Because he's good for nothing!!! Accreditation is the emperor's new clothes. There is no way an accreditation agency can TRULY determine (at least not in an annual site visit, etc.) if a university is up to standard. Just can't.It's very similar to the scam that plays out across elementary, middle, and high schools every year: A teacher is evaluated as highly-effective, effective, or not, based on a SINGLE FORMAL VISIT to the class by an assistant principal. And--get this--the teacher knows WELL IN ADVANCE when the evaluator will be there. In fact, the teacher can even tell them what period to show up! You better believe that we try to hit the highest levels on the evaluation rubric! But even though it is well-intentioned, it has two very deep flaws:1) The obvious one: It's a dog and pony show where a teacher that has been mediocre all year, suddenly dazzles...and where, on the other hand, an otherwise great teacher, can have a bad day and get a less than stellar rating.2) It's so subjective that an evaluator can give you virtually any rating and be able to justify it. I can tell you that I have certainly benefited before from a glowing evaluation when I didn't feel I had actually knocked it out of the park (even with advance notice!). And I've had evaluations that sat me back on my heel, since I thought I had indeed done a superb job, but the evaluator did not think it was worthy of the highly-effective rating I SO RICHLY DESERVED!The same happens at the university level...except it's worse. Why? Because accreditation agencies are PAID by the universities to accredit them. It is a major conflict of interest. I mean, who wants to call a university utterly deficient, when that's going to lose the accreditation agency thousands of dollars a year, as well as, perhaps spawn a backlash that discredits them?So, along with the conflict of interest, there is the rank subjectivity (which is almost always going to go in the university's favor, except for gross infractions).So, let's say that you have you have your bishop certificate, but I come with some sort of scam in which I advertise: You have dedicated yourself to the study of the Word, you have attained an exceptional level of excellence. We think that ministers of your caliber should be nationally and internationally recognized for their excellence. That's why you--yes, you!--can become a charter member of the most prestigious ministerial association in the world and have your ministry recognized as one that adheres to the highest levels of excellence and integrity. For the unheard of price of $400, your ministry can gain the recognition and the networking power that an international.... Blah, blah, blah.Accreditation does NOT mean you received a great education. And non-accreditation does NOT mean you received a bad one. It's just that the accrediting agencies have the bluff on everyone, making them think that if it's not accredited BY THEM, then it's largely worthless (or as OTCP like to say, has limited utility).It's not wrong to seek to attend a university with accreditation. It DOES get accepted far more often than attending a non-accredited school. But it's the END RESULT--and ONLY the end result--that determines the worth of your education. You may not make as much money if you have a non-accredited degree. You might have trouble shopping it. Etc. But you may STILL have an education that is far superior to what someone got at a fully accredited school.If it's about utility, yes, get an accredited degree. If it's all about the money, you might do the same. BUT, if it's about the quality of one's education, that can happen at an accredited OR non-accredited school...or no school at all. But for some, they have built accreditation into an idol of sorts. It doesn't matter the effectiveness of the person's education, it doesn't matter how good or how long they have served...NOPE, the ONLY thing that matters is to score a gotcha over something that does not at all tell us how good your education is.