National Reform Association of Ohio by S. B. H.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Oct 26, 1911

National Reform Association of Ohio

By S. B. H.

On September 25, 26, the National Reform Association of Ohio held a convention in Columbus for the purpose of setting forth its views on national and State reform, etc.

Among the speeches made was one by the Rev. W. S. McClure, of Xenia, on the subject of “The Sabbath as a Civil Necessity.” Among other things, the speaker argued that “people have no more right to violate the fourth [commandment] than any other,” and that the “state’s duty is to punish any infraction of the moral law.” He contended that the Sabbath “is necessary for the maintenance of the church; and the violation of the Lord’s day by man or nation means no worship, no religion, and no God. The refusal to keep the Sabbath means to walk in practical atheism.”

The Rev. J. S. Martin, general superintendent of the National Reform Association, gave it as his opinion that “moral men can be made by law,” and that “Sunday newspapers are the greatest enemy of Sabbath observance.” He said also: “This is neither a Jewish nor a Roman Catholic country, and some of us are determined that it never shall be.” “If the Jew does not like this country, let him stay out.” “The conscience of the nation must rule the conscience of the individual.” “I have no more respect for Americans who disbelieve the Bible than for the Jew,—hardly as much.”

The Rev. J. S. McGaw said, among other things, that the reason God’s name and authority were omitted from the national Constitution was because at the time when it was drawn up “French infidelity was sweeping over America.” Addressing himself to the question of the Hebrew citizen, the Rev. McGaw said: “If the Jew can not stand the Christian government, which, because of its Christianity, has thrown open the doors of America to the downtrodden of the world, the ocean liners are still running.”

From the above remarks, it must be apparent to the careful student of affairs that the National Reform Association stands for a movement in this country which, carried out to its logical sequence, would mean the establishment of an American papacy. In the light of the remarks made by two of the reverend gentlemen concerning the Hebrew citizen, we must conclude that the National Reform Association stands for the repudiation of our national shibboleth, “The land of the free and the home of the brave.” Otherwise they would not be so free in their invitation to the Hebrew to depart from our shores.

But would they stop at the expulsion and banishment of the Jew? We trow

not. Regarding all who will not subscribe to their ideas of civil government and religion as opponents of the Bible, against Christianity, etc., sentiments like the following have been expressed in times past:—

“We might add in all justice, if the opponents of the Bible do not like our government and its Christian features, let them go to some wild, desolate land, and in the name of the devil, and for the sake of the devil, subdue it, and set up a government of their own on infidel and atheistic ideas; and then, if they can stand it, stay there till they die.”—Christian Statesman of May 21, 1888.

“Those who oppose this work now will discover, when the religious amendment is made to the Constitution, that if they do not see fit to fall in with the majority, they must abide the consequences, or seek some more congenial clime.”—Rev. David McAllister.

Our forefathers founded a country which was designed to be “an asylum for the oppressed of every clime.” But if the purposes of the National Reform Association shall be carried out and put into the civil laws of our country, not only is the work of our political ancestors esteemed a thing of naught, but where will the Jew and non-believer and the Bible Sabbath-keeper go for a harbor of tolerance? S. B. H.