Your ShelfYour Projects

American Principles at Stake in Ohio

7%

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Feb 15, 1912

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 89, No. 7.

Read the full edition

American Principles at Stake in Ohio

By S. B. H.

As noted in former issues of the REVIEW AND HERALD, a constitutional convention is in session in Ohio. From press reports we learn that the question of putting the name of God in the new constitution has been before the convention, the ultimate outcome of which is uncertain.
From a wire sent by J. F. Olmstead, of Columbus, we learn that on January 30 the following resolution was introduced in the convention:—
“That the Sabbath shall be a civic institution rather than a religious one.”
The resolution was referred to the judiciary committee, before whom a hearing is expected to be secured. If this resolution is adopted and made part of the constitution, the State of Ohio will place upon its fundamental law book a statement on which it will be at issue with the great Governor of the universe, the Author of the Sabbath law. The proposition is unique and remarkable, but is in harmony with the principles of the National Reform Association. We are not aware that any other State constitution contains an article defining the Sabbath. The falsity of the statement that the Sabbath is or shall be a civil rather than a religious institution is evident when viewed in the light of Holy Writ.
The Sabbath was made for a religious purpose, pure and simple, before sin entered or ever civil government was dreamed of. See Gen. 2:1-3 and the fourth commandment.
The Lord of the Sabbath said to his ancient people: “Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you.” Ex. 31:13. See also Eze. 20:12, 20.
Sanctification is a religious term used in connection with man's relation to his God. If the Sabbath were a civil institution, then the Lord must needs have admonished that its observance would be a sign of sanctification in man's relation to his fellow men.
Moreover, if the constitution shall contain the article suggested by the resolution introduced, it will permit the State legislature to prohibit the observance of any day than the Sabbath in the State of Ohio. Further, it will be necessary for the supreme court of the State to determine which day of the week is the Sabbath. The only command given to man on the subject of Sabbath observance is contained in the fourth commandment, and is associated with the three other commandments pertaining to man's duty to his God.
Let us consider the resolution above referred to in the light of the National Reform literature. The Rev. W. F. Crafts, in a “Hearing on Sunday Rest Bill,” Dec. 13, 1888, said:—
“A weekly day of rest has never beenpermanently secured in any land except on the basis of religious obligation. Take the religion out, and you take the rest out.”
Dr. Joseph Cook, of Boston, in a lecture in 1887, said:—
“The experience of centuries shows that you will in vain endeavor to preserve Sunday as a day of rest, unless you preserve it as a day of worship.”
Much additional matter published by the National Reform Association indicating their position on the matter of State laws enforcing the observance of Sunday might be cited, but the quotations just mentioned are, we believe, sufficient to show that the proposition declaring the Sabbath to be a civil institution is stamped as untrue, the National Reformers themselves being the judges. We trust that the people of Ohio will repudiate the constitution now being framed, should the convention be so unwise as to adopt the article suggested by the resolution in question. S. B. H.