Religious Liberty Notes by K. C. R.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Mar 14, 1907

Religious Liberty Notes

By K. C. R.

SEVERAL Sunday bills have been introduced into the Oregon State Legislature this winter, and the clergy of that State are strongly petitioning their lawmakers for more rigid legislation and further, that heavy fines shall be imposed upon all officials who fail to enforce the Sunday laws to the letter.

The Springfield (Ohio) Daily, bearing date of Feb. 21, 1907, contains a strong protest from a citizen of German Township which is adjacent to Springfield, against Sunday baseball games. When recreation is prohibited both in the cities and country there will only be one place left to go on Sunday, and that is to church.

Assistant District Attorney, Felix McGettrick, recently said in a speech in Boston, Mass., which was reported in the Boston Journal, bearing date of Feb. 23, 1907: “Our interests are now so varied that the Constitution handed down to us by Washington and his compatriots is no longer of much use or value to us. The condition of the people to-day means revolution in some form.”

A Sunday bill, No. 746 A, was introduced into the Wisconsin Legislature, Feb. 15, 1907, by Mr. Grassie. The title of the bill reads in part “To provide rest one day in seven for employees;” but defines that one day in seven by forbidding the employment of any person “during any portion of the first day of the week.” The bill further provides that no employee shall be permitted to work “more than six consecutive Sundays in case of necessity” unless he prefers to have his rest on some other day of the week. It will be seen, even from the excuse of an exemption clause for those who observe another day, that it is a religious measure. It is difficult to hide the cloven foot of these pretended humanitarian bills.

Elder A. R. Ogden in the Kansas Worker, of Feb. 6, 1907, shows how pronounced the religious phase of the recent proposed Sunday bill in the Kansas Legislature was made in a hearing as follows: “When the time of the doing rather than the thing done is made to constitute the crime, it is clearly evident that it is a religious question. This fact was made very prominent in the discussion in the House by the supporters of the bill. A few remarks will show the tenor of the arguments presented in favor of the bill. One speaker said, ‘I want to say that the playing of baseball on Sunday is an encroachment on the sacredness of the day.’ Another remarked, ‘I have had occasion to notice the spirit of commercialism that is destroying the sacredness of the Sabbath.’ While another said in his argument in support of the bill, ‘I am backed only by my ideas of the sacredness of the day.’ Thus the tenor of the arguments in favor of the bill may be clearly discussed. It is the ‘sacredness’ of the day that they are guarding. Think of a civil government passing laws to guard a ‘sacred’ institution!”

The Daily Press of Utica, N. Y., bearing date of Feb. 27, 1907, contains a report of a meeting of the “Trades Assembly” of that city. One of the chief items of business of the meeting was the voicing of a vigorous protest against a bill recently introduced into the New York Legislature by Assemblyman Gluck of New York for a more liberal Sunday law. The association instructed their secretary to correspond with the ministerial association of that city to secure their co-operation in defeating the measure. This is an example showing how trade unions and the federated churches are seeking to secure Sunday legislation.

The Daily Reporter Star of Orlando, Fla., bearing date of Feb. 19, 1907, contains a synopsis of an address on “Sabbath Observance,” by Hon. W. R. O’Neal at the Y. M. C. A. room. Among other things he said, “I appreciate only too well in choosing this subject that I am treading upon dangerous ground.” He then proceeds to prove the necessity of Sunday rest by showing how Christ observed the seventh-day Sabbath, and further adds, “The hope of the American Republic depends upon the careful observance of Sabbath laws. Disregard for these laws has a tendency to break down, disrupt.” That this address was in the interests of Sunday legislation, the report of the meeting concluded by saying, “The sentiment of the meeting was that our present Sabbath (Sunday) laws should be enforced.” Instead of the enforcement of Sunday laws being the safeguard of this nation, they will ultimately accomplish its ruin, as they have that of other nations.

The Lincoln Daily Star, bearing date of March 3, 1907, contains an article nearly a column long, written by Elder Chas. Thompson, in which he reviews the following statement made by one of Lincoln’s prominent ministers: “Who will rule, bums or the people?” The sermon was aimed at Sunday baseball players. The article shows the injustice of classing as “bums” all who desire recreation on Sunday and as “the people” only those who believe in Sunday enforcement. He concludes the article thus: “Because a majority of the people observe Sunday as sacred is no proof that it should receive the crutches of a legislative enactment. For neither our law-making nor our enforcing power has been created for the purpose of enforcing the wish of the majority in establishing a mode of worship. The purpose of government as set forth by the Declaration of Independence and the national constitution is to protect divine rights, and to steer the ship of state clear of settling religious controversy. The torch that has kindled the fires of persecution in every age, the enactments that have blackened the pages of human history, the blood that has issued from the veins of every martyr, the instruments of torture that have inflicted pain and punishment upon humanity, have all been made possible by legislative enactments, at the request of religious fanatics, who felt it a religious duty to burn a heretic to save him. We are a firm believer in that principle which is the foundation of Protestantism, ‘that in matters of conscience, the majority have no power,’ and that principle enunciated by that noble American, General Grant, when he said, ‘Keep the church and state forever separate.’”

The Supreme Court of Massachusetts has recently rendered a decision that the Hebrew must refrain from work on Sunday even though he observes the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath. This decision demonstrates that there is but little virtue in the so-styled exemption clause for those who observe another day. The Boston Journal of Feb. 28, 1907 further says editorially concerning the Supreme Court decision: “A great many prominent Hebrews of Boston feel that an economic injustice is thus done members of their race who, if orthodox, must cease from labor and selling on Saturday, and are then compelled to do the same thing by law on Sunday. They believe that these people might well be permitted to work on Sunday if they do so in a quiet and decent manner that does not offend their neighbors. It is said that Governor Guild has offered some suggestions looking toward the softening of the law in this regard, and it is certain that many citizens not Jews would have no objection to Hebrew labor on Sunday if carried on within reason. Naturally, however, there will be objection to any lessening of the rigor of the Sunday laws. The cry will be raised that no concession should be made to sectarian desires. And yet what else were and are the Sunday laws but the result of sectarian demands? They no longer represent the whole people. The Mohammedan citizen, for instance, or even the Seventh-day Adventist, does not approve of them. But they persist, as a matter of course, and it is always difficult to change them. It will be no less so this year.”

K. C. R.