Out of the Traces

S. D. A. Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Sep 7, 1882

FromThe Signs of the Times, Vol. 8, No. 34; Special Edition, No. 1

Out of the Traces.

It is well known that the Sunday people of California have a standard name for the Sunday Law. It is a “police regulation,” a “sanitary measure.” The Sunday is the “American Sunday,” the “American Sabbath,” and the “Working-man’s Sabbath.” Great pains have been taken to hide the religious nature of the contest now going on. Judges and ministers of the gospel, have declared that the Sunday Law is not a law in favor of religion. They have solemnly repeated the statement that the law is purely secular, and that its enforcement would neither help nor hinder any man’s religion. The idea that the present Sunday agitation savors in the least of a union of church and State has been scouted.

But now comes the California Christian Advocate with an appeal to Christian women to use their influence in favor of Sunday. In this appeal it says: “The action of the Democratic State Convention at San Jose is a most alarming and ominous assault upon the very foundations of our holy religion.” “The women—wives, mothers, sisters, daughters—are especially involved in this attack upon the foundations of our very homes and our holy religion.” (Italics ours.)

Now what is the matter? Is not the Advocate frightened at a bug-bear? We have been repeatedly assured that a strict enforcement of the Sunday Law would not disturb our religious rights in the least. Then how could its repeal have an unfavorable effect upon the foundations of the Advocate’s religion. Its religion must be of a different kind from that of Paul. His was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone.” Eph. 2:20. The Advocate’s “holy religion” seems to be founded upon a “police regulation”—a very shaky foundation. Such a foundation might easily be “removed.” We advise our friends to dig deeper and build of more substantial material.

But we are not left to conjecture that this “police regulation” is the sole ground of the Sunday part of their “holy religion.” In the Advocate of March 1, the following language was used in regard to the Sunday: “When we plead for a law for it as a day of rest, we can justify that only on the ground that it is according to the law of nature and necessary to man. . . . We cannot sustain it before the people, if we claim its sanctity as a religious institution.” We agree with this statement. We know, as well as the Advocate does, that Sunday has no sanctity as a religious institution. The civil law is the only authority for its observance. It is a part of our work to teach this to the people, and we are glad to have the Advocate teach the same thing. We say we are glad; but we are surprised that the Advocate should be willing to admit the fact that its “holy religion” and the restriction of Chinese immigration are both on the same foundation. We prefer a religion for which we can give Bible proof.

But the Advocate shows the real nature of the issue. The contest is one about religious ceremonies and not about civil rights. The law is given under the head of “Offenses Against Religion,” and is a civil enactment discriminating in favor of somebody’s religion. As such it is contrary to the principles of the American Government. Should it be repealed, the working-man would still have his legal holiday—to be used for rest and worship if he so desires—for that is guaranteed by the civil code.

As we have before said, The law is not a temperance law; it bears no harder on the whisky men than it does upon merchants and bankers. Neither is it a “working-man’s law;” if it were abolished, the working-man would have just as many rights as he now has. But it is a law in favor of a form of religion; and in acknowledging this, the Advocate shows that it is out of harmony with the “machine;” for the policy is to delude people with the idea that somebody’s civil rights are in danger, and thus blind them as to the real point—the union of church and State. But it will take a good deal of drilling to get all to work together harmoniously, for consistency is something that has never yet been shown by the advocates of Sunday observance.