Your ShelfYour Projects

Two Strong Protests

5%

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Mar 20, 1913

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 90, No. 12.

Read the full edition

Two Strong Protests

THE MEMBERS OF THE MINISTERIAL ALLIANCE OF OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA., PRESENTED TO THE OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE A MEMORIAL FAVORING THE PASSAGE OF A SUNDAY BILL WHICH WAS THEN PENDING. THIS CALLED OUT A LETTER TO THE MEMBERS OF THE ALLIANCE FROM OUR BRETHREN IN CHARGE OF THE WORK IN THAT PART OF THE FIELD, AND ALSO A PROTEST ADDRESSED TO THE SENATE. BOTH OF THESE DOCUMENTS WE PRESENT HEREWITH:—
“Oklahoma City, Feb. 26, 1913.”
“Esteemed Brethren: Having read a copy of your memorial to the Oklahoma Legislature favoring the passage of Senate Bill No. 329, we take this means of placing before you our reasons for opposing the same.
“We believe that attendance at shows, theaters, etc., is detrimental to Christian experience, and in many cases absolutely corrupting to the morals of society. As Christians, we shall use our influence against such attendance every day of the week. We do not favor shows. Neither do we desire to oppose any one who conscientiously believes that Sunday should be observed as a day of rest.
“We believe that one of our greatest dangers to-day arises from the encroachments of the Church of Rome. She does not and will not fail to improve every opportunity afforded her to gain governmental control. We therefore decidedly oppose Senate Bill No. 329, because we believe it to be a denial of Protestantism, and as a precedent it would open the way for further encroachment from this source.
“The very name Protestant came into existence because Rome denied two great God-given principles; namely:—
“1. ‘The Bible, and the Bible only,’ as a rule of faith.
“2. The right to worship God according to the dictates of the individual conscience without interference on the part of the civil magistrate. (See the Protest of the Princes at the Diet of Spires.)
“The Protestant religion is therefore grounded upon the Bible, and the Bible only, as to matters of faith. Even though the observance of the first day had been commanded by God, Protestants must deny the authority of the state to enforce it upon unbelievers.
“If we deny these foundation-stones of Protestantism, we are but playing into the hands of Rome. Leaving these principles, we can but sink in the mire of tradition. Rome will accept what we place in her hands, and we shall feel her desolating influence.
“We entreat your careful consideration of this question from our viewpoint, and trust that we may be united in fortifying against that which endangers our common liberty.
“We can assure you of our hearty support in your effort against the evils of liquor and tobacco, and against the terrible curse of the white slave trade.
“Hoping that this communication may serve to correct any wrong impression you may previously have had of our work, and praying for your success in all your efforts to build up the cause of Christ, we are—
“Your brethren in Christ, “David Voth, “G. F. Watson, “A. F. Harrison, “W. R. Hanson, “I. A. Crane.”
“Whereas, The Ministerial Alliance of this city has presented a memorial to your honorable body asking for the passage of Senate Bill No. 329, therefore,—
“We the undersigned Seventh-day Adventist ministers now laboring in the city wish to enter a protest against the same:—
“First, we are Protestants. The Protestant rule of faith is ‘the Bible, and the Bible only.’ There is no command found in the Bible for the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week. What is not commanded in the Bible surely should not be enforced by civil law because of its religious nature.
“Second, as Protestants we do not seek the aid of civil law to enforce our faith upon unbelievers. On the contrary, we emphatically deny the right of the state to interfere in matters of religion.
“Third, as American citizens we believe that all men have the right to worship or not to worship God, according to the dictates of conscience. Any deviation from these principles we hold to be neither Protestant nor American.
“David Voth, “G. F. Watson, “A. F. Harrison, “W. R. Hanson, “I. A. Crane.”
THE PRESENTATION OF THE TRUE PRINCIPLES OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, AS SET FORTH IN THESE DOCUMENTS, MUST DO GOOD; AND WE HOPE THE LEGISLATURE OF OKLAHOMA WILL NOT BE INFLUENCED TO VIOLATE THESE PRINCIPLES IN THE ENACTMENT OF RELIGIOUS LEGISLATION.