Book: General Conference Committee, A Statement Refuting Charges Made by A. T. Jones Against the Spirit of Prophecy and the Plan of Organization of the Seventh-day Adventist Denomination (Washington, DC: General Conference Committee, 1906). HTML, Scan.
Contents: Refutes charges made by A. T. Jones after he had united with J. H. Kellogg in undermining the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
Chapter 8: The Battle Creek College Debt
In proof of his assertions, the following statement is made by Elder Jones concerning the Battle Creek College debt:—
“During the General Conference council in Washington in October, 1903, a Testimony came concerning the Battle Creek College debt, and the Acre Fund to pay that debt. That Testimony said: ‘How pleasing to God it would be for all our people—led and encouraged by the General Conference Committee—to share in lifting this obligation of the old Battle Creek College!’
“‘The creditors of Battle Creek College must all be paid. The officers of the General Conference should lend a hand in this work.’
“I was in a position to know full well that the General Conference Committee neither led nor encouraged the people in that thing at all. Indeed their leading and encouraging was against it rather than for it. Also I personally know that ‘the officers of the General Conference’ did not lend any hand in that work. Indeed they were not at all ready even to print that Testimony in the Review. They did by special request, if not persuasion, promise in the Review of October 29, to publish it ‘next week;’ but in fact did not publish it until five weeks afterward, December 3, and then with changes, showing that it had either been sent to California for these changes and back again, or else another copy was received from California to be published in place of the one that they promised October 29 to publish ‘next week.’ Any or all of which shows that loyalty to that Testimony was not at all conspicuous on the part of the General Conference officers.”
The writer of these criticisms of the General Conference Committee assumes to know all about what the Committee have done, and what they have failed to do. He asserts that they have not only failed to heed the instruction [p. 43] given, but have worked against it. If he or any one else will read the instruction with care, and then trace with equal care all that the General Conference Committee have done in behalf of the Battle Creek College obligations, it will be found that the instruction has been complied with. It may not have been at the exact time and in the precise way Elder Jones assumes to know that it should have been done; but it has been carried out the very best the Committee have known how. They have shared in lifting the obligations, and have secured every creditor by giving to each one General Conference notes. It should be remembered that for a long time conditions have been very complicated. Rapid and radical changes have taken place, which have brought great perplexity upon the Committee. At times they have not known how to move, but they have not knowingly rejected any Testimony.
It is true that the Review of October 29 announced that the communication referred to above would appear “next week.” It is also true that it did not appear until five weeks later, December 3. But this does not necessarily prove disloyalty to the Testimonies. It does not even prove a lack of loyalty. There were good reasons for this. These are given in the following statement by Brother C. C. Crisler, who assists Sister White in her work, and is familiar with all the circumstances referred to:—
A Statement Regarding the Article, “The Battle Creek College Debt”
“Early in October, 1903, Professor P. T. Magan came to St. Helena, Cal. During his visit, many matters were discussed; among others, plans for the payment of the debt on the old Battle Creek College property. Sister White had already written out some instruction regarding this matter; and just before he left, she placed in his [p. 44] hands copy of a manuscript entitled, ‘The Battle Creek College Debt.’ This copy had been hastily typewritten, and only a letter-press copy was kept for reference and recopying. No MS. number was placed on the copy given him, and the document was unsigned.
“Afterward, duplicate copies were made, numbered, and placed on file. But meanwhile, Brother Magan had gone on to Washington, D. C., and had submitted the MS to the editors of the Review for publication.
“The editors hesitated,—and not without cause. They understand full well Sister White’s desire that they publish only such matter as she designates as intended for publication; and, having no definite knowledge of her wishes in this matter, and noticing that the MS. bore neither file number nor signature, they thought best to defer publication until they could obtain more full information regarding her wishes concerning the MS. in question.
“In response to their inquiry, Sister White instructed them to wait until she could send a more complete article for publication. This article was prepared as soon as the press of other work would allow, and was forwarded to Washington. It appeared in the Review bearing date of December 3, 1903.
“The original MS. entitled ‘The Battle Creek College Debt’ was written late in the evening of October 8. Several days elapsed before the MS. was presented to the brethren in Washington: Then more time was consumed in writing hack to California for definite instruction. Despite these necessary delays, the article would have appeared even earlier than December 3, had it not been for the fact that Sister White, the General Conference, officers, State Conference officers, and the managers of our publishing houses were just then unitedly putting forth a tremendous effort in behalf of the Fall Missionary Campaign. Specially prepared articles from the pen of Sister White had been furnished for publication during the campaign, and it was deemed advisable to publish the [p. 45] appeal regarding the Battle Creek College debt at a time when this appeal would not be largely neutralized by the simultaneous appearance of strong appeals for other enterprises.
“Taking all these matters into account, it is not at all singular that several weeks elapsed from the time the first incomplete MS. was written to the time when the article as finally Completed was published in the Review and Herald.
“(Signed) Clarence C. Crisler.”