Religious Legislation Demanded
The agitation in favor of a rigid Sunday law for the Dominion of Canada is being vigorously maintained in the religious papers. From an editorial in a recent issue of the Christian Guardian of Toronto we take the following paragraphs:— In all Christian countries the state is bound to legislate on that important matter of the proper observance of Sunday. This is so for two reasons. In the first place, the worker has right to his rest one day in seven, and that right can only be properly secured and safeguarded by strict legislative enactment. And in the second place, the conservation of Sunday, not only as a day of rest, but as a day of religious worship, is recognized as in the highest interests of the people at large, and such conservation is possible only by legislation that will shut out certain things inimical to this. We know that the argument is frequently made that with Sunday as a day of religious worship the state has nothing to do, but such argument is far from conclusive. As a Christian people we are overwhelmingly of the conviction that Sunday should be, above all things else, a day for religious exercises, and given up largely to the consideration of spiritual things. The state has a duty to see that this conviction is possible of realization, and that no extreme secularizing of the day make religious service and worship impossible. . . . A stronger objection [than some others previously mentioned] comes from those who for conscience’ sake wish to observe our present Saturday as their day of rest and worship. We are free to admit that if it were possible, we would like to see the hardship of having to observe two rest days in the week removed from those who feel compelled to keep Saturday as their day of rest. But the utter impossibility of so doing without breaking down every barrier that would conserve the one day in seven to its legitimate purpose makes us a willing party to what might be judged a real hardship. We are convinced, however, that the Jews, for instance, would lose more in the case of a general breaking down of Sunday observance than the doing away with all of the hardships of this proposed legislation would atone for. There is no more than one per cent of our population who ask for the Saturday-Sunday. That small number are in duty bound to consider the highest interests of the whole, and are justly called upon to make the sacrifice asked of them. Modern society is built up upon that law of individual sacrifice for the good of the whole. There is no attempt made in this editorial to conceal the demand for religious legislation, and the expediency of oppressing the minority, even in matters of conscience, for the supposed benefit of the majority is frankly avowed. One of the reasons given in justification of Sunday legislation is that “the conservation of Sunday, not only as a day of rest, but as a day of religious worship, is recognized as in the highest interests of the people at large,” and it is further declared that “Sunday should be, above all things else, a day of religious exercises,” and it is affirmed to be the duty of the state to see that such an observance of the day “is possible of realization.” We regard such straightforward acknowledgment of the real purpose in all Sunday legislation as much more creditable than the effort to hide the real issue under the “civil sabbath” plea. But what prevents any person from devoting Sunday to “religious exercises”? Does the fact that some choose to follow their usual vocations on the first day of the week make it impossible for others to go to church? If so, would not the next step logically be a demand for cessation from labor on all days commanded to be recognized as holy days by the church? But all observers of the seventh day of the week, and their number is constantly increasing, find it altogether possible to devote to “religious exercises” a day which the great majority of people devote to labor. This demonstrates that when it is a matter of conscientious conviction, there is no necessity of legal enactment prohibiting all secular business in order for some to be religious. The declaration of a willingness to impose “a real hardship” upon those who “for conscience’ sake wish to observe our present Saturday as their day of rest and worship” is a brutal announcement of religious persecution. It is worthy of the Inquisition, and could easily lead to it. What a travesty upon Christianity is this! Canada is certainly a good field for missionary effort in behalf of religious liberty, and we are glad that our workers there are making the most of their opportunities.