Putting Themselves on Record.
We published some two weeks since a contributed article which contained some account of the Minnesota Mass Convention of friends of the “Christian Sabbath,” held in Minneapolis June 10, 11, 1889, but we again give some of the facts for the sake of additional comment. In the third session of the Convention, Tuesday afternoon, June 11, the report of the Committee on Permanent Organization was submitted. The first article of their report for a constitution reads as follows:— “The object of this Association shall be to preserve the Christian Sabbath, or Lord’s day, as a day of rest and worship.” They reported that the Association should be called the “Minnesota Sabbath Association,” auxiliary to the “American Sabbath Union.” The other articles of the report were the same as those adopted in similar conventions. After it had been read it was moved that it be adopted as read. This was seconded. The chairman then said:— “It is moved and seconded that the constitution as submitted be adopted. Are you ready for the question?” Elder R. C. Porter then addressed the chairman, saying that he would like to offer an amendment to the first article of the constitution, as follows:— “The object of this Association shall be to preserve the Sabbath as a day of rest and worship; but in securing this object only education, moral influence, and persuasion shall be employed, and the religious rights of all shall be guarded against compulsory laws.” Dr. W. F. Crafts—“I would like to know what denomination this brother represents.” Elder Porter—“The Seventh-day Adventists.” Dr. Crafts—(excitedly) “Yes; well, this convention is called as a State Convention of those who represent the Christian sabbath; and it is not in any sense for those who represent the Saturday Sabbath. They have no natural rights in a convention of this kind except as listeners and reporters.” The chairman sustained the objection, and the report of the committee was adopted. From these facts we can see very plainly the spirit of the American Sabbath Union. We have nothing to say as to the propriety of the presentation of the resolution, or the refusal of the convention to listen to one who was not in full sympathy with them; but the point to which we wish to call especial attention is, that the leaders of the convention utterly refused to recognize the principle presented in the resolution. By this they have placed themselves on record as in favor of compulsory laws, which shall contravene the religious rights of the people; and they have shown that morality is not the object of their214work. They have shown this in that they refused to confine themselves to moral influences in their work, and morality can be advanced only by moral laws. But the moral law is the law of God, and moral laws can be enforced only by the moral governor, that is, God himself. All that men have to do in the line of the moral law is to persuade men to keep it. The refusal of the American Sabbath Union, which was represented at Minneapolis, to use only moral means in their work, stamps their movement as not a Christian work. They are not working to advance the gospel, but simply to compel men by force and arms to conform to their ideas. It matters not by what name they call themselves, they certainly have no right to the name “Christian” so far as their efforts to secure Sunday laws is concerned.