p. 101 | Church and State

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Mar 15, 1870

Church and State.

Fulfillments of prophecy in any age of the world are of absorbing interest to the Bible student—doubly so when the fulfillments occur in his own day and before his own eyes. As he becomes satisfied of the nature of the event, and is confident that he has about reached the time of its fulfillment, with what emotion he watches every indication of the correctness of his application. With such feelings S. D. Adventists now look upon the premonitions of the coming religious contest in this country, which shall result in the fulfillment of Rev. 13: 14–17, and the attempted enforcement of articles of religious faith and practice by law. So far has the agitation already progressed that public documents are everywhere circulated, a National Association has been formed to carry forward the movements, and a National Convention has been called, now sitting in Pittsburg, Pa., on the day we write, March 3, 1870. The following are notices by the Detroit Post and N. Y. Independent, of this movement:

RELIGION AND THE CONSTITUTION.

The following call has been issued:

“The Constitution of the United States makes no acknowledgment of Almighty God, the author of national existence; nor of Jesus Christ, who is the ruler of nations; nor of the Bible, which is the fountain of law and good morals, as well as of religion. This has, from the beginning, been a matter of deep regret. It may have been an oversight; but it was, and it is, both an error and an evil. It does not reflect the views of the great majority of the people upon these great matters. It dishonors God. It is inconsistent with the character of nearly all our State constitutions, and with all the precedents of our early history. It has introduced, or furthered, views and measures which are now struggling for a baneful ascendancy in State and National politics; such as, that civil government is only a social compact; that it exists only for secular and material, not for moral ends; that Sabbath laws are unconstitutional; and that the Bible must be excluded from our public schools. It is easy to see that laws for the prevention of intemperance, blasphemy, impurity, or cruelty, may be objected to on the same grounds. And, indeed, we may expect that law itself will be defined to be the mere advice of the majority, with no proper penalty but the disapprobation of the public. The National Association, which has been formed for the purpose of securing such an amendment to the Constitution of the United States as will remedy this great defect, and indicate that we are a Christian nation, invite all American citizens who favor such an amendment, without distinction of party or creed, to meet in convention in Pittsburgh, on Thursday, the 3d day of March next, at 2 o'clock P. M.”

Among the signers to the call are Gov. McClurg, of Missouri; Judge McCandless, of the United States District Court at Pittsburgh; Bishop Huntington, of Central New York; Bishop Kerfoot, of Pittsburg; Bishop Eastham, of Massachusetts; the Rev. C. G. Finney, late President of Oberlin College, Ohio; the Rev. J. Blanchard, President of Wheaton College, Illinois; and Judge Strong, of the Supreme Court.

The Independent, though disapproving the project, and doubting its success, nevertheless acknowledges that it is an attempt to virtually unite church and state. It speaks as follows:

The National Association—formed for the purpose of promoting an amendment to the Constitution of the United States acknowledging Almighty God as the author of national existence, of Jesus Christ as the ruler of nations, and of the Bible as an authority in morals and religion—invites “all American citizens who favor such an amendment, without distinction of party or creed, to meet in convention in Pittsburgh, on Thursday, the third of March next, at 2 o'clock P. M.” There are honorable and noble men, not a few, working in this movement; but, with the utmost respect for their motives, we frankly declare ourselves totally opposed to the object which they have in view. The Constitution of the United States, in its relations to religion, is, in our judgment, exactly right as it stands; and we are glad to believe that the great majority of Christians of every denomination agree with us. The chance for carrying the proposed amendment is just as good and no better than the chance of uniting church and state in the New World. We could wish that the time and money which this futile movement will cost might be expended in efforts for the conversion of the whole people, as individuals, to the Christian cause.