"This great majority is becoming daily more conscious not only of their rights, but of their power. Their number grows, and their column becomes more solid. They have quietly, steadily opposed infidelity, until it has, at least, become politically unpopular.

They have a.s.serted the rights of man and the rights of the government, until the nation"s faith has become measurably fixed and declared on these points. And now that the close of the war gives us occasion to amend our Const.i.tution, that it may clearly and fully represent the mind of the people on these points, they feel that it should also be so amended as to recognize the rights of G.o.d in man and in government. Is it anything but due to their long patience that they be at length allowed to speak out the great facts and principles which give to all government its dignity, stability, and beneficence?"

Thus for several years a movement has been on foot, daily growing in extent, and importance, and power, to fulfill that portion of the prophecy of Rev. 13:11-17, which first calls forth the dissent of the objector, and which appears from every point of view the most improbable of all the specifications; namely, the erection of the image and the enforcing of the mark. Beyond this, nothing remains but the sharp conflict of the people of G.o.d with this earthly power, and the eternal triumph of the overcomer.

An a.s.sociation, even now national in its character, as already noticed, and endeavoring, as is appropriate for those who have such objects in view, to secure their purposes under the sanction of the highest authority of the land, the National Const.i.tution, already has this matter in hand. In the interest of this a.s.sociation there is published, in Philadelphia, a semi-monthly paper called the _Christian Statesman_, in advocacy of this movement. Every issue of that paper goes forth filled with arguments and appeals from some of the ablest pens in our land, in favor of the desired Const.i.tutional amendment. These are the very methods, by which, in a country like ours, great revolutions are brought about; and no movement has ever arisen so suddenly as this to so high a position in public esteem with certain cla.s.ses, and taken so strong a hold upon their hearts.

Says Mr. G.A. Townsend (New World and Old, p. 212):--

"Church and State has several times crept into American politics, as in the contentions over the Bible in the public schools, the Anti-Catholic party of 1844, &c. Our people have been wise enough heretofore to respect the clergy in all religious questions, and to entertain a wholesome jealousy of them in politics. The latest _politico-theological movement_ [italics ours] is to insert the name of the Deity in the Const.i.tution."

The present movements of this National a.s.sociation and the progress it has made luay be gathered somewhat from the report of the proceedings of the Convention held in Cincinnati, Jan. 31, 1872.

From the Report of the Executive Committee it appeared that ten thousand copies of the proceedings of the Philadelphia Convention have been gratuitously distributed; that a General Secretary (Rev. D. McAllister) has been appointed, with a salary of $2,500; and that a long and elaborate paper by Prof. Taylor Lewis, of Union College, in advocacy of the ideas and objects of the a.s.sociation, will soon be published; that the number of the Executive Committee is recommended to be increased to twenty-five, besides including all presidents of auxiliary a.s.sociations; that $2,177 have been raised the past year by the a.s.sociation, and that a balance of over $90 remains in the treasury. Nearly $1,800 were raised at this Convention.

The Business Committee recommended that the delegates to this Convention hold meetings in their respective localities to ratify the resolutions adopted at Cincinnati; that twenty thousand copies of the proceedings of this Convention be published in tract form; and that the friends of the a.s.sociation be urged to form auxiliary a.s.sociations. All these recommendations were adopted.

The resolutions pa.s.sed were as follows:--

"_Resolved_, That it is the right and duty of the United States, as a nation settled by Christians, a nation with Christian laws and usages, and with Christianity as its greatest social force, to acknowledge itself in its written Const.i.tution, to be a Christian nation.

"_Resolved_, That, as the disregard of sound theory always leads to mischievous practical results, so in this case the failure of our nation to acknowledge, in its organic laws, its relation to G.o.d and his moral laws, as a Christian nation, has fostered the theory that government has nothing to do with religion but to let it alone, and that consequently State laws in favor of the Sabbath, Christian marriage, and the use of the Bible in the schools, are unconst.i.tutional.

"_Resolved_, That we recognize the necessity of complete harmony between our written const.i.tution and the actual facts of our national life; and we maintain that tho true way to eflect this undoubted harmony is not to expel the Bible and all idea of G.o.d and religion from our schools, abrogate laws enforcing Christian morality, and abolish all devout observances in connection with government, but to insert an explicit acknowledgment of G.o.d and the Bible in our fundamental law.

"_Resolved_, That the proposed religious amendment, so far from tending to a union of Church and State, is directly opposed to such union, inasmuch as it recognizes the nation"s own relations to G.o.d, and insists that the nation should acknowledge these relations for itself, and not through the medium of any church establishment."

Mr. F.E. Abbott, editor of the _Index_, Toledo, O., who was present at the foregoing Convention, and presented a protest against its aims and efforts, says of those who stand at the head of the movement:--

"We found them to be so thoroughly sincere and earnest in their purpose that they did not fear the effect of a decided but temperate protest. This fact speaks volumes in their praise, as men of character and convictions. We saw no indication of the artful management which characterizes most conventions. The leading men--Rev. D. McAllister, Rev. A.M. Milligan, Prof. Sloane, Prof.

Stoddard, Prof. Wright, Rev. T.P. Stephenson--impressed us as able, clear-headed, and thoroughly honest men; and we could not but conceive a great respect for their motives and their intentions. It is such qualities as these in the leaders of the movement that give it its most formidable character. They have definite and consistent ideas; they perceive the logical connection of these ideas, and advocate them in a very cogent and powerful manner; and they propose to push them with determination and zeal. Concede their premises, and it is impossible to deny their conclusions; and since these premises are axiomatic truths with the great majority of Protestant Christians, the effect of the vigorous campaign on which they are entering cannot be small or despicable. The very respect with which we were compelled to regard them only increases our sense of the evils which lie germinant in their doctrines; and we came home with the conviction that religious liberty in America must do battle for its very existence hereafter. The movement in which these men are engaged has too many elements of strength to be contemned by any far-seeing liberal. Blindness or sluggishness to-day means slavery to-morrow. Radicalism must pa.s.s now from thought to action, or it will deserve the oppression that lies in wait to overwhelm it."

As to the probability of the success of this movement, there is at present some difference of opinion. While a very few pa.s.s it by with a slur as a mere temporary sensation of little or no consequence, it is generally regarded as a work of growing strength and importance, both by its advocates and opposers. Pet.i.tions and remonstrances are both being circulated with activity, and shrewd observers, who have watched the movement with a jealous eye, and heretofore hoped it would amount to nothing, now confess that it "means business." No movement of equal magnitude of purpose has ever sprung up and become strong, and secured favor so rapidly as this. Indeed, none of equal magnitude has ever been sprung upon the American mind, as this aims to remodel the whole framework of our government, and give to it a strong religious cast--a thing which the framers of our Const.i.tution were careful to exclude from it. They not only ask that the Bible, and G.o.d, and Christ, shall be recognized in the Const.i.tution, but that it shall indicate this as "a Christian nation, and place all Christian laws, inst.i.tutions, and usages, in our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the nation."

Of course, appropriate legislation will be required to carry such amendments into effect, and somebody will have to decide what are "Christian laws and inst.i.tutions." From what we know of such movements in the past in other countries, and of the temper of the churches of this, and of human nature when it has power suddenly conferred upon it, we look for no good from this movement. From a lengthy article in the Lansing _State Republican_ in reference to the Cincinnati Convention, we take the following extract:--

"Now there are hundreds and thousands of moral and professedly Christian people in this nation to-day who do not recognize the doctrine of the Trinity, do not recognize Jesus Christ the same as G.o.d. And there are hundreds and thousands of men and women who do not recognize the Bible as the revelation of G.o.d. The attempt to make any such amendment to the Const.i.tution would be regarded by a large minority, perhaps a majority, of our nation as a palpable violation of liberty of conscience. Thousands of men, if called upon to vote for such an amendment, would hesitate to vote against G.o.d, although they may not believe that the amendment was necessary or that it is right; and such men would either vote affirmatively or not at all. In every case, such an amendment would be likely to receive an affirmative vote, which would by no means indicate the true sentiment of the people. And the same rule would hold good in relation to the adoption of such an amendment by Congress or by the Legislatures of three-quarters of the States. Men who make politics a trade would hesitate to record their names against the proposed Const.i.tutional Amendment, advocated by the leaders of the great religious denominations of the land, and indorsed by such men as Bishop Simpson, Bishop McIlvaine, Bishop Eastburn, President Finney, Prof. Lewis, Prof. Seelye, Bishop Huntington, Bishop Kerfoot, Dr. Patterson, Dr. Cuyler, and many other divines who are the representative men of their respective denominations."

Not only the representative men of the churches are pledged to this movement, but governors, judges, and many of the most eminent men of the land are working for it. Who doubts the power of the "representative men of the denominations" to rally the strength of their denominations to sustain this work at their call? We utter no prophecy of the future; it is not needed. Events transpire in these days faster than our minds are prepared to grasp them. Let us heed the admonition to "watch!" and, with reliance upon G.o.d, prepare for "those things which are coming on the earth."

But it may be asked how the Sunday question is to be affected by the proposed Const.i.tutional Amendment. Answer: The object, or, to say the least, one object of this amendment is to put the Sunday inst.i.tution on a legal basis, and compel its observance by the arm of the law. At the National Convention held in Philadelphia, Jan. 18 and 19, 1871, the following resolution was among the first offered by the Business Committee:--

"_Resolved_, That, in view of the controlling power of the Const.i.tution in shaping State, as well as national, policy, it is of immediate importance to public morals, and to social order, to secure such an amendment as will indicate that this is a Christian nation, and place all Christian laws, inst.i.tutions, and usages in our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the nation, specially those which secure a proper oath, and which protect society against blasphemy, Sabbath-breaking, and polygamy."

By Sabbath-breaking is meant nothing else but Sunday-breaking. In a convention of the friends of Sunday, a.s.sembled Nov. 29, 1870, in New Concord, Ohio, the Rev. James White is reported to have said: "The question [of Sunday observance] is closely connected with the National Reform Movement; for until the government comes to know G.o.d and honor his law, we need not expect to restrain Sabbath-breaking corporations."

Here again the idea of the legal enforcement of Sunday observance stands uppermost.

Once more: The Philadelphia _Press_ of Dec. 5, 1870, stated that some Congressmen, including Vice-president Colfax, arrived in Washington by Sunday trains, Dec. 4, on which the _Christian Statesman_ commented as follows (we give italics as we find them):--

"1. _Not one of those men ivho thus violated the Sabbath is fit to hold any official position in a Christian nation_. * *

"He who violates the Sabbath may not steal because the judgment of society so strongly condemns theft, or because he believes that honesty is the best policy; but tempt him with the prospect of concealment, or the prospect of advantage, and there can be no reason why he who robs G.o.d will not rob his neighbor also. For this reason, the Sabbath law lies at the foundation of morality. Its observance is an acknowledgment of the sovereign rights of G.o.d over us.

"2. _The sin of these Congressmen is a national sin_, because the nation hath not said to them in the Const.i.tution, the supreme rule for our public servants, "We charge you to serve us in accordance with the higher law of G.o.d." These Sabbath-breaking railroads, moreover, are corporations created by the State, and amenable to it. The State is responsible to G.o.d for the conduct of these creatures which it calls into being. It is bound, therefore, to restrain them from this as from other crimes, and any violation of the Sabbath, by any corporation, should work immediate forfeiture of its charter. And the Const.i.tution of the United States, with which all State legislation is required to be in harmony, should be of such a character as to prevent any State from tolerating such infractions of fundamental moral law.

"3. Give us in the National Const.i.tution the simple acknowledgment of the law of G.o.d as the supreme law of nations, and _all the results indicated in this note will ultimately be secured_. Let no one say that the movement does not contemplate sufficiently practical ends."

From all this, we see the important place the Sabbath question is to hold in this movement--the important place it even now holds in the minds of those who are urging it forward. Let the amendment called for be granted, "and all the results indicated in this note," says the writer, "will ultimately be secured;" that is, individuals and corporations will be restrained from violating the Sunday observance.

The acknowledgment of G.o.d in the Const.i.tution may do very well as a banner under which to sail; but the practical bearing of the movement relates to the compulsory observance of the first day of the week.

Even now the question is agitated why the Jew should be allowed to follow his business on the first day after having observed the seventh.

The same question is equally pertinent to all seventh-day keepers. A writer signing himself "American," in the Boston _Herald_ of Dec. 14, 1871, said:--

"The President in his late message in speaking of the Mormon question, says, "They shall not be permitted to break the law under the cloak of religion." This, undoubtedly, meets the approval of every American citizen, and I wish to cite a parallel case, and ask: Why should the Jews of this country be allowed to keep open their stores on the Sabbath under the cloak of their religion while I, or any other true American, will be arrested and suffer punishment if we do the same thing? If there is a provision made allowing a few to conduct business on the Sabbath, what justice and equality can there be in any such provision, and why should it not be stopped at once?"

And this question, we apprehend, will be very summarily decided, when once the Consitutional Amendment has been secured.

At a Ministerial a.s.sociation of the M.E. church held in Healdsburg, Cal., April 26-28, 1870, Rev. Mr. Trefren, of Napa, speaking of S.D.A.

ministers, said, "I predict for them a short race. What we want is law in the matter." Then, referring to the present movement for a law, he added, "And we will have it, too; and when we get the power into our hands, we will show these men what their end will be."

From a work recently published by the Presbyterian Board of Publication, ent.i.tled "The Sabbath," by Chas. Elliott, Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis in the Presbyterian Theological Seminary of the North West, Chicago, Ill., we take this paragraph:--

"But it may be asked, Would not the Jew be denied equality of rights by legislation protecting the Christian Sabbath and ignoring the Jewish? The answer is, We are not a Jewish but a Christian nation; therefore, our legislation must be conformed to the inst.i.tutions and spirit of Christianity. This is absolutely necessary from the nature of the case."

There is no mistaking the import of this language: No matter if the Jew does not secure equal rights with others. We are not a Jewish nation, but a Christian; and all must be made to conform to what the majority decide to be Christian inst.i.tutions. This affects all who observe the seventh day as much as the Jews. And we apprehend it will not be a difficult matter to lead the ma.s.ses, whose prejudices incline them in this direction, to believe that it is "absolutely necessary" that all legislation must take such a form, and cause them to act accordingly.

Several years since, Dr. Durbin of the _Christian Advocate and Journal_; gave his views on this subject as follows:--

"I infer, therefore, that the civil magistrate may not be called upon to enforce the observance of the Sabbath [Sunday] as required in the spiritual kingdom of Christ; but when Christianity becomes the moral and spiritual life of the State, the State is bound through her magistrates to prevent the open violation of the holy Sabbath, as a measure of self-preservation. She cannot, without injuring her own vitality and incurring the divine displeasure, be recreant to her duty in this matter."

At a meeting held at Saratoga Springs, Aug. 12, 1860, ex-president Fillmore said that "while he deemed it needful to legislate cautiously in all matters connected with public morals, and to avoid coercive measures affecting religion, the right of every citizen to a day of rest and worship could not be questioned, and laws securing that right should be enforced."

And the _Christian Statesman_ of Dec. 15, 1871, speaking of the general disregard of the Sabbath [Sunday] in the arrangements for welcoming the Grand Duke Alexis, says:--

"How long will it be before the Christian ma.s.ses of this country can be roused to enact a law compelling their public servants to respect the Sabbath?"

A very marked and rapid change is taking place in public opinion relative to the proposed religious amendment of the Const.i.tution. We have learned of instances of men who were at first openly hostile to the movement, now giving their influence for its advancement, and clamoring loudly for a Sunday law. And some who at first regarded it with indifference, are now becoming its warm partisans. As a sample of this change of feeling, the following paragraph from the _Christian Press_ of Jan, 1872, may be presented. The _Christian Press_ is the organ of the Western Book and Tract Society, Cincinnati, Ohio, and its editor, speaking of the National a.s.sociation above referred to, says:--

"When this a.s.sociation was formed, while we were prepared to bid it G.o.d speed, we did not then feel that there was any pressing need for the object sought; and as our mission was specially directed to the Christianizing, enlightening and elevating, the ma.s.ses of the people, we have said little in our columns on the subject, being a.s.sured that if the people are right, it is easy to set the government right. The late combined efforts, however, of various cla.s.ses of our citizens to exclude the Bible from our schools, repeal our Sabbath laws, and divorce our government entirely from religion, and thus make it an atheistic government--for every government must be for G.o.d or against him, and must be administered in the interests of religion and good morals, or in the interests of irreligion and immorality--have changed our mind, and we are now prepared to urge the necessity for an explicit acknowledgment in the National Const.i.tution of the authority of G.o.d and the supremacy of his law, as revealed in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments."

With the anti-Sunday movements of the present day, considering their a.s.sociations, and the manner and object in and for which they are carried forward, we have no sympathy. They aim at utter no-Sabbathism, freedom from all moral restraint, and all the evils of unbridled intemperance--ends which we abhor with all the strength of a moral nature quickened by the most intense religious convictions. And while the indignation of the batter portion of the community will be aroused at the want of religious principle and the immorality attending the popular anti-Sunday movement, a little lack of discrimination, by no means uncommon, will on account of our opposition to the day, though we oppose it on entirely different ground, easily a.s.sociate us with the cla.s.s above-mentioned, and subject us to the same odium.

Meanwhile, some see the evils involved in this movement, and raise the voice of alarm. The _Christian Union_, Jan., 1871, said:

"The friends of the measure are not likely ever to agree among themselves. The Convention which met in Philadelphia on the 18th inst. to consider this subject, refused to accept a phraseology which simply recognizes the Deity, and insisted upon including in the emendation the name of Jesus Christ as well. A party, in behalf of the Holy Spirit, which is so conspicuously slighted, will be the next in order; and then the way will be open for a proposition to recognize the "Vicegerent of Christ on earth," as the true source of power among the nations! If the proposed amendment is anything more than a bit of sentimental cant, it is to have a _legal_ effect. It is to alter the status of the non-Christian citizen before the law. It is to affect the legal oaths and instruments, the matrimonial contracts, the sumptuary laws, &c., &c., of the country. This would be an outrage on natural right."

The Janesville (Wis.) _Gazette_, at the close of an article on the proposed amendment, speaks thus of the effect of the movement, should it succeed:--