Untitled article by Sanford O. Lane

Pacific Press Publishing Company · New York · March 17, 1892

FromThe American Sentinel, Vol. 7, No. 11

Individual Service to God.

By Sanford O. Lane

THERE are many who seem to believe that the keeping of the Sabbath is not simply an individual obligation. They seem to think a man is unable to meet the requirements of the fourth commandment of God’s law unless his neighbor assists him to keep the Sabbath, by himself refraining from all unnecessary work on that day. The great plea made for the enforcement of Sunday laws is that those who desire to keep that day holy are hindered from so doing by the unnecessary work done by those who do not regard the day as the Sabbath.

But this claim is not true in the least degree; because if it were true, God would be unjust in his requirements; God requires a man to keep the Sabbath holy unto him. The command, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,” means much more than simply refraining from secular employment on that day. The cessation of labor is only the outward sign of an inward regard for the holy ordinance of the Sabbath day.

Now if the Sabbath can not be kept holy by one man while his neighbor disregards its sacredness, and profanes the holy day by following his ordinary vocation, and at the same time God does require a man to keep it holy; does not God require of a man a thing he can not do unless his neighbor assists him by himself refraining from labor on that day? If God did require such a thing of a man without guaranteeing to him that his neighbor would do his part by refraining from work on that day, the Almighty would be requiring that which is unjust. On the other hand, if God had made provision that he who has no regard for the Sabbath should be compelled to conform to an outward observance of that day that he who does reverence the day might be able to keep it holy, then God would compel an outward conformity to his requirement, without inward reverence for the day. Such a thing God never does, it is not his character to coerce; and those who would circumscribe the freedom of others, do not work the works of God.

The Almighty is not unjust. “Justice and judgment are the habitation of his

throne.” He requires nothing of a man that he can not do even though the whole world is opposed to him. It is not true that one man can disturb his neighbor in such a way as to interfere with his acceptance with God in the observance of his holy day.

God requires the best and holiest regard for his day we can give under the circumstances which surround us, and over which we can have no control. The commandment says that a man and all he controls—his animals, his servants, and the stranger that abides with him—shall rest on that day, and when a man conforms to that requirement, sincerely and heartily, his service is acceptable to his Maker, whether his neighbor observes the day or not.

What one man can do and be accepted of God another can do and be accepted; because God is no respecter of persons. I know that I can serve God by resting on his Sabbath even though thousands of busy men are toiling all around me regardless of the sacred claims of God’s holy day. My conscience could not be troubled because they are at work. I know this because I have kept the day under just such circumstances, and felt not the slightest compunction of conscience because others did not choose to observe the Sabbath day with me. God accepted my service because I kept the day according to the commandment made to me individually and to every other individual human being on the earth.

A great political lecturer was once addressing a large audience. During his speech he made a very bold statement. A man in the audience arose and stated a little personal experience which completely contradicted the bold statement of the lecturer. “This,” says the man, “I know to be a fact by my own personal experience; and how do you harmonize it with your statement.” “But,” replied the lecturer, “I know nothing of this fact you state, I never heard of it before.” The man in the audience then replied, “But my knowledge of this fact, no matter how limited, is not to be offset by your ignorance of it however extensive that may be.”

So with Sabbath observance, if one man knows he can render acceptable service to God by keeping his Sabbath, even though thousands are working on that day, it makes no difference how many may say they know nothing of his experience. There is not only one but there are thousands who can testify to a sense of acceptance with God in resting on his Sabbath, when the world around them was engaged in its usual secular business, bustle, and wickedness.

There is only one way in which a man can disturb his neighbor’s conscience by working on the day his neighbor observes as the Sabbath. He can not disturb his conscience in the least if that conscience is first right between himself and his God. If it is not right, it can be very easily disturbed by the course of some one whose conscience is “void of offense toward God and men.”

To illustrate: Railroads and steamboats have run, and factories have been operated all over this country on Sunday, and they have been comparatively unmolested, in their disregard of the day. But who has been prosecuted for Sunday work? A typical case is that of a quiet farmer in the State of Tennessee, who was arrested for working in his back fields, where he was out of sight or hearing of any religious gathering, and where he could disturb no one by his work. What was there about this man that he should be prosecuted for quietly working where he could disturb no one, while at the same time thousands of busy hands were running railroads, steamboats, telegraph lines, and following almost every vocation under the sun? —Because that man had conscientiously rested on another day, and had performed his duty to his Maker, and felt in his heart not the slightest regard for Sunday as a sacred day. This case and a few similar ones show where the efforts of those who favor Sunday legislation are tending.

It is not so much those who work on Sunday who offend, as it is those who deny the sacredness of the day by resting on some other day, which is sacred to them, and which answers the demands of the conscience. In the Salem witchcraft fanaticism men and women were condemned, not for being witches and wizards but for denying the reality of witchcraft, and if a man confessed himself a wizard or a woman confessed herself a witch, it was almost sure to release them from the death to which they had been condemned. The parallel between the insane fanaticism of that time and the movement in our day which seeks to put a popular belief in the fundamental law of the land on an undeniable legal basis is very significant. Persecution has never been directed so much against those who denied God, as against those who departed from the popular forms of worshiping God.

SANFORD O. LANE.