see no reason for changing our original conclusion, and we still regard the reopening of Battle Creek College as an ill-advised move, which will tend to confuse the minds of this people concerning the steps which have been taken under the counsel of the spirit of prophecy, and which will be likely to lead to many misunderstandings in the future.