THE BROKEN BLUEPRINT

PART THREE - G
THE STORY OF LOMA LINDA: WHAT IT DID TO OUR CHURCH
(1905 - ONWARD)

BETWEEN 1931 AND 1935

1933: THE F.C. GILBERT ARTICLE

In the midst of the furor over accreditation, in 1933, Elder F.C. Gilbert (1867-1946), a converted Jew and General Conference officer, wrote an article for Ministry magazine, entitled Why the Jews Rejected Christ.

A spirit of friendship developed between the Greeks and the Jews . . An arrangement was entered into that allowed a large number of rabbis from Jerusalem to go to Alexandria and translate the writings of the Jewish Scriptures into the Greek language. It was also suggested by the Greeks that the Jews send their talented young men to Alexandria for training . . in the . . sciences and . . learning of the Greeks.

Many of the elders of Israel feared the results of such a course . . They counseled the young men against such a procedure. These [young men], in turn, argued that it would be an advantage for strong, thoughtful, vigorous young men to enter the schools of Greeks, as they might influence the philosophers and Greek scholars to see the beauty of the Jewish religion.

Many of Israel's influential men yielded to Greek insistence . . They were encouraged to believe that the synagogues where the children were taught their religion would not be interfered with . . The former said that God would help their young men be true to their religion, and the training schools of Jewery would have a better standing in the eyes of the nations . . Gradually the Jewish schools came to confer degrees upon their graduates. There was the Rav or Rabbi, the Tana, the Goyon, the Sadi, and the Rabbon. It was thought necessary for the graduates of the rabbinical schools to show the marks of rank by wearing different clothing. The man with a degree must wear a particular gown and cap. Little by little an educational aristocracy was formed, which was called the Sanhedrin.

While the religious schools continued to operate, a marked declension in spiritual influence and power was visible. Year by year the Word of God was studied less, as the courses of studies based on culture and philosophy increased. The curriculum of the rabbinical schools was increased toward intellectualism. As the years became exalted and God was less thought of, the Rabbi was extolled; the unschooled depreciated. Piety gradually diminished as form and ceremony increased.--F.C. Gilbert, Why the Jews Rejected Christ, Ministry, 1933.

1933: MAGANS LETTER TO MOFFETT

Not only had Loma Linda become an obedient dog on a leash, soon more leashes would be fastened to the collars of our other colleges. Or else.

In the spring of 1933, Elder W.C. Moffett, president of Washington Missionary College, wrote to Magan to find out why their premedical students may not be admitted at Loma Linda.

On June 12, Magan explained the matter to him. He began by chiding Moffett for not having applied for accreditation, when Magan earlier warned all the colleges to do so.

Now I think that our dear brethren at the Washington Missionary College felt probably that I was just a mite too hard [in my earlier proddings], and consequently they were a bit conservative about starting in to get accredited.

I do not blame them for their stand, they must not blame me for mine . .

The net results, Brother Moffett, is this: That we are now notified by the Association of Medical Colleges that we will be published with the cases of all students submitted by us [to take state board examinations] from non-accredited colleges.

This is pretty nearly blacklisting us, and is only another form of warning that we will be dropped from the accredited list if we do not stop this practice.

The whole matter is coming up at the next meeting of the Association; consequently there was but one thing for us to do. That was to get busy and set our house in order. And that is exactly what we have been obliged to do . .

[It] is not at all fair . . for us to accept students from unaccredited schools into the medical school, knowing that we are liable to meet trouble when they get out [and try to take state board exams]--Magan to W.C. Moffett, June 12, 1933.

In 1934, Magan wrote the General Conference that another inspection, the most thorough and exhaustive, was coming within a year or two. It would be the most rigorous, far-reaching survey ever undertaken.

They have openly announced that there is a large difference today between the best medical colleges and the poorest in our land, as there was in the early years of this century when they cut the number of medical schools almost exactly in half, putting 50 percent of these institutions out of business. These men are firmly of the opinion that some medical schools will have to go.--Magan to J.L. Shaw, W.H. Branson, et al., August 16, 1934.

1935: THE BRANSON COMMITTEE

The situation in our colleges, in relation to accreditation, had reached such stupendous proportions that, in the spring of 1935, church leaders appointed Elder Branson to head a special committee to study the matter and prepare a report to be presented to the 1935 Autumn Council.

W.H. Branson (1887-1961) was, at that time, head of the North American Division (1930-1938). Later he would serve as General Conference president (1950-1954). Although a very good man, Elder Branson was caught in the midst of an increasing storm of demands for worldly affiliation. 

THE COUNCIL THAT DUG THE GRAVE

THE 1935 AUTUMN COUNCIL

At the October 1935 Autumn Council, many of our church leaders recognized that a terrible mistake had been made by that vote four years earlier. It was seen that it had only worsened the situation.

It was hoped that, one way or another, the growing controversy could finally be satisfactorily resolved at this council.

On behalf of the Branson Committee, the Branson Report was presented by W.H. Branson to the October 1935 Autumn Council.

It was the recommendation of the committee that only two of our colleges should seek accreditation, so they could send premedical students to Loma Linda. The rest should continue training ministers, teachers, and missionaries for the foreign fields.

Many of our faithful leaders were horrified at the conclusions of the report. As you might imagine, there was lengthy and even agonized discussion. It was clearly recognized that we had painted ourselves into a corner.

Men of God stood to their feet and pled that there was only one way to get out: a total return to the divinely appointed blueprint.

AN EARNEST PLEA TO RETURN TO THE BLUEPRINT

Elder Charles H. Watson (1877-1962; General Conference president from 1930 to 1936), explained the whole problem and stated the only worthwhile solution:

The facts involve us into the consideration of whether or not we will continue with an educational program that has become more and more worldly, or whether we will start an educational plan that is in harmony with the instruction we have received from God. The plan of accrediting our schools adopted four years ago has been a very strong contributing factor during these four years to our educational program becoming more and more worldly in its character, in its aim, in its determination to meet the requirements of outside accrediting bodies. These accrediting bodies have not only shown their determination, they are determined to control the program of our educational work, and also the methods by which that program shall be carried out. There is no doubt about it.

The policy provided in 1931 that we only select teachers with definite Christian experience to enter upon graduate training in the universities of the world. Experience has taught us that this is impossible; for the moment we set the standards for teaching efficiency, then a university training, that moment every young man and young woman who seeks to reach the highest in teaching feels forced to enter upon the training that will bring him to the highest place, and we have not been able to control it. We have such a situation here.

As a result of that action, within the last four years forty of our young people were in one university at the same time seeking training to help them reach their objective in education. If you can continue this program which destroys our own denominational ideals of true education, then we are wasting our time by discussing the report of this commission. It gives some of us a burden . . for it has shown itself to be beyond the control of the policy adopted in 1931.

The medical college was at one time the chief  urge for accreditation. It is a large part of the urge today. And if it comes to a choice between whether we continue the [regular AMA] medical college or go worldly, my vote shall be that we shall not continue our [regular AMA] medical work; and as a leader in the denomination I am calling upon you in the fear of God to take this step to keep the principles of true education from being lost to us. That is my appeal. It is silly and useless of us to go to the world with any statement that God has given us the principles of true education and then take steps that will lead us to a total ignorance of these principles in the near future.

These are the steps that we have taken in the last four years. We are urged in choice between certain things. The training of educators in the service of this denomination requires that our students shall be [spiritually] fitted, whether we shall keep the doors of our medical college open or close them.--Elder C.H. Watson, statement to Autumn Council, October 30, 1935; quoted in 1935 Branson Report, pp. 121, 124.

As you can see from the above statement, there were only two possibilities: either all connections between Loma Linda and the AMA and other accrediting agencies must be totally severed--or all our other colleges would rather quickly jump on the bandwagon and also become accredited; and, of course, all our teachers would want to obtain advanced degrees from outside universities.

Elders Watson and Branson, as well as many other leaders deeply loyal to the blueprint, recognized that if universal accreditation and degree-seeking became the norm, our colleges would erelong have much the same content as the universities of the world!

Reading through these proceedings, it becomes clear that these godly men really anguished over the situation. A dramatic changeover was taking place before their eyes, and they were frightened.

Prior to this time, our young people would attend our own schools, become filled with the message, then go out and proclaim it.

But suddenly things were changing, and those changes were taking place rapidly. Our youth were getting the idea that the chief end of schooling was to provide themselves with a good paying job. They were beginning to think that the only true higher education was to be found in outside universities.

BRANSON INTRODUCES THE REPORT

Here are a few excerpts from both Elder Branson's Report, presented to the 1935 Autumn Council on October 28-30, and the discussion which followed. You will find the complete Report in The Branson Report [DH25-28], available from the present publisher.

Elder Branson mentioned that only two of the six colleges had already obtained accreditation (Pacific Union College and Walla Walla College), and the others were desperately trying to obtain it.

Elder Branson then discussed the fact that individuals who were not men and women of experience, deeply grounded in the faith and who had served in the work for years, were being hired by our colleges--simply in order to satisfy accreditation needs.

Instead of a few teachers being selected carefully by college boards as was recommended (that is, teachers who would present outstanding Christian experience, be successful in their Christian work, and have fidelity to the Bible and Testimonies that is unquestioned), we have found that a large class of very young and immature people have been finding their way into the universities, believing that it was a highway to appointment in our institutional work. They have not waited to gain these years of Christian experience--the experience that comes through years of Christian service. They have not waited to be chosen by some board that would carefully weigh the question of whether or not this or that individual should go to the university. Scores of these young people have been going from the graduating classes of our colleges into the universities, believing that this would facilitate their going into our work or finding employment in an educational institution.--W.H. Branson, Branson Report, October 28, 1935.

Elder Branson then viewed the radical changes which had occurred in just the four years, since the 1931 Autumn Council.

Our commission brought us information that, from one college alone, thirty had gone into the university for further training during these [four] years. We are told that, for a social evening in one university, there was a get-together of our Seventh-day Adventist students attending there; forty present of these were at that social, and not all were reached by invitation.

We might multiply facts like this which indicated to us, as we believed, that this thing has gotten out of hand. It has gone way beyond anything the denomination planned, and the by-products of this are found in the schools where boards have been pressed by the accreditation body to put men on their faculty who have advanced degrees; they did not know where to turn for men of experience and outstanding integrity to fill the positions. They have felt obliged to take some of these immature men who have not been selected but who have pushed their own way into the university, secured their degree, and presented themselves for employment.

We believe, Mr. Chairman, that in this we face one of our greatest dangers; for instead of careful selection, we have come to the place where we have been forced to take men who otherwise would not have been chosen for the responsible places to which they were called.--Branson Report.

Elder Branson then uttered this fearful warning:

We believe, as a result of what has taken place, the wrong emphasis is being placed on certain things in our work. We believe that undue emphasis is being placed upon the idea of securing degrees from worldly institutions rather than training our youth for spiritual service in the cause of God.

I suppose many of us could testify honestly that we have been hearing more during the past four years about degrees, accreditation, and universities than we have heard in our lifetime before. Some of us have had to learn a new vocabulary, in the language, in trying to fathom what this is all about and what it means. I remember a few years ago we didn't hear such things as we are talking about now.

The emphasis now is being placed upon the importance of worldly studies and degrees, and this is having a mighty influence. Scores of teachers believe it is all right for them to be trained in outside universities, as a result of denominational sanction and encouragement in advising them to do so. Many who will be lost, lose their hold upon God, and will not fill a position of responsibility in this cause that it was designed of God that they should fill. If they should fill positions of responsibility, many of them would bring into the denominational work influences that would lead further and further afield from the original purpose that was in the hearts of the men who established this work.

Your commission believes, therefore, that, as a denomination, we are drifting; that it is entrusted to us at this Autumn Council, of 1935, to endeavor to call a halt, to retrace our course, to drive down new stakes, and determine by the help of God that we will rectify anything that is wrong in what we undertook to do four years ago.--Branson Report.

Elder Branson warned that, if we took this step, we would follow in the disastrous course of other denominations.

As was pointed out by our General Conference president [C.H. Watson], in his address that was read yesterday morning [Review, November 21, 1935, pp. 3-8], other religious bodies have passed this way before us. As a result of their efforts to secure worldly recognition, we know they made shipwreck of their faith. There are exceptions in individual cases, but this statement is almost universally true.--Branson Report.

Elder Branson then quoted a statement, made in 1930, by the president of a non-Adventist college:

The hitherto undisputed claim that the church college carried a more wholesome moral and spiritual atmosphere has been a compelling argument in its favor. But this claim is seriously questioned today.

The requirements of standardizing agencies have compelled church colleges to shift their emphasis from morality to scholarship. This has changed the whole mental pattern and modified the spirit of church colleges. They have not developed, in recent years, along lines that express the urge and soul of vital Christianity. They have given up their natural element of greatest strength (religion), and taken up the tax-supported [public] institutions element of greatest weakness (standardization) . .

The forces that terminate institutions have a long drift, but they move inexorably. Usually the change is at hand before society is aware. The passing of the church college is now taking place, and most of its devotees are looking upon the transition; some are even players in the drama, and do not recognize it.--Andrew D. Harmon, president of Transylvania College, statement in Current History, December 1930; quoted in Review, October 24, 1935; and then in the Branson Report, October 28-30, 1935.

Elder Branson then stated:

I wondered, as I read this, whether Seventh-day Adventists were included in the last remark of this statement, The passing of the church college is now taking place, and most of its devotees are looking upon the transition; some are even players in the drama and do not recognize it.

We have been in the period of transition for a period of four years. We recognize, on every hand, that there has been a shift of standards, a shift in the ideals, a shift in the emphasis, till many of our people throughout the churches of this land are becoming alarmed. We hear it on every hand. There is alarm, and that alarm is in the hearts of our best leaders and laymen that make up the membership of our churches. Since, as this man states, other denominations have passed along this way, the universal result has been the passing of the church college, dropping the ideals of the founders in the establishment of these schools.

It seems to us of this commission that we need to restate whether or not we are able to follow the same course they have been following, follow it to its conclusion, and yet stand against the tide that has swept them off their feet. Can we maintain our ideals in their purity and yet reach, to the fullest extent, the recognition from the world and agree to being standardized by the world, which means that we must be under the domination of these worldly organizations?--Branson Report.

Next, Elder Branson cited a specific example. An accreditation board had recently noted that one of our colleges had lost its original objective of training workers.

I hold in my hand here a report that was rendered by the representatives of one of these accreditation organizations--a recent report that was made concerning one of our colleges. This college was being surveyed, by representatives of the accreditation board, to ascertain whether or not their application for accreditation would be granted. In the very outset of the report, we find the following statement was made:

The original articles of incorporation in this particular college definitely state that the college was organized to provide special opportunity for men and women to become acquainted with the mission fields and to have education in branches and methods for the same. The school was a part of the missionary program of the church. That ideal has persisted to a considerable extent and has affected the spirit of the curriculum and methods of the college; but a change in emphasis has slowly taken place, and now education as a preparation for various careers and, most of all, for the art of living is the dominant ideal.

So we are commended here by representatives of the accreditation board; the comment was because of the fact that we have changed our ideals, are further away from the idea of training men and women for the mission fields of the world, and are coming to the place where we train them for the various careers and the art of living.The Branson Report.

From the top of the rocks I see him, and from the hills I behold him. Lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations (Numbers 23:9). This has been Gods program all through the ages. Israel shall dwell alone and shall not be reckoned among the nations. And I believe that has a very definite application to the Israel of God here in this last generation, as He endeavors to convert the people and to take them to heaven. It seems to me that Israel needs to be free from the government of worldly organizations that know not God in these times.

There is setting in on this people a tide of worldliness to which we are surrendering. I do not mean to imply that we are not resisting these influences at all; but I believe that the measure of resistance that we are putting forth is not holding us. We are gradually being swept backward, and should be alarmed about it.--Branson Report.

Elder Watson then quoted six Spirit of Prophecy passages, in which the path we should take was clearly stated: (6T 145; CT 86 [also in 5T 21, written in 1881]; CT 532; 6T 142; FE 534-535.)

Elder Branson then recommended that, as a means of compromise, only two of our colleges should receive full four-year accreditation. Following a brief mention as to why Pacific Union College and Emmanuel Missionary College were the two to be selected, Elder Branson concluded his presentation. (More on this compromise later.)

DEEP CONCERN BY OTHER CHURCH LEADERS

As Elder Branson finished his remarks, everyone was deeply moved. Church leaders recognized that this meeting, in 1935, would be pivotal in the history of the church. And so it proved.

Other leaders now arose and spoke:

I was riding on the train with a Baptist director for the State of Wisconsin who has charge of one hundred and fifty-six Baptist churches. He told me he had eliminated every fundamentalist preacher out of those churches except three, and he expected to clean them up within the year. That is what a Baptist university did for the Baptist denomination. A Chicago [Baptist] university is almost entirely responsible for what has happened to the Baptist churches of America . .

I believe we [have] started on the same road, the highway that will head to the undermining of the foundations of this movement.

I believe God is at this time calling for repentance and for us to turn about face and to take our stand and escape the consequences and turn to the right. The Lord has counseled us not to be connected by so much as a thread, and yet some of our schools are so bound to worldly systems that we cannot cut the rope. It will take a decided attitude on our part to save them. I would feel terrible if, as a denomination, we would have to travel the same desert road that the other Protestant denominations have been traveling and, as sure as we start on these roads, we will turn out in the same way.--W.A. Nelson, President, New Jersey Conference; Autumn Council, October 28-30, 1935.

Elder Watson spoke next.

I believe God has placed before us very definitely the standards that we have, and we do not have to go to the world to inquire. I think we have been mistaken in accepting standards from the world in education and in other standards.--C.H. Watson, President, General Conference. Ibid.

The president of the Canadian Union Conference spoke:

I believe that the entire future of the youth of this denomination is dependent upon maintaining, in the institutions of education, the educational policies of this denomination, right principles and clinging to the blueprint God has given to us.

Not very long ago I had the privilege of visiting with the man who stands at the head of the schools of an entire denomination. During the course of our conversation, he said that he was deeply concerned over the trend of his denomination, stating that his denomination was rapidly losing its youth, and I know his statement is correct. He stated that it seems to him the way schools at the present time, colleges and seminaries, are drifting in a worldly direction, years from now they will cease to exist if we continue to drift in this direction. I asked him why he made such a statement; he pointed out to me that since schools had reached out, affiliated with the universities, and employed teachers who have been trained in non-Christian universities, they have come back into the schools, brought to the schoolroom a spirit of unbelief in the Book of all books, and we are drifting.

As a member of this denomination, I do not want to be a party, in that direction, in any plan that will make it more difficult for our youth to hold true to the fundamentals that God has given to us.--Elder S.A. Ruskjer, Canadian Union Conference President. Ibid.

Elder Wilcox, one of many outstanding editors of the Review in earlier years, spoke:

Four years ago I stood very decidedly against the accreditation in any form. I stand on practically the same ground today. I was a member of this commission, and I united with my brethren in presenting this report because it seems to me it was the best under the circumstances . .

In the last few years there has been a university bias. I tell you how I think we can protect that. I think we should enunciate the principles we have heard from this desk, to return to our old paths; and, in our personal influence as workers, to turn the hearts of our parents and children away from the wrong way. I believe it would go much further than any resolution that we can pass here . . While I favor this report, it is a compromise; I favor it as a compromise, and I hope there will come a time next year when we can return free from these influences all about us.--Elder F.M. Wilcox, editor, Review.

Two other leaders spoke:

If we do not accredit our medical schools, we fear what can happen to us, we are today told. We were told yesterday to exercise faith. I do not honestly see how I can go back and repeat your speech, Elder Watson; and, when the brethren ask me, Are we tied by a thread? say Not a thread. How can I harmonize that by what we are doing today . . And now we think we have saved the cause from these wicked things by eliminating three from accreditation. I am afraid we will rue this day if we go ahead with this program. Four years ago we did make a mistake. We made a mistake, as you say.--President Anderson [probably J.N. Anderson, president of Union College].

Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to appear opposed to this resolution, but I remember four years ago when I was talking to Elder McElhaney about this matter when the vote was taken. He said we will see the day when we will rue what we have done. Now we have accredited two senior colleges. Now we propose to recommend that another college be accredited, and that all junior colleges proceed with caution. If this is wrong, how can it be right to recommend to accredit another? If we should not be tied by so much as a thread, why not cut loose?--Elder Rice [probably M.L. Rice, a president of various conferences throughout those years].

C.L. Watson arose again. He voiced the problem in the minds of all present. They well-recognized that, although most of the influential leaders did not want our colleges to receive accreditation, they felt helpless in the face of the demands of Loma Linda.

That decision in 1912, to accredit CME, was threatening to open the door to all our teachers being trained in outside schools and all our colleges being forced to obey the demands of worldly accreditation agencies.

What they did not seem to realize was that Loma Linda would not close its doors if it was not accredited! It would, instead, return to the training of medical missionaries and nurses for foreign fields.

Indeed, as Percy Magan had discovered to his sorrow, the students who attended the accredited CME were leaving to start medical practices in California. Under such circumstances, there was no reason to keep that school open!

Now, we recognize that very much of the urge of accreditation for educational work has come from the medical college, for it can only carry on its work on that basis, the basis allowed by the American Medical Association . . Unless we decide to wholly discontinue that medical college, there has to be accreditation of the schools that prepare students for entrance to the courses in the college. There is no other way of having them enter there. There has to be certain specialized training of at least some of the teachers that prepare students for entrance to these schools in which that training is given, and these schools in which that training is given must be accredited. These must be at least junior colleges.--C.L. Watson, President of the General Conference.

At this, a faithful college president arose to his feet:

Mr. Chairman, I think it should be defined here what accrediting really is. I cannot read anywhere in the Testimonies that, in order to meet state requirements, we shall have to join up with the North Central Association or the Middle States Association or any other regional body, for these associations have no state recognition. They are not known by the state. They have no legal sanction or status.

If we are obliged to accredit our schools at all, as some seem to think, to meet the requirements of the statements in the Spirit of Prophecy, (if this is the real interpretation), why cannot we get state recognition instead? Personally, I do not believe in any accreditation at all from outside sources. If we are going to come out of Babylon, why not come altogether out, and not have two or three schools in?--H.H. Hamilton [president of Washington Missionary College].

At this juncture, Percy Magan, who had only arrived the night before, stood to speak--and dropped a new bombshell: Within a couple years, none of the colleges would be eligible to send graduates to Loma Linda! This was because all those already accredited--only had two-year accreditation. They would have to begin the toilsome--and very expensive--task of upgrading to three- or four-year status.

Church leaders were beginning to see that there would never be an end to the upward spiral of college accreditation and teacher certification requirements. With such warning, they should have voted to return to the educational blueprint given so many years earlier to our people.

Mr. Chairman, I am not rising to discuss in any way the entire question. I have not been here. I only got here late last night from Toronto where it was my duty to attend a meeting of the Association of AMA colleges, and . . the proposal was put forth that the medical colleges should be obliged to go on a three-year pre-medical basis, and that means a three-year accredited basis. That is not the law yet, but that was brought up by Dr. Paterson, the president, in his annual address; and it seems to have met with practically universal favor.

In all probability by another year or so, you will see that rule . . I am stating this to you because as sure as medical schools are obliged to go to a three-year basis, then within a year or two years junior colleges are out of the list.--P.T. Magan, President, College of Medical Evangelists.

That news shook the entire assembly, so W.A. Nelson, of the General Conference Department of Education, gave a brief appeal to approve the Branson Report for the sake of high attainment in Adventist education. Then Elder Watson rose to his feet and said this:

The facts involve us in the consideration of whether or not we will continue with an educational program that has become more and more worldly or whether we will start an educational plan that is in harmony with the instruction we have received from God. The plan of accrediting our schools, adopted four years ago, has been a very strong contributing factor during these four years to our educational program becoming more and more worldly in its character, in its aim, in its determination to meet the requirements of outside accreditation bodies . .

These accreditation bodies have not only shown their determination, they are determined to control the program of our educational work and also the methods by which that program shall be carried out. There is no doubt about it.--C.L. Watson, General Conference President.

Next, Elder Branson arose and pled with the members to approve the Report (for the accreditation of at least two of our colleges), at least, on a temporary try-out basis.

It seems to members of the commission that we are shut up to three courses of procedure. All of these three views have been agitated on the floor of the council. One is that we do nothing to try to turn back the tide of worldliness flooding our schools, do nothing to meet or quiet the fears of those who think we are in the wrong way . . We cannot conceive of this council taking a stand of that kind . .

We feel, on the other hand, that a great number of suggestions have been made that go to the other extreme--to sweep aside altogether this plan for accreditation of our schools. We think these suggestions would be premature. It may come to that. It may come to the place where we shall have to close the medical college, but I join the president of the General Conference and say that, if it is necessary to do that to stem the tide of worldliness, I would be favorable to it.

I do not believe that this denomination must be led into a worldly position by any institution in our ranks. I do not believe that it is the desire of the medical college; yet it has been the urge that has come from the medical college, to urge us to accredit this thing four years ago; and it will be the urge from that school to continue on as is. I dont believe that we should be hasty in an action to brush aside accreditation; that would mean closing the medical college, closing all teacher training.

I believe in the plan suggested by the commission, that which adequately provides for the meeting of every need of the medical college for the present. We do not have a three-year preparatory course yet. We do not know that it will ever be a three-year course. If it ever comes to a three-year course, we can accomplish that without accrediting all our colleges, and can go on as we have.--W.H. Branson, Vice-President for North American Division.

Elder Branson acknowledged that not one Adventist college had an accredited three-year preparatory, premedical course,

Although probably unintended, the error in the above argument is that, if accreditation and degrees were rejected--this would close down Loma Linda or stop our training of missionary physicians and nurses. But this was not so. They could still receive a thorough training and then leave to work as missionaries. In addition, short courses in natural remedies could also be given to interested believers who wanted to help their neighbors here in the United States.

Elder Piper, board chairman of Union College clearly gave the only correct solution:

The policy provided, in 1931, that we only select teachers with definite Christian experience to enter upon graduate training in the universities of the world. Experience has taught us that this is impossible, for the moment we set the standards for teaching efficiency, with a university training, that moment every young man and young woman who seeks to reach the highest in teaching feels forced to enter upon the training that will bring him to the highest place, and we have not been able to control it. We have such a situation here.

As a result of that action within the last four years, forty of our young people were in one university at the same time seeking training to help them reach their objectives in education. If you can continue this program, which destroys our own denominational ideals of true education, then we are wasting our time by discussing the report of this commission. It gives some of us a burden, for it has shown itself to be beyond the control of the policy adopted in 1931.

The medical college was at one time the chief urge for accreditation. It is a large part of the urge today; and, if it comes to a choice between whether we continue the medical college or go worldly, my vote shall be that we shall not continue our medical work; and, as a leader in the denomination, I am calling upon you, in the fear of God, to take this step to keep the principles of true education from being lost to us. That is my appeal.

It is silly and useless of us to go to the world with any statement that God has given us, the principles of true education, and then take steps that will head us toward a total ignorance of these principles in the very near future. These are the steps that we have taken in the last four years. We are urged to  choose between certain things. The training of educators in the service of this denomination requires that our students shall be fitted, whether we shall keep the doors of our medical college open or close them.--Elder J.F. Piper, Union College board chairman.

 Elder [H.H. Votaw, head of the General Conference Religious Liberty Department, a powerful speaker, said it clearly:

 I think Brother Watson's talk just now has risen to the height of his Tuesday morning talk, yet we are preparing to send boys to hell in three of our schools. If this is the plan, we have no right to set up two colleges--already set up, going to set up a third one, and do the very thing that we ought not to do. I cannot see any difference between two and six for the whole system of schools. If this accreditation is wrong, it is wrong altogether. It is wrong in two of them, I cannot bring myself up here to find any agreement between the speech of the president of the General Conference and the report of this commission. The commission says you have only two schools already in. They are accredited schools. We are going to keep one accredited and are not going to take the other out without wrecking many of our other schools. Let us face the thing--do one thing or the other . . I cannot see it any other way, between sending boys and girls to hell from three schools or six. If it is wrong let us quit it . .

I am the president of the Union College board. My interests are there. I am glad if this is the proper way to do--by accrediting EMC and PUC. I am glad they have your accreditation and recognition; but, brethren, I cannot yet see the consistency of this. I appreciated the remarks Elder Watson made. He has clarified the situation some. Maybe it is necessary for me to go on and allow the world to direct our movement, in connection with fitting our young men and women for medical work. Possibly that is so, but I do not see light in compromising with the world in any degree;  I am ready to cast my vote contrary to this recommendation because I do not see its consistency. I do not see light in the proposition.--Elder Herber H. Votaw, General Conference Religious Liberty Department.

THE 1935 COMPROMISE VOTE

After extensive discussion, a compromise vote was taken. Aside from Loma Linda which was already accredited, only two of our colleges were to hold two-year accreditation: Pacific Union College and Emmanuel Missionary College; the other colleges were to continue training missionaries for foreign fields. In other words, three colleges (including Loma Linda) would be permitted to depart from the blueprint, but the other colleges (Washington Missionary College, Atlantic Union College, Union College, and Walla Walla College are listed) must remain on it--and not obtain accreditation. Walla Walla, which had already obtained two-year accreditation, would by the recommendation have to cancel it. All of the above were specifically stated to be senior (four-year) colleges.

The entire decision was printed in the November 28, 1935 issue of the Review, under the title, Recommendations of the Educational Council, adopted by the Autumn Council.

Clarification: Mention was made that, in 1935, we had six colleges. But no mention was made in the discussion of three other colleges (Southwestern Junior College, Southern Missionary College, and Oakwood College), probably because, in 1935, they were still junior colleges.

One speaker at the council said Loma Linda, Pacific Union College, and Walla Walla already had accreditation; another that Emmanuel Missionary College already had it, and another that it would soon have it. Elder Branson recommended that Pacific Union College and Emmanuel Missionary College should alone retain a two-year accreditation status.

In reality, by 1935, four of the colleges had become accredited: Loma Linda in 1922. The other three had received junior (two-year) college accreditation. This meant that only the first two years of their three or four years of study were accredited. These three were Emmanuel Missionary College in 1922, Walla Walla College in 1932, and Pacific Union College in 1933.

Prior to 1931, several colleges had been trying to obtain two-year accreditation status. The 1931 Autumn Council vote said that all the colleges could obtain two-year college accreditation. Branson's 1935 recommendation was that only two colleges should have two-year college accreditation: Pacific Union College and Emmanual Missionary College. A primary reason was that they were in opposite parts of the continent. Branson's plan would require that Walla Walla's accreditation be canceled.

However, early in the discussion following Branson's presentation, P.T. Magan spoke up and said that, the latest edict from the AMA was that within two years no two-year accredited school could send students to Loma Linda, only four-year accredited colleges!

Obviously, there were only two routes our church could take: either let the colleges move toward the full accreditation or call a halt, eliminate all accreditation (including at Loma Linda) and return all our schools to their original objectives. None of the schools would have to close their doors!

Those students who wished to fulfill the blueprint would attend them. Those who wished to obtain a worldly education for self-advancement were free to attend other colleges and universities--state, private, or religious.