The National Sunday Law Dilemma

THE NATIONAL SUNDAY-LAW DILEMMA

"We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God andheaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never haveto give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion,will be disappointed." Review & Herald, July 26, 1892.

"Let allprove their positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every pointthey claim as truth from the revealed word of God." Evangelism, page256.

"There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that thereis no more truth to be revealed and that all our expositions ofScripture are without error. The fact that certain doctrines have beenheld as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that ourideas are infallible." Review & Herald, Dec. 20, 1892.

"The truthof God is progressive; it is always onward, going from strength togreater strength, from light to greater light." Signs, May 26, 1890.

As pointed out by Luis Munilla in his Jan. 28, 1995 newsletter, ". . .Mexico, Canada, Italy, France, Germany, and other countries around theworld [including England], have already designated Sunday as their dayof rest."

(Brackets mine.) In the past we have understood that theUnited States would be the first to enforce a National Sunday Law."Foreign nations will follow the example of the United States, thoughshe leads out, yet the same crisis will come upon our people in allparts of the world." 6T, page 395.

In context, Ellen White wasreferring to the restriction of religious liberty when writing of "thesame crisis." On the same page she continues,". . . when they [theauthorities] command us not to proclaim the commandments of God and thefaith of Jesus, then it will be necessary for us to say as did theapostles: 'whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto youmore than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things whichwe have seen and heard.' Acts 4:19, 20." (Ibid.).

Clearly the principleto be understood regarding a crisis arising in our land is therestriction of religious liberty to the degree that Seventh-dayAdventists cannot "proclaim the commandments of God and the faith ofJesus." While this state of things could have been brought about by theNational Sunday Law, any oppressive law abridging the free exercise ofthe Seventh-day Adventist faith would fulfill the prophecy.

In 1888 the Blair Sunday Rest Bill was before Congress, and the finaltest of the image of the beast was soon to be enforced upon the peopleof God. ". . . the image of the beast . . . is to be the great test forthe people of God, by which their eternal destiny will be decided . .."

SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, page 976. Much of Ellen White'swriting on the subject of the National Sunday Law was pertaining tothis event and the efforts by the National Reform movement of that era.In 1889 Ellen wrote, "Events which for more than forty years we haveupon the authority of the prophetic word declared to be impending arenow taking place before our eyes. Already the question of an amendmentto the Constitution restricting liberty of conscience has been urgedupon the legislators of the nation. The question of enforcing Sundayobservance has become one of national interest and importance. We wellknow what the result of this movement will be." 5T, page 711. ByProvidence, the National Reform movement failed in their attempts tobring about a national law enforcing Sunday observance. The proposedamendment to the Constitution restricting liberty of conscience wasalso foiled. But "Foreign nations [have] follow[ed] the example of theUnited States," and religious liberty has been restricted forSeventh-day Adventists in various "parts of the world." However, theimage of the beast has never been given life "that the image of thebeast might even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image ofbeast [might] be killed." Rev. 13:15. This "oppressive law" has not yetbeen fully enforced upon God's Remnant in the United States. Verylittle effort is required to research the Sunday question around theworld. Library databases are replete with this information. As weresearch the subject, we discover that many countries have passednational Sunday legislation, and in the recent past many of those lawshave been repealed. Even in Rome, Italy, where one might think Sundaywould be a popular day of rest, controversy over Sunday closing lawshas been keen. The difficulty in obtaining support for Sunday closinglaws might be demonstrated by a recent statement by Lord's Day Alliance President Paul J. Craven, Jr., in 1988: We have found we live in a day very different from yesteryear. Mostlegislation supporting Sunday closing has been struck down. Fewer andfewer enterprises are interested in closing on Sundays, and still fewerare sensitive to the desires of individuals who would choose to keepSunday as a day of worship and rest.

So where do we go from here? We who comprise the Board of Managers mustpool our creative energies constantly to look for and produce newapproaches to our mission. What no longer has the support oflegislation may now need the support of persuasion. Liberty Sentinel,vol. 13, 1989-90, Number 5. (emphasis supplied.)

In Liberty Alert, vol. 2 no.1, Jan/Feb 1993, Roland R. Hegstad writes:Through the years I've seen Sunday laws disappear from the books of 21states most recently from Virginia, which in its colonial phase had alaw containing the death penalty. An additional 18 states have soliberalized their laws that it would take a psychopath to search out anillegal act. In the remaining states, county by county, municipality bymunicipality, Sunday laws are being removed from the books.

Over the 30 years the growing secularization of society has been a greater threat to our church than have Sunday laws.

Even though other countries followed the example of our country byenforcing Sunday laws of their own, the prophecy of the two-hornedbeast of Revelation 13 was never fulfilled. "This power, the last thatis to wage war against the church and the law of God, was symbolized bya beast with lamblike horns . . . the 'two horns like a lamb' wellrepresent the character of the United States government . . ." Signs,Nov. 1, 1899. This Signs article is entitled "The Seal of God" anddescribes the oppressive powers that sought to force God's people todisobey God's law and the final struggle of commandment-keepers againstthe beast and his image. The mark of the beast has never been enforcedin this country as required by the prophecy. And note that the markdoes not necessarily need to be enforced through the means of aNational Sunday Law. The mark of the beast is enforced when ". . . thiscountry [U.S.A.] will follow in the steps of Rome in trampling on therights of conscience." Great Controversy, page 588.

Remember, "Toreceive the mark of the beast means to come to the same decision as thebeast has done, and to advocate the same ideas, in direct opposition tothe word of God." SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, page 979. And "whileone class, by accepting the sign of submission to earthly powers,receive the mark of the beast, the other, choosing the token ofallegiance to divine authority, receive the seal of God." GreatControversy, page 605. In this, the discerning mind clearly understandsthe principles involved in the enforcement of the mark of the beast.The particular "form" through which it is enforced does not matter, butwe must recognize the power and institution through which it comes. Therestriction of religious liberty is the sure result of the U.S.government enforcing the mark of the beast upon God's remnant people."The contest is between the commandments of God and the commandments ofmen." Maranatha, page 200. And the Creation 7th Day (the Sabbath) isthe great object of controversy.

"In every age there is a new development of truth, a message of God tothe people of that generation. The old truths are essential; new truthis not independent of the old, but an unfolding of it . . . it is thelight which shines in the fresh unfolding of the New that glorifies theOld. He who rejects the New, does not really possess, the Old. For himit loses its vital power, and becomes but a lifeless form." Signs, June20, 1902.

Adventists have focused on the concept of the National SundayLaw until they have lost sight of the Sabbath Rest Principle whichsecures the believer in a child-like faith relationship with theCreator and Savior of the world. Professed Sabbath-keepers have held upSaturday as if it was a god to be worshiped. Through this extremism,the final test for Christ's professed disciples has been purported tobe a choice between resting on Saturday vs. resting on Sunday (or somevariation thereof). This can not be the test, for "if I give all mypossessions to feed the poor, and if I deliver my body to be burned,but do not have love, it profits me nothing." 1 Cor. 13:3 (NASB). Thereis no way that a national law requiring Sunday rest would fulfill theprophecy of Revelation 13 unless it prohibited the keeping of Jehovah'srest. The mark of the beast will make void the law of God and restrictthe liberty of Seventh-day Adventists who profess to be keeping "thecommandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ."